Unpopular Question

[gchamblee]

UW struggling to keep coordinators could be explained in the same terms used to describe our own current issues with coordinators.
If CPR does a decent job this next season there's a better than 90% he's gone. 

In regards to the coach who bolted for Oregon State -
It should be clear to anyone paying attention that Barry Alvarez runs UW football.  He is not "hands off". 
UW clearly is not suffering from this situation... nor are they missing either Bielema or Andersen. 

There's a fundamental difference in pulling a coach from a position he's happy in (Petersen from Boise to Washington), and what Jeff Long has done with his football hires -

Bielema wanted to get away from a program where "he" led them to 3 Rose Bowls.  Most here were clearly ready to gobble up the given explanation of "why".

Getting Petrino was like walking down the street and finding a bag with 5 million dollars in it.  Being on the receiving end of that event doesn't make you a financial genius.  It makes you lucky.
The subsequent fallout when things went sideways can further be likened to what happens to lottery winners who find themselves bankrupt... they don't know what to do with what they've got. 
You don't bring in a controversial coach if you're not prepared to deal with controversy.  Jeff Long was not willing to deal with controversy in order to keep the 5 million, and now at the end of that drama we're left with Bielema who couldn't handle being under Barry Alvarez.

Uninformed post from you, as usual. Jeff Long was obviously prepared to deal with controversy, because that is exactly what he did. You, on the other hand, were not prepared and felt the best move was ignoring it and hiding your head in the sand hoping it would all just go away. You have made it quite clear that the coward approach is your preference, but Long is not cut from the same cloth as you.

[ricepig]

Our staff salaries, stadium size, recruiting ranking, and football budget are all in the 8-10 range in the conference. It is what it is.

[gchamblee]

Not even a difficult choice.

it makes sense that integrity gets under your skin

[gchamblee]

How many USC fans do you think regret the time period with Reggie Bush (and the numerous other players who received similar benefits)?
None.

How many Auburn fans do you think regret Cam Newton?
LOL none. 

How many Ohio State fans do you think regret Jim Tressel?

We could go on and on and on...

But see here's the thing - no one on here is really EXPECTING Arkansas to be in the National Championship game.  If it were to somehow happen then GREAT... but what the majority of Arkansas fans would really appreciate is once more just being RELEVANT and winning games we're supposed to win.   
Let's start there before we begin talking Playoffs... then we can raise hopes and expectations.

So ill mark you down as approves of cheating.

[Wildhog]

it makes sense that integrity gets under your skin

If you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'.

[wachhog]

You're absolutely right... it's the right question about the right person.

You're also absolutely right in that this will get you roasted on here.

Congratulations, you fellow idiot.

Yeah, because once Petrino was fired, the Hogville that we had known and loved died and arose again as Loveletters to/from Long.

[BearsBisonsBoars]

2. and 3. I can agree with.  1. not so sure about.  I wouldn't say the SEC is worse now than it was then, but there was a year where going into the final BCS standings it was LSU Bama and Us 123.  That was pretty competitive then  as well.

The SEC as a whole may have been on par with now, but the West is much more competitive now. There are no bad teams in our division and we have a surgent A&M to deal with too. The East being garbage balances the whole back down to CBB levels. But being in what is likely the strongest division in FBS history will skew any direct record comparison.

[wachhog]

What is the REAL problem? We have coaches that have proven in the past that they know how to win. Mike Anderson was able to do it at 2 schools that were barely even respected. I have a hard time believing that both coaches suddenly forgot how to coach and win, so what happened? Is there something going on behind the scenes? Could it also be the reason that Dana Altman quit on day 1? (maybe a stretch, but you never know). Like most in this group, I just want to see our teams be great, no matter who needs to be let go

Barry Alvarez has proven he knows how to win, Alvarez has proven he can hire lackeys. Bret Bielema has never proven HE knows/can do much of anything except follow orders. Long has proven even less.

[kodiakisland]

It's a pretty complicated question, but what is the purpose of the AD?  Hire the right guys and give them what they need to succeed.  Has JL done those things?  If so, he is doing his job. 

