SEC Represents 1/3 of ESPN's Top 15 Programs-But no Hogs-Spin that one.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

JJ, maybe, but I don't think there is any chance he is coming, so lets go with some REALISTIC names.

Jim Grobe
He won the ACC title with freaking Wake Forrest!

Yes Wake Forrest went to the BCS.
If Grobe was here, he wouldnt accept anything less than an SEC championship. He wouldnt be showing off division titles at the SEC media days either.

Yes, a ACC that had 2 teams ranked in the final top 25, and none in the top 15.  The SEC had 6 teams ranked, 4 in the top 15.  Grobe seems like a decent coach, but lets see if he can do it over a sustained period before we proclaimm him a program savior.

And I just love how everyone here seems to know just what coaches would and would not do at this school or in that league. 

And still, no one has answered WHY these kids are going to by pass these perinial powers to come here.
[/quote]

Yes it is called speculating and some common sense. A good coach doesnt get up there among SEC and national champions to show off a division championship ring. Good coaches shoot for the moon. Jim Grobe is a good coach.

Why would these kids choose us over the national powers when we have an AD spout off about how we're "8th in the SEC in putenchul".
We dont have a chance at the big time out of state prospects till we show them we are dedicated to winning and winning big. We need to show those kids that we are not just happy with 10-4 seasons and division championships.
We will start getting those kids once we start winning BIG and start showing them that we are dedicated to getting this program to the top with those power schools.

What you want is somebody to come out and say the reason we cant get those players is because we're little poor ol Arkansas and we cannot do any better than what nutty has given us.
That's what you would call a good answer. YOu are not getting that from me. I expect better from this program and I am one that believes this football program deserves better and can do better than what nutty has given us.

[ErieHog]

I don't agree with you 100% but I have to give a +1 for using the word Pedantic. By the way, how am I being pedestrian or unimaginative?

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Your rehashed and tired  ' You are poor mouthing Arkansas' argument.

[ErieHog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

Erie, the hole in your logic, and the answer to the question: Can Nutt lead us to the 9-10 win barrier every year, is answered in last years fiasco.

The reason that Nutt cannot lead us to consistent, top tier SEC status, is that he has maxed out  his leadership potential.  Nutt's failure to recognize the need for an OC, his inability to "manage" primadonna players and staff, coupled with his totally inept public relations ability, is enough evidence to convict anyone of being a Mid-Major leader.

Admitedly, Nutt has a "small town" "underdog" mentality, that he is perfectly confortable with, and, is the self fulfilling prophecy of his future.

You are what you think!

See ya

If you use last year as a bar, he can.   Played in an SEC title game--  and the program has clicked in at 9 wins on several occassions during his tenure.

[ErieHog]

You mean to tell me if Jimmy Johnson took the Arkansas job tomorrow you don't think recruits would be lining up to play in Fayetteville? That's BS and you know it.

Of course you want to be among the best.  I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.  But, what is the answer?  Simply changing the coach?  Changing the AD?  Changing all of them?  And, no matter who the coach or the ad is, they still have to come up with reasons for TOP TALENT to by pass LSU and Fla, and Auburn, and Bama, and Texas, and Ohio State, etc to get us to that level. 

having an AD and a coach that believes that we are only "8th in the SEC in putenchul" sure as hell doesnt help things.

Having a coach show off a division championship ring in a room full of SEC and national champions sure as hell doesnt help changes things at Arkansas.

Arkansas needs new blood that will be bent on getting us to that top 10 level.

I am not disagreeing.  BUt, and I have asked this several times and still get no good answers, WHY is a kid with offers to FLA/TX/Ohio St etc going to tell them all no, and come her.  And i mean enough of these kids to make a huge difference.  We seem to get one or 2 a year like that, but I mean enough to get some real SEC depth.  And I don't just buy " its the coach " because several SEC teams have these type of coaches. 

To paraphrase a famous quote  "Jimmy Johnson ain't walking through that door, so get used to it."

There is absolutely no reason to believe Arkansas can attract a truly high-profile coach.

[311Hog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

Erie, the hole in your logic, and the answer to the question: Can Nutt lead us to the 9-10 win barrier every year, is answered in last years fiasco.

The reason that Nutt cannot lead us to consistent, top tier SEC status, is that he has maxed out  his leadership potential.  Nutt's failure to recognize the need for an OC, his inability to "manage" primadonna players and staff, coupled with his totally inept public relations ability, is enough evidence to convict anyone of being a Mid-Major leader.

Admitedly, Nutt has a "small town" "underdog" mentality, that he is perfectly confortable with, and, is the self fulfilling prophecy of his future.

You are what you think!

See ya

If you use last year as a bar, he can.   Played in an SEC title game--  and the program has clicked in at 9 wins on several occassions during his tenure.

yeah of course he can...........every 3 years because he has clicked in with 9 wins which was usually followed up by 2 sub par to losing seasons before he was able to "climb that mountain" again to 9 wins, followed by another slump etc etc.

[311Hog]

You mean to tell me if Jimmy Johnson took the Arkansas job tomorrow you don't think recruits would be lining up to play in Fayetteville? That's BS and you know it.

Of course you want to be among the best.  I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.  But, what is the answer?  Simply changing the coach?  Changing the AD?  Changing all of them?  And, no matter who the coach or the ad is, they still have to come up with reasons for TOP TALENT to by pass LSU and Fla, and Auburn, and Bama, and Texas, and Ohio State, etc to get us to that level. 

having an AD and a coach that believes that we are only "8th in the SEC in putenchul" sure as hell doesnt help things.

Having a coach show off a division championship ring in a room full of SEC and national champions sure as hell doesnt help changes things at Arkansas.

Arkansas needs new blood that will be bent on getting us to that top 10 level.

I am not disagreeing.  BUt, and I have asked this several times and still get no good answers, WHY is a kid with offers to FLA/TX/Ohio St etc going to tell them all no, and come her.  And i mean enough of these kids to make a huge difference.  We seem to get one or 2 a year like that, but I mean enough to get some real SEC depth.  And I don't just buy " its the coach " because several SEC teams have these type of coaches. 

To paraphrase a famous quote  "Jimmy Johnson ain't walking through that door, so get used to it."

There is absolutely no reason to believe Arkansas can attract a truly high-profile coach.

and there is absolutely no reason to believe Arkansas cant attract a truly high profile coach.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

Erie, the hole in your logic, and the answer to the question: Can Nutt lead us to the 9-10 win barrier every year, is answered in last years fiasco.

The reason that Nutt cannot lead us to consistent, top tier SEC status, is that he has maxed out  his leadership potential.  Nutt's failure to recognize the need for an OC, his inability to "manage" primadonna players and staff, coupled with his totally inept public relations ability, is enough evidence to convict anyone of being a Mid-Major leader.

Admitedly, Nutt has a "small town" "underdog" mentality, that he is perfectly confortable with, and, is the self fulfilling prophecy of his future.

You are what you think!

See ya

If you use last year as a bar, he can.   Played in an SEC title game--  and the program has clicked in at 9 wins on several occassions during his tenure.

98, 06, 02, and 03
That 03 year was an underachieving year. WE had all that talent and we pissed it away in Shreveport.

I wouldnt judge a program like ours on 9 win seasons. I would judge it on top 25 finishes. We only have 3 top 25 finishes under nutt.

BTW, 4 9W seasons in 9 years is not that great.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

You mean to tell me if Jimmy Johnson took the Arkansas job tomorrow you don't think recruits would be lining up to play in Fayetteville? That's BS and you know it.

Of course you want to be among the best.  I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.  But, what is the answer?  Simply changing the coach?  Changing the AD?  Changing all of them?  And, no matter who the coach or the ad is, they still have to come up with reasons for TOP TALENT to by pass LSU and Fla, and Auburn, and Bama, and Texas, and Ohio State, etc to get us to that level. 

having an AD and a coach that believes that we are only "8th in the SEC in putenchul" sure as hell doesnt help things.

Having a coach show off a division championship ring in a room full of SEC and national champions sure as hell doesnt help changes things at Arkansas.

Arkansas needs new blood that will be bent on getting us to that top 10 level.

I am not disagreeing.  BUt, and I have asked this several times and still get no good answers, WHY is a kid with offers to FLA/TX/Ohio St etc going to tell them all no, and come her.  And i mean enough of these kids to make a huge difference.  We seem to get one or 2 a year like that, but I mean enough to get some real SEC depth.  And I don't just buy " its the coach " because several SEC teams have these type of coaches. 

