http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

That is lazy reporting. The guy should have done some research on the new hires and ranked them according to an honest assessment. Just placing them in a last place tie is just lazy.

(01-18-2016 07:00 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

That is lazy reporting. The guy should have done some research on the new hires and ranked them according to an honest assessment. Just placing them in a last place tie is just lazy.

How do you suggest ranking three guys with a combined single year of FBS coaching expeeience?

(01-18-2016 07:21 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 07:00 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

That is lazy reporting. The guy should have done some research on the new hires and ranked them according to an honest assessment. Just placing them in a last place tie is just lazy.

How do you suggest ranking three guys with a combined single year of FBS coaching expeeience?

These 3 coaches are not new to coaching. They have a history. The reporter could actually analyze their college football coaching history (statistical success, recruiting, former players they've coached, ...). There is plenty of data to examine.

(01-18-2016 07:36 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 07:21 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 07:00 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

That is lazy reporting. The guy should have done some research on the new hires and ranked them according to an honest assessment. Just placing them in a last place tie is just lazy.

How do you suggest ranking three guys with a combined single year of FBS coaching expeeience?

These 3 coaches are not new to coaching. They have a history. The reporter could actually analyze their college football coaching history (statistical success, recruiting, former players they've coached, ...). There is plenty of data to examine.

Two of them have zero head coaching experience. If there was a surefire way of ranking rookie head coaches there would be a lot less failed coaches.

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

Can't believe they didn't rank Art Briles #1. He's much better than Patterson. Briles beat Patterson last year (2014) when TCU supposedly had his best team ever, and almost beat him this year without a QB. And when I say without a QB, Baylor was literally down to their 4th string QB (due to injuries) and had to use 2 WR's to take snaps.

(01-18-2016 09:44 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

Can't believe they didn't rank Art Briles #1. He's much better than Patterson. Briles beat Patterson last year (2014) when TCU supposedly had his best team ever, and almost beat him this year without a QB. And when I say without a QB, Baylor was literally down to their 4th string QB (due to injuries) and had to use 2 WR's to take snaps.

Tough call. Both are really great coaches.

(01-18-2016 08:06 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 07:36 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 07:21 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 07:00 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

That is lazy reporting. The guy should have done some research on the new hires and ranked them according to an honest assessment. Just placing them in a last place tie is just lazy.

How do you suggest ranking three guys with a combined single year of FBS coaching expeeience?

These 3 coaches are not new to coaching. They have a history. The reporter could actually analyze their college football coaching history (statistical success, recruiting, former players they've coached, ...). There is plenty of data to examine.

Two of them have zero head coaching experience. If there was a surefire way of ranking rookie head coaches there would be a lot less failed coaches.

Of course there is no "surefire" process for picking a rookie coach, but athletic departments weigh assistant coaches records and accomplishments all the time. There is no reason why the reporter can't follow a similar path and then rank the new coaches at North Texas, UTSA, and Texas State.

(01-18-2016 09:44 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(01-18-2016 12:45 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-...ches-texas

Can't believe they didn't rank Art Briles #1. He's much better than Patterson. Briles beat Patterson last year (2014) when TCU supposedly had his best team ever, and almost beat him this year without a QB. And when I say without a QB, Baylor was literally down to their 4th string QB (due to injuries) and had to use 2 WR's to take snaps.

I agree. I'd place Briles #1 too. Even if the two were even, I'd give the edge to Briles. Patterson just comes off as a jerk sometimes.