Most people are disagreeing with you here only because the main point on why they are relevant is because of the dollar value they may be worth.

 

In terms of pure football, their relevancy is diminishing.  The same can be said for Texas and UF as well.  They bring in tons of money, but on the field their relevance is being lost.  College football is more about the head coach, and until those teams fix that problem, they will continue to flounder.

 

Because of the rich winning traditions with Texas,  UF,  and Michigan,  combined with their financial resources,   these schools have the foundation to hire a top flight Head Coach.   So much of course depends on hiring the right person and making sure that he can build the type of program that he believes can be a consistent high caliber product.   It's much more difficult to build a program from scratch.   Using a College Basketball example,  the job Jim Calhoun did in turning UCONN into a consistent national power,  with very little national winning tradition before he became their HC,   is a much greater challenge than turning around Texas,  Florida,  and Michigan in College Football.

---

Is it any different than when they hired Hoke two years ago or Rodriguez five years ago?

 

Sometimes it takes multiple hires to get it right.   Michigan clearly didn't make the type of hires the last two times that translated into major success. The good news for Michigan is I believe most coaches worth pursuing  still feel that it's a program that has tremendous potential to be a top 10 caliber program more often than not.    Even if Michigan fails to get it right the 3rd and even 4th time around,   I still believe that Michigan would have great potential and football attractiveness. 

---

Because of the rich winning traditions with Texas,  UF,  and Michigan,  combined with their financial resources,   these schools have the foundation to hire a top flight Head Coach.   So much of course depends on hiring the right person and making sure that he can build the type of program that he believes can be a consistent high caliber product.   It's much more difficult to build a program from scratch.   Using a College Basketball example,  the job Jim Calhoun did in turning UCONN into a consistent national power,  with very little national winning tradition before he became their HC,   is a much greater challenge than turning around Texas,  Florida,  and Michigan in College Football.

 

I agree completely.  College football is about coaching, pro football is about players.  You obviously need a bit of the other to win, but a strong recruiting coach that can develop talent a bit is a method for long term success.

 

My guess is UF makes a huge run at Freeze at the end of the season.

---

I agree completely.  College football is about coaching, pro football is about players.  You obviously need a bit of the other to win, but a strong recruiting coach that can develop talent a bit is a method for long term success.

 

My guess is UF makes a huge run at Freeze at the end of the season.

 

I disagree. College football is just as much about the players as the NFL is. Do you really think Larry Coker is that good of a coach, or was it because the 2001 Miami Hurricanes were THAT loaded? Same with Mack Brown. Before Texas started going down the commode at the end of his career, his teams that won 10+ games ten years in a row were pretty damn talented. Once the talent started leaving, you saw how good of a coach Coker was along with Mack Brown.

---

I disagree. College football is just as much about the players as the NFL is. Do you really think Larry Coker is that good of a coach, or was it because the 2001 Miami Hurricanes were THAT loaded? Same with Mack Brown. Before Texas started going down the commode at the end of his career, his teams that won 10+ games ten years in a row were pretty damn talented. Once the talent started leaving, you saw how good of a coach Coker was along with Mack Brown.

 

Right, but its the coach that brings those players in. It's why a certain team could be full of talent and a few years later that talent pool dries up...ie, Urban Meyer using another coach's players.

 

I'm not saying you dont need talented players to win, I'm saying you need a coach to lure in those talented players.

---

I agree completely.  College football is about coaching, pro football is about players.  You obviously need a bit of the other to win, but a strong recruiting coach that can develop talent a bit is a method for long term success.

 

My guess is UF makes a huge run at Freeze at the end of the season.

 

Dantonio would be a good look at as well. 

---

Whether someone has a liberal, or conservative viewpoint, a authoritative figure should not lock a thread for the sole purpose to get the last word in all the while prohibiting someone else from being able to respond.

I agree completely. College football is about coaching, pro football is about players. You obviously need a bit of the other to win, but a strong recruiting coach that can develop talent a bit is a method for long term success.


My guess is UF makes a huge run at Freeze at the end of the season.

Any other ideas of who might take muschamps spot?

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

Dantonio would be a good look at as well. 

Yup, another good choice out there. Foley needs to stop trying to show how smart he is. You don't need to hire assistants who you think have a bright future as a head coach. At UF you can hire the cream of the crop proven head coaches out there.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Please take the #98 of the lousy QB.  I know he did it out of respect but he's actually disgracing the number right now.  We're all going to remember #98  now was the terrible QB that got his coach fired.

---

Maybe they shouldn't have been so quick to give up on Rich Rod...

---

Maybe they shouldn't have been so quick to give up on Rich Rod...

 

The Michigan fan base is ridiculous. I'm a big proponent of at least letting a coach get his players through the system. It's kind of like how you give a GM 3 years befor you evaluate his draft classes. You can't get a great reading on a coach when he isn't putting his guys on the field.

 

That being said, I don't think Rich Rod or Hoke were the right guys for the Michigan job. John Beilein (basketball coach) on the other hand, is. His third season was a huge disappoitment as Michigan greatly fell short of expectations. Half of the Michigan fanbase was calling for Beilein's. Once he got his players in the system, results followed, and now Beilein has a case for best Michigan basketball coach in the history of the program.

---

Please take the #98 of the lousy QB.  I know he did it out of respect but he's actually disgracing the number right now.  We're all going to remember #98  now was the terrible QB that got his coach fired.

 

Gardner may suck, but Hoke getting fired will have a lot more to do with Brady Hoke than any specific players.

---

Now a loss to Rutgers...it's looking grimmer for Hoke by the day.

---

Hey they beat App State

---

Now a loss to Rutgers...it's looking grimmer for Hoke by the day.

 

He's gotta go.

---

2015 Michigan coach Mark Stoops

---

;

;

I think Jim Harbaugh might come back to college and UM.  But he apparently starts to wear on people quickly. In college your players are gone in 4 years so that wouldn't be a much of an issue. But he would need a really strong AD to corral him.

 

I would think he would be the sexy pic that would bring UM back quickly but I'm not sure he would be the best choice.

---