More than 7-8 wins per year, plus mandatory bowl victories? I'm curious because Nehlen averaged 7 wins per year and routinely lost bowl games. Why does Nehlen get a pass? Holgorsen averages the same 7 wins per year. Plus he has won a major bowl whereas Nehlen never did. Thoughts?
Since when do we demand....
- Thread starter ThePunish-EER
- Start date
Why are you so obsessed with comparing different coach's from different era's? The only thing that matters is today. If holgorson would start winning close games. stop losing to teams with equal or inferior talent than you wouldn't have to keep making yourself look foolish in your continued defense of him.
Because he has no legit way to defend the status quo. The numbnut believes we had a good year. That tells you all you need to know.
oh so it's different standards for different eras now? Lol
no dr dope, just showing its about our average season.
Nehlen averaged 7 wins with 11 games. Dana is given an extra win every year so apples to apples he's one game worse per year and Dana walked into a much better situation. When Dana crushes Florida in Florida and turns around and blows out a top 10 Oklahoma team at OU, we can talk about Nehlen comparisons.
It seems you post this about once a week and each week I have to point out that the NCAA added a 12th game while Nehlen only had 11.
So do you have memory loss issues or are you really just that stupid? Tell us again how we have had to play 4 teams the caliber of the BE Miami again...
you just summed about 95% of Nehlens success with the Florida and Oklahoma wins that happens his first 4 years. Outside of that, 1993 Miami is about the only other significant win in his 21 years. Btw Dana crushed Clemson in the orange bowl. So yes, we can talk about Nehlen comparisons
You are a very effective Marshall troll. I will give you that. You may even have wbgvwbgv beaten...
Nehlens 1st 4 years where much more Impressive. He took over a program after 4 losing seasons and had to coach at a time when there where fewer bowls. The powers that be where not restricted to 85 scholarships like they are today. I doubt Dana would have had that success if he where faced with that scenario. Is your name really Joe deforest? Since you have this Bromance with Holgorson it would seem fitting since Holgy's the only one who would have you on the payroll outside of being a towel boy
please stay on topic. Explain why it was ok for Nehlen to average 7 wins against lesser competition and routinely lose bowl games.
in 1978 the limit on scholarships was 95. Not that much different than today. Nehlen came in 1980. The 85 limit started in 1992
Typical response from you. Nehlen coached 20 years so the sample size is quite larger and while where at it was does this matter. Who care what any previous coach did or didn't do all that matters is the present and 7-5 isn't cutting it in year five
Since teams played less games by then, go by winning percentage instead of wins per season.
And why do you constantly shit on a hall of fame coach that coached here for 20 years, nearly getting us a national championship?
Very bizarre.
And why do you constantly shit on a hall of fame coach that coached here for 20 years, nearly getting us a national championship?
Very bizarre.
what does it matter? It matters because you guys are praising Nehlen for his accomplishments but you are trying to run Dana off for not being good enough. Why was it ok for Nehlen? But not Dana? Dana has won a major bowl. Nehlen never did. Dana plays much tougher competition and still averages same win total as Nehlen. Dana likely has just as many big wins in his 5 years that Nehlen had in 21 years. You fools demand Dana gone if we lose the cactus bowl. Yet Nehlen set a NCAA record for most consecutive bowl losses. You make no sense. Fact is, you knuckleheads got spoiled by Rodriguez in the big east. You're ungrateful. None of you can comprehend this league is light years tougher than that big east ever was.
I don't think Dana plays "much tougher competition"
Nehlen had to deal with Penn State and Miami when they were winning championships. Cuse was good, VT, BC, and Maryland were all good at times during Nehlen's tenure.
The Big 12 is about as overrated as it gets and the fact that TCU and Baylor can win this conference illustrates that. No defense is played in the Big 12.
Nehlen had to deal with Penn State and Miami when they were winning championships. Cuse was good, VT, BC, and Maryland were all good at times during Nehlen's tenure.
The Big 12 is about as overrated as it gets and the fact that TCU and Baylor can win this conference illustrates that. No defense is played in the Big 12.
Holgorson took over a program that had won 9 games the previous six years before he arrived. It is true that The big 12 is tougher than the big east but he has had the opportunity's to win close games that he continually loses due to poor play calling and clock management. you can defend him all you want but teams like TCU and Baylor have been able to compete for conference championships with similar talent to what holgorson has been getting. Maybe for once he should find a QB capable of running his system. You have an average coach you get average results
You are the one that's stupid. Now go ahead and address where I am wrong, pussy.
I don't understand why he thinks the big 12 is a juggernaut since we joined in 2012 the conference hasn't really performed all that well during bowl season
The Big 12 has OU, BU, and TCU this year as the only teams that are really good, and when the Big 12 has another losing bowl season this year I'm sure we'll get the same excuses.
I think Dana would have been a C+ coach had he beaten K- State. Losing to them takes him down to a C-. When he can finish #4 in the Big12, I'll give him a B-, Third B, Second B+, Big12 champion, an A. When he starts getting mentioned for other coaching jobs openings, we will have some consensus that he is a good coach. Right now he is just middle of the pack in the Big12 at best. I thought he showed some signs that he was adapting to the talent he has this year, then there were other signs that he is not really able to sustain focus and give his team the edge. I really am tired of comparisons with Nehlen and Stewart. Meaningless. Do we aspire to finish 5th or 6th in the Big12 at best, or do we aspire to win the conference Championship? Which outcome will Dana be able to deliver as far as recruiting and game day management? I'm not much interested in a coaching carousel, but I'm not a big fan of Dana either. I don't care if he is better than Nehlen, I don't care if he is better than Cignetti. If he can't build a team that every 4 or 5 years has at least a remote chance to take the CC then we have to ask ourselves what we are settling for.
Lessor competition? Says who and by how much exactly? You like riling people up because you know there are Nehlen faithful on this board. You're not fooling anyone. And never mind the fact that you're comparing a 21 year tenure to a five year tenure.
You're a joke and always were on here.
yes, lesser competition. I state facts. If you got something to counter, now is the time to provide. Otherwise, you're the joke.
Yeah, that 21 year tenure by DH at WVU really crept up on us. I didn't even notice how long he's been here now that I think of it. So please tell us how you know TCU and Baylor will stay "up there" for 21 years, which basically gives some edge to SOS doesn't it?
Do you understand that nehlen ran the table in the regular season not once but twice? Do you understand how difficult that is to do? And the major eastern independents of the 80's were not lesser competition than the current big 12. Those independents were well respected through out the country. Dana is still learning how to coach major div 1 football. To compare him to Nehlen is insane. He may become a better coach but the jury is still out.
