- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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: Thank You Gerry D
Posted on 4/6/09 at 2:17 pm to Weizenman
Posted on 4/6/09 at 2:17 pm to Weizenman
Great Thread! Personally heard Dinardo say "If we hire a young up and coming coordinator he'll leave after a couple of years". Staff became in-bread with no objectivity. That was what killed his program. Also bitter division between Rohan/Booty supporters
1
Posted on 4/6/09 at 2:26 pm to laftoothdr
quote:
Also bitter division between Rohan/Booty supporters
yah...I always got the sense that Booty was going to play no matter what due to some outside force. Or maybe it was Master P. Who knows.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 3:20 pm to biglego
As far as I am concerned, Josh Booty was little more than am arse sore. Not being able to sign him did a number on Hallman (even though he would not have known what to do with him, if he had) since Josh decided to play pro baseball. He was an arse sore for Dinardo, and when I saw Nick Saban shew his arse shortly befor the half of Saban's first bowl game, I felt that Booty's career was pretty much done at that point. Maybe the kid could play some decent high school ball, but he was not really worth a shite at the major college level, and really do not contribute much in the NFL.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 3:43 pm to miledawg
quote:
Dinardo markedly improved LSU's recruiting, and proved LSU could mostly play up to the level of Bama/Florida. But failed to consolidate his gains due to hardheadedness
Totally agree. Without DiNardo and Faulk, our program could have been crippled for generations. Attendance had dropped to the lowest levels since the '78 expansion. The only four years Tiger Stadium averaged below 70,000 since that expansion were the four years before DiNardo took over. He "brought back the magic" and turned that around before crashing and burning over the Tepper fiasco.
Average attendance in 1994 (capacity 80,150): 65,124
Average attendance in 1999 (capacity 80,000): 78,826
So thanks, Gerry, for turning us around. I'm glad you came when you did.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:03 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:His first team went 7-4-1. 4 of those 7 wins (over half) featured a true freshman at QB, 6 of the 7 featured a true freshman at TB, and all 7 featured a true freshman at DT. When you have three true freshman leading your team at RB, DT and QB in your first season, you are not winning off the last guy's talent.
but there is no way in hell DiNardo could have won 17 games in his first 2 years if he didn't have something to work with
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:12 pm to roygu
quote:He was.
I think his initial success went to his head and he began to believe that he was responsible for that success.
quote:Not really. Firing in mid-season is almost never absolutely necessary, so taking the position of waiting until season's end is hardly ever flat out wrong. And prior to the '99 season, there really wasn't much of an argument for firing him. He decided to give Tepper and his defense one more season, and his success warranted allowing him that gamble with his job at stake. He knew it (or should have known it), and rolled the dice with it. Once the '99 season got under way and those dice came up snakeeyes, it was all over for him. So then the question became, "now, or at the end of the season?" So arguing for "end of the season" wouldn't really have been that wrong, imo.
[quote]I was a big Dinardo supporter up until the time that he was fired. His last season we had some great debates on the old "Geaux Board. I was on the wrong side of those debates.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:14 pm to TheDoc
quote:
dinardo also recruited michael clayton before saban did...
when clayton was in 8th grade
Yup if you lived in Baton Rouge or worked/helped out at Christian Life you know Dinardo and Clayton met and talked about what LSU was building.
Having known Clayton at this time in his life I know he talked about Coach D and the LSU program. Clayton was a special athlete, just like kids today start going to athletic functions as freshmen/sophomore's you knew Clayton was talented.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:17 pm to DaSaltyTiger
quote:All-SEC="not worth a shite"?
Maybe the kid could play some decent high school ball, but he was not really worth a shite at the major college level
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:19 pm to King Joey
Yeah, Thanks Gerry D for making my final 3 seasons as an undergraduate student so memorable with back to back losses to Ole Miss, Kentucky, and and Tuberville smoking cigars on the field.
God da** those final 2.5 seasons of the Dinardo tenure (everything post UF 97 win) were some painful times to be a Tiger Fan.
