Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bulldog Tom
Oh my, here we go again. Still trying to prove Holtz is a good coach. Here are the 17 seasons before Holtz. Under the current bowl system, we would have went bowling at least 11 times, with 14 being a possibility. All these seasons we played a far superior schedule to what Holtz gets each of his seasons. During these 17 seasons we won conference championships and we won games against Power 5 schools. The reason Dooley and Dykes “bailed asap” was because of the job they did here at Tech. The reason Holtz is still here is because of the job he has done here at Tech and his previous history. If Holtz had coached in the 1990’s and produced the same results he would be considered a good coach, but there is nothing in his coaching career that suggests that would be the case.
1996 6-5 Crowton Bowl
1997 9-2 Crowton Bowl
1998 6-6 Crowton Bowl
1999 8-3 Bicknell Bowl
2000 3-9 Bicknell
2001 7-5 Bicknell Bowl
2002 4-8 Bicknell Bowl
2003 5-7 Bicknell Possible Bowl
2004 6-6 Bicknell Bowl
2005 7-4 Bicknell Bowl
2006 3-10 Bicknell
2007 5-7 Dooley Possible Bowl
2008 8-5 Dooley Bowl
2009 4-8 Dooley
2010 5-7 Dykes Possible Bowl
2011 8-5 Dykes Bowl
2012 9-3 Dykes Bowl
In the other thread debating Holtz’ skills or lack thereof part of the debate centered around big wins. Many feel Holtz has no big wins. Let’s look at the big wins (Power 5 or raked teams) during this period. Look at that 10 wins against Power 5 schools.
09.21.96 at Mississippi State 38-23 Crowton
10.04.97 California 41-34 Crowton
11.01.97 at Alabama 26-20 Crowton
09.18.99 at Alabama 29-28 Bicknell
11.03.01 Boise State 48-42 Bicknell
08.31.02 Oklahoma State 39-36 Bicknell
09.13.03 at Michigan State 20-19 Bicknell
11.02.04 Fresno State #17 28-21 Bicknell
12.02.05 at Fresno State #22 40-28 Bicknell
08.30.08 Mississippi State 22-14 Dooley
11.12.11 at Ole Miss 27-7 Dykes
09.22.12 at Illinois 52-24 Dykes
10.06.12 at Virginia 44-38 Dykes
There is no intelligent argument to make that Crowton, Bicknell, Dooley or Dykes wouldn’t have matched or exceeded Skips record if they were the coach during Skips years. Skip gets to coach in a conference where about a third of the teams were in the FCS or didn’t have a football program a decade ago. Skip produces mediocre results in a low-level Group of 5 conference. Of course, he loves Ruston it is the locale of his retirement job. He will never produce results that would attract a Power 5 job and with the scheduling of TMAC should never have a losing season therefore, he will always have at least a New Orleans Bowl bid. By the way, CBS Sports predicts a New Orleans Bowl against ULM this season. That’s sounds like fun, huh? Maybe we can bring back BVDV to turn down this bid.
Thanks for putting in the time and effort to document the “facts” about how lousy a coach Holtz really is. I think Holtz did beat Illinois in one of the bowl games. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
glm47
Thanks for putting in the time and effort to document the “facts” about how lousy a coach Holtz really is. I think Holtz did beat Illinois in one of the bowl games. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.
I write this as a truth-seeker and not as a Tech fan or Holtz fan. I did some research based on objective Sagarin Predictor ratings. It only gave me 1 of Crowton's 3 years, but here's how each coach's teams have ranked: (this factors in strength of schedule to take the subjective opinion out of the argument). A win over #52 North Texas should be considered a better win than beating #115 Ole Miss and Sagarin acknowledges that.
Crowton:
1998 - 61
Bicknell:
1999 - 35 (I give Crowton some points here because he passed off a great program to Bicknell).
2000 - 143
2001 - 79
2002 - 109
2003 - 92
2004 - 96
2005 - 94
2006 - 169
Dooley
2007 - 119 (Dooley gets credit for improving what Bick passed to him, but at least he didn't pass the 2006 team to him).