To paraphrase a famous quote  "Jimmy Johnson ain't walking through that door, so get used to it."

There is absolutely no reason to believe Arkansas can attract a truly high-profile coach.

we may not can attract a big name coach.

But we can absolutley attract a big time coach. SOmethign we dont have right now.

[ErieHog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

[ErieHog]

You mean to tell me if Jimmy Johnson took the Arkansas job tomorrow you don't think recruits would be lining up to play in Fayetteville? That's BS and you know it.

Of course you want to be among the best.  I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.  But, what is the answer?  Simply changing the coach?  Changing the AD?  Changing all of them?  And, no matter who the coach or the ad is, they still have to come up with reasons for TOP TALENT to by pass LSU and Fla, and Auburn, and Bama, and Texas, and Ohio State, etc to get us to that level. 

having an AD and a coach that believes that we are only "8th in the SEC in putenchul" sure as hell doesnt help things.

Having a coach show off a division championship ring in a room full of SEC and national champions sure as hell doesnt help changes things at Arkansas.

Arkansas needs new blood that will be bent on getting us to that top 10 level.

I am not disagreeing.  BUt, and I have asked this several times and still get no good answers, WHY is a kid with offers to FLA/TX/Ohio St etc going to tell them all no, and come her.  And i mean enough of these kids to make a huge difference.  We seem to get one or 2 a year like that, but I mean enough to get some real SEC depth.  And I don't just buy " its the coach " because several SEC teams have these type of coaches. 

To paraphrase a famous quote  "Jimmy Johnson ain't walking through that door, so get used to it."

There is absolutely no reason to believe Arkansas can attract a truly high-profile coach.

and there is absolutely no reason to believe Arkansas cant attract a truly high profile coach.

Yes there is;  see the basketball search.

[ErieHog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

Erie, the hole in your logic, and the answer to the question: Can Nutt lead us to the 9-10 win barrier every year, is answered in last years fiasco.

The reason that Nutt cannot lead us to consistent, top tier SEC status, is that he has maxed out  his leadership potential.  Nutt's failure to recognize the need for an OC, his inability to "manage" primadonna players and staff, coupled with his totally inept public relations ability, is enough evidence to convict anyone of being a Mid-Major leader.

Admitedly, Nutt has a "small town" "underdog" mentality, that he is perfectly confortable with, and, is the self fulfilling prophecy of his future.

You are what you think!

See ya

If you use last year as a bar, he can.   Played in an SEC title game--  and the program has clicked in at 9 wins on several occassions during his tenure.

yeah of course he can...........every 3 years because he has clicked in with 9 wins which was usually followed up by 2 sub par to losing seasons before he was able to "climb that mountain" again to 9 wins, followed by another slump etc etc.

Which is why consistency has to be the next benchmark of the Program;  the troughs need to be evened out, and the bad years made better.   

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

and what were those programs like before they started winning BIG time?
Auburn threw down a 3-8 record and lost to teams like Central Florida.
LSU even lost a game to UAB for gosh sakes.

Just because we havent won big in quite sometime doesnt mean it cant happen with the right coach. Houston nutt has proven time and time again that he is mediocre at best.

YOu will never convince me to take the "poor ol Arkansas" side of the argument.

Wow those stats you reeled off about Iowa tradition vs. Arkansas tradition really backs up your argument.
ha. I belive i would put the Iowa argument to bed.

[hogsanity]

JJ, maybe, but I don't think there is any chance he is coming, so lets go with some REALISTIC names.

Jim Grobe
He won the ACC title with freaking Wake Forrest!

Yes Wake Forrest went to the BCS.
If Grobe was here, he wouldnt accept anything less than an SEC championship. He wouldnt be showing off division titles at the SEC media days either.

Yes, a ACC that had 2 teams ranked in the final top 25, and none in the top 15.  The SEC had 6 teams ranked, 4 in the top 15.  Grobe seems like a decent coach, but lets see if he can do it over a sustained period before we proclaimm him a program savior.

And I just love how everyone here seems to know just what coaches would and would not do at this school or in that league. 

And still, no one has answered WHY these kids are going to by pass these perinial powers to come here.

Yes it is called speculating and some common sense. A good coach doesnt get up there among SEC and national champions to show off a division championship ring. Good coaches shoot for the moon. Jim Grobe is a good coach.

Why would these kids choose us over the national powers when we have an AD spout off about how we're "8th in the SEC in putenchul".
We dont have a chance at the big time out of state prospects till we show them we are dedicated to winning and winning big. We need to show those kids that we are not just happy with 10-4 seasons and division championships.
We will start getting those kids once we start winning BIG and start showing them that we are dedicated to getting this program to the top with those power schools.

What you want is somebody to come out and say the reason we cant get those players is because we're little poor ol Arkansas and we cannot do any better than what nutty has given us.
That's what you would call a good answer. YOu are not getting that from me. I expect better from this program and I am one that believes this football program deserves better and can do better than what nutty has given us.
[/quote]

NO, the "poor little ole Ar" line is NOT WHAT I WANT TO HEAR.  I do want to hear some answers though, and no one can ever give one except "get a new coach and ad".  I think that is just as big of a cop out as the por little ole arky line. 

Here, I will give you what Ii think needs to happen:

1.  COMPLETELY CLEAN HOUSE  from White to the waterboys

2.  Hire a ad that will OVERSEE but not interfere

3.  Hire a coach that has BCS league HC experience

4.  Hire a marketing firm to sell the state as something other than hillbilly heaven

5.  Recruit the top 5 or 6 players in Ar, then go elsewhere hunting for the best players possible.  I still say the 50th player in Texas is USUALLY better than the 7th payer in AR.

There, thats a start.

[cbjagman]

It is easy to argue that we have nothing to lose by moving into the future with a new head coach, you can't just be satisfied with 7-9 wins, and the continuing poor bowl performances.  However, you are looking through rose coloered glasses not to appreciate a very real risk that the guy you bring in totally blows it (Jack Crowe).  This does not justify status quo but does justify calculated consideration.  I believe you better know where you are jumping before you jump.  I'm not saying don't jump...you just better make the right move or its another fifteen years down the road before there is hope again.  And I don't know about you guys, but hope has been a long time coming.  It was 1989 or so that last time we could legitimately feel like we belonged in the conversation with the top 20s.

Gee. think life itself isn't full of risks! Yes, I'll agree that there is a chance that we could bring in another Jack Crowe and turn into a miserable flop. However, I remind you one thing about that particular selection: go back and examine the circumstances behind his being chosen. If I recall Hatfield and company had come "out of left field" with their resignations just before signing date. I honestly don't think Frank had any alternate plan to replace Kenny and the staff. It's my understanding that JC was literally pulled off the plane with the rest of the departing staff and offered the job. My point is that while hiring any new coach has some risks, I think we've all seen the general trend and expectations from Dale. Generally a mediocre record with an 10 win season thrown in when all the fates smile favorably on the Hogs. Personally, I'll take the chance of looking for a current HC who has a proven track record to take over the helm. Can't see what we really have to lose expect for the possibilty of our mediocrity status..............

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

JJ, maybe, but I don't think there is any chance he is coming, so lets go with some REALISTIC names.

Jim Grobe
He won the ACC title with freaking Wake Forrest!

Yes Wake Forrest went to the BCS.
If Grobe was here, he wouldnt accept anything less than an SEC championship. He wouldnt be showing off division titles at the SEC media days either.

Yes, a ACC that had 2 teams ranked in the final top 25, and none in the top 15.  The SEC had 6 teams ranked, 4 in the top 15.  Grobe seems like a decent coach, but lets see if he can do it over a sustained period before we proclaimm him a program savior.

And I just love how everyone here seems to know just what coaches would and would not do at this school or in that league. 

And still, no one has answered WHY these kids are going to by pass these perinial powers to come here.

Yes it is called speculating and some common sense. A good coach doesnt get up there among SEC and national champions to show off a division championship ring. Good coaches shoot for the moon. Jim Grobe is a good coach.

Why would these kids choose us over the national powers when we have an AD spout off about how we're "8th in the SEC in putenchul".
We dont have a chance at the big time out of state prospects till we show them we are dedicated to winning and winning big. We need to show those kids that we are not just happy with 10-4 seasons and division championships.
We will start getting those kids once we start winning BIG and start showing them that we are dedicated to getting this program to the top with those power schools.

