Kickin it with Gene Chizik

[The Prowler]

True but look at the number of close games he lost while at ISU. The rule of thumb is that when you don't have the talent you are beaten by wide margins, when you are out coached it is usually by a small margin. If you can't take big 12 North level talent and coach them to win against other b12N level talent then what chance do you have to take SEC level talent and coach them to win against SEC level talent? Basically none.

After looking at his w/l record @ ISU what other SEC school would have wasted their time giving him an interview? I'll give you the answer skippy. None, no one, nada, zilch and on and on. Vandy, Kentucky, Ole Miss, Arkansas...none of the perennial bottom feeders would have blown an interview.

A job like ISU is considered a starter job in head coaching. When  you fail at it you fade away to mediocrity. Thats the harsh truth. chizik failed big time despite any and all positive spin he puts on it. He's either a really shiitakety liar or is in complete denial of his inability to be a head coach. Either one of those traits is a recipe for disaster.
And we are paying him 2 million a year to eff up our program.  

Yes, you are correct.

Signed,
Mack Brown (1979-1981 Iowa State WR Coach/OC; 1985-1987 Tulane HC, 11-23 in his three years; 1988-1997 North Carolina HC, 2-20 in his first 2 years)
Pete Carroll (1978 Iowa State Secondary Coach under Earle Bruce)
Earle Bruce (1973-1978 Iowa State HC, 8-21 in his first 3 years)
Johnny Majors (1968-1972 Iowa State HC, 6-14 in his first 2 years)
Houston Nutt (1993-1996 Murray State HC, 9-13 in his first 2 years; 1997 Boise State HC, 4-7 in his first and only year)
Dennis Erickson (Head Coaching Resume is basically all over the landscape and he had rough starts in his first year at 3 of his 7 Head Coaching stops)

[The Prowler]

Because nothing else is necessary. 

Here, Prowler, try your interpretation skills on this: 

Here's looking at you, Kaos.

[Argo]

Yes, you are correct.

Signed,
Mack Brown (1979-1981 Iowa State WR Coach/OC; 1985-1987 Tulane HC, 11-23 in his three years; 1988-1997 North Carolina HC, 2-20 in his first 2 years)
Pete Carroll (1978 Iowa State Secondary Coach under Earle Bruce)
Earle Bruce (1973-1978 Iowa State HC, 8-21 in his first 3 years)
Johnny Majors (1968-1972 Iowa State HC, 6-14 in his first 2 years)
Houston Nutt (1993-1996 Murray State HC, 9-13 in his first 2 years; 1997 Boise State HC, 4-7 in his first and only year)
Dennis Erickson (Head Coaching Resume is basically all over the landscape and he had rough starts in his first year at 3 of his 7 Head Coaching stops)

I'm not sure if you misunderstood the weasel, but he stated "when they fail at it".  Mack Brown built a solid team at North Carolina.  He didn't fail.  He struggled early, but he stayed and made the program successful.  

Pete Carroll's time at Iowa State wasn't as head coach, so not sure why you used that one??

Earl Bruce was successful at Iowa State, despite how he started.  He stayed until he turned the program around, so that one isn't a fail.

Without going into further research, all of those guys had success during their first head coaching tour.  Many of them may have struggled to start, but they all stayed and enjoyed success before moving on to better jobs.  

In short, your analogies sucked.

[The Prowler]

I'm not sure if you misunderstood the weasel, but he stated "when they fail at it".  Mack Brown built a solid team at North Carolina.  He didn't fail.  He struggled early, but he stayed and made the program successful.  

Pete Carroll's time at Iowa State wasn't as head coach, so not sure why you used that one??

Earl Bruce was successful at Iowa State, despite how he started.  He stayed until he turned the program around, so that one isn't a fail.

Without going into further research, all of those guys had success during their first head coaching tour.  Many of them may have struggled to start, but they all stayed and enjoyed success before moving on to better jobs.  

In short, your analogies sucked.

If all of the coaches that I listed were hired away after their first two or three years at their first Head Coaching stop, then they would be considered as a failure.

[boartitz]

Yes, you are correct.