What is it that's not working?  Anderson and Bielema were good hires, regardless of what you think of them now.  They were successful coaches with good track records.  Sometimes good coaches just don't work out.  Sometimes good coaches can't overcome the negatives of the program to succeed.  What is it that is keeping them from succeeding here?  Chance?  bad luck?  Or something of substance?

If you are going to blame success or failure on JL, you need to be able to define what it is he is doing or not doing to get the blame.  I don't know one way or the other and can't make an informed decision on JL's performance.  Eventually everyone is judged on results and it will eventually fall to him regardless of who and what the problem really is.

[TheJoeyBucketz]

If Wisconsin fans readily attribute Wisconsin's football success to Alvarez (as they have for awhile), shouldn't our AD have been able to recognize that?

Like fans of all schools, most wisky fans wouldn't know what was really responsible for their success if it walked up and teabagged them.

[#1Fan]

Like fans of all schools, most wisky fans wouldn't know what was really responsible for their success if it walked up and teabagged them.

I'm pretty sure they all attribute it to Alvarez, which is probably correct.

https://www.landof10.com/wisconsin/barry-alvarez-wisconsin-mount-rushmore-ohio-natives-ready-visit-buckeyes

[Wildhog]

Like fans of all schools, most wisky fans wouldn't know what was really responsible for their success if it walked up and teabagged them.

Well, they've remained very successful, regardless of head coach. That does lend some credence to it.  You could even argue that Wisconsin improved when they lost Bielema.

[factchecker]

Well, they've remained very successful, regardless of head coach. That does lend some credence to it.  You could even argue that Wisconsin improved when they lost Bielema.

Have yet to win a BIG10 championship game since he left.

[Razorbackers]

Well, they've remained very successful, regardless of head coach. That does lend some credence to it.  You could even argue that Wisconsin improved when they lost Bielema.

Well, you can also attribute the easy transition between coaches to Bielema recruiting well, leaving the program in tip top shape, and not being a pos like every other coach that has left Arkansas in the past decade. CBB left Wisky with a full cabinet, no scandals, and deep pockets.

It's become normal here, but as it turns out, most coaches don't set the program on fire as they leave, like Nutt and Petrino did.

[Wildhog]

Have yet to win a BIG10 championship game since he left.

Did win the Cotton Bowl, which is now the equivalent of a BCS bowl.  Also, the combined winning percentage of Gary Andersen/Paul Chryst is higher than CBB's, so far.

I'm just saying the argument could be made. 

[Wildhog]

Well, you can also attribute the easy transition between coaches to Bielema recruiting well, leaving the program in tip top shape, and not being a pos like every other coach that has left Arkansas in the past decade. CBB left Wisky with a full cabinet, no scandals, and deep pockets.

It's become normal here, but as it turns out, most coaches don't set the program on fire as they leave, like Nutt and Petrino did.

Well, CBB stepped into a great situation himself at Wisconsin.

[shown006]

1. The SEC is much more competitive now than when BP was HC
2. Every fan thinks their school think they are doing it the right way. It's more a function of boosters than it is the program.
3. Optics are just optics. All those feel good metrics only sound good when included with winning.

The SEC is more competitive now than when BP was here?  Petrino's last conference game occurred when 3 SEC teams were #1, #2, and #3 in the COUNTRY, and they were all in the West.  #3 was the Hogs if you've forgotten.  1 and 2 were SEC teams that played for the National Title that year.  The SEC was in the midst of a 7 year title run when Petrino was here...one of the titles was from another team in the West, Auburn; who wasn't in one of the top 3 mentioned above in 2011.

[factchecker]

Did win the Cotton Bowl, which is now the equivalent of a BCS bowl.  Also, the combined winning percentage of Gary Andersen/Paul Chryst is higher than CBB's, so far.

I'm just saying the argument could be made.

Ask Wisconsin fans if they'd rather win the Cotton Bowl vs. Western Michigan in front of a sparse crowd or play in the Rose Bowl.

They went 68-24 under Bielema = 73.9% win %

They are currently 41-13 since = 75.9 win %

By your logic Bielema is better than Alvarez.  Alvarez went 119–74 (4 ties won't count against or for) giving him a 61.7 winning %.

