Welcome to Hogville!      Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Alvarez Inconsistency

Started by Razorfox, November 09, 2017, 10:03:23 am

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Razorfox

For those of you that say that CBB was only successful at Wisconsin because of Alvarez, you are stuck in the middle of the logical fallacy of inconsistency. 

First, you say that Alvarez was an amazing coach and is so good that he can be an AD and help his football coach be successful at the same time.  A subset of that was that Alvarez helped CBB pick good assistants.  However, it's also a fact that Alvarez handpicked CBB as his replacement as the head coach.  How can Alvarez be so great at everything, including picking coaches, yet suck at picking his own replacement?


Disclaimer: This has nothing to do with the fact that CBB hasn't succeeded here.  I'm merely making the case that he was a successful coach when he was hired here.



Wildhog

Bielema won like 10 games/year at Wisconsin.  I'd say he did a pretty good job.
Arkansas Razorbacks Football National Championships:
1909/1964/1965/1977

 

HoggyCat

Maybe because Alvarez knew he'd still run the show no matter who he hired. All coaches since he stepped down and became AD have 10 win seasons. And he even said at the TD Club that he & Bert had 4-5 game plan discussions every week.

Furthermore, look at coaches' records after they left Wisconsin.
I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you perceive it.

Wildhog

Quote from: HoggyCat on November 09, 2017, 10:05:41 am
Maybe because Alvarez knew he'd still run the show no matter who he hired. All coaches since he stepped down and became AD have 10 win seasons. And he even said at the TD Club that he & Bert had 4-5 game plan discussions every week.

Furthermore, look at coaches' records after they left Wisconsin.

yarp.
Arkansas Razorbacks Football National Championships:
1909/1964/1965/1977

Razorfox

Quote from: HoggyCat on November 09, 2017, 10:05:41 am
Maybe because Alvarez knew he'd still run the show no matter who he hired. All coaches since he stepped down and became AD have 10 win seasons. And he even said at the TD Club that he & Bert had 4-5 game plan discussions every week.

Furthermore, look at coaches' records after they left Wisconsin.

So you're telling me that Alvarez purposefully picks head coaches that he thinks are average or poor just so he can help them look good, so that a few crazies on a message board can conspiratorially attribute the success to him?  Sure, that makes a lot of sense.  NOT!

In actuality, it would make Alvarez look better if he got the best coaches he could, was an involved AD, and together they won a conference championship or NC.  Since that's actually what probably happened (or was his desire) when he picked CBB to be his replacement, he thought CBB was a good coach.

Again, for different reasons, CBB's success didn't follow him to Arkansas, but his lack of success here does NOT in any way diminish his time before he came.  Nor was he a bad choice based on his resume and history.   

snoblind

Quote from: HoggyCat on November 09, 2017, 10:05:41 am
Maybe because Alvarez knew he'd still run the show no matter who he hired. All coaches since he stepped down and became AD have 10 win seasons. And he even said at the TD Club that he & Bert had 4-5 game plan discussions every week.

Furthermore, look at coaches' records after they left Wisconsin.

Should be so painfully obvious by this point that it isn't even a topic of discussion.  But it will be...

Wildhog

I'm just flat missing the point of this thread.  Alvarez has done a great job hiring coaches that win at Wisconsin.  What they do away from Wisconsin should be irrelevant.
Arkansas Razorbacks Football National Championships:
1909/1964/1965/1977

Razorfox

Quote from: Wildhog on November 09, 2017, 10:14:27 am
I'm just flat missing the point of this thread.  Alvarez has done a great job hiring coaches that win at Wisconsin.  What they do away from Wisconsin should be irrelevant.

Really?  You haven't read the numerous posts that state CBB was a "lazy hire".  That what he did at Wisconsin didn't really matter or wasn't really him.  That Long is stupid for hiring him.  Etc, etc. 

If people could just not go to crazy land and say what we know, which is that it hasn't worked out here and that a change is needed, this board would be much more sane. 

GoHogzzGo

Alvarez picked who he thought was the best fit. As he has with all his coaches to be consistent with your logic.

However time has shown the key to success at Wisconsin is not Alvarez's choice of coaches, it is the system he insists on running their. Which enables whomever he chooses to succeed.

I think Alvarez also made a great point that CBB should be using speed players here versus road graters, perhaps CBB could still be a good coach in that Midwest region. He just doesn't know how to use the talent here.
Success isn't permanent and failure isn't fatal.

