What would you do if CFB created a "Super League"

Aggies where in two Big12 Title games. They have 0 appearances in the SEC. Now Mizzou is about even with 2 appearances in the Title Game for both the Big12 and SEC and Mizzou failed to win either league.

In truth, it is all about coaching. Get the right coach and it makes a world of difference. Take Alabama and compare pre-Saban and Saban eras or Oklahoma prior to Bob Stoops and after Bob Stoops. That is one of Texas' (and Tennessee's) main issues right now. Neither program has hit the coaching lottery. Tennessee has had laughable picks, I think all of our past 3 coaches are ranked in the top 15 all-time worse coaching hires. (Dooley, Jones, Pruitt). Texas A&M had a great coach in 1990s and was very competitive in Big12 (it also helped that OU and Texas were down). A&M struggled in the 2000s but they did have some good teams the last 3-4 years in the league.
Two question VB.
1. If A&M and Mizzou had been placed in the opposite divisions of the SEC (A&M in the East and Mizzou in the West), do you think those SEC CCG appearances would have been reversed?
2. Do Mizzou and A&M have their "coaching lottery" hires currently in place?
 
Two question VB.
1. If A&M and Mizzou had been placed in the opposite divisions of the SEC (A&M in the East and Mizzou in the West), do you think those SEC CCG appearances would have been reversed?
2. Do Mizzou and A&M have their "coaching lottery" hires currently in place?

Deep Creek... good question. Let me address them to the best of my knowledge below (most of this is opinion and speculation):

1. If Texas A&M was in the SEC East, they would have won the Division the 2012 with Johnny Football. Heck, they beat the crap out of Oklahoma that year and would have likely won Big12 as well. The only thing that kept them from winning their league was an Alabama team that won the National Title. Missouri was the best team in SEC East in 2013 and I think Texas A&M could have potentially won the division that year as well. Georgia was really the only good program at that time. 2014 is an interesting year, in that year Missouri, for the most part, backed their way into the title game kind of like Arkansas in 2006 and Tennessee in 2007. Missouri took advantage of Georgia having to play an unbalanced schedule and having more Ls (Georgia beat Missouri soundly in 2014 but Missouri took the division). A&M wasn't that great in 2014 so I am not sure about that year. I don't think A&M makes the title game 2015-2021. Georgia and Florida both got good again and had solid teams that won the division. A&M could have had 2-3 Title Game appearances from 2012-2014 so it isn't totally unforeseeable. 2012-2013 is the perfect scenario since they have Johnny Manziel and a solid team and the SEC East just wasn't very good those 2-3 years. However, this is all speculation. I am confident in 2012, A&M is in, and fairly confident in 2013. 2014 is up in the air.


2. Missouri's best coach in recent history was Gary Pinkel. Since he has left, the program has struggled. I think Missouri has had alright coaches for their condition (I would have taken any of their coaches over the crap we had in Knoxville) but none of them were able to recruit or win like Gary Pinkel. Missouri, due to location and lack of tradition, has some built-in disadvantages so succeeding there isn't as easy as succeeding at an Alabama, LSU, Oklahoma, etc. However, the program isn't as bad as UK and Vandy for example. I would say Gary Pinkel was winning the lottery. The other two coaches (Odom and current coach) are a break-even.

Regarding A&M, getting a National Title Coach is winning the lottery so yes on Jimbo Fisher. Sumlin wasn't a horrible pick-up either but he wasn't necessarily winning the lottery. They did win lottery with having a QB that fit his system well for 2-3 years (Johnny Manziel) combined with general talent across the board. I do feel like that with the talent in College Station, A&M should have better results than what they have on the field. A&M has gotten a recruiting boon for being the only Texas team in the SEC. I think they are in the top 10 (maybe 5) classes this year. I haven't looked at the rankings today. A&M has so much potential to win a title right now. It kind of reminds me of UF in the early 1990s.
 
The talent for aggy isn't holding them back, but i really do feel that Fisher's offense is. It's great for them since they don't get blown out for the most part (Bama, LSU withholding), but they need to be able to put more points on the board.