What you want is somebody to come out and say the reason we cant get those players is because we're little poor ol Arkansas and we cannot do any better than what nutty has given us.
That's what you would call a good answer. YOu are not getting that from me. I expect better from this program and I am one that believes this football program deserves better and can do better than what nutty has given us.

NO, the "poor little ole Ar" line is NOT WHAT I WANT TO HEAR.  I do want to hear some answers though, and no one can ever give one except "get a new coach and ad".  I think that is just as big of a cop out as the por little ole arky line. 

Here, I will give you what Ii think needs to happen:

1.  COMPLETELY CLEAN HOUSE  from White to the waterboys

2.  Hire a ad that will OVERSEE but not interfere

3.  Hire a coach that has BCS league HC experience

4.  Hire a marketing firm to sell the state as something other than hillbilly heaven

5.  Recruit the top 5 or 6 players in Ar, then go elsewhere hunting for the best players possible.  I still say the 50th player in Texas is USUALLY better than the 7th payer in AR.

There, thats a start.
[/quote]

We could use an AD that has NO arkansas ties whatsoever. We need somebody that has no ties to Frank Broyles. A guy like Jeremy Foley (florida) or Joe Castiglione (oklahoma).
Just a business man that will come in and not take crap from anybody and be bent on making the football program one of the best in the country.

Hire a BCS leage coach? Jim Grobe.

[LZH]

UGa and LSU were in our position and they found a way to the top tier.

Amen, brother, amen.  LSU was Miss. St. with cooler uniforms until Saban got there.  Bring in a top-shelf coach, give him about three years, and let's see where we are then...10 wins a year won't be such a big deal like it is now.  At least the new coach won't squirt in his britches like HDN does when we do have a great year because it's to be expected.

[ErieHog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

and what were those programs like before they started winning BIG time?
Auburn threw down a 3-8 record and lost to teams like Central Florida.
LSU even lost a game to UAB for gosh sakes.

Just because we havent won big in quite sometime doesnt mean it cant happen with the right coach. Houston nutt has proven time and time again that he is mediocre at best.

YOu will never convince me to take the "poor ol Arkansas" side of the argument.

Wow those stats you reeled off about Iowa tradition vs. Arkansas tradition really backs up your argument.
ha. I belive i would put the Iowa argument to bed.

It shows that Iowa was clearly the superior program in the decade prior to the arrival of their respective current regimes; take off the rose-colored glasses.   There's no shame in admitting just where we've been.   And we're better than Iowa right now, and have out-performed Iowa during the overlapping time frame-- so we went from being worse, to being better than them.


In the decade before Tubberville's arrival,  Auburn was 77-36-2  (.670) -- this included 3 10 win seasons, an undefeated team and a one loss team.

LSU's success didn't come overnight, either.  They won their title in Saban's 4th season,  but its not like there was absolutely no LSU winning tradition before Saban;  they had won 10 games and 9 games once each in the 5 seasons prior to his arrival.   Overall, the program was down, but not without success-- and most importantly, it was still located in one of the prime recruiting areas in the country--- where LSU was shorter on historical resume than most, it made up the difference with overwhelming local talent.

[budcampbellfan]

ESPN has no faith in Arkansas football and it is our own fault.  With Nutt we always lose the bowl games and lose at least 2 regular season games that should have been in the bag.  We do not win the key games for year-end rankings. 

Before that Broyles had already reduced our reputation tremendously.  Broyles has refused to hire a top name coach since Holtz.  At first he might have been able to but his reputation of meddler began with Holtz and has gotten worse until now it is legandary so that now he has not been able to hire top quality coaches since Hatfield probably.  Our program has been kept at the "also ran" level for decades by Broyles.  Nutt has had plenty of time to bring Arkansas to the top 10 level but because of both his own incompetence and Broyles incompetent meddling, he can't. 

It has been a very long time, at least since 1989, since Arkansas could be counted on to end up the year right.  We were then already on our way down because of Broyles and Hatfield's neanderthal offenses.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

and what were those programs like before they started winning BIG time?
Auburn threw down a 3-8 record and lost to teams like Central Florida.
LSU even lost a game to UAB for gosh sakes.

Just because we havent won big in quite sometime doesnt mean it cant happen with the right coach. Houston nutt has proven time and time again that he is mediocre at best.

YOu will never convince me to take the "poor ol Arkansas" side of the argument.

Wow those stats you reeled off about Iowa tradition vs. Arkansas tradition really backs up your argument.
ha. I belive i would put the Iowa argument to bed.

It shows that Iowa was clearly the superior program in the decade prior to the arrival of their respective current regimes; take off the rose-colored glasses.   There's no shame in admitting just where we've been.   And we're better than Iowa right now, and have out-performed Iowa during the overlapping time frame-- so we went from being worse, to being better than them.


In the decade before Tubberville's arrival,  Auburn was 77-36-2  (.670) -- this included 3 10 win seasons, an undefeated team and a one loss team.

LSU's success didn't come overnight, either.  They won their title in Saban's 4th season,  but its not like there was absolutely no LSU winning tradition before Saban;  they had won 10 games and 9 games once each in the 5 seasons prior to his arrival.   Overall, the program was down, but not without success-- and most importantly, it was still located in one of the prime recruiting areas in the country--- where LSU was shorter on historical resume than most, it made up the difference with overwhelming local talent.

do you remember our early SEC days when even Arkansas was beating up on LSU?

And your stats on Iowa doesnt exactly tell me that Iowa was "superior" to Arkansas.

there comes a time when you have to put up and shut and start winning big consistently. For that to happen, we need new blood.

[ErieHog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

and what were those programs like before they started winning BIG time?
Auburn threw down a 3-8 record and lost to teams like Central Florida.
LSU even lost a game to UAB for gosh sakes.

Just because we havent won big in quite sometime doesnt mean it cant happen with the right coach. Houston nutt has proven time and time again that he is mediocre at best.

YOu will never convince me to take the "poor ol Arkansas" side of the argument.

Wow those stats you reeled off about Iowa tradition vs. Arkansas tradition really backs up your argument.
ha. I belive i would put the Iowa argument to bed.

It shows that Iowa was clearly the superior program in the decade prior to the arrival of their respective current regimes; take off the rose-colored glasses.   There's no shame in admitting just where we've been.   And we're better than Iowa right now, and have out-performed Iowa during the overlapping time frame-- so we went from being worse, to being better than them.


In the decade before Tubberville's arrival,  Auburn was 77-36-2  (.670) -- this included 3 10 win seasons, an undefeated team and a one loss team.

LSU's success didn't come overnight, either.  They won their title in Saban's 4th season,  but its not like there was absolutely no LSU winning tradition before Saban;  they had won 10 games and 9 games once each in the 5 seasons prior to his arrival.   Overall, the program was down, but not without success-- and most importantly, it was still located in one of the prime recruiting areas in the country--- where LSU was shorter on historical resume than most, it made up the difference with overwhelming local talent.

do you remember our early SEC days when even Arkansas was beating up on LSU?

And your stats on Iowa doesnt exactly tell me that Iowa was "superior" to Arkansas.

there comes a time when you have to put up and shut and start winning big consistently.

Is math just beyond you?   How is going to more bowl games, winning bowl games -- any bowl wins at all--,  having almost half as many losing seasons, and having a better record,  especially those years when in comparable conferences,  not being plainly *better*?

I remember our early days in the SEC very well;  I remember losing 28-0 in Baton Rouge;  I remember losing 30-12 in Little Rock to a team that won *4* games.   We were playing fairly decently against LSU on the whole, but we were a far cry from dominating them. 

[MuskogeeHogFan]

ESPN has no faith in Arkansas football and it is our own fault.  With Nutt we always lose the bowl games and lose at least 2 regular season games that should have been in the bag.  We do not win the key games for year-end rankings. 

Before that Broyles had already reduced our reputation tremendously.  Broyles has refused to hire a top name coach since Holtz.  At first he might have been able to but his reputation of meddler began with Holtz and has gotten worse until now it is legandary so that now he has not been able to hire top quality coaches since Hatfield probably.  Our program has been kept at the "also ran" level for decades by Broyles.  Nutt has had plenty of time to bring Arkansas to the top 10 level but because of both his own incompetence and Broyles incompetent meddling, he can't. 