HoggyCat

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 10:11:58 am
So you're telling me that Alvarez purposefully picks head coaches that he thinks are average or poor just so he can help them look good, so that a few crazies on a message board can conspiratorially attribute the success to him?  Sure, that makes a lot of sense.  NOT!

In actuality, it would make Alvarez look better if he got the best coaches he could, was an involved AD, and together they won a conference championship or NC.  Since that's actually what probably happened (or was his desire) when he picked CBB to be his replacement, he thought CBB was a good coach.

Again, for different reasons, CBB's success didn't follow him to Arkansas, but his lack of success here does NOT in any way diminish his time before he came.  Nor was he a bad choice based on his resume and history.   

Why don't you spend just 30 minutes and look at each individual season he had at Wisconsin. Look at records, who he beat, who he lost to and who he managed to avoid. Look at year 7, where he was 7-5 but "won" the conference becomes tOSU and PSU were ineligible for post season..... and Matt Canada stood up to him and called HIS game in the conference championship game.

Quit looking on the surface. Don't be a sheep, it's ok to research.
I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you perceive it.

HoggyCat

Quote from: The ColonelHog on November 09, 2017, 10:20:28 am
Until you can show me one coach that failed at Wisky when BB left, I'll take your OP a little more serious.  EVERY HC that left Wisky has failed!  That's not a coincidence my friend.  Besides, nobody has said or posted proclaiming Alvarez was some coaching genius. What posters have said is that Alvarez has a winning formula at Wisky and everyone that had coached there under Alvarez has run the EXACT same formula.  Also, refer to a little history; the BIG10 format is totally different now than when Alvarez coached there.  Who couldn't win 10 games a year in that division!

Preach!!!
I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you perceive it.

Tusks



If Alvarez had 4-5 game plan meetings with Bert, then Bert was an executive assistant coach more so than a head coach.
sometimes it's a good and some times it's a schit

je100

Like Arkansas, Wisconsin is the only college football-relevant state university.  They have more than twice the number of NFL'ers that hail from the state of Wisconsin.  And Madison is less than one hour from the Illinois (which also has minimal in-state competition for talent) border, which produces about three times the NFL talent as the state of Arkansas.

More a matter of geography than Alvarez, Beliema or Chryst.

 

Razorfox

Quote from: The ColonelHog on November 09, 2017, 10:20:28 am
Until you can show me one coach that failed at Wisky when BB left, I’ll take your OP a little more serious.  EVERY HC that left Wisky has failed!  That’s not a coincidence my friend.  Besides, nobody has said or posted proclaiming Alvarez was some coaching genius. What posters have said is that Alvarez has a winning formula at Wisky and everyone that had coached there under Alvarez has run the EXACT same formula.  Also, refer to a little history; the BIG10 format is totally different now than when Alvarez coached there.  Who couldn’t win 10 games a year in that division!

It's only been two guys; not exactly enough data to make the claim or to use the word "every". 

Look at where those two guys went, Arkansas and Oregon State.  No one would debate that Oregon State is not a bad program and a bottom dweller in the Pac-12.  Arkansas has teetered between awful to mid-range in the SEC over its time in the conference.  So it's just as likely that you could attribute Bielema's and Andersen's downfalls to their schools they left for. 

Again, CBB hasn't done well enough here to stay our coach, I'm not even close to trying to make that case. 

pigtrino

There is a reason an undefeated Wisconsin team was ranked behind two one loss B10 schools.  Not the hardest place to win.

Razorfox

Quote from: HoggyCat on November 09, 2017, 10:21:16 am
Why don't you spend just 30 minutes and look at each individual season he had at Wisconsin. Look at records, who he beat, who he lost to and who he managed to avoid. Look at year 7, where he was 7-5 but "won" the conference becomes tOSU and PSU were ineligible for post season..... and Matt Canada stood up to him and called HIS game in the conference championship game.

Quit looking on the surface. Don't be a sheep, it's ok to research.

Not discounting year 7, but what about years 5 and 6?  Still two championships and two Rose Bowls. 

And how do you have this expectation that CBB should have a winning record against Ohio State during his time there?  That's unrealistic given that Ohio State was/is the Big 10 equivalent of Saban's Bama in the SEC.  The only other two teams he didn't have a winning record against were Penn State and Mich State and his records against them weren't terrible.  He beat consistently everyone he should have and almost always lost to who he should have.