Be interesting to see how they do with actual expectations this season.
 
@Deep Creek

Just for my enjoyment and perhaps yours, let's talk about Tennessee's hires

1. Lane Kiffin - This hire was interesting. It is hard to say it was necessarily a bad hire but it wasn't a good hire to follow a legend. This hire looks more attractive later on for Tennessee when the struggles start. The impression of Fulmer was that his coach and teams had gotten stale and failed to modernize with the rest of CFB. This was the reason for the struggles in Fulmer's last 5 years. Kiffin was the polar opposite of Fulmer but was a major risk. When you consider the state of Tennessee's program at this time and the coaches that were interested, there was a lot better options out there (Chip Kelly and Gary Patterson are two coaches that Tennessee passed over for Kiffin). So I would say this was a bad hire, but not a total disaster

2. Derek Dooley - Even though Tennessee was under the gun with Kiffin leaving after 1 year in the middle of recruiting season, this was a bad hire. Derek Dooley had a losing record at La Tech and no real evidence of success. He would have been a better AD hire than coaching hire. Interestingly, the fanbase actually liked this hire at the time arguing his educational background as a lawyer, his dad's legacy, and his role of being both an AD and Coach. The guy could not recruit and that was his primary reason for failing. Losing to a UK team without a QB on its roster in year 2 sealed his fate. No matter how you spin this one, it was an epically bad hire. At worse, UT should have brought in a 1-year interim and then searched the filed. Tennessee was still considered a top job at the time

3. Butch Jones - On paper this is not a bad hire. It also came right after Charlie Strong shot down the job. Jones had a Conference Championship at Cincinnati and had winning teams at all levels. Butch Jones was also enthusiastic about the job. His major downfall was that he failed to make adjustments with his teams. He ran the same type of offenses every year. When he had Josh Dobbs (the best UT QB until at least Erik Ainge, perhaps Tee Martin), he had a lot of success. His first real kink was the lost to South Carolina in 2015. IMO, this loss was driven by the fact that he played Josh Dobbs despite the issue that Dobbs had the flu and did not look even 75% out there. Cleary a 2nd string QB was NOT developed or recruited. Once Dobbs left, Jones teams got derailed.

I would rank this coaching hire as a B-C grade at the time. Obviously Jones did not live up to hype and had major flaws. Hindsight puts this grade even lower. Regarding the lottery question, so far Tennessee has NOT won the lottery with anyone.

4. Jeremy Pruitt - On paper this was a good hire, especially after a messy off-season. I hindsight, he might be the WORSE hire on the list. With the exception of a run in 2019 against mediocre to decent SEC programs, Pruitt never accomplished anything. He recruited very well but even that is now under scrutiny with the NCAA infractions. Pruitt, on paper, looked like another Kirby Smart hire but ended up being a disaster. He kind of reminds me of Will Muschamp. Both got a lot of attention as potentially coaches of the future as assistants but both failed miserably.

This would be like Clark Griswold Vegas Vacation epic fail when it comes to gambling on the lottery.

5. Josh Huepel - To be determined on whether he won the lottery. Regarding how it looks at the time of his hire, it appears a lot like the Butch Jones hire; B or C grade at the time. The Tennessee job is not near as attractive as it was in 2009 or 2010 when Dooley and Kiffin were hired so in light of circumstances, this is a decent hire on paper. We will see if he can have any success on the field.
 
College football has been around for 120 years. Oregon not winning a Title also doesn't help. UCLA and Washington both have National Titles. I think Stanford does as well but don't quote me on that. I also think those schools have more Pac12 titles all-time than Oregon.

at what point does the past become irrelevant to the current game?
Rutgers has a NC
Army
GT has a couple
Illinois
Pitt has a whole mess of them.
Stanford in 26
Michigan State

would anyone consider any of these schools for the league?
 