It has been a very long time, at least since 1989, since Arkansas could be counted on to end up the year right.  We were then already on our way down because of Broyles and Hatfield's neanderthal offenses.

Bingo......on the money.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

and what were those programs like before they started winning BIG time?
Auburn threw down a 3-8 record and lost to teams like Central Florida.
LSU even lost a game to UAB for gosh sakes.

Just because we havent won big in quite sometime doesnt mean it cant happen with the right coach. Houston nutt has proven time and time again that he is mediocre at best.

YOu will never convince me to take the "poor ol Arkansas" side of the argument.

Wow those stats you reeled off about Iowa tradition vs. Arkansas tradition really backs up your argument.
ha. I belive i would put the Iowa argument to bed.

It shows that Iowa was clearly the superior program in the decade prior to the arrival of their respective current regimes; take off the rose-colored glasses.   There's no shame in admitting just where we've been.   And we're better than Iowa right now, and have out-performed Iowa during the overlapping time frame-- so we went from being worse, to being better than them.


In the decade before Tubberville's arrival,  Auburn was 77-36-2  (.670) -- this included 3 10 win seasons, an undefeated team and a one loss team.

LSU's success didn't come overnight, either.  They won their title in Saban's 4th season,  but its not like there was absolutely no LSU winning tradition before Saban;  they had won 10 games and 9 games once each in the 5 seasons prior to his arrival.   Overall, the program was down, but not without success-- and most importantly, it was still located in one of the prime recruiting areas in the country--- where LSU was shorter on historical resume than most, it made up the difference with overwhelming local talent.

do you remember our early SEC days when even Arkansas was beating up on LSU?

And your stats on Iowa doesnt exactly tell me that Iowa was "superior" to Arkansas.

there comes a time when you have to put up and shut and start winning big consistently.

Is math just beyond you?   How is going to more bowl games, winning bowl games -- any bowl wins at all--,  having almost half as many losing seasons, and having a better record,  especially those years when in comparable conferences,  not being plainly *better*?

I remember our early days in the SEC very well;  I remember losing 28-0 in Baton Rouge;  I remember losing 30-12 in Little Rock to a team that won *4* games.   We were playing fairly decently against LSU on the whole, but we were a far cry from dominating them. 

Iowa overall does NOT have a better football tradition than Arkansas. The stats you put up? I wouldnt exactly call that dominating numbers. Give it up on that arguement. So Iowa was better than us during that time period. So what? That doesnt mean they have an overall better tradition.

I remember dominating LSU in baton rough 42-24 and beating them 30-6 the next year.

My point is LSU was AWFUL. then gradually got better.
They were AWFUL even though they were in the middle of all that talent as you claim.

They were 4-7 in 98 and went 1-7 in conference the year after. Guess who that ONE win was against.
Then the right coach came along and brought them 2 SEC titles and a national title.

It can be done here with the right coach which we dont have right now.

[ErieHog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

and what were those programs like before they started winning BIG time?
Auburn threw down a 3-8 record and lost to teams like Central Florida.
LSU even lost a game to UAB for gosh sakes.

Just because we havent won big in quite sometime doesnt mean it cant happen with the right coach. Houston nutt has proven time and time again that he is mediocre at best.

YOu will never convince me to take the "poor ol Arkansas" side of the argument.

Wow those stats you reeled off about Iowa tradition vs. Arkansas tradition really backs up your argument.
ha. I belive i would put the Iowa argument to bed.

It shows that Iowa was clearly the superior program in the decade prior to the arrival of their respective current regimes; take off the rose-colored glasses.   There's no shame in admitting just where we've been.   And we're better than Iowa right now, and have out-performed Iowa during the overlapping time frame-- so we went from being worse, to being better than them.


In the decade before Tubberville's arrival,  Auburn was 77-36-2  (.670) -- this included 3 10 win seasons, an undefeated team and a one loss team.

LSU's success didn't come overnight, either.  They won their title in Saban's 4th season,  but its not like there was absolutely no LSU winning tradition before Saban;  they had won 10 games and 9 games once each in the 5 seasons prior to his arrival.   Overall, the program was down, but not without success-- and most importantly, it was still located in one of the prime recruiting areas in the country--- where LSU was shorter on historical resume than most, it made up the difference with overwhelming local talent.

do you remember our early SEC days when even Arkansas was beating up on LSU?

And your stats on Iowa doesnt exactly tell me that Iowa was "superior" to Arkansas.

there comes a time when you have to put up and shut and start winning big consistently.

Is math just beyond you?   How is going to more bowl games, winning bowl games -- any bowl wins at all--,  having almost half as many losing seasons, and having a better record,  especially those years when in comparable conferences,  not being plainly *better*?

I remember our early days in the SEC very well;  I remember losing 28-0 in Baton Rouge;  I remember losing 30-12 in Little Rock to a team that won *4* games.   We were playing fairly decently against LSU on the whole, but we were a far cry from dominating them. 

Iowa overall does NOT have a better football tradition than Arkansas. The stats you put up? I wouldnt exactly call that dominating numbers. Give it up on that arguement.

I remember dominating LSU in baton rough 42-24 and beating them 30-6 the next year.

My point is LSU was AWFUL. then gradually got better.
They were AWFUL even though they were in the middle of all that talent as you claim.

They were 4-7 in 98 and went 1-7 in conference the year after. Guess who that ONE win was against.
Then the right coach came along and brought them 2 SEC titles and a national title.

It can be done here with the right coach which we dont have right now.

Yet you claim Huggers have their heads in the sand.

There is a profound difference between being bad *in spite* of local talent,  and being bad *because* of local talent.  When Arkansas has been been bad, especially when we first entered the SEC, it was *because* we had virtually no local talent, compared to the rest of the league. LSU has never had that problem--  and Saban wasn't an overnight success in BR, either; it took him a few years to knock things together, and he still had more 8 win seasons than 10+ win seasons.

Get a great recruiter in a great area, and some excellent assistants, with hit and miss winning in the recent past, and its easy to turn a program around in a few years;  get a great recruiter in an area that's comparatively low on talent, and that hasn't won in memory,  and you'll struggle to do it in 10.

I'm no Nutt fan, but I have serious doubts that anything that comes along afterwards has any hope of doing considerably better.

[311Hog]

The Arkansas of 1998 is not the same Arkansas of 2007 is the point he is trying to make.  You still think of Arkansas High School football in terms of 1998 when we had no chance what so ever of competing. Sure things arent near the level of Louisiana or Texas or anything like that, but HS football is WORLDS better then it was 10 years ago.

Hell the areas in general are, and that is something that is not being recognized by a large portion of fans.  We are prepared, both financially and in terms of facilities, etc to compete at the next level, it is just our mind sets and over all expectations that are holding us back.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

What about Virginia Tech?
What about Iowa?
Both those programs have more recent conference championships.
Va Tech even went to the national title game.

That's whats wrong with a good portion of the Arkansas fan base and the arkansas athletic department.

You have to WANT to be great to be great. Too many settle for just getting to a bowl game and too many see a division title as winning the super bowl.

It didn't happen overnight at Virginia Tech, and Iowa had far more relevant tradition than Arkansas has had.   It took Beamer 9 years to win 10 games at VT;  it took him 13 years to win 11 once;  in that mix were 4 losing seasons as well as 2  6-5 seasons.

Iowa's also been an underachiever of late, considering what has been expected of them.

Moving to the Big 12 would be putting a band-aid on the wound;  yes, the record would improve by 2 or so wins a season, but when trounced in a bowl again,  and with fewer dollars coming to campus,  why bother?   I'd rather win 8 or 9 in the SEC than 10 in the Big 12.

Iowa has a better football tradition than Arkansas?

Their last football championship was in 1958.

I love the ol "poor us, poor little Arkansas. We just cant do any better than 7-9 wins a year and a good bowl game".

The talent in state this year is better than it has been probably ever. WE have programs like Tennessee, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Auburn coming after our kids. That excuse won't cut it anymore.

Also Auburn is another program. They are in a remote location within the state that has probably the best college football program of all time.
Whats the excuse there?

You're being pedantic;  yes, Iowa has a more relevant tradition than Arkansas;  it's  'championship' predates our own by a whopping 2 years,  but Iowa has a better record over the past 20 years than Arkansas, by a good margin---  and let's not kid ourselves,  its not like Iowa is winning huge right now, either.   They are a combined 13-12 over the past 2 years,  worse than Arkansas.