I'm not going to use a dispute between him and an assistant as some universal condemnation when he's had dozens of assistants work for him over the years that have been just fine in their relationships. 

HoggyCat

Quote from: tusked on November 09, 2017, 10:21:50 am

If Alvarez had 4-5 game plan meetings with Bert, then Bert was an executive assistant coach more so than a head coach.

Don't take my word for it. Pull up his TD club speech.
I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you perceive it.

Razorfox

Quote from: The ColonelHog on November 09, 2017, 10:45:35 am
Let's try this a different way.  Actually there are 3 coaches of record.  Not one hiccup at Wisky but the two who left, SUDDENLY, in the still of night have both failed.  Each of the 3 had the exact same recruiting philosophy, exact same defensive philosophy, exact same offensive philosophy.  What are the odds of that?  Alvarez himself stated at the TD Club, "I meet with my FB coach 2-3 times a week."  Do you think they are discussing recipes, wives, and the best drinking hole?  To not be able to take the similarities of how 3 coaches perform under the same boss is just hiding your head in the sand.  Alvarez is Wisky FB!  Ask a Wisky person, my wife of 15 years lives 70 Miles from Madison and Alvarez is the AD D. Royal of the Midwest!

Sorry, not buying it...correlation does not imply causation. 

These things would all need to be true:
1) Alvarez is so good he can be an AD and a super-assistant FB coach at the same time.
2) He would purposefully hire head coaches he doesn't think are that good.
3) Years in the presence of Alvarez's greatness didn't rub off on those two guys in any way.

What's more likely is that both CBB and Andersen were both good coaches, and combined with Wisconsin's geography and resources had success that proved much more difficult at schools like Oregon State (no surprise) or Arkansas (a bit surprising that's it's gone this badly). 

And I don't see 2-3 meetings per week as enough for him to be the mastermind.  Were they 12 hour meetings?

#1Fan

Quote from: The ColonelHog on November 09, 2017, 10:20:28 am
Until you can show me one coach that failed at Wisky when BB left, I'll take your OP a little more serious.  EVERY HC that left Wisky has failed!  That's not a coincidence my friend.  Besides, nobody has said or posted proclaiming Alvarez was some coaching genius. What posters have said is that Alvarez has a winning formula at Wisky and everyone that had coached there under Alvarez has run the EXACT same formula.  Also, refer to a little history; the BIG10 format is totally different now than when Alvarez coached there. Who couldn't win 10 games a year in that division!
Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue, Iowa, Nebraska and Northwestern.

DeltaBoy

Whiskey got a fertile field to recruit from and a Set in stone system set up by Barry A.
If the South should lose, it means that the history of the heroic struggle will be written by the enemy, that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers, will be impressed by all of the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors and our maimed veterans as fit subjects for derision.
-- Major General Patrick Cleburne
The Confederacy had no better soldiers
than the Arkansans--fearless, brave, and oftentimes courageous beyond
prudence. Dickart History of Kershaws Brigade.

Razorfox

Quote from: #1Fan on November 09, 2017, 11:05:34 am
Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue, Iowa, Nebraska and Northwestern.

UCONN, Houston, Navy, ECU, Temple

Razorfox

Quote from: The ColonelHog on November 09, 2017, 11:33:11 am
Ok, I give up, you are a dunce!  He isn’t purposely hiring bad coaches.  He hire yes men!  Two, Madison does not have more resources in anything than UA except booze!  Wisky’s recruiting budget is waaaaay lower than ours and when did Illinois become a hotbed recruiting ground?  And no silly goose, it is not a coincidence that the philosophy of the FB program hasn’t changed one bit!  Also it doesn’t take rocket science to extrapolate an AD coming out of the office TWICE to coach the team through its bowl game seamlessly to attribute being able to do that requires in depth knowledge of the FB program!  What other AD in the country could do that or even attempt it? 

Your thread is dumb, uninformed, and without substance that can be substantiated.  And, you never answered my first question:  name ONE coach under Alvarez that failed at Wisky.  Next question:  name one who left Alvarez who has succeeded.  Third question:  is it just coincidence that the philosophy hasn’t changed one bit from Alvarez’s coaching days?

ALVAREZ IS WISCONSIN FB!

He's only hired three coaches.  If he's good, he hires coaches he/we would expect to be good, so you wouldn't expect any of them to fail. 

