CountryFrog
Active Member
Where the scheiss do people get this [ Finebaum ]?Why do you consider his time at cal a plus overall? He was 10-26
Where the scheiss do people get this [ Finebaum ]?Why do you consider his time at cal a plus overall? He was 10-26
I know we as TCU fans make fun of SMU and denigrate them because they are TCU's rivals, but the reality is that they have historically been a pretty solid football program. With out having received the death penalty their entire story would be dramatically different. Yes they did receive the death penalty and have been struggling to rebuild ever since. But they have had periods of success since then with June Jones. They have multiple national championships and the Doak Walker award, and are in Dallas. It's not like SMU is North Texas or Rice. The point is, would you really be that surprised if their next coach went 5-3 in the American?I think it's strange to look at what he's done at SMU, which is more recently, and act like it's nothing. No, he hasn't been to an AAC title game yet, but the league is a hell of a lot tougher than the Sun Belt or the SWAC, and he's winning 2/3's of his games at a place where they haven't won jack [ #2020 ] in almost 40 years.
We've made fun of SMU being such a terrible football school since forever and with FAR fewer resources to work with he's made that team better than us.
Having a look at his resume, his floor seems to be 1-11.I don’t understand this conflation of “easiest” with “bad.”
The “easy” pick can also be the “best available” pick.
Dykes may be the obvious/easy hire because he’s a Texas guy at a lesser program down the road having decent success and he wants to be here and he meets the short/medium term wants/needs for the program.
He can also be the best available option because we’ve clearly run a national search and had some other guys tell us no.
Don’t understand why that’s bad or what the better alternative is. I’m not a Dykes cheerleader, nor was he my first choice, but I’m not upset about it and am taking a generally optimistic wait and see approach. Worst case scenario is we don’t improve and go find someone else in a few years, but I think his floor is still better than what we’ve seen the past few years.
In four years of high school football we got into only one brawl. JV game on the road at Stephenville. Coaches jumped in and everything. Refs called the game. Had no idea that was a common thing since that was the only time we ever played Stephenville.Yup. But not just HS…they were implementing that “behavior” starting in middle school
It's his conference record at Cal.. Should've clarified that, but his overall record with them isn't spectacular at 19-30.Where the scheiss do people get this [ #2020 ]?
The new AAC? No, not really. I'd be surprised if the guy next year can do it.I know we as TCU fans make fun of SMU and denigrate them because they are TCU's rivals, but the reality is that they have historically been a pretty solid football program. With out having received the death penalty their entire story would be dramatically different. Yes they did receive the death penalty and have been struggling to rebuild ever since. But they have had periods of success since then with June Jones. They have multiple national championships and the Doak Walker award, and are in Dallas. It's not like SMU is North Texas or Rice. The point is, would you really be that surprised if their next coach went 5-3 in the American?
We won't, don't worry.Having a look at his resume, his floor seems to be 1-11.
I don't want TCU to go 1-11 next year.
I’m definitely not excited about Dykes, he’s clearly not the “home-run” hire that we all wanted
Says it allThough Rhule is obviously a better coach than Dykes
Good point regarding Mel Tucker, I'd forgotten his time at CU.The new AAC? No, not really. I'd be surprised if the guy next year can do it.
But he's had THE two best seasons that school has had since 1984 in his four years. I mean, they sure have had a hell of a time figuring it out despite all that stuff you mention going for them, haven't they? And would you at least agree that Cal is not a place to go for coaches to compile impressive winning records? Citing his "P5 record" there as some sort of reason why he's no good seems ingenuous at best. Plus, he inherited a broken program to begin with. Just a bad fit all around. Heck, Mel Tucker had a sub .500 FBS record when he got the MSU job. HIs record at Colorado didn't derail his career because people know it's not easy to win there.
Obviously the committee preferred Napier over Dykes since he was our #1 - so to me that would be a good startI guess I’m failing to see who the home run hire was/is supposed to be.
Peterson, I guess? That seemed like a long shot and it’s not looking like he’s coming out of retirement for any of the other jobs.
Kellen Moore? He’s killing it as an OC in the NFL for one of the biggest brands in the world. Again, not seeing him leaving to coach tcu or any other CFB job opening.
Campbell? Seems like he’s staying at ISU. And given his performance this year with a team that had high expectations he doesn’t seem home run.
Napier? Why is he considered a home run?
Sanders? Um, okay…
The coaching pool this cycle doesn’t seem too deep and the candidates that are truly available (ie not Peterson and Moore) all seem about the same.
Okay. The search committee liked Napier more. Sounds like the committee preferred Peterson and Moore over Napier.Obviously the committee preferred Napier over Dykes since he was our #1 - so to me that would be a good start
So three home runs and we settled for Dykes, ok with that explanation.Okay. The search committee liked Napier more. Sounds like the committee preferred Peterson and Moore over Napier.
My question is why is Napier considered the be all end all of this coaching search? The “home run” hire as people keep referring to.
My main point is that the available coaches all seem about the same. Nothing spectacular nothing terrible.
You don’t really know that but maybe they had one as about a 9 and the other as about an 8.5. Who knows? And maybe their #2 will end up being better than the #1 would have been anyway.Obviously the committee preferred Napier over Dykes since he was our #1 - so to me that would be a good start
Maybe they kinda did.Seems like you’d have your homerun choice lined up before you pinkslip the guy who resurrected your program and was (like it or not) the face of the university for twenty years.
What is truly stupid is you getting all worked up over someone else (not me) calling Dykes 'not a home run hire'You don’t really know that but maybe they had one as about a 9 and the other as about an 8.5. Who knows? And maybe their #2 will end up being better than the #1 would have been anyway.
It’s like you’re wanting to put a definitive grade on this hire. It’s stupid. Time will tell how good a hire this will be. Besides, it’s not like every great coach hired was the absolute #1 choice by those that hired him.