[Wildhog]

Ask Wisconsin fans if they'd rather win the Cotton Bowl vs. Western Michigan in front of a sparse crowd or play in the Rose Bowl.

They went 68-24 under Bielema = 73.9% win %

They are currently 41-13 since = 75.9 win %

By your logic Bielema is better than Alvarez.  Alvarez went 119–74 (4 ties won't count against or for) giving him a 61.7 winning %.

You can make the argument.

[ricepig]

You can make the argument.

Well, that does seem to be something we like to do around here.   

[Wildhog]

Well, that does seem to be something we like to do around here.   

It sustains me.

[Razorbackers]

Well, CBB stepped into a great situation himself at Wisconsin.

For sure.

My point is, that firing coaches as often as we do is clearly bad for a program.

So maybe we should calm down.

Wisconsin has had 4 coaches in 20 years, and that's counting 1 guy who just stayed for 1 season.

We've had 4 in 10.

[Wildhog]

For sure.

My point is, that firing coaches as often as we do is clearly bad for a program.

So maybe we should calm down.

Wisconsin has had 4 coaches in 20 years, and that's counting 1 guy who just stayed for 1 season.

We've had 4 in 10.

I'd be all for it if we found a really good one. 

[Razorbackers]

I'd be all for it if we found a really good one. 

haha, I get your point, tho. I just think that for us as a program right now, stability is crucial. I don't think we could hire a good coach right now. Wait at least 1 more year. Maybe CBB lives up to what the 2017 roster should be. Maybe he doesn't. But I don't think it's as bad right now as some folks.

[LRRandy]

The SEC as a whole may have been on par with now, but the West is much more competitive now.There are no bad teams in our division and we have a surgent A&M to deal with too. The East being garbage balances the whole back down to CBB levels. But being in what is likely the strongest division in FBS history will skew any direct record comparison.

well there's only one good one. No team not named Alabama won more than 8 games. One team failed to go to a bowl. Only two teams of the six that went to a bowl won a bowl game one of them needing a last second field goal to beat a middling MAC team. The division is mediocre. Which I think would make it prime time for a coach at Atkansas to be successful.

[Wildhog]

haha, I get your point, tho. I just think that for us as a program right now, stability is crucial. I don't think we could hire a good coach right now. Wait at least 1 more year. Maybe CBB lives up to what the 2017 roster should be. Maybe he doesn't. But I don't think it's as bad right now as some folks.

I don't think it's "bad."

I just think it's "extremely meh."

[onebadrubi]

Did win the Cotton Bowl, which is now the equivalent of a BCS bowl.  Also, the combined winning percentage of Gary Andersen/Paul Chryst is higher than CBB's, so far.

I'm just saying the argument could be made.

That argument could only by made by someone with an extremely narrow mind. So many different factors involved. Also consider,  it would be very similar to us running through the ssc east the last 2-3 years.   You could also contribute their continued success to the wellness the program Bielema left

[Razorbackers]

I don't think it's "bad."

I just think it's "extremely meh."

I think, and this is mostly for me, what makes it feel so extremely meh is how close we came, two years in a row, to it not being so.

2015, injuries set us behind the 8 ball early on. After the bye week, we looked like the team that we should have been all year. That was a 10 win team if all those injuries don't happen.

2016, obviously going to take a step back after losing those offensive guys. But dang...2 meltdowns away from 9 wins. Heck, give me the miz game and a bowl loss and we still had 8, which matched last year, which was a team that should have won more.

Sucks man. That's biggest problem with everything, is that I can see the talent. We've either been unlucky, or just under prepared.

[Hoggish1]

I am begging to get roasted here but I'll go ahead and ask it.

When the Football team struggles we take a look at the Football coach.

When the Basketball team struggles we take a look at the Basketball coach.

When they are both struggling isn't it time to take a look at the guy who hired them?

Fire away, I'm sure there are many here that can tell me what an idiot I am.  In what other job would the past 5 and 6 years' results collectively be acceptable.  To be clear the results I am talking about are wins and losses in Football and Basketball.  There are programs similar to Arkansas in size and demographic that are seeing better results so we know its possible.

What are you afraid about asking your question? 

Anybody can see that Long is an obsequious character who is very smarmy. 