Look, this is getting old...you obviously miss my point, which is that CBB was NOT a bad hire when it was done.  Almost every person that looks at it in hindsight and says "I told you so", were the same people clamoring for Butch Joneses out there that failed the same or worse. 






snoblind

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 11:48:38 am
He's only hired three coaches.  If he's good, he hires coaches he/we would expect to be good, so you wouldn't expect any of them to fail. 

Look, this is getting old...you obviously miss my point, which is that CBB was NOT a bad hire when it was done.  Almost every person that looks at it in hindsight and says "I told you so", were the same people clamoring for Butch Joneses out there that failed the same or worse.

Folks get your point, they don't agree with it. 

hogginbama

Quote from: The ColonelHog on November 09, 2017, 10:45:35 am
Let's try this a different way.  Actually there are 3 coaches of record.  Not one hiccup at Wisky but the two who left, SUDDENLY, in the still of night have both failed.  Each of the 3 had the exact same recruiting philosophy, exact same defensive philosophy, exact same offensive philosophy.  What are the odds of that?  Alvarez himself stated at the TD Club, "I meet with my FB coach 2-3 times a week."  Do you think they are discussing recipes, wives, and the best drinking hole?  To not be able to take the similarities of how 3 coaches perform under the same boss is just hiding your head in the sand.  Alvarez is Wisky FB!  Ask a Wisky person, my wife of 15 years lives 70 Miles from Madison and Alvarez is the AD D. Royal of the Midwest!

I lived in Madison and I definitely wouldn't say Alvarez is the D.Royal equivalent of the Midwest. I would say it is a 50/50 split of the folks up there.
My ole buddy Biscuit has crossed that rainbow bridge. Life sure is different without him around.

 

Razorfox

Quote from: snoblind on November 09, 2017, 11:54:28 am
Folks get your point, they don't agree with it. 


Right, because they're keyboard heroes.  It's easy to sound smart and throw spears at everyone that makes decisions when you're on a message board.  But in most cases, if you go back and look at their post histories, their decisions/desires would have gotten us something worse or are so unrealistic as to be comical. 

bkjbearcat

Quote from: Wildhog on November 09, 2017, 10:04:27 am
Bielema won like 10 games/year at Wisconsin.  I'd say he did a pretty good job.

He was a good Big 10 HC.

As a SEC HC he's P**s poor.

Next season he'll be a good MAC or Missouri Valley HC.
B-E-A-R-C-A-T-S BEARCATS, BEARCATS GOOOOOOO BEARCATS!!!!!!!<br /><br />D2 National Champs in Football: 1998, 1999, 2009, 2013, 2015, 2016<br /><br />D2 National Champs in Mens Basketball: 2017, 2019, No.1 team in 2020,2021, 2022

Razorfox

Quote from: bkjbearcat on November 09, 2017, 12:11:12 pm
He was a good Big 10 HC.

As a SEC HC he's P**s poor.

Next season he'll be a good MAC or Missouri Valley HC.

I'd say there are very few people that disagree with that anymore.  The point is, who was to know that 5 years ago?  And how can you point to a coach at Iowa State or Memphis or Louisiana Tech, etc and say that because they are good there, they'll be good in the SEC?  You can't! 

razorbackfaninar

Quote from: HoggyCat on November 09, 2017, 10:05:41 am
Maybe because Alvarez knew he'd still run the show no matter who he hired. All coaches since he stepped down and became AD have 10 win seasons. And he even said at the TD Club that he & Bert had 4-5 game plan discussions every week.

Furthermore, look at coaches' records after they left Wisconsin.

Alvarez didn't "run the show" all that great when he was the head coach. He averaged 7 wins a season in 16 seasons.

razorbackfaninar

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 12:15:14 pm
I'd say there are very few people that disagree with that anymore.  The point is, who was to know that 5 years ago?  And how can you point to a coach at Iowa State or Memphis or Louisiana Tech, etc and say that because they are good there, they'll be good in the SEC?  You can't!

You must not listen to sports talk radio.  Every caller I've heard knew when we hired Bielema it was a terrible fit.

Razorfox

Quote from: razorbackfaninar on November 09, 2017, 12:33:48 pm
You must not listen to sports talk radio.  Every caller I've heard knew when we hired Bielema it was a terrible fit.