I don't know if i can ever forgive the man for pissing away some football seasons at the best times of my life.
God da** those final 2.5 seasons of the Dinardo tenure (everything post UF 97 win) were some painful times to be a Tiger Fan.
I don't know if i can ever forgive the man for pissing away some football seasons at the best times of my life.
This post was edited on 4/6/09 at 4:22 pm
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:41 pm to King Joey
quote:
All-SEC="not worth a shite"?
I still find it amazing that Booty got that. Anyone who followed LSU knew better.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:42 pm to King Joey
quote:
His first team went 7-4-1. 4 of those 7 wins (over half) featured a true freshman at QB, 6 of the 7 featured a true freshman at TB, and all 7 featured a true freshman at DT. When you have three true freshman leading your team at RB, DT and QB in your first season, you are not winning off the last guy's talent.
Do I really have to point out that there are 22 starters on offense and defense plus your special team guys plus key backups etc? Do I seriously have to point out that a roster is 100 players? Those guys were important (and Curley played a key role by continuing to recruit these guys), but they were not the team in and of themselves. This is truly a silly shite argument.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:43 pm to tduecen
Yea, without Gerry D, we wouldn't have Ruffino's.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:52 pm to tduecen
I was there in the Gerry D days ... friend of mine wasn't. She was drunk one night searching LSU on E-bay ... she bought a framed pic of Gerry D while drunk ...
It's hanging over the toilet ... this still makes me laugh ...
Really, he did start the upward trend and hell, he got us to the INDY Bowl in '95 and Peach in '96!
It's hanging over the toilet ... this still makes me laugh ...
Really, he did start the upward trend and hell, he got us to the INDY Bowl in '95 and Peach in '96!
Posted on 4/6/09 at 4:55 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:Of course not.
Do I really have to point out that there are 22 starters on offense and defense plus your special team guys plus key backups etc?
quote:No, they weren't. Are you seriously suggesting that the talent Curley recruited was equal to the talent DiNardo was recruiting, and he just "happened" to have three key players in his first recruiting class who would take over as true freshman from the "equally talented" Curley recruits? Are you seriously suggesting that the emergence of three true freshmen at those positions does not suggest an improvement in the talent level being recruited?
Those guys were important (and Curley played a key role by continuing to recruit these guys), but they were not the team in and of themselves.
In '96, Mark Roman was a starter at Safety. He was a true freshman, beating out 3rd, 4th and 5th year guys from Hallman's era. Larry Foster was a true Sophomore starting at WR in '96. Where were the "equally talented" guys Hallman had recruited in '92, '93 and '94 that couldn't beat out a true Sophomore?
Hallman left more talent than Archer. DiNardo improved on that talent level and left (even after his disastrous departure) even more talent than Hallman. I don't hate Hallman, I just think he was a coach woefully underqualified for the job he was hired to do. LSU (like some others) mistook USM's success under Hallman as a reflection of how good a coach he was and overlooked the impact of some kid named Favre being under center. Four losing seasons and a 16 year Super Bowl-winning, Hall of Fame career later, we all know better.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 5:28 pm to King Joey
quote:
No, they weren't. Are you seriously suggesting that the talent Curley recruited was equal to the talent DiNardo was recruiting, and he just "happened" to have three key players in his first recruiting class who would take over as true freshman from the "equally talented" Curley recruits? Are you seriously suggesting that the emergence of three true freshmen at those positions does not suggest an improvement in the talent level being recruited?
Hallman recruited 9 top 100 draftees in 4 years, 8 of which DiNardo benefited. DiNardo recruited 6 (including #101 D. Davis and #103 B James) over 5 years, 3 of which DiNardo had full benefit (i.e. Saban inherited only 3). DiNardo did recruit a bunch of lower draft picks though, so his classes were probably deeper. It's basically a quality vs quantity argument. I would give the edge to DiNardo, but not significantly as implied by many here. Hallman truly had the more difficult situation that he walked into. Hallman also was recruiting all those guys that you refer to in DiNardo's first class and he deserves partial credit. DiNardo did not start from scratch like Saban had to because of Hallman's professionalism in this matter. Overall DiNardo did not elevate the talent level that he inherited as much as Hallman did with what he inherited.
