I'll take a wild stab at some horrible logic and memory: "Hey, Michigan wanted Butch, didn't get him. Who did they get after that? Harbaugh!"
Butch has won nine games the past two years to Harbaugh's ten and the SEC is infinitely more difficult.
General consensus seemed to be that because Michigan is still behind OSU Harbaugh hasn't really won anything. Another guy insisted on comparing Harbaugh's first two years to Butch's third and fourth years, which is a more favorable comparison for Butch than just comparing years one and two for both.
I don't understand that train of thought. The guy turned Stanford into a perennial top 15 program before taking the 49ers to the Super Bowl.
Only gripe you can have against Harbaugh is that he's never won a title outside of a non-AQ conference title when he was at San Deigo and he probably talks too much for a coach that hasn't done won one. Still light years ahead of Lyle.
Someone said, and I wish I were joking here, that an Outback Bowl win is better than a Super Bowl loss. To which someone responded, isn't an NFC Championship win better than an Outback Bowl win?
I enjoy Harbaugh's schtick while Butch's infuriates me. Of course he's never coached one of my teams. And he's a much better coach.
I love how it is unclear whether your second to last sentence ends in a beautiful colloquial turn - or whether you were going to type 'hasn't done anything' and decided instead to say 'hasn't won one.'
And Stanford was a program that had annual recruiting classes at the bottom of the PAC 12 and had demphasized football so much they reduced their stadium by 30k and paid harbaugh $500k a year. Despite this his staff had like 3 future head coaches on it.
I think you could claim harbaugh is a program builder and not the guy who is going to build a Saban annual NC contender. Maybe. That being said butch can't do either.