Jeff Long is emphatic: Arkansas coach Bret Bielema isn’t on the hot seat

[jkstock04]

So should every program just pick and choose which coaches get included in their programs win/loss records? Every program has coaches that are good and bad. You want to throw out almost our entire history in the sec because you do not think the coaches were any good, yet two of the ones you deem bad are the only ones to actually appear with the Hogs in the seccg.

I guess it just depends on what one thinks of those past coaches. Were they mistakes or par for the course.

I know this...of all the bellyaching you old timers do about the SWC days and Texas always getting preferential treatment...sure seems like we had some great teams. I wasn't really around but it seems like we legitimately had aspirations of winning the conference going into a lot of years.

[jkstock04]

which swc, the one where from 32-62 the Hogs went 140-151-16? And where from 32-91 the Hogs went 379-247-24 for a 60 year win % of .580.

How about the 70s & 80s? you tell me...give me a quick history lesson.

[hogsanity]

I guess it just depends on what one thinks of those past coaches. Were they mistakes or par for the course.

I know this...of all the bellyaching you old timers do about the SWC days and Texas always getting preferential treatment...sure seems like we had some great teams. I wasn't really around but it seems like we legitimately had aspirations of winning the conference going into a lot of years.

I'm 47, and I hate talking about the swc because we have not been in it since I was 22. And, as the numbers point out, the Hogs, in total, were not any better then than they are now. In their last 60 seasons in the swc they had a win % of .580.

[WilsonHog]

Would you argue that any of those are objectively good coaches?  Ford was drunk half the time and completely disinterested when he was here.  Nutt, was Nutt.  And Bielema has not done it here.

I would argue a couple of things. First of all, Danny Ford was 96-29-4 and Clemson, where he won six conference titles and one national championship. Yes, I would call him a good coach.

Bielema was 68-24 at Wisconsin; yes, I would call him a "good coach."

I don't believe you label a coach based on how he performs at one school over a four or five-year period, because all schools are not created equal. I suspect that people in the coaching profession would consider, for example, that Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Texas A&M are all easier places to win than Arkansas is. 

[GuvHog]

So should every program just pick and choose which coaches get included in their programs win/loss records? Every program has coaches that are good and bad. You want to throw out almost our entire history in the sec because you do not think the coaches were any good, yet two of the ones you deem bad are the only ones to actually appear with the Hogs in the seccg.

When the Hogs have had Good HC's (Broyles, Holtz, Hatfield, Petrino), they did well. When they had coaches that were not very good (Ford, Nutt, Smiley, Bielema), they didn't do very well. Broyles had some lean years when he first arrived but turned it around. I'm still hoping CBB turns it around too.

[hawgon]

I would argue a couple of things. First of all, Danny Ford was 96-29-4 and Clemson, where he won six conference titles and one national championship. Yes, I would call him a good coach.

Bielema was 68-24 at Wisconsin; yes, I would call him a "good coach."

I don't believe you label a coach based on how he performs at one school over a four or five-year period, because all schools are not created equal. I suspect that people in the coaching profession would consider, for example, that Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Texas A&M are all easier places to win than Arkansas is.

I suspect that if you had worked the drive through at a liquor store in Fayetteville you would know why Ford wasn't winning at Arkansas.  He bought a 12 pack a day at that little store across from Harps.

Why would you call A&M better and easier to win at when neither there overall record nor their series record with us bears that out?

[WilsonHog]

I suspect that if you had worked the drive through at a liquor store in Fayetteville you would know why Ford wasn't winning at Arkansas.  He bought a 12 pack a day at that little store across from Harps.

Why would you call A&M better and easier to win at when neither there overall record nor their series record with us bears that out?

Recruiting. If I had to choose between our recruiting base and the Aggies' base as a coach, I'd rather work from theirs.

[GuvHog]

I suspect that if you had worked the drive through at a liquor store in Fayetteville you would know why Ford wasn't winning at Arkansas.  He bought a 12 pack a day at that little store across from Harps.