[Wildhog]

That argument could only by made by someone with an extremely narrow mind.

I don't think that's true at all.  Not everyone will agree, and that's okay, but I think there's a very legitimate case for it. 

[onebadrubi]

I don't think that's true at all.  Not everyone will agree, and that's okay, but I think there's a very legitimate case for it.

Go ahead and make it then and let's look at it

[Wildhog]

Go ahead and make it then and let's look at it

Pretty sure I already did.  CBB walks into a great situation left by Alvarez, and does well.  Andersen/Chryst walk into a similar situation, and (cumulatively) have had a better winning percentage.

That's not to say that there aren't other contributing factors, but to act like the case can't be made is silly.

[Hogwild]

1. The SEC is much more competitive now than when BP was HC

That isn't close to being accurate.

[onebadrubi]

Pretty sure I already did.  CBB walks into a great situation left by Alvarez, and does well.  Andersen/Chryst walk into a similar situation, and (cumulatively) have had a better winning percentage.

That's not to say that there aren't other contributing factors, but to act like the case can't be made is silly.

He put wisky on the map and in every ESPN conversation for recruits the last few years as they were growing up in Jr high and high school.  This helps in recruiting and awareness, elevating the brand you could say. So I say his ability to leave a great team there for those winning percentages to be given a chance is credit owed to Bielema.  Those coaches walked into great spots, especially Andersen with recruits wanting to come check out wisky because of what Bielema did.

Let's also not forget, their schedule kind of looks like our basketball schedule. ( http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-16/2016-wisconsin-badgers-football-schedule.php ). They beat sisters of the poor and a team we came to find out would be coach less (LSU), besides that they lost to any decent team they played this year. Wisconsin is in a great spot right now to be given 9 wins automatically a year.  Arkansas would have had a 9-10 win regular season this year with their schedule. Take a look at their 2014 11 win schedule... Its weak as hel l. http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-14/big-ten/2014-wisconsin-badgers-football-schedule.php

So using your best piece of evidence to make your argument, winning percentage, screams to me narrow minded or agenda driven to even to want to have that discussion.

[Inhogswetrust]

For sure.

My point is, that firing coaches as often as we do is clearly bad for a program.

So maybe we should calm down.

Wisconsin has had 4 coaches in 20 years, and that's counting 1 guy who just stayed for 1 season.

We've had 4 in 10.

So what? From 1997 to 2007 Alabama had 4 in ten years. Actually SIX if you include Price and Kines. From 1995 to 2005 LSU had four. From 2001 to 2011 Florida had four, 5 if you include Strong as an interim. From 2003 to 2013 Tennessee had four. USCw has had 4 in ten. Quite a few schools have had 4 in ten years over their history and a whole lot more 3 in ten. Of course some of those individual coaches moved on their own but that still is a coaching change and the school has to try to find the right coach to replace them no matter what. We actually have only fired ONE head football coach in ten years recently and that was Bobby which was understandably fired for what he did. Houston could probably have stayed for one more year and then gotten fired but he saw the hand writing on the wall and White gave him an easy out. Even IF he had officially gotten fired the year he left that would still be only two permanent ones fired. Bobby is the reason we do not appear to have stability in coaches.

[Wildhog]

He put wisky on the map and in every ESPN conversation for recruits the last few years as they were growing up in Jr high and high school.  This helps in recruiting and awareness, elevating the brand you could say. So I say his ability to leave a great team there for those winning percentages to be given a chance is credit owed to Bielema.  Those coaches walked into great spots, especially Andersen with recruits wanting to come check out wisky because of what Bielema did.

Let's also not forget, their schedule kind of looks like our basketball schedule. ( http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-16/2016-wisconsin-badgers-football-schedule.php ). They beat sisters of the poor and a team we came to find out would be coach less (LSU), besides that they lost to any decent team they played this year. Wisconsin is in a great spot right now to be given 9 wins automatically a year.  Arkansas would have had a 9-10 win regular season this year with their schedule. Take a look at their 2014 11 win schedule... Its weak as hel l. http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-14/big-ten/2014-wisconsin-badgers-football-schedule.php

So using your best piece of evidence to make your argument, winning percentage, screams to me narrow minded or agenda driven to even to want to have that discussion.