I am not defending Hallman as a coach. The context here is the premise that DiNardo started from scratch with the nadir of LSU talent. This is just false. Regardless of his faults, Hallman deserves credit for improving what he received although it didn't translate on the field.
This post was edited on 4/6/09 at 6:13 pm
Posted on 4/6/09 at 5:35 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:
Let's not forget....It was Gerry that brought the white jerseys home to Tiger Stadium
and the H goal posts
Posted on 4/6/09 at 7:00 pm to tduecen
I am so sick of hearing about this, and it's somewhat of a new phenomenon since Saban went to Alabama. Before that, Gerry was a pariah.
His major accomplishment was winning with mostly inherited talent for his first three seasons. I can't think of a major thing he did to truly change the culture of the program, the way Saban did. Any quality assistants he had, he ran off because of his ego, in order to hire yes-men. If you do a breakdown of DiNardo's entire 1999 staff, I'm sure most of them are coaching high school or out of coaching altogether.
The DiNardo lovers always like to talk about how much NFL talent he left for Saban. That seems to be their benchmark. Here's an illustration of the difference between the DiNardo era, when we were happy to beat Kentucky, and the Saban era, where we were national champs.
1st round players inherited by Les Miles: Russell, Buster, Bowe, LaRon Landry, Addai, Dorsey, Tyson Jackson (maybe)
1st round players inherited by Saban: ZERO
I'm sure the rest of the rounds break down similarly.
5th year seniors in Miles' fourth year: about 10
5th year seniors in Saban's fourth year: 3
True freshmen who played in Miles' first year:3
True freshmen who played in Saban's first year: about 11
For those of you who aren't following, this is indicative of the roster depth left by DiNardo for Saban (not very much), compared to that left by Saban for Miles (a lot).
Any progress we made during the DiNardo years came to a screeching halt anyway, and the morale was as low as it was at any time during the Hallman or Archer years. Anyone who disagrees was not there the night the players quit on Gerry and his retard coaching staff; losing by two touchdowns to Houston in front of a crowd of about 40,000 for our 8th straight loss of the season. How many of you felt optimistic at that moment? How many of you felt Gerry really lined up the pins for the next coach?
Only Joe Dean would have hired a coach whose biggest accomplishment was a 5-6 record, and whose last game was a 65-0 loss. And please don't mention Michael Clayton in this thread. He wasn't coming here if DiNardo was retained, to be a part of the miserable football team he presided over... he's said as much. Neither was Marcus Spears. Neither was Marquise Hill. Players of that caliber have no interest in playing for 3-8 football teams, for a head coach who believes that fundamentally, nothing is wrong with the team.
The bottom line is that Gerry DiNardo was in over his head, and was an egotistical man who thumbed his nose at the players, fans and program when he arrogantly made nepotism his top priority, instead of winning.
His major accomplishment was winning with mostly inherited talent for his first three seasons. I can't think of a major thing he did to truly change the culture of the program, the way Saban did. Any quality assistants he had, he ran off because of his ego, in order to hire yes-men. If you do a breakdown of DiNardo's entire 1999 staff, I'm sure most of them are coaching high school or out of coaching altogether.
The DiNardo lovers always like to talk about how much NFL talent he left for Saban. That seems to be their benchmark. Here's an illustration of the difference between the DiNardo era, when we were happy to beat Kentucky, and the Saban era, where we were national champs.
1st round players inherited by Les Miles: Russell, Buster, Bowe, LaRon Landry, Addai, Dorsey, Tyson Jackson (maybe)
1st round players inherited by Saban: ZERO
I'm sure the rest of the rounds break down similarly.
5th year seniors in Miles' fourth year: about 10
5th year seniors in Saban's fourth year: 3
True freshmen who played in Miles' first year:3
True freshmen who played in Saban's first year: about 11
For those of you who aren't following, this is indicative of the roster depth left by DiNardo for Saban (not very much), compared to that left by Saban for Miles (a lot).