Well said. Ford was a has been and the game had passed him by. He was good at Clemson but his best days were behind him. He should never have been hired as Hog HC.

Bret still has a chance to turn things around here. I srue hope he does.

[bphi11ips]

I guess it just depends on what one thinks of those past coaches. Were they mistakes or par for the course.

I know this...of all the bellyaching you old timers do about the SWC days and Texas always getting preferential treatment...sure seems like we had some great teams. I wasn't really around but it seems like we legitimately had aspirations of winning the conference going into a lot of years.

What bellyaching?  For the first 30 years of my life, Arkansas finished in the AP Top 10 ten times.  We finished 10-15 another five times, and 16th once. 

Three things happened in 1990. First, Frank Broyles made a short term decision to hire Jack Crowe.  That didn't seem like a bad decision at the time, but Crowe did essentially to the team what Smiley did to it.  Second, we joined the SEC.  No explanation needed there.  Third, we stopped hiring top-notch coaches for almost twenty years.  Petrino looked like one for a while.  Bret Bielema is a top-notch coach who has stabilized the program and gives it a chance to compete in the SEC West.  The trajectory looked as expected but for two games to end 2016. 

Will 2017 be a breakout season?  No one knows, but it could be.  One thing I know is that it's fun playing TCU, A&M, South Carolina, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State and Missouri.  Any year you beat 5 of those teams is generally nothing to be ashamed of, especially if the program itself is something we can all be proud of and every opponent knows they better bring their A-game or lose. 

All of this discussion about expectations in terms of floors and ceilings is pretty silly.

[bphi11ips]

When the Hogs have had Good HC's (Broyles, Holtz, Hatfield, Petrino), they did well. When they had coaches that were not very good (Ford, Nutt, Smiley, Bielema), they didn't do very well. Broyles had some lean years when he first arrived but turned it around. I'm still hoping CBB turns it around too.

Broyles only had one half of a lean year.  He lost his first six games before closing 1958 with four straight wins. The next four years he was 34-10, won the SWC three times, and finished second once.  All four years the Hogs finished ranked in the AP Top 10. 

[jabberjawls]

I'm 47, and I hate talking about the swc because we have not been in it since I was 22. And, as the numbers point out, the Hogs, in total, were not any better then than they are now. In their last 60 seasons in the swc they had a win % of .580.

Isn't our record the last 4 years 10-22?  When were we ever 10-22 in SWC?......um...when were we ever 10-22 in the  SEC?

[GuvHog]

Broyles only had one half of a lean year.  He lost his first six games before closing 1958 with four straight wins. The next four years he was 34-10, won the SWC three times, and finished second once.  All four years the Hogs finished ranked in the AP Top 10. 

Didn't they have a rough season the year before they won the national title??

[jkstock04]

What bellyaching?  For the first 30 years of my life, Arkansas finished in the AP Top 10 ten times.  We finished 10-15 another five times, and 16th once. 

Three things happened in 1990. First, Frank Broyles made a short term decision to hire Jack Crowe.  That didn't seem like a bad decision at the time, but Crowe did essentially to the team what Smiley did to it.  Second, we joined the SEC.  No explanation needed there.  Third, we stopped hiring top-notch coaches for almost twenty years.  Petrino looked like one for a while.  Bret Bielema is a top-notch coach who has stabilized the program and gives it a chance to compete in the SEC West.  The trajectory looked as expected but for two games to end 2016. 

Will 2017 be a breakout season?  No one knows, but it could be.  One thing I know is that it's fun playing TCU, A&M, South Carolina, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State and Missouri.  Any year you beat 5 of those teams is generally nothing to be ashamed of, especially if the program itself is something we can all be proud of and every opponent knows they better bring their A-game or lose. 

All of this discussion about expectations in terms of floors and ceilings is pretty silly.

I pay attention to what the Sportsbooks say, they are much more objective than listening to Bo Mattingly on the radio. And when they put us at 6 or 6.5 wins that makes me raise an eyebrow.

