Let's not act like these players haven't been getting paid over the years. It's just out front and more than what it used to be.

Parents and players have long played this game at schools. The schools like wise would capitalize on the popularity of those players.

College sports as we knew it are done

Quote from: southarkhog06 on Yesterday at 11:47:33 pmTenessee focuses on offense therefore their pitching is up and down, but fair they consistently have great lineups. Kentucky is having a dream season as is TAMU, but they are no where near consistently good. We focus on pitching and defense and want the offense to work counts, and hit homers. We won't have a lineup like you want as long as DVH is here, it just isn't his philosophy. If you point that out 18 times every game thread some of us are gonna assume you think DVH is overrated. CNT is doing exactly what CDVH wants him too, and we are all a little tired of you also mentioning how bad you think he is every game thread. I was hoping that with CMH making Tebow look dumb we could have some peace, but now we just have to listen to whining about NT every game.

Except we literally had the top offense in the conference in 2018 under NT. We were top 3 again in 2019. Post-covid though, it seems we started sacrificing BA for power, which was fine, until we fell near the bottom of the rankings in power too. It seems we slowly have lost the offensive identity we had.

Another stat - our four primary outfielders (Lovich, Edmunson, Wilmsmeyer, and Diggs) are a combined 31/164 for a .189 average in conference play. For reference, Rowland hit .182 and Bolton hit .206 last year. Somehow our lineup black hole has gotten bigger.

https://x.com/dshi12/status/1781527754535739803?s=46&t=4yXoXWOsnPdOMsb8brdEmg

Quote from: hoglady on Yesterday at 11:26:03 pmAloy's come a long way with his bat since the start of the season.
Souza doesn't appear to be near as confident at the plate on the road. Hopefully he can get that figured out.

Totally agree. Aloy has come a long way and I think he's in for a good stretch. He's had a couple head-scratching ABs but I look for him to be fine.
Souza is a beast and he'll put it all together. Road series for a true frosh in the SEC....I can't imagine

Stone Hewlett with his 4th 6-pitch save of the season.  That's some kind of whacked record.

We in good hands fellas. Have a cold one or a rolled one, or both, a just relax. Everything is gonna be aight

Quote from: southarkhog06 on Yesterday at 11:34:26 pmand that focus on defense more often than not has kept us consistently good. We haven't gotten that lucky break to win it all, but we are always in a position too. I do understand those that would trade places with the miss schools and take the title and multiple years of being terrible. That just isn't who I am, the unbelievable high of winning it all is not worth multiple 2016s. Going through that whole summer apathetic about baseball was among the worst sports related experiences of my life.

I agree with you 100% here. 2016 was miserable

Quote from: AHiD on Yesterday at 11:22:33 pmI think that's a DVH thing, not a CNT thing. We recruit really really well, but I think our hitting prospects are disproportionately guys whose tools we like but who we know can play defense. An example—I don't think we would have given Tommy Tanks the time of day, especially not to play 3B, because of truly awful defense

and that focus on defense more often than not has kept us consistently good. We haven't gotten that lucky break to win it all, but we are always in a position too. I do understand those that would trade places with the miss schools and take the title and multiple years of being terrible. That just isn't who I am, the unbelievable high of winning it all is not worth multiple 2016s. Going through that whole summer apathetic about baseball was among the worst sports related experiences of my life.

Quote from: AHiD on Yesterday at 11:22:33 pmI think that's a DVH thing, not a CNT thing. We recruit really really well, but I think our hitting prospects are disproportionately guys whose tools we like but who we know can play defense. An example—I don't think we would have given Tommy Tanks the time of day, especially not to play 3B, because of truly awful defense

I know he wasn't great last year but he's only had one error this year. Anyone who wouldn't want that guy on their team is nuts.

Quote from: RWQ on Yesterday at 11:40:00 amI know I'm late to this discussion, but what high school or NFL coach has anyone compared CSP to unfavorably?

