I'd be fine with Kelly but Oregon had a rough time against Auburn that year and I don't recall Auburns defense being lights out. His style of offense just doesn't do it for me.
Did he say Gruden is a nobody, or that he hasn't proven himself as a college football coach? I'm to lazy to go back and read it again.
I don't think one can say Gruden is a guaranteed winner in college. Guaranteed to unite the fanbase, enliven the program, bring top coaches here, top players, in game adjustments...but he's never won a college game. However, it would be very difficult with the support and talent, not to win with his acumen and motivation. The main issue always was and still is, his dealing with kids in college, instead of men in pro. Finebaum mentioned it the other day in regards to his conversations with people that know Gruden and the recruiting/babysitting aspect is the biggest reason why they gave that Gruden didn't want college. Like everything else in life, that view can change and Gruden could, but imo its still the biggest factor. Not money, not control...babysitting teenagers, playing the recruiting game, and ncaa rules.
He overstated the conclusion, but the factual underpinnings were actually factual. "Gruden has never coached at the college level" is a statement of fact. "Gruden is a proven winner" is also a statement of fact. The disagreement appears to be on how easily being an NFL winner translate to being a college winner I think it's a fair question (See Smith, Lovie).
You siding with a man who has never won a game of college football over a guy with a 46-7 record because "his style of offense just doesn't do it for you"? The guy is a winner. As long as he wins, who the hell cares what his style of offense is?
Lovie Smith doesn’t have players and probably never will at Illinois. That won’t be a problem for Gruden if he were to come here.
The disagreement is coming form people driving this narrative that Gruden will walk through the door and W's will start raining from the sky because... Gruden... Superbowl Ring. It's all based on nothing more than hopes and dreams. You would think that after a decade of hiring unproven coaches we would have learned our lesson, instead, this fanbase is falling all over itself to do it all over again. We don't deserve better because we can't learn a lesson as simple as - if you want to win, hire someone who has proven they can win.
I think it's based on the fact that 75 of Rivals top 100 will commit on name recognition alone. And I get 5 star heart, but at some point, 5 star talent wins out.
Hasn't Gruden proven he can win? I guess I'm confused about championships versus 5-star hearts and the associated conversion math.
All valid points. I think the allure for me is Gruden has been talked about for so long that I want to see him as the HC above anyone. Again, I'd be fine with Kelly. He'd be a huge upgrade over the thief we have now...i simply don't care for his style of offense.
I prefer Gruden, would be thrilled with Kelly. Gruden's star power would put a massive spotlight on UT. I get the sense that he is well liked by the talking heads that have been dismissive to UT in the past. Recruiting would be the least of my concerns. He'd have his pick of QBs who could pick up his system. He'd have his pick of experienced and talented assistants who'd want to work with him. He'd be the kind of royalty that the NCAA doesn't have the balls to trifle with. I think Curry would also have the mojo to tell the 'AA and SEC to shove it. Gruden would be glorious.