If we are as deep as the pro-Bielema people say, deepest we have ever been since joining the SEC...this just makes zero sense. Legit expectations for this year should be in the 9-10 win range. Instead it's 6-7.

I don't see it as silly. It's strange to me that you guys who got to live through the glory years take all this with a smile. I caught that Jimmy Johnson/Jerry Jones before they were Cowboys on ESPN the other night. What a proud history we truly do have...the coaching prowess that slipped through our university is insane.

I see why y'all celebrate it so much, but on the flip side I don't understand why you dismiss wins and losses so easily in this day and age.

[bphi11ips]

Isn't our record the last 4 years 10-22?  When were we ever 10-22 in SWC?......um...when were we ever 10-22 in the  SEC?

Bret Bielema took over a program in free fall.  John L. Smith's 2012 team opened the season ranked 10th in the country.  He went 4-8 and lost his last 4 SEC games.  That was the beginning of a 17 game SEC losing streak.  None of ever would have believed that could happen had we not lived through it.

Since winning his first SEC game, Bielema is 10-9.  That is pretty consistent with our overall SEC record since joining the conference.  In other words, Bielema seems to have stopped the bleeding and now has a team full of his own recruits.  With a fifth gear senior QB and some key home games, there's reason for optimism at this point.

[gchamblee]

So, from two years in which we DID win 10 and then 11 games (which you say we should not expect every season), you extrapolate that we should win a minimum of eight regular season games every year (which we have failed to do in 23 out of the last 47 years, or 48.9% of the time?)

A man who can twist logic like that should be capable of fellating himself a minimum of three times a day.

[daBoar]

Bret Bielema took over a program in free fall. 

Freefall, yes.  Absent talent, no. CBB has had the same chance as CBP.  But, in year 3 CBP took the Hogs to the Sugar Bowl and only a muffed fumble recovery shy of a W over OSU; CBB is still seeking a top 20 finish after 4 seasons, where his most recent season was a decrease rather than an increase.

[jkstock04]

Freefall, yes.  Absent talent, no. CBB has had the same chance as CBP.  But, in year 3 CBP took the Hogs to the Sugar Bowl and only a muffed fumble recovery shy of a W over OSU; CBB is still seeking a top 20 finish after 4 seasons, where his most recent season was a decrease rather than an increase.

The general trend has the arrow pointed upward since his arrival...but man what low standards

[bphi11ips]

Freefall, yes.  Absent talent, no. CBB has had the same chance as CBP.  But, in year 3 CBP took the Hogs to the Sugar Bowl and only a muffed fumble recovery shy of a W over OSU; CBB is still seeking a top 20 finish after 4 seasons, where his most recent season was a decrease rather than an increase.

Polar opposites in philosophy and different talent levels.  The two situations aren't similar.

Consider two coaches with philosophies similar to Bret Bielema's at programs similar to Arkansas. Look at the time it took them to install their culture and roster. 

Steve Spurrier took over a relatively stable program from Lou Holtz.  Holtz's went 0-11 his first year at South Carolina, then went 8-4, 9-3, 5-7, 5-7, and 6-5.  Spurrier started 7-5, 8-5, 6-6, 7-6, 7-6, 9-5.  Then he went 11-2 three years in a row before falling to 7-6 and resigning in the middle of a 3-9 season.  The hallmarks of Spurrier's best South Carolina teams were physical defense and balanced offense, just as they were at Florida.  Same for Bielema at Wisconsin.

Mark Dantonio took over a Michigan State program that went 22-26 in four seasons under John L. Smith.  Yes -"Smiley".  Dantonio went 7-6, 9-4, 6-7 his first three seasons.  Then he won at least 11 games in five of six seasons before going 3-9 last year.  Dantonio is known for his defenses and O-lines.  Those take time to build.

We'll see what happens the next two years, but it feels like things are moving in the right direction, albeit in the toughest division of the best conference in college football.

[hoghearted]

I pay attention to what the Sportsbooks say, they are much more objective than listening to Bo Mattingly on the radio. And when they put us at 6 or 6.5 wins that makes me raise an eyebrow.