Maybe I'm misreading you, but it almost sounds like you're crediting Bielema for building Wisconsin.  Surely you aren't doing that?

[#1Fan]

Maybe I'm misreading you, but it almost sounds like you're crediting Bielema for building Wisconsin.  Surely you aren't doing that?

It's kinda like driver's education where CBB was in the driver's seat but Alvarez was in the passenger seat with his own set of brakes and controls.

[Wildhog]

It's kinda like driver's education where CBB was in the driver's seat but Alvarez was in the passenger seat with his own set of brakes and controls.

Bielema sitting on Alvarez's lap? 

[Inhogswetrust]

It's kinda like driver's education where CBB was in the driver's seat but Alvarez was in the passenger seat with his own set of brakes and controls.

I admit it appears Barry is a back seat driver with his coaches but Bret has never said that. Besides we've had that here as well before.

[LRRandy]

Maybe I'm misreading you, but it almost sounds like you're crediting Bielema for building Wisconsin.  Surely you aren't doing that?

Burp was the beneficiary of what Alvarez built and the B1G elite teams being down or on sanctions. Michigan and Penn St. could barely go .500 and tOhio State was in the middle of a coaching change.  He is showing his coaching ceiling at Arkansas while Wisconsin thrives.

[onebadrubi]

Maybe I'm misreading you, but it almost sounds like you're crediting Bielema for building Wisconsin.  Surely you aren't doing that?

Building?  I think you are trying to deflect a little.  Bielema walked into a good situation, took advantages of down conf foes, and some schedule help along the way just as his predecessors have.

I give Boelema credit for what he did at wisky, yes. Alvarez wasn't out recruiting, wasn't wearing a headset and making calls on the field (while not many would be shocked by this it would have came out by now), and did not get the public perception of winning those games. What you are trying to link would be similar to asking why didn't johnelle keep bp's success going?  Why?  Because it is much more on the current coaching staff for that year. Also without looking it up, Bielema was in what like his 5-6th year as head coach of wisky when he took residence in the rose bowl?  You don't ride a predecessors coat tails that long without doing a lot of things right.

I see you also didn't have much to say with your argument on the rest of it

[Wildhog]

Building?  I think you are trying to deflect a little.  Bielema walked into a good situation, took advantages of down conf foes, and some schedule help along the way just as his predecessors have.

I give Boelema credit for what he did at wisky, yes. Alvarez wasn't out recruiting, wasn't wearing a headset and making calls on the field (while not many would be shocked by this it would have came out by now), and did not get the public perception of winning those games. What you are trying to link would be similar to asking why didn't johnelle keep bp's success going?  Why?  Because it is much more on the current coaching staff for that year. Also without looking it up, Bielema was in what like his 5-6th year as head coach of wisky when he took residence in the rose bowl?  You don't ride a predecessors coat tails that long without doing a lot of things right.

I see you also didn't have much to say with your argument on the rest of it

I didn't say CBB didn't do a good job at Wisconsin.  I'm saying he didn't build it, and others have done just as well, if not better, in similar situations.

Sorry, but I'm really not seeing your point.

[onebadrubi]

I didn't say CBB didn't do a good job at Wisconsin.  I'm saying he didn't build it, and others have done just as well, if not better, in similar situations.

Sorry, but I'm really not seeing your point.

You are deflecting.  Originally this started out as you making the argument you said could be made that Andersen and chryst are doing better than Bielema. Now you've been countered and saying built.  Completely different than your original comment that the argument could be made that Wisconsin has had better success after Bielema.

I'm not saying Bielema built wisky, don't believe I ever did either? 

If you are going to compare Bielema to Andersen/chryst and use winning percentage as your only evidence then yes, that is the definition of narrow minded.  The landscape of that division would take a johnelle type collapse to not win 10 games a year. They lost this year to anyone with even close to top 25 ranking, didn't they?  Then went on to play western Michigan in a bowl game, really? 

[onebadrubi]

You're not going to get it out of him.  He's dead-set on Bielema being responsible for UW's success while he was there. 

Maybe he'll accuse you of being narrow-minded again.