@Deep Creek

Just for my enjoyment and perhaps yours, let's talk about Tennessee's hires

1. Lane Kiffin - This hire was interesting. It is hard to say it was necessarily a bad hire but it wasn't a good hire to follow a legend. This hire looks more attractive later on for Tennessee when the struggles start. The impression of Fulmer was that his coach and teams had gotten stale and failed to modernize with the rest of CFB. This was the reason for the struggles in Fulmer's last 5 years. Kiffin was the polar opposite of Fulmer but was a major risk. When you consider the state of Tennessee's program at this time and the coaches that were interested, there was a lot better options out there (Chip Kelly and Gary Patterson are two coaches that Tennessee passed over for Kiffin). So I would say this was a bad hire, but not a total disaster

2. Derek Dooley - Even though Tennessee was under the gun with Kiffin leaving after 1 year in the middle of recruiting season, this was a bad hire. Derek Dooley had a losing record at La Tech and no real evidence of success. He would have been a better AD hire than coaching hire. Interestingly, the fanbase actually liked this hire at the time arguing his educational background as a lawyer, his dad's legacy, and his role of being both an AD and Coach. The guy could not recruit and that was his primary reason for failing. Losing to a UK team without a QB on its roster in year 2 sealed his fate. No matter how you spin this one, it was an epically bad hire. At worse, UT should have brought in a 1-year interim and then searched the filed. Tennessee was still considered a top job at the time

3. Butch Jones - On paper this is not a bad hire. It also came right after Charlie Strong shot down the job. Jones had a Conference Championship at Cincinnati and had winning teams at all levels. Butch Jones was also enthusiastic about the job. His major downfall was that he failed to make adjustments with his teams. He ran the same type of offenses every year. When he had Josh Dobbs (the best UT QB until at least Erik Ainge, perhaps Tee Martin), he had a lot of success. His first real kink was the lost to South Carolina in 2015. IMO, this loss was driven by the fact that he played Josh Dobbs despite the issue that Dobbs had the flu and did not look even 75% out there. Cleary a 2nd string QB was NOT developed or recruited. Once Dobbs left, Jones teams got derailed.

I would rank this coaching hire as a B-C grade at the time. Obviously Jones did not live up to hype and had major flaws. Hindsight puts this grade even lower. Regarding the lottery question, so far Tennessee has NOT won the lottery with anyone.

4. Jeremy Pruitt - On paper this was a good hire, especially after a messy off-season. I hindsight, he might be the WORSE hire on the list. With the exception of a run in 2019 against mediocre to decent SEC programs, Pruitt never accomplished anything. He recruited very well but even that is now under scrutiny with the NCAA infractions. Pruitt, on paper, looked like another Kirby Smart hire but ended up being a disaster. He kind of reminds me of Will Muschamp. Both got a lot of attention as potentially coaches of the future as assistants but both failed miserably.

This would be like Clark Griswold Vegas Vacation epic fail when it comes to gambling on the lottery.

5. Josh Huepel - To be determined on whether he won the lottery. Regarding how it looks at the time of his hire, it appears a lot like the Butch Jones hire; B or C grade at the time. The Tennessee job is not near as attractive as it was in 2009 or 2010 when Dooley and Kiffin were hired so in light of circumstances, this is a decent hire on paper. We will see if he can have any success on the field.
I think you are mostly correct. While coaching hires can be a crap shoot, I think we often overlook some of the details of exactly what a new coach is walking in to. A couple examples in the extreme both ways.

Matt Rhule walked into one of the worst situations in the history of CFB IMO. He did well. But others may not have done as well and would have been considered "failures" when in fact, it was extremely difficult to put back together.

Ryan Day walked into one of the best situations in the history of CFB IMO. He's done well also...whether you consider it "maintaining" or "improving." That said, he didn't have near the "row to hoe" that Matt Rhule did. Same could be said for Lincoln Riley. While he may not have walked into a situation as good as Day's, Stoops still didn't leave him a disaster at all. In fact, it was in good shape IMO.

Which brings me to the question. What did Fulmer leave Kiffen? What did Kiffen leave Dooley? and so on.