If we are as deep as the pro-Bielema people say, deepest we have ever been since joining the SEC...this just makes zero sense. Legit expectations for this year should be in the 9-10 win range. Instead it's 6-7.

I don't see it as silly. It's strange to me that you guys who got to live through the glory years take all this with a smile. I caught that Jimmy Johnson/Jerry Jones before they were Cowboys on ESPN the other night. What a proud history we truly do have...the coaching prowess that slipped through our university is insane.

I see why y'all celebrate it so much, but on the flip side I don't understand why you dismiss wins and losses so easily in this day and age.

Head scratcher, for sure.

[Swine-as-wine]

When it is necessary to say stuff like that....

when you're on the "hot seat"

[MuskogeeHogFan]

when you're on the "hot seat"

Yeah well, I don't think he is on the "hot seat" just yet. Now win 8 or less this coming season and I wouldn't be surprised if the seat gets pretty warm.

[oldhawg]

Regarding Razorback football, I love this time of the year.  In spite of compelling historical data and statistics that predict the contrary; in spite of a highly vocal group with logical arguments calling for the coaches head on a platter if the team has less than an eight win season; in spite of obvious improvements in coaching and player performance that are needed to improve on last years record; I still see the the 2017 team as a ten win, top twenty, January bowl team.  If need be, I will deal with the disappointment later.  Although most of the season I expect to be half way around the world, out of contact with sports, politics, and bills, I am no less of a Razorback fan than many I see posting on HV.  However I do plan to be back for the January bowl game.   

[hogsanity]

When trying to compare coaches or eras in football people often leave out important things. Those who point to JFB usually leave out 2 significant changes that happened right around his best seasons. 1 the rules governing substitutions, and 2 integration of the game. The changes in substitution rules helped his teams, but college football becoming fully integrated hurt his program because of the demographics of Arkansas and other states. Also, various changes to scholarship limits affected the game. Trying to simply look at a 5 or 10 year period, void of context, of ten leaves out information that contributes to long term trend changes.

[bphi11ips]

When trying to compare coaches or eras in football people often leave out important things. Those who point to JFB usually leave out 2 significant changes that happened right around his best seasons. 1 the rules governing substitutions, and 2 integration of the game. The changes in substitution rules helped his teams, but college football becoming fully integrated hurt his program because of the demographics of Arkansas and other states. Also, various changes to scholarship limits affected the game. Trying to simply look at a 5 or 10 year period, void of context, of ten leaves out information that contributes to long term trend changes.

Unlimited substitutions started in 1964.  Integration began in the SWC and SEC for all intent and purpose about 1970.  Scholarship limits went into effect in 1973 as the direct result of Title IX.  In the 60s Bear Bryant might have had 150 or more players on scholarship. Broyles had the benefit of being able to afford more than many schools as well. 

I don't understand why Broyles specifically benefitted from those changes more than his peers at the time.  Everyone was playing by the same rules.  Maybe schools like Rice didn't have as many scholarship players as Arkansas had, I don't know, but other than that it should all have been a wash.

[hogsanity]

Unlimited substitutions started in 1964.  Integration began in the SWC and SEC for all intent and purpose about 1970.  Scholarship limits went into effect in 1973 as the direct result of Title IX.  In the 60s Bear Bryant might have had 150 or more players on scholarship. Broyles had the benefit of being able to afford more than many schools as well. 

I don't understand why Broyles specifically benefitted from those changes more than his peers at the time.  Everyone was playing by the same rules.  Maybe schools like Rice didn't have as many scholarship players as Arkansas had, I don't know, but other than that it should all have been a wash.

I did not say he benefited MORE than others, but as things like scholarship limits and full integration came along, he was not as successful.

[bphi11ips]

I did not say he benefited MORE than others, but as things like scholarship limits and full integration came along, he was not as successful.

