- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Update
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:13 am to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:13 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Its not risking the program at all, if the coordinators you hire get hired away was head coaches. Since most assistant coaches want to be head coaches, why wouldn't they want to go to a team where the last 2 DC's got head coaching jobs (assuming Walker comes and is 1 and done.)
I would hire Walker as well, but there is risk involved.
#1, there is a learning curve every time you bring in someone new
#2, there is always the possibility that the next hire doesn't fit as well as you think.
You don't want to be making a change like this frequently.
2
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:18 am to Colonel Hapablap
quote:
this has been thought about and it's a terrible argument. Short term greatness is better than long term mediocrity EVERY TIME.
Of course it is. Are you saying that Walker is the embodiment of greatness and Chavis is the embodiment of mediocrity?
5+ years of very good defense > 1 year of great defense and hoping to find another very good/great DC one year later. It is quite possible that having to hire yet another new DC in 2010 could seriously hinder the program in ways we, not being head coaches, don't realize.
This post was edited on 12/20/08 at 10:19 am
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:20 am to moneyg
greatness is not guaranteed with Walker
mediocrity is not guaranteed with Chavis
I'll take either but that is no argument at all. Walker is a much riskier hire. I don't get the idea that Walker is a slam dunk great performer. I think he's a downgrade from Bo. He or Chavis are certainly miles better than what we had this year. On last season's performance Chavis is a better DC. Who knows?
mediocrity is not guaranteed with Chavis
I'll take either but that is no argument at all. Walker is a much riskier hire. I don't get the idea that Walker is a slam dunk great performer. I think he's a downgrade from Bo. He or Chavis are certainly miles better than what we had this year. On last season's performance Chavis is a better DC. Who knows?
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:23 am to moneyg
quote:
I would hire Walker as well, but there is risk involved.
For the record I would too, but only because I think there is a decent chance he could succeed at LSU and still be around for 2010.
But, if I was Miles and thought he was almost surely going to be gone after 2009... 5 DCs in 4 years... IMO the downgrade to Chavis is minor enough that it is worth the stability.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:43 am to Maximus
I agree that Chavis is the "safer" hire. His 10 year tenure in the SEC and demonstrated ability to coordinate multiple top 10 defenses in the SEC makes him a "safe bet" IMO.
Perhaps Les feels that hiring Chavis/Orgeron/Raymond combined witht the WIZ aat OC will be the ticket for long term success at LSU. That being defined as competing for the SEC West each year, and the MNC every 4-5 years. Can't say that I really disagree at this point.
I'm cautiously optimistic
Perhaps Les feels that hiring Chavis/Orgeron/Raymond combined witht the WIZ aat OC will be the ticket for long term success at LSU. That being defined as competing for the SEC West each year, and the MNC every 4-5 years. Can't say that I really disagree at this point.
I'm cautiously optimistic
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:46 am to Maximus
quote:
Miles knows that he can stay around forever losing 3-4 a year because all the rantards suck his dick no matter what because they "remember Curley Hallman years." Chavis is the "safe" hire.
Do you really look at Miles and see a guy that is at all worried about being "safe" to be secure in his job?
He gambles on the field against conventional wisdom. He sent out feelers to Michigan during the course of a season. And when rumors broke that he would take the job? He blew up to the press, not to clear up his own name, but because he wanted his team to have a chance to win a championship.
Miles has many faults, but I can't see him as being a guy that worries about being "safe" for his own job security. If he makes a mistake being safe it is because he is trying to be safe for those around him involved with LSU.
This post was edited on 12/20/08 at 10:48 am
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:49 am to Tigercat
quote:
And when rumors broke that he would take the job? He blew up to the press, not to clear up his own name, but because he wanted his team to have a chance to win a championship.
you really believe that?Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:50 am to Maximus
quote:
you really believe that?
Um, yes? I sure as hell ain't calling the man a Saint, some think he didn't even send out feelers. I sure as hell do.
If he wasn't worried about the team and was worried about taking the Michigan job he wouldn't have addressed in it in the press.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:53 am to Maximus
quote:
Miles knows that he can stay around forever losing 3-4 a year because all the rantards suck his dick no matter what because they "remember Curley Hallman years." Chavis is the "safe" hire.
I would say there are more Rantards who are over the top critical of Miles than there are who are over the top supportive. Both are Rantards.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:55 am to moneyg
WORD!
Posted on 12/20/08 at 10:59 am to moneyg
I respect someone if they think Chavis over Walker is "too safe," but anyone that says that Miles has a history of being a safe or conservative head coach needs to get their objectivity checked.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:00 am to Maximus
quote:Why you gotta come frick up a perfectly good belowpar thread with some bullshite that obviously belongs on the fricking rant?
Maximus
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:00 am to Maximus
quote:
Miles knows that he can stay around forever losing 3-4 a year because all the rantards suck his dick no matter what because they "remember Curley Hallman years." Chavis is the "safe" hire.
So people who support Miles are rantards, but you're not?
This post was edited on 12/20/08 at 11:02 am
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:03 am to drexyl
quote:
Why you gotta come frick up a perfectly good belowpar thread with some bullshite that obviously belongs on the fricking rant?
I agree with this
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:14 am to Geauxst
quote:
because all the rantards suck his dick no matter what because they
Wrong... Rantards are all Miles haters, who miss Saban.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:26 am to drexyl
par says chavis and other reliable people say walker
hmmmmmmmmm
hmmmmmmmmm
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:33 am to BilJ
quote:
par says chavis and other reliable people say walker
co-DCs.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:35 am to Maximus
i will be happy with either. shite.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:36 am to Tigercat
quote:
I respect someone if they think Chavis over Walker is "too safe," but anyone that says that Miles has a history of being a safe or conservative head coach needs to get their objectivity checked.
I do not believe Chavis plus O is "too safe". At this point in time, "SAFE" might be exactly what LSU needs.
for instance:
1) one year removed from MNC
2) on the verge of landing the #1 recruitng class in the nation.
3) having recent success employing less agressive sceems than Walker is alledged to prefer.
4) having as much talent on the roster as anyone in college football.
Posted on 12/20/08 at 11:39 am to Maximus
maybe yours is!
Page 21 of 35
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News