Ranking ACC/SEC Coaches

FullMetalBuzz said:
Some of these make no sense.

Kirby ranked above Jimbo? Jimbo rebuilt FSU and won a natty while Kirby came into a stacked program and has continued their perennial underachieving.

Mack Brown at 23? Not much respect for another coach with a title.

Collins makes sense - with no Power 5 experience and no lower division titles like Satterfield he needs to earn his way up the charts.[/QUOTE

Mack Brown not being much higher is a joke after what he did at UNC previously, and winning a title at Texas. This article has the typical SEC bias.
Click to expand...
 
USA Today has an article out about Ranking the New Head Coaches for 2019. Don't check it out, it's worthless.
 
johncu said:
Duke is decidedly mediocre, and has been throughout Cutcliffe's tenure. That's the whole point - Duke was arguably the worst FBS football program not too long ago. Cutcliffe's run has been very similar to Doeren's, only Doeren has MUCH more of a structural advantage. And Cutcliffe actually made an ACCCG. I don't see an argument for Clawson at all. In 5 years, he has yet to have a winning conference record. Cutcliffe won 10 games and a division title at one point.
Click to expand...
Wake has beaten Duke 2 years in a row, including 59 - 7 last year. He's won a bowl game 3 years in a row despite playing in the much tougher side of the conference. Duke has had some success against us but some Tech fans don't pay attention to the rest of their season. They are usually below 500 in conference with Wake as their permanent opponent and then load up on 3 or 4 easy non conference wins. Cutcliffe has had 2 winning conference records in 11 years. He has Duke competitive but there are much better coaches with more success on this list.
 
Deke said:
Based on recent results, I don't think that's a stretch. NC State has been pretty solid top-but-not-Clemson team in the Atlantic, and Wake Forest smashed Duke last year (and had a similar record). Despite having our number, Duke has been pretty mediocre the last couple of years.

Granted, Cutcliffe did produce a top 10 draft pick.
2ywi2b.png
Click to expand...


I think you could argue that a 'great' coach would do better than 3 - 5 playing in the weak ACC Coastal with an NFL first rounder at QB.
 
In 6 seasons, Doeren has only finished second to Clemson once, and only finished above .500 in conference twice, almost completely owing to the troubles of FSU and the complete collapse of Louisville. All during an era in which UNC only had one decent year.

Edit - to put it in relatable terms Doeren's results are worse than Chan Gailey's.
 
Last edited:
goldmember said:
Wake has beaten Duke 2 years in a row, including 59 - 7 last year. He's won a bowl game 3 years in a row despite playing in the much tougher side of the conference. Duke has had some success against us but some Tech fans don't pay attention to the rest of their season. They are usually below 500 in conference with Wake as their permanent opponent and then load up on 3 or 4 easy non conference wins. Cutcliffe has had 2 winning conference records in 11 years. He has Duke competitive but there are much better coaches with more success on this list.
Click to expand...

Duke had 13 consecutive losing seasons before Cutcliffe. He won almost as many games in his first two years (9) as they had won in the previous 8 years (10). One or two head-to-head wins doesn't trump that.
 
I don't see how its relevant how many games Ted Roof won at Duke 15 years ago. Both Wake and Duke are hard places to win but most people would consider Wake harder, smaller school, less resources and money, and they are clearly in the tougher half of the conference.

My biggest issue is Cutcliffe being ranked as high as he is and people arguing he should be ranked higher. He has a 20 year head coaching career including Ole Miss and it's barely mediocre. He's had 2 10 win seasons in 20 years and plenty of losing seasons and he had a losing conference record at both Ole Miss and Duke. Lots of coaches could win 6 or 7 games at Duke with 4 easy out of conference games every year and playing in the ACC Coastal with Wake as your permanent opponent. Chan Gailey could do that and Paul Johnson certainly could.

If you wanna look at somebody who took traditionally bad programs and actually accomplished something beyond being competetive then look at Art Briles at Baylor or Pat Fitzgerald at Northwestern or Bill Snyder at K-state.
 
Last edited:
goldmember said:
I don't see how its relevant how many games Ted Roof won at Duke 15 years ago. Both Wake and Duke are hard places to win but most people would consider Wake harder, smaller school, less resources and money, and they are clearly in the tougher half of the conference.
Click to expand...

Eh, Wake was a bad P5 program but one that had been to an Orange Bowl under the previous regime. It's not an exaggeration to say that Duke was among the very worst programs in FBS football.
 
gtfan088 said:
Eh, Wake was a bad P5 program but one that had been to an Orange Bowl under the previous regime. It's not an exaggeration to say that Duke was among the very worst programs in FBS football.
Click to expand...

Duke has had 4 *winless* seasons with three different head coaches in the last 30 years. Only 8 winning seasons in the 50 years prior to cutcliffe. Losing seasons his first 5 years there.

Wake isn't far behind, but it's hard to sugarcoat how bad Duke as a football program has been.
 
jacketpridecitywide said:
Mack Brown is 67 years old and went 30-21 his last 4 years at Texas. I'm not concerned with him at NC
Click to expand...

Yep. How many examples are there of the coach that was at a big time school, fired because the program tanked under him, and then he comes back in his old age at a lower school and finds success? Generally, when you're fired because the game has passed you by, the game has actually passed you by.
 
1. The job Cut did at Duke was amazing. This was an absolute abomination of a program. They still had a freaking track around the football field when Cut was elevating the program. He made so many right moves and got everything he could out of that school.

2. It seems like it has gotten a little stale, which I think should hurt him in the rankings. He's 65ish years old. Richt wasn't even 60 when the game passed him by. Mack Brown was younger when the game passed him by.
The Coastal, not counting last season, has gotten a little better compared to when Cutcliffe came in and took advantage of the bad coaches that were mitigating the advantages. While at the same time, he has lost some coaches and has been slow to bring in new blood.
Cutcliffe should have been what Kansas is hoping Les Miles will be. Come in, improve the talent, "professionalize" the way the entire operation is run, stay for about 5 years, and leave an elevated program that is stable and ready for a younger guy to come in and keep it going. Cut did all of that, but he's overstayed and now the reality of an older coach past his prime, is kinda starting to take over.
 
goldmember said:
I don't see how its relevant how many games Ted Roof won at Duke 15 years ago. Both Wake and Duke are hard places to win but most people would consider Wake harder, smaller school, less resources and money, and they are clearly in the tougher half of the conference.

My biggest issue is Cutcliffe being ranked as high as he is and people arguing he should be ranked higher. He has a 20 year head coaching career including Ole Miss and it's barely mediocre. He's had 2 10 win seasons in 20 years and plenty of losing seasons and he had a losing conference record at both Ole Miss and Duke. Lots of coaches could win 6 or 7 games at Duke with 4 easy out of conference games every year and playing in the ACC Coastal with Wake as your permanent opponent. Chan Gailey could do that and Paul Johnson certainly could.

If you wanna look at somebody who took traditionally bad programs and actually accomplished something beyond being competetive then look at Art Briles at Baylor or Pat Fitzgerald at Northwestern or Bill Snyder at K-state.
Click to expand...
Harder to win at Duke and Wake than at Georgia Tech? And how is the Atlantic tougher than the Coastal---because we aren't in it?
 
Yukonwreck said:
Harder to win at Duke and Wake than at Georgia Tech? And how is the Atlantic tougher than the Coastal---because we aren't in it?
Click to expand...
Yea i think it's harder to win at Wake and Duke than at GT. Seems like history would make this obvious, do you disagree ? If it's not then it makes the job Cutcliffe has done look worse because all he's really done is make Duke competitive, not good. Same with Ole Miss. .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top