Other than 1975, the 70s were mediocre years for Broyles.  You make good points, but cause and affect may or may not be there.  Probably more of a connection between integration than substitution rules and scholarship limits.  On the other hand, Lou Holtz won big with the integrated squad he inherited from Broyles in 1977, all of whom were signed after scholarship limits were implemented. Players recruited by Broyles carried Holtz through 1979.

A case can certainly be made, however, that Broyles didn't keep up with changes in the game itself, many of which were driven by the speed and athleticism of African-American athletes.  And he suffered from the same geographic disadvantage Arkansas coaches face today where demographics are concerned.  Whether he would have been successful beyond 1976 is anybody's guess.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Other than 1975, the 70s were mediocre years for Broyles.  You make good points, but cause and affect may or may not be there.  Probably more of a connection between integration than substitution rules and scholarship limits.  On the other hand, Lou Holtz won big with the integrated squad he inherited from Broyles in 1977, all of whom were signed after scholarship limits were implemented. Players recruited by Broyles carried Holtz through 1979.

A case can certainly be made, however, that Broyles didn't keep up with changes in the game itself, many of which were driven by the speed and athleticism of African-American athletes.  And he suffered from the same geographic disadvantage Arkansas coaches face today where demographics are concerned.  Whether he would have been successful beyond 1976 is anybody's guess.

Scholarship limitations affected every program but it did prevent the bigger, wealthier schools from stockpiling players just to keep them from playing for the competition. The best I can tell, here is the timeline for Div I football.

Prior to 1973: No limitations on scholarships.
1973-1977: 105 scholarship limitation.
1978-1991: 95 scholarship limitation.
1992-Today: 85 scholarship limitation.

[hawgon]

Scholarship limitations undoubtedly helped Arkansas.  That freed up a lot of athletes who would have previously sat the bench at Texas.

[bphi11ips]

Scholarship limitations undoubtedly helped Arkansas.  That freed up a lot of athletes who would have previously sat the bench at Texas.

Arkansas stockpiled players, too.  It probably helped smaller schools more than major powers, and in 1973 Arkansas was considered a major power.  But scholarship limitations were not implemented to level the playing field like salary caps in professional sports.  They arose in response to Title IX, which prevents sex discrimination in education.  Those stockpiles required lots of scholarships for men.

[Athog]

This year will have the entire razorback fanbase clicking its heels and wishing Bret and Long were somewhere else.

Some will no matter what and the vocal minority will disappear if things go well. They have to feel bad to feel good!

[DLUXHOG]

which swc, the one where from 32-62 the Hogs went 140-151-16? And where from 32-91 the Hogs went 379-247-24 for a 60 year win % of .580.

Good luck with this as I've warned everyone about our historical averages....

[DLUXHOG]

And you are averaging in Nutt and Bielema. What's that 14 or 15 years of the 25?

Many people would argue those are two dud coaches.

When(and he will) Bielema has an unbelievably great year, could be this year or next, you'll be thinking he's the second coming of Tom Landry....

[bphi11ips]

I still remember the SI article - 30/95 and look who's alive. 

I'll be curious to see if bphi11ips remembers this...

Don't remember it, even though SI was second for me at the time only to Dave Campbell's Arkansas Football.  But ... just read it.  What a blast from the past.

The foreshadowing by Ron Meyer is classic.  He talks in 1978 about scholarship limits giving SMU a chance to return to its former glory, then the Ponies get the death-penalty for recruiting violations that began under his watch.

[LZH]

Some will no matter what and the vocal minority will disappear if things go well. They have to feel bad to feel good!

No. We want to win. And are irritated by having to watch HDN 2.0 all while being told we're building the program the right way.

#uncommon.........(uncommon at what?)

[MuskogeeHogFan]

No. We want to win. And are irritated by having to watch HDN 2.0 all while being told we're building the program the right way.

#uncommon.........(uncommon at what?)

So, is it "just" winning that matters? Is that our only benchmark for success? I know it is important and I'm not satisfied with 7-8 wins every year either, though that has pretty much been what this program has been for the last 4 decades. We have won 10 games or more in a season just 8 times in the last 40 years. I'd be happy with 9 in the regular season which would offer us a chance to move up to 10 with a bowl win. Winning is important no doubt but looking at this in an unbiased way, the program has improved in other ways aside from getting over the 7-8 win hump.

