What about when they go 10-3 the previous year, are picked 4th, and finish tied for 1st? Of course media projections don't mean anything, but if you consistently outperform projections, that means you're probably a good coach. [Do not read this comment as an argument that Jones has consistently outperformed expectations. He hasn't. It's just a single data point]
I'll answer. Backing into garbage championships that require little in the way of recruiting and a decent QB means [penis] to me.
Beating good teams. Beating the conference crap at those levels often hinges on one playmaker. When those guys step up and beat teams with broad talent range, they're recruiting and coaching over their station. He hasn't come close to doing either. He was handed a head start on a shitty conference in the Big East and did nothing with it.
So your standard for winning at the MAC level is beating major conference teams that_________. Are ranked? Are in the top half of their conference? Have beaten a ranked team themselves?
So, what are you trying to argue here? Are we supposed to be impressed or feel some sort of confidence from what he did at Central Michigan? He didn't create some kind of Urban Meyer juggernaut and was left with a winning program. If I'm hiring for Toledo, I'll cream in my pants for him. Since I'm worried about Tennessee, I'm not overly impressed. There are a slew of coaches like him on that level.
I am arguing that your comment that he didn't win anything at lower levels is asinine. What standard for "winning at lower levels" can you possibly have such that he didn't do it? Nothing more, nothing less.
Hahahaha.... Oh man, that is rough...and I didn't want to think it....but the thought has actually been bouncing around in my head for two days trying to find a weakness in my filter so it could get out...
This is where I come from on Jones and UC. I lived up there for a time. Kelly and him had nothing to work with other than promises and a decent big city vibe. UC football facilities are crap and the school is not much better. I could care less about what UC fans or players or national talking heads say about Jones. It's means nothing to me as a fan of UT. Like Tenny I want championships. By the end of Year 3 he needs to be playing in the SECCG. Period. Spurrier and Richt will be heading out or already gone. Muschamp is a goofball. Doable to get to the SECCG by then. I will not be spending any money on anything UT unless Hart/Cheek are gone. At this point the BOT and "big boosters" have every appearance of being their pawns. If they don't have the guts to can those two they get no money from me. If enough fans get the message when they get blown out by Oregon and UF, maybe the pansies will fire the two losers. As far as Jones as a coach goes, he appears to be OK. His offense has some nice wrinkles in it. He has the players' focus and they seem to respond the right way. They run to contact and not away from it - a hardnosed approach. D is D. Most of the schemes are the same. However, the understanding by the players of what they see is what is so important. Can they teach it and recruit the right players? The clock is aleady ticking. The fan base is not going to attend games when it starts downhill again no matter how many kool-aid drinkers there are now. And I will celebrate that if the losing starts again. I hope it breaks them financially and emotionally until Hart/Cheek are gone.
Why did we not even look at someone like Doeren who dominated his conference while Jones went 12-9 in the BIG SCARY BIG EAST. Or Taggart who took an 0-12 and made them 7-5. I will never understand.
Ah, so we're arguing semantics instead of something of actual importance. Fine, you're the winner. He's won nothing of actual value as a coach. Better?
You were using the lack of MAC success as the reason to believe Jones won't succeed at UT. That's not semantics. That's stupid. The only way I can interpret it to not be stupid is that when you said he won't succeed here because he never won anything at a lower level, you meant he never won anything in the Big East, but you just didn't specify that when you said "lower level," you weren't including the MAC. If that's what you were doing, then there's no real argument here. Just say what you mean.
I'll just leave this here Here's pretty much how I evaluate a coach (in no particular order): 1. Record before he got there vs. record with him 2. Conference record 3. Conference titles 4. Record in rivalry games Winning big games you shouldn't is another one, but I have no idea which games Central Michigan should and should not win. For Jones at Central Michigan: 1. 10-4 pre-Jones, 11-2 when he left. 2. 20-3 vs. the MAC. 3. 2 outright conference titles 4. 3-0 against Western Michigan My take: Kelly did go before him, but he still looks great at this point. You could say that Kelly left the program before he peaked there, but Jones took them to heights (11-2, 8-0 in the MAC) Kelly never reached. At Cincinnati: 1. 12-1 Sugar Bowl team pre-Jones, 9-3 now. 2. 12-9 in the Big East. 3. 2 shared conference titles 4. 2-1 against Louisville My take: This is a lot more underwhelming. People just kind of accept that Jones has "2 titles," but both of them were three- or four-way tie kind of deals. Never was his team actually the one invited to a BCS bowl as Big East champion. He only beat one team with a record better than 7-5, and it was Miami (OH) - not really seeing any surprise victories out of Jones. Overall, 12-9 in the Big East sticks out to me as Jones now moves to the SEC. It seems like that's where he kind of leveled out, and where he belongs. Those looking for positive signs can certainly play up the CMU record, because it is impressive, but given his lack of signature wins I have a really hard time seeing him beat the likes of Saban/Miles/Spurrier/Sumlin/Richt/Muschamp. And that's exactly what we need to do.
What is comes down to is Jones is a coach of what could be. Considering the state of the program, what could be is not the solution.
