M-Borg vs. THE Flavortown U Thread, Orig. by Buckeye Paul, absconded w/by talent.

[iam416]

I myself would like to add to your two ingredients having a clear goal. Talent + coaching + organisational clarity.

That's a fair add-on, though it's obviously of less significance. I will note that there was an article about Mal Moore, Bama's AD, and his vision for Alabama football and how he contributed to getting Alabama where it needed to be. Gist was UAT was resting on its laurels with crappy facilities -- Moore changed that. And, of course, he was absolutely relentless in his pursuit of Saban.

and btw.. I'm already tired of bama fans and espn talking about this is the best dynasty ever, because UNL shared a championship. Sorry.. 70-3 has not been matched. Bama lost to a freshman QB at home. you're not that dynasty... so kindly fuck off.

Should have shared TWO. :-) That was a great run for UNL. I'm not sure, exactly, when it ended -- they were still really good in 1999. I think the combo of Colorado + Miami killed whatever image of greatness UNL still had. But they were damn good.

M can compete for the NC... so can UNL... but it is going to be done the way UNL has competed in the past.

Just to be clear -- that's what UNL has to do. IMO, M has considerably more recruiting potential than UNL which means they don't have to fumble around with 9 wins seasons waiting for the right mix to hit.

[iam416]

hack... there is a lot more to winning the NC than just coaching and talent.

That's true. FTR, entropy, my formula was just as it pertains to being an ELITE team. A handful of elite teams don't win a national title every year. I still think the 1998 OSU team was an elite caliber team, but for some of the reasons you mention in your post, they didn't win the national title.

[entropy]

talent.. UNL has not been the same program since the Colorado loss.

it really took the loss to FSU in the 94 orange bowl (93 season) to breath unwavering confidence into the program. I think that CU loss in 2001 created a culture of doubt. From 1993-2001 UNL was 102-12. Amazing stretch that really spoiled us..

[iam416]

Finally, if you accept that it's talent + coaching + organizational clarity, which I do, then you need to look at what advantages the SEC/Alabama have. They have no inherent advantage in the last two variables. The talent variable, though, is influenced by their aggressive practice of cutting dead wood. It's not even oversigning, necessarily, but the process of "cutting" kids that aren't going to contribute. No one in the B10 does that. No one. And I think that's how Alabama signs an "extra class".

As an example, under NCAA rules you can sign 25 players per class, but you're roster can only have 85 scholarship players come August. So, you can't actually sign 25 if everyone stays. In the B10, you're allowed to sign up to 28 if you show where those spots are coming from (presumably, then, at least 3 would be early enrollees who would count against the previous class. So, in a 5 year period, M or OSU *could* sign 140 kids. But to do so would require at least 30 kids to leave the program over those 5 years. That just doesn't happen at B10 schools. It does at Alabama.

If you forced 4-year scholaships on everyone and significantly restricted the use of medical scholarships, I think you'd go a long way to resolving this particular talent advantage.

Entropy has posted a ton of good stuff on this on the CFB thread.

[iam416]

talent.. UNL has not been the same program since the Colorado loss.

Yeah, if I were guessing, I would have said that was the day that changed everything for UNL. In reality, the wheels were in motion and the slide was inevitable, but that was the loss that officially announced it, IMO.

And you're right about the Orange Bowl. That was a great game. And I remember being shocked that UNL was every bit the team FSU was, given UNL's stretch of Orange Bowl losses (to be fair, to some really fucking good teams).

[entropy]

nothing better than playing the #1 or #2 team 5 yrs in a row, in their back yard...

[hack]

Ent, I agree. Talent was just stripping it to the basics to focus on, and I wanted to add that.

That's a fair add-on, though it's obviously of less significance.