Not sure of the time frame, but Kelley and Patterson may have been considered too similar to Fulmer at that time. Patterson didn't really "modernize" either until he'd been in the Big 12 for a few years. And, he's scaled it back a little because his defenses got very fatigued when they first went full Air Raid...which didn't sit too well with him.

Another situation was A&M. People don't understand how good of a situation Sumlin walked into. Mike Sherman didn't leave Sumlin a dumpster fire at all.

Sometimes the guy that built it doesn't get to stay long enough to see it through and the next guy benefits. And vice versa. And, nowadays you only get so long to prove yourself whether you inherited something in horrible shape or just so so.
 
at what point does the past become irrelevant to the current game?
Rutgers has a NC
Army
GT has a couple
Illinois
Pitt has a whole mess of them.
Stanford in 26
Michigan State

would anyone consider any of these schools for the league?

This is likely why a super league is dumb. We also have teams that have had bursts of success and then fallen off as well. Louisville and West Virginia stand out for one. Both were fixtures in top 10 for 5-10 year span. Out of your list, Georgia Tech, Michigan State, Pittsburgh, and Stanford could all hit the lottery on coaching and become powers again. Heck, Michigan State and Stanford have had a lot of success recently. Stanford has given Oregon fits on a regular basis.

The Super League would naturally have winners and losers. The bottom half of the league would get diluted because recruits don't want to go to teams that are losing. What would happen is these recruits would go to some of the BEST teams left out of the Super Leagues so arguments would start regarding adding these teams to the Super League. This happens now. A player would rather go to UCF because it is easier to get 10-11 wins than go to NC State for example. NC State is in a BETTER league and theoretically could make playoffs easier than UCF if they go unbeaten but UCF has had a far higher winning percentage due to their easier schedule which results in more media attention and easier time getting recruits than NC State. This would happen even in the Super League scenario in fact it would only be amplified because you would leave out capable programs no matter how you spin it. Someone that is NOT in the Super League would eventually emerge as a regular playoff contender.
 
I think you are mostly correct. While coaching hires can be a crap shoot, I think we often overlook some of the details of exactly what a new coach is walking in to. A couple examples in the extreme both ways.

Matt Rhule walked into one of the worst situations in the history of CFB IMO. He did well. But others may not have done as well and would have been considered "failures" when in fact, it was extremely difficult to put back together.

Ryan Day walked into one of the best situations in the history of CFB IMO. He's done well also...whether you consider it "maintaining" or "improving." That said, he didn't have near the "row to hoe" that Matt Rhule did. Same could be said for Lincoln Riley. While he may not have walked into a situation as good as Day's, Stoops still didn't leave him a disaster at all. In fact, it was in good shape IMO.

Which brings me to the question. What did Fulmer leave Kiffen? What did Kiffen leave Dooley? and so on.

Not sure of the time frame, but Kelley and Patterson may have been considered too similar to Fulmer at that time. Patterson didn't really "modernize" either until he'd been in the Big 12 for a few years. And, he's scaled it back a little because his defenses got very fatigued when they first went full Air Raid...which didn't sit too well with him.

Another situation was A&M. People don't understand how good of a situation Sumlin walked into. Mike Sherman didn't leave Sumlin a dumpster fire at all.

Sometimes the guy that built it doesn't get to stay long enough to see it through and the next guy benefits. And vice versa. And, nowadays you only get so long to prove yourself whether you inherited something in horrible shape or just so so.

Kiffin was left a great slate of players and a program that was a National Power. Had he stayed, he would have had success IMO. When he left, all of the players left so Dooley was left with nothing and did not recruit well. Butch Jones brought in talent after some time but had QB issues in his last year and left Pruitt a talented but flawed team. Heupel is inheriting a major dumpster fire. Only Dooley's situation is comparable although UT still had a winning rep at the time of Dooley. They don't even have that now. So I would likely say Heupel inherited the worse mess as a UT coach while Kiffin inherited the best situation out of the UT coaches.
 
is this the super league?
 
I wanted to say that but was afraid rmilia would get mad and defensive about the B1G getting left out.