2008 - 100
2009 - 78
Dykes
2010 - 89
2011 - 39
2012 - 52
Holtz
2013 - 167 (I give a lot of blame to Dykes for handing this kind of team to Holtz)
2014 - 33
2015 - 73
2016 - 57
2017 - 93
2018 - 80 (so far)
My ranking of the coaches considering all things: (average ranking of team they inherited and left for the next guy)
1. Crowton - 51 (probably better than this, but Sagarin wasn't around his first 2 years)
2. Dykes -75
3. Holtz - 84
4. Dooley - 87
5. Bicknell - 100
My conclusion: Nobody was really lighting it up. Crowton had a great team in 97. Bicknell had a great team in 99. Dooley never had a great team. Dykes had a great team in 11 and a good team in 12. Holtz had a great team in 14 and a good team in 16. A ton of mediocrity in between those teams. Fair?
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
The number of bowl games is the measuring stick being used for Holtz. If bowl appearances is the measuring stick, then 6 win seasons or better is the only data needed to compare coaches.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
T1
I write this as a truth-seeker and not as a Tech fan or Holtz fan. I did some research based on objective Sagarin Predictor ratings. It only gave me 1 of Crowton's 3 years, but here's how each coach's teams have ranked: (this factors in strength of schedule to take the subjective opinion out of the argument). A win over #52 North Texas should be considered a better win than beating #115 Ole Miss and Sagarin acknowledges that.
Crowton:
1998 - 61
Bicknell:
1999 - 35 (I give Crowton some points here because he passed off a great program to Bicknell).
2000 - 143
2001 - 79
2002 - 109
2003 - 92
2004 - 96
2005 - 94
2006 - 169
Dooley
2007 - 119 (Dooley gets credit for improving what Bick passed to him, but at least he didn't pass the 2006 team to him).
2008 - 100
2009 - 78
Dykes
2010 - 89
2011 - 39
2012 - 52
Holtz
2013 - 167 (I give a lot of blame to Dykes for handing this kind of team to Holtz)
2014 - 33
2015 - 73
2016 - 57
2017 - 93
2018 - 80 (so far)
My ranking of the coaches considering all things: (average ranking of team they inherited and left for the next guy)
1. Crowton - 51 (probably better than this, but Sagarin wasn't around his first 2 years)
2. Dykes -75
3. Holtz - 84
4. Dooley - 87
5. Bicknell - 100
My conclusion: Nobody was really lighting it up. Crowton had a great team in 97. Bicknell had a great team in 99. Dooley never had a great team. Dykes had a great team in 11 and a good team in 12. Holtz had a great team in 14 and a good team in 16. A ton of mediocrity in between those teams. Fair?
So looking at 1996-2012 Tech would’ve gone to bowls 10 of 17 years, based on today’s bowl environment, including 4 straight from 1996-1999. Mediocre, yes, just like what we have now. Fair?
And do you not consider the schedules played by those other coaches? Surely you don’t think this CUSA is comparable to the WAC or to some of the schedules played by those other coaches.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PawDawg
The number of bowl games is the measuring stick being used for Holtz. If bowl appearances is the measuring stick, then 6 win seasons or better is the only data needed to compare coaches.
Here's the rank of each team and which ones went to bowl games:
33. 2014 Holtz (Bowl game)
35. 1999 Bicknell/Crowton
39. 2011 Dykes (Bowl game)
52. 2012 Dykes (turned down an invite)
57. 2016 Holtz (Bowl game)
61. 1998 Crowton
73. 2015 Holtz (Bowl game)
78. 2009 Dooley
79. 2001 Bicknell (Bowl game)
80. 2018 Holtz (It looks like another bowl game)
89. 2010 Dykes/Dooley
92. 2003 Bicknell
93. 2017 Holtz (Bowl Game)
94. 2005 Bicknell
96. 2004 Bicknell
100. 2008 Dooley (Bowl Game)
109. 2002 Bicknell
119. 2007 Dooley/Bicknell
143. 2000 Bicknell
167. 2013 Holtz/Dykes
169. 2006 Bicknell
* Crowton is the only one with a complaint, imo. Dooley was fortunate in 2008 and Holtz was fortunate last year.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
glm47
Surely you don’t think this CUSA is comparable to the WAC or to some of the schedules played by those other coaches.
It's Sagarin Predictor Ratings. Non-biased, objective, based on strength of schedule and the final scores of the games.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
T1
* Crowton is the only one with a complaint, imo. Dooley was fortunate in 2008 and Holtz was fortunate last year.
I understand, but again, W/L record is all that matters today. I'm not taking sub .500 possibilities into account.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PawDawg
I understand, but again, W/L record is all that matters today. I'm not taking sub .500 possibilities into account.