Any progress we made during the DiNardo years came to a screeching halt anyway, and the morale was as low as it was at any time during the Hallman or Archer years. Anyone who disagrees was not there the night the players quit on Gerry and his retard coaching staff; losing by two touchdowns to Houston in front of a crowd of about 40,000 for our 8th straight loss of the season. How many of you felt optimistic at that moment? How many of you felt Gerry really lined up the pins for the next coach?
Only Joe Dean would have hired a coach whose biggest accomplishment was a 5-6 record, and whose last game was a 65-0 loss. And please don't mention Michael Clayton in this thread. He wasn't coming here if DiNardo was retained, to be a part of the miserable football team he presided over... he's said as much. Neither was Marcus Spears. Neither was Marquise Hill. Players of that caliber have no interest in playing for 3-8 football teams, for a head coach who believes that fundamentally, nothing is wrong with the team.
The bottom line is that Gerry DiNardo was in over his head, and was an egotistical man who thumbed his nose at the players, fans and program when he arrogantly made nepotism his top priority, instead of winning.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 7:22 pm to Carlos
Thanks Carlos.
You explained very well the thoughts I failed to express.
You explained very well the thoughts I failed to express.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 7:53 pm to Carlos
quote:Saban inherited a lot of talent.
For those of you who aren't following, this is indicative of the roster depth left by DiNardo for Saban (not very much), compared to that left by Saban for Miles (a lot).
During Saban's five seasons at LSU (2000-2004), he had 24 players that were selected in the NFL draft. Of these 24 players, 17 were already on the LSU roster before Saban ever coached a game as a Tiger.
The list includes: Seniors: T Brandon Winey, C Louis Williams, and TE Robert Royal; Juniors: QB Josh Booty, QB Rohan Davey, DE Jarvis Green, and DT Howard Green; Sophomores: RB Domanick Davis, WR Josh Reed, LB Bradie James, and CB Norman LeJeune; Freshman: RB LaBrandon Toefield, RB Devery Henderson, CB Corey Webster, LB Lionel Turner, DT Chad Lavalais, and P Donnie Jones.
Also, Saban inherited some other major talent on the LSU roster before he ever coached a game for the Tigers (Seniors: WR Abram Booty and WR Reggie Robinson; Sophomores: T Brad Smalling, S. Damien James, and CB Demtrius Hookfin.
Posted on 4/6/09 at 10:20 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:Talent wise? Yes. Overall? No. Hallman took over a program that was 2 years removed from an SEC Championship. DiNardo took over a program 6 years removed from a winning season. Attendance was down more than it had been in 15 years, percent of seating capacity was the lowest it had been in decades, the program was not just losing but mired in a losing mentality; DiNardo inherited all of that. Hallman didn't. Hallman inherited a program that had been devasted by two bad seasons at the hands of a terrible program manager and bad recruiter. The foundation was there to restore the talent and correct the (at the time) brief aberration. In four years, he failed utterly at that, and left an even more desperate situation for his replacement.
Hallman truly had the more difficult situation that he walked into.
quote:DiNardo started from significantly less than scratch. He had a moribund program that couldn't put 70,000 people in an 80,000 seat stadium. Five years later he left Saban a program that could put 90,000 people in a 92,000 seat stadium.
DiNardo did not start from scratch like Saban had to because of Hallman's professionalism in this matter.
quote:No, he deserves blame for taking over a strong program that had stumbled and turning it into a has-been program that had fallen apart. His 4 year record was worse than Archer's record the two years before he took over. That means he made the program WORSE than it was before he took over, and generated four more years of losing in the process.
Regardless of his faults, Hallman deserves credit for improving what he received although it didn't translate on the field.
Talent is far from the only measure to a program. If you really think Saban would have had as easy a time doing what he did at LSU in '95 as he did in '00 -- or would have had in '91 in Hallman's place, then you simply weren't paying attention to the late 80's and the '90s in LSU football.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News