I dunno about that. I've been a fan of the Lions, owned by the Fords, and a fan of the Pistons owned by Davidson. I'm oddly fascinated by U of M as a concept, a money-generation machine, and an organisation. Maybe I'm just prone to viewing sports and other things through the filter of the very top rung of an organisation and its vision and clarity and motivations, but I think it's the most important thing for sustaining excellence.

[hack]

Finally, if you accept that it's talent + coaching + organizational clarity, which I do, then you need to look at what advantages the SEC/Alabama have. They have no inherent advantage in the last two variables.

I think when you're an elite coach, you look at the third and sign up. Gotta wonder about Miles in 2007. He can get whatever he wants down there, or come up here for sentimental reasons and have to play by a set of rules and hold the hands of a bunch of buffoons who think they can tell him how to do his job cause they were Michigan Men during the Ten Year War. Your typical coach, unless he's really tied to that place for sentimental reasons, is going to choose to coach where he gets the ``tools'' he needs to do the job. And perhaps that's why the Big Ten has crappier coaches top to bottom than the SEC.

The SEC isn't the only place to find that organisational clarity. But outside them, among elite programs currently, it's just a few scattered programs like OSU, USC and Oregon.

[iam416]

Professionally, I agree, Hack. As a Stillers fan, I will tout the Rooneys and Stiller organization all day. But that's apples and oranges, IMO.

I think organizational clarity dovetails with coaching. If you're committed to winning, you find the best coach, pay him what he needs to be paid AND you pay his staff and give him a ginormous recruiting budget and world class facilities. If you're organizational clarity is muddled, you haggle and end up with Plan B or C or D coach, a cheap staff, modest recruiting budget and/or antiquated facilities.

On the professional level, so much is about organization. From the GM to scouts to coach -- it's all about being on the same page, getting players that fit with what you want to do and getting those players to perform.

All of those tasks fall under "coaching" in the CFB game.

[hack]

Disagree. Is situational. Look at the UM football program and the UM basketball program. For basketball, all of it falls under ``coaching''. For football, not a whole lot of it does.

[iam416]

The SEC isn't the only place to find that organisational clarity

Your points are well-taken, but I'd almost rephrase it as "commitement to football." The SEC, no matter the school, is hugely committed to its football programs -- to the exclusion of most its remaining sports (and, some may even argue, academics).

B10 schools have a different mantra and set of values. Ohio State is able to be as committed to football as SEC schools because Ohio State has a humongous AD and revenue stream. But that commitment isn't to the exclusion of other sports in any way (I won't bother you with the various non-revenue sports improvements around campus). Michigan has the same type of athletic department. They *could* be all-in on football AND still maintain the core value of providing as many intercollegiate athletic opportunities to its students as possible.

The difference is below OSU and M. Illinois and Iowa can't really spend like, say, Auburn or South Carolina on football. Even though they have endowments that dwarf those shitass schools, are flagship state universities, have very good ADs, etc. They just ain't gonna do it.

So, instead of 6 or 7 or 8 programs that are legitimately all-in for the football arms race, the B10 has 3 (counting PSU).

[iam416]

Disagree. Is situational. Look at the UM football program and the UM basketball program. For basketball, all of it falls under ``coaching''. For football, not a whole lot of it does.

I can't really comment on that one or the other. Just don't know.

At Ohio State, UFM runs the football program -- from gameday to recruiting to training table.

[entropy]

bama was a nobody from 1993-2001... when I ran the numbers on UNL, they only won 56% of their games... meaning they were the 44th best program during that stretch.

Tenn and Florida were the SEC during those years. Saban has obviously grown as a coach since his MSU days, but I still think the over signing has inflated his stock.

[entropy]

talent.. 2 things. Kentucky is all in for basketball, not football.

and why only 3 in the BIG? I would have said 5

[iam416]

I don't know what Nebraska, Wisky and MSU pay for assistant coaches. That's my crude metric for "all-in".

I know UFM's staff is the highest paid and would rate something like #3 in the SEC.

I think M is #2. I don't know after that. It was a loose statement.