No, that was a complaint because he ran a system that they thought was "less fun".  However, those same people that wanted someone like Butch Jones or Jim McElwain, who were more offense guys, would have ended up in the same place or worse had they gotten their way.

#1Fan

Quote from: The ColonelHog on November 09, 2017, 11:34:53 am
Exactly!  GARBAGE DIVISION!
But the question is why can't those teams do the same thing that Wisky does and win 10 games a year?  After all, they play in the same garbage division.  Answer:  Barry Alvarez

bkjbearcat

Quote from: razorbackfaninar on November 09, 2017, 12:33:48 pm
You must not listen to sports talk radio.  Every caller I've heard knew when we hired Bielema it was a terrible fit.

When he was hired I asked a few friends of mine and a few people at work about the hire. Many thought on his resume alone he was the right choice. But I asked them on their thoughts on Big 10 football and most if not all of them said it's crap, slow and boring. So Hogs brings in the guy from the program who was the poster boy for the Big 10 style of football that no one in the SEC likes.

Yes there was a lot of people who didn't like the hire. And his first season here it just reinsured their thoughts.
B-E-A-R-C-A-T-S BEARCATS, BEARCATS GOOOOOOO BEARCATS!!!!!!!<br /><br />D2 National Champs in Football: 1998, 1999, 2009, 2013, 2015, 2016<br /><br />D2 National Champs in Mens Basketball: 2017, 2019, No.1 team in 2020,2021, 2022

#1Fan

Quote from: razorbackfaninar on November 09, 2017, 12:31:52 pm
Alvarez didn't "run the show" all that great when he was the head coach. He averaged 7 wins a season in 16 seasons.
To be fair, he took over a dumpster fire and was 11-22 in his first three seasons while getting it turned around.  Then went on to win three Rose Bowls.

razorbackfaninar

Quote from: #1Fan on November 09, 2017, 01:09:20 pm
To be fair, he took over a dumpster fire and was 11-22 in his first three seasons while getting it turned around.  Then went on to win three Rose Bowls.

11-33 in his first three seasons 1-11, 5-11, 5-11 then 10 games in 93. Then he went 7-12, 4-7, 8-13, 8-13 before having a back to back 11 and 10 win season in 98 and 99 then finished out the career winning 9, 5, 8, 7, 9 , 10.  The numbers are not shameful, but they also don't suggest a Machiavellian mastermind controlling Wisconsin football form the AD chair.  He was a good coach who won more that he lost.  Wisconsin benefits from having a very favorable schedule.  It's why they are undefeated this year and yet ranked behind several other one loss teams.  A very mediocre Michigan team is the stiffest competition on their schedule.   

razorbackfaninar

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 12:53:41 pm
No, that was a complaint because he ran a system that they thought was "less fun".  However, those same people that wanted someone like Butch Jones or Jim McElwain, who were more offense guys, would have ended up in the same place or worse had they gotten their way.

No I was just joking because now that he is doing poorly everyone who calls into the radio shows likes to say they knew when he was hired that he was a bad fit and wouldn't work out. 

#1Fan

Quote from: razorbackfaninar on November 09, 2017, 02:25:22 pm
11-33 in his first three seasons 1-11, 5-11, 5-11 then 10 games in 93. Then he went 7-12, 4-7, 8-13, 8-13 before having a back to back 11 and 10 win season in 98 and 99 then finished out the career winning 9, 5, 8, 7, 9 , 10.  The numbers are not shameful, but they also don't suggest a Machiavellian mastermind controlling Wisconsin football form the AD chair.  He was a good coach who won more that he lost.  Wisconsin benefits from having a very favorable schedule.  It's why they are undefeated this year and yet ranked behind several other one loss teams.  A very mediocre Michigan team is the stiffest competition on their schedule.
Wisky played 16 games during his second season and third season there?  He must really have some pull.

Vantage 8 dude

Quote from: pigtrino on November 09, 2017, 10:39:03 am
There is a reason an undefeated Wisconsin team was ranked behind two one loss B10 schools.  Not the hardest place to win.
If you're referring to this season IMO much of that would have to do with Wisconsin's feather weight schedule so far this year. If I'm not mistaken I heard yesterday that even if they make it to the Big 10 championship game as it now stands they will not have played a school ranked anywhere in the top 25. In today's college game for a P5 school that's pretty hard to do.