No idea what you are talking about here. I brought up HS and NFL separately from Pittman to point out that there are differences in difficulty. I'll say the same thing differently. A state HS track champion isn't going to be better than a last place olympian. Winning vs losing in a vacuum doesn't define talent. Context is important. 

QuoteI have been a Sam Pittman supporter and defender, but at some point in the context of coaching college football, you are who your record says you are.  I will cede year one to you because of unprecedented circumstances.  Even without that CSP's record is 20-18. 

20-18 is a lot better than 23-25 for starters. Secondly, striking year 1 isn't the best way to do that. If you look at the games we won and lost in 2020 and compare that to our original 12-game schedule for 2020, we either go 6-6 or 7-5. That makes the record 26-24 or 27-23.

And no, you are never who your record says you are. Your record is a part of it, it's a factor, absolutely. But it's never the end-all-be-all. 8-4 is the SEC is a lot different than 8-4 in the sun belt in terms of coaching success. Two teams could be 10-2 but one team would be -14 against the other in betting. If your record was all that mattered, how could that be? Maybe the team had a bunch of injuries. Maybe they had an easy schedule and their two losses were to the only two good teams they played and both losses were a bloodbath.

QuoteAnother year like the last and he will be under .500 and likely out of a job.  He has a chance to salvage something with the help of an experienced coach on staff,

You'll have to search far and wide to find anybody who things differently there.

Quotebut I have seen nothing objectively or subjectively to suggest to me that Sam is a better coach than BB. 

Which Bielema are we talking about? Pittman at his worst is still streets ahead of Bielema in 2017.

Now, earlier Bielema? The Bielema who went to three straight rose bowls, recruited his butt off in 2013 after inheriting the worst roster that I can truly remember (key word inherited, so imagine the 2013 roster but no Collins, no Henry, no Skipper/Kirkland, etc... only the returning roster, sure there was some talent, but much of it was completely inexperienced too)? The Bielema who punched peak Bama in the face, trounced Texas, and was willing to make changes to upgrade the offense? That Bielema? Yeah, peak Bielema was very likely a better coach than we've seen so far with Pittman (though if wins and losses are all that matters, Pittman won 9 games which Bielema never did, to argue against that requires dropping your argument that w/l is the sole thing that matters and agreeing with me that context matters).

QuoteI have certainly not seen any of the growth I hoped for in allowing for his lack of experience as a head coach.

Well, I'm not sure how high your hopes for, but I've certainly seen more than satisfactory growth from him.

QuoteIf you are not arguing that Sam is a better coach than Bret and you can't compare coaching records to make the case for Bret, I apologize for  misunderstanding.

I'm arguing that context matters. Bielema is among the best hires we ever made in terms of incoming resume. Bielema as Wiscy was a vastly better coach than Pittman and I'd argue that his early time at Arkansas he was a better coach than Pittman. But his 2016 and 2017 seasons? I'd argue that Pittman's 2023 was a better job of coaching than either of those by Bielema.

Another thing that I'd argue in favor of Pittman over Bielema is trajectory. Bielema's coaching started strong, but fell apart and eventually he lost the lockerroom. Alcoholism is the rumored culprit and it certainly checks all the boxes of what we saw and know. Pittman hasn't had that. While his win/loss has followed a similar trajectory, again, context matters. Pittman's made mistakes in coaches hired and the culture that they bring. He's made changes to presumably fix said culture. Pittman's dealing with completely new deals in NIL and transfer portal. He's handled both of those well, but he's absolutely struggled with team cohesion in this new world and that has gotten worse. But, that isn't Pittman declining, that's the world changing and we'll see whether or not he can adapt. He hasn't shown skills in that yet. Bielema's world wasn't changing, he was changing into an alleged alcoholic. That's a huge difference IMO.

tl;dr Context matters is my argument. Win loss record alone doesn't mean much without context. Which coach is better is dynamic. Parts of Bielema's career were better than Pittman. Parts were worse. Overall, Pittman's biggest downfall is struggling to adapt to a changing environment, Bielema's biggest downfall was his own vices (allegedly).