No one has said we 'can't'   -- just that we're not *entitled* to more, and that it is not reasonable to expect such, when Arkansas still has a long way to go in the building process to be the sort of team that wins 9+ games consistently.

Talent is better in state now, than it the past?  Sure.   That doesn't mean a thing, though.   Depth of talent means more than just the top-flight talent,  as Arkansas fills out its rosters with Arkansas 2 and 3 stars, while the likes of Texas and Florida fill theirs out with 4 star Florida kids.   That's a problem that has to be overcome.


Oh-- and Auburn,  again, has more relevant tradition than Arkansas-- including things like Heisman Trophy winners, and splits of various contested NCs.

Hard to say?  Yes--  but a long, honest look in the mirror is the first step in correcting the problem.

Arkansas won the championship in 64 by the way.
I have a very tough time believing Iowa has a better overall football tradition than we do. You'll never convince me of that.

Arkansas needs new blood in the worst way possible.
We will not get to that next level until we get a new AD, a new coach, and maybe a fanbase that believes Arkansas can get to that next level. Heck we just about did it this past year and would have had we had a coach that new anything about developing a passing game.

If UGa, LSU, Auburn, Va Tech, Iowa can do it. SO can Arkansas.

Florida was also not NEARLy as good before Steve Spurrier came along and shook things up.

UGA:  Has had both a National Title and a Heisman Winner in the past 30 years; sits in fantastic recruiting territory.  Was slightly down at the end under Donnan, but still had relevant winning tradition when Richt took over.

LSU:  Has a National Title, and sits in one of the true hotbed of football talent nationwide--  and again, wasn't built up overnight.

Auburn: Again,  prominent national seasons in recent memory, and a Heisman trophy winner;  a couple of undefeated seasons is a nice kicker too.

VA Tech:  Well-documented elsewhere that this is not a Darksider-friendly argument point;  Beamer inherited a program that was winning, and took it in the tank for a while;  took him 9 years to win 10 games, and 13 years to win 11.   Posted more losing seasons at Va Tech than they had experienced in the previous 15 years,  including a 2 win season and a pair of 3 win seasons.   Had a 6 year window starting out at VT where he went a combined 25-40-2.

Iowa currently isn't in as good of shape as a program as Arkansas;

During the tenure of the current Iowa coach, the program is 55-43  (.561)
During the same time period, Arkansas is 58-41 (.585)

In the decade prior to the arrival of both coaches at their respective programs:

Iowa: 66-49-2 (.564;  3 losing records; 1 10 win season; 2-2-1 in Bowls)
Arkansas:  58-55-2  (.504; 5 losing seasons; 2 10 win years at the very beginning of the prior decade; 0-4 Bowl Games).

and what were those programs like before they started winning BIG time?
Auburn threw down a 3-8 record and lost to teams like Central Florida.
LSU even lost a game to UAB for gosh sakes.

Just because we havent won big in quite sometime doesnt mean it cant happen with the right coach. Houston nutt has proven time and time again that he is mediocre at best.

YOu will never convince me to take the "poor ol Arkansas" side of the argument.

Wow those stats you reeled off about Iowa tradition vs. Arkansas tradition really backs up your argument.
ha. I belive i would put the Iowa argument to bed.

It shows that Iowa was clearly the superior program in the decade prior to the arrival of their respective current regimes; take off the rose-colored glasses.   There's no shame in admitting just where we've been.   And we're better than Iowa right now, and have out-performed Iowa during the overlapping time frame-- so we went from being worse, to being better than them.


In the decade before Tubberville's arrival,  Auburn was 77-36-2  (.670) -- this included 3 10 win seasons, an undefeated team and a one loss team.

LSU's success didn't come overnight, either.  They won their title in Saban's 4th season,  but its not like there was absolutely no LSU winning tradition before Saban;  they had won 10 games and 9 games once each in the 5 seasons prior to his arrival.   Overall, the program was down, but not without success-- and most importantly, it was still located in one of the prime recruiting areas in the country--- where LSU was shorter on historical resume than most, it made up the difference with overwhelming local talent.

do you remember our early SEC days when even Arkansas was beating up on LSU?

And your stats on Iowa doesnt exactly tell me that Iowa was "superior" to Arkansas.

there comes a time when you have to put up and shut and start winning big consistently.

Is math just beyond you?   How is going to more bowl games, winning bowl games -- any bowl wins at all--,  having almost half as many losing seasons, and having a better record,  especially those years when in comparable conferences,  not being plainly *better*?

I remember our early days in the SEC very well;  I remember losing 28-0 in Baton Rouge;  I remember losing 30-12 in Little Rock to a team that won *4* games.   We were playing fairly decently against LSU on the whole, but we were a far cry from dominating them. 

Iowa overall does NOT have a better football tradition than Arkansas. The stats you put up? I wouldnt exactly call that dominating numbers. Give it up on that arguement.

I remember dominating LSU in baton rough 42-24 and beating them 30-6 the next year.

My point is LSU was AWFUL. then gradually got better.
They were AWFUL even though they were in the middle of all that talent as you claim.

They were 4-7 in 98 and went 1-7 in conference the year after. Guess who that ONE win was against.
Then the right coach came along and brought them 2 SEC titles and a national title.

It can be done here with the right coach which we dont have right now.

I'm no Nutt fan, but I have serious doubts that anything that comes along afterwards has any hope of doing considerably better.

Its exactly that mentality that is holding this program back.
Apparantly Nutt and Broyles would agree with you.

we may not have the best HS football in the country but its better than it was when nutty got here.
And even last year we had pretty good football talent but they're all at USC and Auburn.

This instate class is one of the best ever and we're getting most of the big timers. . Hopefully we get a coach to coach them in the future.

[ErieHog]

The Arkansas of 1998 is not the same Arkansas of 2007 is the point he is trying to make.  You still think of Arkansas High School football in terms of 1998 when we had no chance what so ever of competing. Sure things arent near the level of Louisiana or Texas or anything like that, but HS football is WORLDS better then it was 10 years ago.

Hell the areas in general are, and that is something that is not being recognized by a large portion of fans.  We are prepared, both financially and in terms of facilities, etc to compete at the next level, it is just our mind sets and over all expectations that are holding us back.

We need to spend, point blank.     We haven't, historically.    I was very heartened to see significant increases to the recruiting budget this past year, and I think we're starting to see some on the field-dividends for the money spent.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Erie, a new HC, a KNOWN HC, one with a solid reputation, could come in and do great things here. We have the facilities, we have the school, we have the fans, we have the Conference, the vast spaces of Texas lay open to us and yet we schedule teams like Tennessee-Chattanooga. I am sure that will do worlds of good for our recruiting. We need to be playing bigger Div 1 schools and going to other states to play and then play very very well when we get there, to build our recruiting. A combination of your wins, competition for the conference title and national recognition(by playing in other parts of the country) as well as who your HC is and what his reputation is, is what grows your recruitingadn begins to feed you with first class talent.

THAT is where we need to be and the first step is a new AD and the second is a new HC.

[hawaiianhogster]

With a coach Like Houston Nutt Frank was right when he said we're 7 or 8 in SEC. We'll never average above that with our coach. Can the man.

I'm beginning to believe that the ones that are in charge of hiring and firing coaches don't want Arkansas to be competitive as winners.

[ErieHog]

Erie, a new HC, a KNOWN HC, one with a solid reputation, could come in and do great things here. We have the facilities, we have the school, we have the fans, we have the Conference, the vast spaces of Texas lay open to us and yet we schedule teams like Tennessee-Chattanooga. I am sure that will do worlds of good for our recruiting. We need to be playing bigger Div 1 schools and going to other states to play and then play very very well when we get there, to build our recruiting. A combination of your wins, competition for the conference title and national recognition(by playing in other parts of the country) as well as who your HC is and what his reputation is, is what grows your recruitingadn begins to feed you with first class talent.

THAT is where we need to be and the first step is a new AD and the second is a new HC.

Texas isn't a vaccum;  we pinch nickles until the buffalo shiiits; we have an improving but still 2nd tier reputation nationally;  we have a great conference, fantastic TV exposure, and our facilities are top flight (for now).     