Not sure I'm following. Last year was the only 6-6 team we've ever had to make a bowl game. Remove that and Holtz still has the record. Add a couple of Bick's crappy 6-6 teams and they tie? I'm missing the point.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
T1
Here's the rank of each team and which ones went to bowl games:
33. 2014 Holtz (Bowl game)
35. 1999 Bicknell/Crowton
39. 2011 Dykes (Bowl game)
52. 2012 Dykes (turned down an invite)
57. 2016 Holtz (Bowl game)
61. 1998 Crowton
73. 2015 Holtz (Bowl game)
78. 2009 Dooley
79. 2001 Bicknell (Bowl game)
80. 2018 Holtz (It looks like another bowl game)
89. 2010 Dykes/Dooley
92. 2003 Bicknell
93. 2017 Holtz (Bowl Game)
94. 2005 Bicknell
96. 2004 Bicknell
100. 2008 Dooley (Bowl Game)
109. 2002 Bicknell
119. 2007 Dooley/Bicknell
143. 2000 Bicknell
167. 2013 Holtz/Dykes
169. 2006 Bicknell
* Crowton is the only one with a complaint, imo. Dooley was fortunate in 2008 and Holtz was fortunate last year.
I would say unfortunate last year losing 3 games by one point and another in OT. Yes, you can blame Holtz for these close losses but remember, he is not in a uniform. It comes down to who are you going to hire if Holtz leaves or gets fired. With what we can pay, it will be a youngster from a smaller school or a retread head coach or an unproven assistant. These are good times.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dadawgula
I would say unfortunate last year losing 3 games by one point and another in OT. Yes, you can blame Holtz for these close losses but remember, he is not in a uniform. It comes down to who are you going to hire if Holtz leaves or gets fired. With what we can pay, it will be a youngster from a smaller school or a retread head coach or an unproven assistant. These are good times.
I agree it could be better, and y'all should want better, but Holtz has given you 4 of the Top 10 teams since 1998 in his first 6 years here (and one team wasn't his fault, imo). I think he's building a tradition, stocking the trophy chest, and recruiting a better athlete because of it. I always wanted a coach who would stick around and try build the program with good men who can play ball. Perspective. Holtz isn't a great coach, but we haven't had a great coach in my lifetime (I wasn't around for Lambright or Aillet). If we did, he would be gone as quickly as Manny Diaz was gone.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
T1
Not sure I'm following. Last year was the only 6-6 team we've ever had to make a bowl game. Remove that and Holtz still has the record. Add a couple of Bick's crappy 6-6 teams and they tie? I'm missing the point.
This post list the bowl games that would have been under the current system with so many bowl games. Crowton = 3, Bicknell = 5, Dooley = 1, Dykes = 2, Holtz = 4
Bicknell certainly had the most difficult circumstances and schedule of all our recent coaches.
1996 6-5 Crowton Bowl
1997 9-2 Crowton Bowl
1998 6-6 Crowton Bowl
1999 8-3 Bicknell Bowl
2000 3-9 Bicknell
2001 7-5 Bicknell Bowl
2002 4-8 Bicknell Bowl
2003 5-7 Bicknell Possible Bowl
2004 6-6 Bicknell Bowl
2005 7-4 Bicknell Bowl
2006 3-10 Bicknell
2007 5-7 Dooley Possible Bowl
2008 8-5 Dooley Bowl
2009 4-8 Dooley
2010 5-7 Dykes Possible Bowl
2011 8-5 Dykes Bowl
2012 9-3 Dykes Bowl
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
First, UTSA sat home with 6 wins last year, so nothing is guaranteed. Second, 2002 (4-8), 2003 (5-7), 2007 (5-7), and 2010 (5-7) would not have gotten Tech into a bowl game today. Those spots go to P5 teams with big fan bases.
So Bicknell may have gotten 4 tops (but all his non-bowl teams were worse than Holtz's except for 99). Bicknell's teams were not as good as Holtz's teams. Holtz has had 3 teams already that were better than Bick's "WAC championship team."
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
I mis-counted Bicknell. He was only 4 with one of them being 6-6. I'll take that 6-6 team over our 6-6 team last year. Not that it matters, but I'm pretty sure Bicknell's 6-6 2004 is what got him his last contract.
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
BTW, T-1 are y'all driving over to be "every loyal" this weekend?;)
Re: Thank You Skip--since1990 4 out of 8 bowls were with Holtz and about to be 5 out
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PawDawg
BTW, T-1 are y'all driving over to be "every loyal" this weekend?;)
Are you kidding? It's 10 year old volleyball season around here. :)