[LZH]

So, is it "just" winning that matters? Is that our only benchmark for success?

As far as I'm concerned....yeah, pretty much.

[jabberjawls]

Good luck with this as I've warned everyone about our historical averages....

Are you referring to our 10-22 record over the last 4 years?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Are you referring to our 10-22 record over the last 4 years?

No he isn't, but I think that you knew that already.

[HF#1]

Perhaps I was wrong. Maybe Bret has the same luxury Mike Anderson and Dave Van Horn have.  As long as Jeff is at Arkansas they will be at Arkansas unless they leave on their own.

[Inhogswetrust]

Perhaps I was wrong. Maybe Bret has the same luxury Mike Anderson and Dave Van Horn have.  As long as Jeff is at Arkansas they will be at Arkansas unless they leave on their own.

No they do not have any luxury........Jeff has fired coaches in the past...............He perhaps gives them more time than some fans want him too but that is his decision to make. No matter how a coach is doing, unless they are winning multiple NC's, some fans aren't going to want them and believe they know better how things should be than the AD and school administration.

[HF#1]

No they do not have any luxury........Jeff has fired coaches in the past...............He perhaps gives them more time than some fans want him too but that is his decision to make. No matter how a coach is doing, unless they are winning multiple NC's, some fans aren't going to want them and believe they know better how things should be than the AD and school administration.

Mike Anderson will be here as long as Jeff Long is here unless Mike leaves on his own. I feel the same about DVH. Those two have enough built up capital, they could probably survive just about any result on the court/field. Bielema I'm not so certain about and I was of the belief that 6-7 wasn't going to save him this season.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Mike Anderson will be here as long as Jeff Long is here unless Mike leaves on his own. I feel the same about DVH. Those two have enough built up capital, they could probably survive just about any result on the court/field. Bielema I'm not so certain about and I was of the belief that 6-7 wasn't going to save him this season.

So since he didn't go 6-7 we are all good, right?

[Inhogswetrust]

Mike Anderson will be here as long as Jeff Long is here unless Mike leaves on his own. I feel the same about DVH. Those two have enough built up capital, they could probably survive just about any result on the court/field. Bielema I'm not so certain about and I was of the belief that 6-7 wasn't going to save him this season.

NO coach can survive losing to many. The key for coaches is how any particular place defines "losing to many" at a point in time.

[hogsanity]

Perhaps I was wrong. Maybe Bret has the same luxury Mike Anderson and Dave Van Horn have.  As long as Jeff is at Arkansas they will be at Arkansas unless they leave on their own.

DVH has earned a very long leash by being very successful for many years. They have been to the college ws multiple times, hosted regionals and super regionals, and competed at a high level most seasons.

In terms of success at Arkansas, neither BB or MA can hold DVH's equipment bag.

[gchamblee]

Perhaps I was wrong. Maybe Bret has the same luxury Mike Anderson and Dave Van Horn have.  As long as Jeff is at Arkansas they will be at Arkansas unless they leave on their own.

So you think DVH needs to be fired? LMAO HAHA OMG I CANT BREATHE LOL

[HiggiePiggy]

Dave Van horn I believe has had 1 losing season here and I believe has been in he playoffs almost every year except that 1 season.  He among the 3 big sports has been the most successful coach we have had since Nolan Richardson.

[HF#1]

So you think DVH needs to be fired? LMAO HAHA OMG I CANT BREATHE LOL

I didn't say that. I question your intelligence if that is the conclusion you came to from my post. No where in the post did I suggest that.

[HF#1]

So since he didn't go 6-7 we are all good, right?

6-7 wins...

[MuskogeeHogFan]

6-7 wins...

He was always going to be here through 2018 short of going 3-9/4-8 prior to that time.

[HF#1]

He was always going to be here through 2018 short of going 3-9/4-8 prior to that time.

I'm not as confident.