Yes, Bielema is responsible for Wisconsin's success in years 10,11,12. If not, then mike Anderson is NOT responsible for his product on the court last year or this year.

[LRRandy]

You are deflecting.  Originally this started out as you making the argument you said could be made that Andersen and chryst are doing better than Bielema. Now you've been countered and saying built.  Completely different than your original comment that the argument could be made that Wisconsin has had better success after Bielema.

I'm not saying Bielema built wisky, don't believe I ever did either? 

If you are going to compare Bielema to Andersen/chryst and use winning percentage as your only evidence then yes, that is the definition of narrow minded.  The landscape of that division would take a johnelle type collapse to not win 10 games a year. They lost this year to anyone with even close to top 25 ranking, didn't they?  Then went on to play western Michigan in a bowl game, really?

yeah, the top 25 win they had was to an overrated team from an overrated conference.i think you have a point. 

[LZH]

I didn't say CBB didn't do a good job at Wisconsin.  I'm saying he didn't build it, and others have done just as well, if not better, in similar situations.

Sorry, but I'm really not seeing your point.

Narrow- minded.

[LZH]

You're not going to get it out of him.  He's dead-set on Bielema being responsible for UW's success while he was there. 

Maybe he'll accuse you of being narrow-minded again.

Ha....echo.

[Wildhog]

You are deflecting.  Originally this started out as you making the argument you said could be made that Andersen and chryst are doing better than Bielema. Now you've been countered and saying built.  Completely different than your original comment that the argument could be made that Wisconsin has had better success after Bielema.

I'm not saying Bielema built wisky, don't believe I ever did either? 

If you are going to compare Bielema to Andersen/chryst and use winning percentage as your only evidence then yes, that is the definition of narrow minded.  The landscape of that division would take a johnelle type collapse to not win 10 games a year. They lost this year to anyone with even close to top 25 ranking, didn't they?  Then went on to play western Michigan in a bowl game, really? 

You're the one that said that Bielema put UW on the map (I think.  It's hard to tell what the hell you meant).  I asked you to clarify and you accused me of deflecting and called me narrow-minded.  I've been nothing but consistent.  You're all over the place.

[Hogwild]

I am begging to get roasted here but I'll go ahead and ask it.

When the Football team struggles we take a look at the Football coach.

When the Basketball team struggles we take a look at the Basketball coach.

When they are both struggling isn't it time to take a look at the guy who hired them?

Fire away, I'm sure there are many here that can tell me what an idiot I am.  In what other job would the past 5 and 6 years' results collectively be acceptable.  To be clear the results I am talking about are wins and losses in Football and Basketball.  There are programs similar to Arkansas in size and demographic that are seeing better results so we know its possible.

I agree with you 100%, Long was hired at the end of 2007, we are now in 2017.

The basketball team had just replaced a coach who had taken us to back to back NCAA tournments in final two season.  The new hiredly coach would take us the the tournament in the 2007-2008 season.

One NCAA tournament berth since then. The worse 10 year stretch for Razorback basketball since the 1960s.

The football team in '07 would finish the season by defeating the national champions and a trip to the Cotton Bowl

Not only do we have a losing conference record (29-43), we have the worse conference record during his tenure in the division, a 25% decrease from the Nutt era.

[onebadrubi]

You're the one that said that Bielema put UW on the map (I think.  It's hard to tell what the hell you meant).  I asked you to clarify and you accused me of deflecting and called me narrow-minded.  I've been nothing but consistent.  You're all over the place.

I was saying that Bielema making the rose bowls, while current recruits or recent recruits saw him making rose bowl after rose bowl he is responsible for.

Why is mike responsible for his teams complete failure in year 5 and 6, but Bielema is NOT responsible for Wiskys success in his year 5 and 6.  This is not complex thought here.  I personally believe mike is responsible for this failure and Bielema, as I said, was seen as responsible by talking heads and other people for Wiskys run of rose bowls.

I clarified for you, in a very direct sentence actually. I'm not all over the place, in providing a reasoning why your original comment was innaccurate and you can't successfully make your argument. Since then you've deflected by pulling out what was the first sentence and dissecting it to move goal post (to pull a term often used in politics discussions)