Changing the AD is long overdue;  Frank the Fundraiser needs to stick around, but Frank the Meddler needs to go to the retirement home.     Coach-wise,  the basketball fiasco should have sobered up everyone something fierce.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Erie, a new HC, a KNOWN HC, one with a solid reputation, could come in and do great things here. We have the facilities, we have the school, we have the fans, we have the Conference, the vast spaces of Texas lay open to us and yet we schedule teams like Tennessee-Chattanooga. I am sure that will do worlds of good for our recruiting. We need to be playing bigger Div 1 schools and going to other states to play and then play very very well when we get there, to build our recruiting. A combination of your wins, competition for the conference title and national recognition(by playing in other parts of the country) as well as who your HC is and what his reputation is, is what grows your recruitingadn begins to feed you with first class talent.

THAT is where we need to be and the first step is a new AD and the second is a new HC.

Texas isn't a vaccum;  we pinch nickles until the buffalo shiiits; we have an improving but still 2nd tier reputation nationally;  we have a great conference, fantastic TV exposure, and our facilities are top flight (for now).     

Changing the AD is long overdue;  Frank the Fundraiser needs to stick around, but Frank the Meddler needs to go to the retirement home.     Coach-wise,  the basketball fiasco should have sobered up everyone something fierce.

using the basketball coaching search as an excuse? Frank Broyles screwed that crap up. I believe we ended up with a good coach though. Time will tell.

We have a coach right now that is satisfied with getting to bowl games and winning the division.

You gotta take chances or we'll just end up with a program that continues to wallow in mediocrity.

[TOWNSHOG]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

[Theolesnort]

 ErieHog You are being perceived as the little choo choo that is always saying to himself I hope I can I hope I can where as hoggystyle is perceived as the little choo choo who is saying I know I can I know I can. Can you not see the difference? If you look for reasons why you will fail you surely will fail where as people who will not let obstacles stand in the way and take the bull by the horns will much more likely achieve success. My granny always told me can't, can't do nothing. Recruiting wise this State is starting to produce a lot of skilled position athletes. We are still a little short on big fast physical linemen but we can steal from other states to compensate if we play it smart and work hard at it. This University in other areas has tremendous resources to compete in any sport or so says our esteemed Johnny Mac the track coach. I am more like hoggystyle I know we can I know we can. In fact we already did it once when resources were truly scarce back in the 60's 70's and some of the 80's. I know, I lived and experienced those good times.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

it would help if nutt was a professional like Bobby Bowden instead of a bumbling fool.

[jabohog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

I don't know how old you are, but over the history of CFB, I have seen polls that rank Arkansas around 18th. Not bad for a school that supposedly doesn't have tradition. We did have it and the talent pool wasn't any better then than it is now. Granted we have lost some tradition, but it is because of what is being allowed to go on now. The right coach who wants to work and not settle for second place could bring the tradition back.

[Hogginitall]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

I don't know how old you are, but over the history of CFB, I have seen polls that rank Arkansas around 18th. Not bad for a school that supposedly doesn't have tradition. We did have it and the talent pool wasn't any better then than it is now. Granted we have lost some tradition, but it is because of what is being allowed to go on now. The right coach who wants to work and not settle for second place could bring the tradition back.

That "winning tradition" was built in the SWC, not exactly the SEC.  In fact, I would say it was more like the Big East is now.  It's a little different for a team like Arkansas to consistently win 9 or more games in the SEC than it was to do it in the SWC....PERIOD.  We're heading in the right direction, if a certain faction of fans would let us get there, we could be a consistent national power.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

I don't know how old you are, but over the history of CFB, I have seen polls that rank Arkansas around 18th. Not bad for a school that supposedly doesn't have tradition. We did have it and the talent pool wasn't any better then than it is now. Granted we have lost some tradition, but it is because of what is being allowed to go on now. The right coach who wants to work and not settle for second place could bring the tradition back.

That "winning tradition" was built in the SWC, not exactly the SEC.  In fact, I would say it was more like the Big East is now.  It's a little different for a team like Arkansas to consistently win 9 or more games in the SEC than it was to do it in the SWC....PERIOD.  We're heading in the right direction, if a certain faction of fans would let us get there, we could be a consistent national power.

Oh yeah, that "certain faction of fans" that wants us to get there and has been pressuring for it to happen, is "holding us back". Is that you HDN, or Danny?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

I think that if you are really passionate about Razorback football, I would encourage to go back and research all that has happened and a great deal that has been posted on here about that. That will give you all the information you need. As for the Bannister comparison, is was about the way people think, a many of them think that we cannot be the major power that many of us want and believe we can be. You have to believe it, before you can do it. That was the point in a Nutt-shell.

As for HDN's accomplishments or the lack thereof, I will just say, over 9 years, he has been average. He has a 10 win season that included a three game slide and choke at the end, and a lot of people are ready to make him King for Life. 6 out of the last 9 years he has had multiple games slides of 3, 4 or 5 games. 9 out of the last 9 years, he has lost the very next SEC game after the first SEC loss. His bowl record is abysmal, his record against major players in non-conf play over the last 9 years has been 3-7. What did a 30% grade get you in school? Most any place, that is an "F".

Go do your research and then come back and talk. There is so much that has happened I don't have the time to list it all here right now.

[Hogginitall]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

I think that if you are really passionate about Razorback football, I would encourage to go back and research all that has happened and a great deal that has been posted on here about that. That will give you all the information you need. As for the Bannister comparison, is was about the way people think, a many of them think that we cannot be the major power that many of us want and believe we can be. You have to believe it, before you can do it. That was the point in a Nutt-shell.

As for HDN's accomplishments or the lack thereof, I will just say, over 9 years, he has been average. He has a 10 win season that included a three game slide and choke at the end, and a lot of people are ready to make him King for Life. 6 out of the last 9 years he has had multiple games slides of 3, 4 or 5 games. 9 out of the last 9 years, he has lost the very next SEC game after the first SEC loss. His bowl record is abysmal, his record against major players in non-conf play over the last 9 years has been 3-7. What did a 30% grade get you in school? Most any place, that is an "F".

Go do your research and then come back and talk. There is so much that has happened I don't have the time to list it all here right now.

But, do a comparison with the other coaches in our history (including Holtz, Hatfield, and Broyles) and you will find the same credentials, minus one factor----an SEC schedule.  Just look at how some of Arkansas' best teams from the SWC days fared against OOC opponents...especially SEC OOC opponents.
Obviously, some of you guys still don't get it.  If you can't see the difference between winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SWC schedule and winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SEC schedule-----you just can't see

[ErieHog]

ErieHog You are being perceived as the little choo choo that is always saying to himself I hope I can I hope I can where as hoggystyle is perceived as the little choo choo who is saying I know I can I know I can. Can you not see the difference? If you look for reasons why you will fail you surely will fail where as people who will not let obstacles stand in the way and take the bull by the horns will much more likely achieve success. My granny always told me can't, can't do nothing. Recruiting wise this State is starting to produce a lot of skilled position athletes. We are still a little short on big fast physical linemen but we can steal from other states to compensate if we play it smart and work hard at it. This University in other areas has tremendous resources to compete in any sport or so says our esteemed Johnny Mac the track coach. I am more like hoggystyle I know we can I know we can. In fact we already did it once when resources were truly scarce back in the 60's 70's and some of the 80's. I know, I lived and experienced those good times.

No, I'm living in reality, and Hoggystyle is living in a hope.    Reality tends to crash hard down upon those who try to plan the future by dreaming, instead of doing.   It is a hard and painful thing to admit to one's self, as a fan;  Arkansas is not, nor has it been Elite since arguably the 70s.      There are ways to overcome disadvantages, and ways to turn things around, but there is no such thing as a free lunch or an easy path to success.   It's going to be hard.

Bringing Track into the conversation is a common tactic to distract from the realities of big time college football-  while that program is fantastic it's own right,  and is a unique (and IMHO underutilized) asset to the football team,  Arkansas spends  extremely competitively on Track and Field, and the dollars go further there, to boot.   We care more about track than other people, and spend accordingly.  We simply don't, with football.

[hogsanity]

ErieHog You are being perceived as the little choo choo that is always saying to himself I hope I can I hope I can where as hoggystyle is perceived as the little choo choo who is saying I know I can I know I can. Can you not see the difference? If you look for reasons why you will fail you surely will fail where as people who will not let obstacles stand in the way and take the bull by the horns will much more likely achieve success. My granny always told me can't, can't do nothing. Recruiting wise this State is starting to produce a lot of skilled position athletes. We are still a little short on big fast physical linemen but we can steal from other states to compensate if we play it smart and work hard at it. This University in other areas has tremendous resources to compete in any sport or so says our esteemed Johnny Mac the track coach. I am more like hoggystyle I know we can I know we can. In fact we already did it once when resources were truly scarce back in the 60's 70's and some of the 80's. I know, I lived and experienced those good times.