#1Fan

Quote from: Vantage 8 dude on November 09, 2017, 02:46:30 pm
If you're referring to this season IMO much of that would have to do with Wisconsin's feather weight schedule so far this year. If I'm not mistaken I heard yesterday that even if they make it to the Big 10 championship game as it now stands they will not have played a school ranked anywhere in the top 25. In today's college game for a P5 school that's pretty hard to do.
Iowa and Northwestern are in the top 25 this week.

Oklahawg

No hire is a "gimme" - all coaches at all schools have a chance to be miserable failures.

CBB looked as favorable as any hire under Long. It didn't work. I am glad we gave it a shot. "next"
I am a Hog fan. I was long before my name was etched, twice, on the sidewalks on the Hill. I will be long after Sam Pittman and Eric Mussleman are coaches, and Hunter Yuracheck is AD. I am a Hog fan when we win, when we lose and when we don't play. I love hearing the UA band play the National Anthem on game day, but I sing along to the Alma Mater. I am a Hog fan.<br /><br />A liberal education is at the heart of a civil society, and at the heart of a liberal education is the act of teaching. - Bart Giamatti <br /><br />"It is a puzzling thing. The truth knocks on the door and you say, 'Go away, I'm looking for the truth,' and so it goes away. Puzzling." ― Robert M. Pirsig<br /><br />Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good, too.  – Yogi Berra

hawg66

So I guess Canada should be mad at Alvarez not Bielema?  So much flaw in the logic of all of this. We're five years in. When Bielemas successors win their first B10 title they'll have a start on equaling his record time n Madison.

A lot of us didn't like Chaney. In hindsight he's a much better fit for Bielema than Enos is. His heavy run formations were perfect for Bielema ball and his relationship with Pittman was a big part of that. He's doing a really good job at Georgia right now. Enos is a much better Qb coach and a great playcaller but he's not a good fit for what Bielema was raised on.

From Tusk Till Dawn

Quote from: #1Fan on November 09, 2017, 01:09:20 pm
To be fair, he took over a dumpster fire and was 11-22 in his first three seasons while getting it turned around.  Then went on to win three Rose Bowls.
Thats way different than what CBB stepped into here right?????????????

wachhog

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 10:11:58 am
So you're telling me that Alvarez purposefully picks head coaches that he thinks are average or poor just so he can help them look good, so that a few crazies on a message board can conspiratorially attribute the success to him?  Sure, that makes a lot of sense.  NOT!

In actuality, it would make Alvarez look better if he got the best coaches he could, was an involved AD, and together they won a conference championship or NC.  Since that's actually what probably happened (or was his desire) when he picked CBB to be his replacement, he thought CBB was a good coach.

Again, for different reasons, CBB's success didn't follow him to Arkansas, but his lack of success here does NOT in any way diminish his time before he came.  Nor was he a bad choice based on his resume and history.   
Practicing the pitch you'll make to schools when he looks fit a job?

From Tusk Till Dawn

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 11:48:38 am
He's only hired three coaches.  If he's good, he hires coaches he/we would expect to be good, so you wouldn't expect any of them to fail. 

Look, this is getting old...you obviously miss my point, which is that CBB was NOT a bad hire when it was done.  Almost every person that looks at it in hindsight and says "I told you so", were the same people clamoring for Butch Joneses out there that failed the same or worse.
Heres your problem, you are clearly above average in critical thinking skills and are trying influence with common sense and facts.  Those are ill advised here.

Most of the HV experts would think they died and went to Heaven if we came anywhere near the type of success he had at Wis.  And if they pull the weak schedule angle, put your boots on.  Hell there are more posts about moving to the Big 12 so we can be more competitive than you can shake a stick at.  Also Barry was just an over performer at Wis running the entire athletic dept along with the football team.  CBB tried that here which is why he is responsible for every dropped pass, missed fg, and fumble that occurs.

No sir, you will need to adjust your approach in order to influence here.


rude1

Quote from: hawg66 on November 09, 2017, 09:47:09 pm
So I guess Canada should be mad at Alvarez not Bielema?  So much flaw in the logic of all of this. We're five years in. When Bielemas successors win their first B10 title they'll have a start on equaling his record time n Madison.