Animated GIF
 
@Deep Creek

Just for my enjoyment and perhaps yours, let's talk about Tennessee's hires

1. Lane Kiffin - This hire was interesting. It is hard to say it was necessarily a bad hire but it wasn't a good hire to follow a legend. This hire looks more attractive later on for Tennessee when the struggles start. The impression of Fulmer was that his coach and teams had gotten stale and failed to modernize with the rest of CFB. This was the reason for the struggles in Fulmer's last 5 years. Kiffin was the polar opposite of Fulmer but was a major risk. When you consider the state of Tennessee's program at this time and the coaches that were interested, there was a lot better options out there (Chip Kelly and Gary Patterson are two coaches that Tennessee passed over for Kiffin). So I would say this was a bad hire, but not a total disaster

2. Derek Dooley - Even though Tennessee was under the gun with Kiffin leaving after 1 year in the middle of recruiting season, this was a bad hire. Derek Dooley had a losing record at La Tech and no real evidence of success. He would have been a better AD hire than coaching hire. Interestingly, the fanbase actually liked this hire at the time arguing his educational background as a lawyer, his dad's legacy, and his role of being both an AD and Coach. The guy could not recruit and that was his primary reason for failing. Losing to a UK team without a QB on its roster in year 2 sealed his fate. No matter how you spin this one, it was an epically bad hire. At worse, UT should have brought in a 1-year interim and then searched the filed. Tennessee was still considered a top job at the time

3. Butch Jones - On paper this is not a bad hire. It also came right after Charlie Strong shot down the job. Jones had a Conference Championship at Cincinnati and had winning teams at all levels. Butch Jones was also enthusiastic about the job. His major downfall was that he failed to make adjustments with his teams. He ran the same type of offenses every year. When he had Josh Dobbs (the best UT QB until at least Erik Ainge, perhaps Tee Martin), he had a lot of success. His first real kink was the lost to South Carolina in 2015. IMO, this loss was driven by the fact that he played Josh Dobbs despite the issue that Dobbs had the flu and did not look even 75% out there. Cleary a 2nd string QB was NOT developed or recruited. Once Dobbs left, Jones teams got derailed.

I would rank this coaching hire as a B-C grade at the time. Obviously Jones did not live up to hype and had major flaws. Hindsight puts this grade even lower. Regarding the lottery question, so far Tennessee has NOT won the lottery with anyone.

4. Jeremy Pruitt - On paper this was a good hire, especially after a messy off-season. I hindsight, he might be the WORSE hire on the list. With the exception of a run in 2019 against mediocre to decent SEC programs, Pruitt never accomplished anything. He recruited very well but even that is now under scrutiny with the NCAA infractions. Pruitt, on paper, looked like another Kirby Smart hire but ended up being a disaster. He kind of reminds me of Will Muschamp. Both got a lot of attention as potentially coaches of the future as assistants but both failed miserably.

This would be like Clark Griswold Vegas Vacation epic fail when it comes to gambling on the lottery.

5. Josh Huepel - To be determined on whether he won the lottery. Regarding how it looks at the time of his hire, it appears a lot like the Butch Jones hire; B or C grade at the time. The Tennessee job is not near as attractive as it was in 2009 or 2010 when Dooley and Kiffin were hired so in light of circumstances, this is a decent hire on paper. We will see if he can have any success on the field.
Very good writeup. The only things I would add was Lane's hire over the coaches you mentioned is that the risks on Lane was mitigated by the thoughts that Lane's dad would come with him. I actually thought at the time that it was a solid hire and the diehards here in NETN were more excited about Monte than Lane.

As far as Coach Dooley goes, after the Schiano debacle, he was about as good as UT would get. From this hire on, UT's struggles rest squarely on the shoulders of the boosters that got Schiano "unhired". As a result Dooley destroyed the relationship UT athletics had with the state's high school programs. It's not that he was bad at recruiting, the state's high schools lost all faith in the coach and as a result UT was not welcome at a lot of schools and even not allowed on campus of many.
 
Well, this big boy football thing was fun while it lasted for Bailore

Guess we're a basketball school now
 
Top