No, I'm living in reality, and Hoggystyle is living in a hope.    Reality tends to crash hard down upon those who try to plan the future by dreaming, instead of doing.   It is a hard and painful thing to admit to one's self, as a fan;  Arkansas is not, nor has it been Elite since arguably the 70s.      There are ways to overcome disadvantages, and ways to turn things around, but there is no such thing as a free lunch or an easy path to success.   It's going to be hard.

Bringing Track into the conversation is a common tactic to distract from the realities of big time college football-  while that program is fantastic it's own right,  and is a unique (and IMHO underutilized) asset to the football team,  Arkansas spends  extremely competitively on Track and Field, and the dollars go further there, to boot.   We care more about track than other people, and spend accordingly.  We simply don't, with football.

This topuches on something I said a couple of weeks ago.  LEts assume, yes I know what assuming does, that the Hogs avg 9 wins over the period of 2006-2010.  How much more would they have to spend to win more games, if that can be calcualted?  Would they have to pay a coaching staff 2mil more than the current one?  Increase spending on recruting by another 30%. Lets say they spend 4mil more per year on Football, would they see an increase in wins, and, even if they did, would additional revenues be created to offset the additional expense. 

Football must be looked at as a business, sadly, and sometimes in business, increasing output is not necesarry to make maximum profit.

[ErieHog]

Arkansas isn't a 10-12 win program, especially in the modern SEC;  there are a handful of such programs that do exist, and almost all of them have either dominant talent pools or relevant tradition.     Arkansas is, after 9 years with Nutt, a 7-9 win Program.    There is no shame in that--- its simply a reflection of how things are, not how anyone wishes them to be-- we were a 4 win program before he arrived.    The road to the top started with respectability, which we've gained; its dogged by inconsistency, which we've struggled with--- and the remainder is long, and hard, and there are no 'quick fixes'.     Can Nutt lead the Hogs on towards the 9 win mark more consistently?   We'll see;  if he can't win 8 or 9 with this bunch, he's likely done.

LSU was a terrible program for a while too. Then they were a 7-9 win program and then they got a good coach and look at them now.

Georgia also was a 7-9 win program under Jim Donnan. They got rid of their mediocre coach and got a good coach and won 2 SEC titles.
OKlahoma also sucked. Texas sucked. Both got good coaches and turned their programs into powerhouses.

It can be done here with a good coach that aspires to be more than a division winner, trust me.

LSU sits on a massive talent bed, as does Texas;  Texas and OU have relevant tradition (they've won big in the lifetimes of kids going to school these days).

You don't have to have both, but you have to have at least one of the two.  We have neither.

I don't know how old you are, but over the history of CFB, I have seen polls that rank Arkansas around 18th. Not bad for a school that supposedly doesn't have tradition. We did have it and the talent pool wasn't any better then than it is now. Granted we have lost some tradition, but it is because of what is being allowed to go on now. The right coach who wants to work and not settle for second place could bring the tradition back.

Usually varies between 18th and 25th, depending on which All Time list you prefer;  that encompasses a lot of eras, though where Arkansas was a legitimate power (the 60s),  a fading power (the 70s),  an oddity (the 80s), an afterthought (the 90s), and now a roller coaster.

College football used to be a very regional game, and until the modern TV contract era, relatively small budget.  With the explosion of TV dollars, college football became a big business, with big budgets.

Arkansas has some serious assets, but it also has serious liabilities;  a tradition that is relevant to 18 year old kids isn't among the assets;  maybe to their parents, but not to the kids who you need, to win now.

[ErieHog]

ErieHog You are being perceived as the little choo choo that is always saying to himself I hope I can I hope I can where as hoggystyle is perceived as the little choo choo who is saying I know I can I know I can. Can you not see the difference? If you look for reasons why you will fail you surely will fail where as people who will not let obstacles stand in the way and take the bull by the horns will much more likely achieve success. My granny always told me can't, can't do nothing. Recruiting wise this State is starting to produce a lot of skilled position athletes. We are still a little short on big fast physical linemen but we can steal from other states to compensate if we play it smart and work hard at it. This University in other areas has tremendous resources to compete in any sport or so says our esteemed Johnny Mac the track coach. I am more like hoggystyle I know we can I know we can. In fact we already did it once when resources were truly scarce back in the 60's 70's and some of the 80's. I know, I lived and experienced those good times.

No, I'm living in reality, and Hoggystyle is living in a hope.    Reality tends to crash hard down upon those who try to plan the future by dreaming, instead of doing.   It is a hard and painful thing to admit to one's self, as a fan;  Arkansas is not, nor has it been Elite since arguably the 70s.      There are ways to overcome disadvantages, and ways to turn things around, but there is no such thing as a free lunch or an easy path to success.   It's going to be hard.

Bringing Track into the conversation is a common tactic to distract from the realities of big time college football-  while that program is fantastic it's own right,  and is a unique (and IMHO underutilized) asset to the football team,  Arkansas spends  extremely competitively on Track and Field, and the dollars go further there, to boot.   We care more about track than other people, and spend accordingly.  We simply don't, with football.

This topuches on something I said a couple of weeks ago.  LEts assume, yes I know what assuming does, that the Hogs avg 9 wins over the period of 2006-2010.  How much more would they have to spend to win more games, if that can be calcualted?  Would they have to pay a coaching staff 2mil more than the current one?  Increase spending on recruting by another 30%. Lets say they spend 4mil more per year on Football, would they see an increase in wins, and, even if they did, would additional revenues be created to offset the additional expense. 

Football must be looked at as a business, sadly, and sometimes in business, increasing output is not necesarry to make maximum profit.

Its difficult to put an exact dollar figure on how much you need to spend;  for the budget size, Arkansas spends -fairly- smartly, and keeps capital improvements off of the budget, which is a fantastic thing.    What historically has been very telling was how little we actually spent on a recruiting budget;  thankfully, there are very positive signs that this number will be increasing dramatically.

[Hogginitall]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

I think that if you are really passionate about Razorback football, I would encourage to go back and research all that has happened and a great deal that has been posted on here about that. That will give you all the information you need. As for the Bannister comparison, is was about the way people think, a many of them think that we cannot be the major power that many of us want and believe we can be. You have to believe it, before you can do it. That was the point in a Nutt-shell.

As for HDN's accomplishments or the lack thereof, I will just say, over 9 years, he has been average. He has a 10 win season that included a three game slide and choke at the end, and a lot of people are ready to make him King for Life. 6 out of the last 9 years he has had multiple games slides of 3, 4 or 5 games. 9 out of the last 9 years, he has lost the very next SEC game after the first SEC loss. His bowl record is abysmal, his record against major players in non-conf play over the last 9 years has been 3-7. What did a 30% grade get you in school? Most any place, that is an "F".

Go do your research and then come back and talk. There is so much that has happened I don't have the time to list it all here right now.

But, do a comparison with the other coaches in our history (including Holtz, Hatfield, and Broyles) and you will find the same credentials, minus one factor----an SEC schedule.  Just look at how some of Arkansas' best teams from the SWC days fared against OOC opponents...especially SEC OOC opponents.
Obviously, some of you guys still don't get it.  If you can't see the difference between winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SWC schedule and winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SEC schedule-----you just can't see

Before HDN Arkansas was 53-80-3 against SEC schools.  Arkansas was 9-16-3 in bowl games before HDN.

[311Hog]

Believe me i know and the "realists" on this board know how hard it will be, and to be perfectly honest HDN and Frank know how hard it will be, that is WHY THEY DONT DO IT. That is the beef i have and many others have, we see the "reality" of it all.

We see how it is "possible" to be more then we are, we understand it will take risks, it is the PTB that REFUSE to take those risks because they sit in absolute comfort, living their posh million dollar lifestyles so why change ?

Why would HDN work harder then has to? when he knows he can "mail it in" and keep his job that pays him millions of dollars to win 7 games and play in Shreveport?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

I think that if you are really passionate about Razorback football, I would encourage to go back and research all that has happened and a great deal that has been posted on here about that. That will give you all the information you need. As for the Bannister comparison, is was about the way people think, a many of them think that we cannot be the major power that many of us want and believe we can be. You have to believe it, before you can do it. That was the point in a Nutt-shell.