A lot of us didn't like Chaney. In hindsight he's a much better fit for Bielema than Enos is. His heavy run formations were perfect for Bielema ball and his relationship with Pittman was a big part of that. He's doing a really good job at Georgia right now. Enos is a much better Qb coach and a great playcaller but he's not a good fit for what Bielema was raised on.
I have no idea what your point is and I am starting to doubt whether you do too. How hard is it to understand that Alvarez already knows what it takes to win at Wisky, he built that blueprint on how to do it. He isn't going to hire some lone ranger with his own bright idea on how to win at Wisky, he has his stamp all over that program and when another coach is hired he is hired with the understanding that he is to use "the blueprint". Naturally coaches egos kick in and start to believe they know better as Bret did and want to prove themselves away from here, unfortunately what works there only works there.

Bret Big 10 titles are more about being in the right place at the right time when the programs in the conference he couldn't beat were in transition or on probation, he was able to beat up on the bottom half of the bad teams in the conference, take his loss or two from the top of the conference and still win it. 

razorbackfaninar

Quote from: #1Fan on November 09, 2017, 02:45:59 pm
Wisky played 16 games during his second season and third season there?  He must really have some pull.
yeah my bad, 5-6 and 5-6 I think I meant to put 5 of 11 but I don't know

From Tusk Till Dawn

Quote from: rude1 on November 09, 2017, 10:56:28 pm
I have no idea what your point is and I am starting to doubt whether you do too. How hard is it to understand that Alvarez already knows what it takes to win at Wisky, he built that blueprint on how to do it. He isn't going to hire some lone ranger with his own bright idea on how to win at Wisky, he has his stamp all over that program and when another coach is hired he is hired with the understanding that he is to use "the blueprint". Naturally coaches egos kick in and start to believe they know better as Bret did and want to prove themselves away from here, unfortunately what works there only works there.

Bret Big 10 titles are more about being in the right place at the right time when the programs in the conference he couldn't beat were in transition or on probation, he was able to beat up on the bottom half of the bad teams in the conference, take his loss or two from the top of the conference and still win it.
Your bottom paragraph essentially defined our SWC history of success (beating cupcakes regularly) which basically has shaped our identity to date.

rude1

Quote from: From Tusk Till Dawn on November 09, 2017, 11:03:33 pm
Your bottom paragraph essentially defined our SWC history of success (beating cupcakes regularly) which basically has shaped our identity to date.
Yeah and we found what worked in the SWC didn't give us a snow balls chance in hell in the SEC.

texas tush hog

Quote from: tusked on November 09, 2017, 10:21:50 am

If Alvarez had 4-5 game plan meetings with Bert, then Bert was an executive assistant coach more so than a head coach.



Exactly.

Cinco de Hogo

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 10:03:23 am
For those of you that say that CBB was only successful at Wisconsin because of Alvarez, you are stuck in the middle of the logical fallacy of inconsistency. 

First, you say that Alvarez was an amazing coach and is so good that he can be an AD and help his football coach be successful at the same time.  A subset of that was that Alvarez helped CBB pick good assistants.  However, it's also a fact that Alvarez handpicked CBB as his replacement as the head coach.  How can Alvarez be so great at everything, including picking coaches, yet suck at picking his own replacement?


Disclaimer: This has nothing to do with the fact that CBB hasn't succeeded here.  I'm merely making the case that he was a successful coach when he was hired here.

What's your point?  Spell it out, do you want to keep BB?

bennyl08

Quote from: Razorfox on November 09, 2017, 10:03:23 am
For those of you that say that CBB was only successful at Wisconsin because of Alvarez, you are stuck in the middle of the logical fallacy of inconsistency. 

First, you say that Alvarez was an amazing coach and is so good that he can be an AD and help his football coach be successful at the same time.  A subset of that was that Alvarez helped CBB pick good assistants.  However, it's also a fact that Alvarez handpicked CBB as his replacement as the head coach.  How can Alvarez be so great at everything, including picking coaches, yet suck at picking his own replacement?


Disclaimer: This has nothing to do with the fact that CBB hasn't succeeded here.  I'm merely making the case that he was a successful coach when he was hired here.

Bolded is an assumption that the alvarites may not be making. Think back to the petrino years where basically petrino ran every aspect of the team and the other coaches were just there to get a paycheck. While an exaggeration, there was some truth to the idea. The alvarites may have a similar idea. That it doesn't matter how good or bad the coaches alvarez picks are, he runs the ship and the team will be good regardless of the quality of his hires.
Quote from: PorkSoda on May 05, 2016, 09:24:05 pm
damn I thought it was only a color, didn't realize it was named after a liqueur. leave it to benny to make me research the history of chartreuse