As for HDN's accomplishments or the lack thereof, I will just say, over 9 years, he has been average. He has a 10 win season that included a three game slide and choke at the end, and a lot of people are ready to make him King for Life. 6 out of the last 9 years he has had multiple games slides of 3, 4 or 5 games. 9 out of the last 9 years, he has lost the very next SEC game after the first SEC loss. His bowl record is abysmal, his record against major players in non-conf play over the last 9 years has been 3-7. What did a 30% grade get you in school? Most any place, that is an "F".

Go do your research and then come back and talk. There is so much that has happened I don't have the time to list it all here right now.

But, do a comparison with the other coaches in our history (including Holtz, Hatfield, and Broyles) and you will find the same credentials, minus one factor----an SEC schedule.  Just look at how some of Arkansas' best teams from the SWC days fared against OOC opponents...especially SEC OOC opponents.
Obviously, some of you guys still don't get it.  If you can't see the difference between winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SWC schedule and winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SEC schedule-----you just can't see

We see and we know what is possible. Us "poor liitle ole Arkies" like to use our SEC schedule and conference as an excuse. Excuses are for losers, winners make it happen. We are very capable of making it happen, but many who make excuses for us(including our current HC and AD) are the ones holding us back. Time for a change.

[hogsanity]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

I think that if you are really passionate about Razorback football, I would encourage to go back and research all that has happened and a great deal that has been posted on here about that. That will give you all the information you need. As for the Bannister comparison, is was about the way people think, a many of them think that we cannot be the major power that many of us want and believe we can be. You have to believe it, before you can do it. That was the point in a Nutt-shell.

As for HDN's accomplishments or the lack thereof, I will just say, over 9 years, he has been average. He has a 10 win season that included a three game slide and choke at the end, and a lot of people are ready to make him King for Life. 6 out of the last 9 years he has had multiple games slides of 3, 4 or 5 games. 9 out of the last 9 years, he has lost the very next SEC game after the first SEC loss. His bowl record is abysmal, his record against major players in non-conf play over the last 9 years has been 3-7. What did a 30% grade get you in school? Most any place, that is an "F".

Go do your research and then come back and talk. There is so much that has happened I don't have the time to list it all here right now.

But, do a comparison with the other coaches in our history (including Holtz, Hatfield, and Broyles) and you will find the same credentials, minus one factor----an SEC schedule.  Just look at how some of Arkansas' best teams from the SWC days fared against OOC opponents...especially SEC OOC opponents.
Obviously, some of you guys still don't get it.  If you can't see the difference between winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SWC schedule and winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SEC schedule-----you just can't see

We see and we know what is possible. Us "poor liitle ole Arkies" like to use our SEC schedule and conference as an excuse. Excuses are for losers, winners make it happen. We are very capable of making it happen, but many who make excuses for us(including our current HC and AD) are the ones holding us back. Time for a change.

TIme for change in a lot of things in Arkansas, yet the FB program is the only one that is not supposed to use the "little ole ark" argument.  It is okay to use when fighting school consolidation, defending wanting a lottery and casino gaming, maybe getting 8 man football in small HS, etc.  People on here scream to "change the status quo, get rid of the good ole boy network"  when they talk about the Hogs, but they want to leave the rest of it the same.  Either we are poor little ole small arkansas or we are not. 

[311Hog]

lol i dont i would welcome some changes around here.

[woghild]

That is no surprise whatsoever. 

Lying coach + cupcake schedule + world's worst hugger play-by-player = who the F cares

[HawgWyld]

Before HDN Arkansas was 53-80-3 against SEC schools.  Arkansas was 9-16-3 in bowl games before HDN.

That's your defense of HDN? That the Hogs went from pathetic to just average? Damn!

[Hogginitall]

Muskogee, Bannister?  You compare him to the performance of our football program under Nutt?  I do not see the comparison here, Bannister was competeting against himself essentially.
I am not a "hugger", I am aware that HDN has his faults and has been a clown at times in the past, but doesn't everyone?  I am at least grateful that he is passionate about the program and making a difference in a young mens life.  
However, our program is definitely on the rise currently and I think we are headed in the right direction yet you want a new HC.   A great example of a program that was mediocre at best many years ago is Florida State.
People in Tallahassee wanted to get rid of Bobby Bowden on the upswing of his tenure their.  He was able to persevere through it all, and the program did not have any substantial success until about 10 to 12 years into his reign.  As we all know now, FSU is a nationally recognized program that has been dominate throughout many years.
With that being said, I feel that Nutt maybe on the fringe of making us a consistent top 20 to 25 program yearly and occasionally a top 5 to 10 finish.  Nutt is well respected in the coaching community as well, mind you, apparently some professionals in the NFL and NCAA think he has enough ability to be very successful in the industry. Also, with all of the recent turmoil surrounding the program, do you really think a "top notch" coach really would step into the current situation?  Especially after winning the SEC West along w/ a 10 win season, and the fans call for the coaches head and dug for negative information on the coach to get rid of him.  Futhermore, since we are not a dominate program or a nationally recognized program regularly(last 15 years) I just do not see where this would be an inviting opportunity for an elite coach.
I think at this point we should just allow Nutt to coach and take a wait and see approach.  Lastly, if HDN does not perform at the present time then things usually have a way of working themselves out.

I think that if you are really passionate about Razorback football, I would encourage to go back and research all that has happened and a great deal that has been posted on here about that. That will give you all the information you need. As for the Bannister comparison, is was about the way people think, a many of them think that we cannot be the major power that many of us want and believe we can be. You have to believe it, before you can do it. That was the point in a Nutt-shell.

As for HDN's accomplishments or the lack thereof, I will just say, over 9 years, he has been average. He has a 10 win season that included a three game slide and choke at the end, and a lot of people are ready to make him King for Life. 6 out of the last 9 years he has had multiple games slides of 3, 4 or 5 games. 9 out of the last 9 years, he has lost the very next SEC game after the first SEC loss. His bowl record is abysmal, his record against major players in non-conf play over the last 9 years has been 3-7. What did a 30% grade get you in school? Most any place, that is an "F".

Go do your research and then come back and talk. There is so much that has happened I don't have the time to list it all here right now.

But, do a comparison with the other coaches in our history (including Holtz, Hatfield, and Broyles) and you will find the same credentials, minus one factor----an SEC schedule.  Just look at how some of Arkansas' best teams from the SWC days fared against OOC opponents...especially SEC OOC opponents.
Obviously, some of you guys still don't get it.  If you can't see the difference between winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SWC schedule and winning 9, 10, 11 games with an SEC schedule-----you just can't see

We see and we know what is possible. Us "poor liitle ole Arkies" like to use our SEC schedule and conference as an excuse. Excuses are for losers, winners make it happen. We are very capable of making it happen, but many who make excuses for us(including our current HC and AD) are the ones holding us back. Time for a change.

You don't know what is possible for Arkansas' football team in the SEC....except for what has gone on since 1992.

Now, if we had been in the SEC and had the success we had in the SWC at one point in time, that would be different.  All you know is possible for Arkansas in the SEC is either really horrible seasons (Joe Kines and Danny Ford) or considerably better seasons overall (Houston Nutt).

If you want to SPECULATE as to how we would do with a different coach at Arkansas playing in the SEC, then be my guest.  But, you know nothing (at least not from any sort of history or past success) of how Arkansas could do with the right coach in the SEC.  Danny Ford had won a National Championship when he came here, why couldn't he do it at Arkansas?  Better yet, why couldn't he do better than ONE winning season in 5 years here?  Why was he 26-30-1 overall at Arkansas?  Why couldn't he beat SMU?  Why did he go 1-2 against Memphis State while he was here?  Why was he 0-1 in bowl games?
Danny Ford's teams lost to SMU in consecutive seasons!
Why do you think just changing the coach is going to change our history as a little above average football program?  It takes time, especially after moving into a different conference (that also happens to be the toughest conference in the nation), to establish winning tradition in that new conference...especially if that conference is the SEC.
You nay-sayers always act like you KNOW that we could do better if we got rid of Nutt.  What proof do you have?  The only coaches you have to go by are Kines, Ford, and Houston Nutt.
If we get rid of Nutt, we'll have to start from scratch all over again.  I, for one, am not up for it.