Signed,
Mack Brown (1979-1981 Iowa State WR Coach/OC; 1985-1987 Tulane HC, 11-23 in his three years; 1988-1997 North Carolina HC, 2-20 in his first 2 years)
Pete Carroll (1978 Iowa State Secondary Coach under Earle Bruce)
Earle Bruce (1973-1978 Iowa State HC, 8-21 in his first 3 years)
Johnny Majors (1968-1972 Iowa State HC, 6-14 in his first 2 years)
Houston Nutt (1993-1996 Murray State HC, 9-13 in his first 2 years; 1997 Boise State HC, 4-7 in his first and only year)
Dennis Erickson (Head Coaching Resume is basically all over the landscape and he had rough starts in his first year at 3 of his 7 Head Coaching stops)

By listing Houston Nutt, you proved the other side's argument. He's right around 50% wins in the SEC in 11 years. Mediocrity.

[Argo]

If all of the coaches that I listed were hired away after their first two or three years at their first Head Coaching stop, then they would be considered as a failure.

Agreed, but that wasn't the case.  Weasel's point still remains.

[AuburnChopper 3.0]

Yeah, I just read over it again. Chopper, there is no way to misread that statement. You can chop off the last half and still get the same thing, because it adds absolutely no value to the statement.

I'll ask you the same thing that Kaos won't answer.  It's a simple question.  How is only posting 1/3 of the total statement NOT posting a fragment?  There was more to that article that would have explained Chizik's statment.  It would have given it context, even if it was butchered a little.  You and Kaos ignored it though.  Why?  Probably simply because it's much more fun to try and one-up Chopper instead of actually debate the facts.

Do I know he misspoke? Yes. Do I know what he meant? Yes. Is it funny that he said what he said? Yes. Fuck, you're saying I'm just using a sentence fragment by taking the last half off, you're just ignoring the whole damn sentence and rewording it.

Where did I ignore or reword anything?  I've only either quoted you, or copy and pasted from the article YOU linked.  I didn't reword shit.  

I mean.  You say you understand what he meant.  So what's your point here?

[Snaggletiger]

I'll ask you the same thing that Kaos won't answer.  It's a simple question.  How is only posting 1/3 of the total statement NOT posting a fragment?  There was more to that article that would have explained Chizik's statment.  It would have given it context, even if it was butchered a little.  You and Kaos ignored it though.  Why?  Probably simply because it's much more fun to try and one-up Chopper instead of actually debate the facts.

Where did I ignore or reword anything?  I've only either quoted you, or copy and pasted from the article YOU linked.  I didn't reword shiitake.  

I mean.  You say you understand what he meant.  So what's your point here?

That's exactly what I was thinking.  If you really undersatnd what the guy meant, why page after page of bullshit?  This kind of useless, lame ass argument is fine for April when there ain't squat going on.  Right now, this is top 5 on the horseshit list.  Arguing just to be arguing.

[Greaseyweasel]

Did you possibly take the time to look up OTHER coaches who hitched up to the ol' suck wagon in their first 2 years and did not beat the odds? I wonder how many of them there were? All of the coaches you listed were failures early in their tenures as head coaches but as suckified as they were how many had only 3 wins in their first season and then only 2 in their second? I looked quickly at the stats that you posted for these coaches and guess what.......... as bad as they were in the start NONE of them had a start anywhere close to bad as a 5-19. So it can easily be argued that even though some coaches have started bad and went on to have good careers none of them were as bad as chizik.
Another angle on this discussion is to ask "How many coaches out there have been shit canned after 2 years of suckassed coaching and never heard from again?". I'm willing to bet that it is way more than the 6 you listed. As a matter of fact I'm willing to bet you won't have to go all the way back to the '60's to get enough fired and never heard of losers to have a list 10 times longer than the list of 6 you dug back to 1968 to find enough to make your list more than just a what if blurb.
When it comes to getting something done do as my Granddad used to tell me. "Spit in one hand and hope in the other and see which one gets wet faster." That same rule applies to coaches. "Hire a winner or hire a loser and hope he can change and see which one piles up the wins faster".
chizik is a loser and that is all he is capable of, that and blaming it on everyone but himself.

[Kaos]

I'll ask you the same thing that Kaos won't answer.  It's a simple question.  How is only posting 1/3 of the total statement NOT posting a fragment?  There was more to that article that would have explained Chizik's statment.  It would have given it context, even if it was butchered a little.  You and Kaos ignored it though.  Why?  Probably simply because it's much more fun to try and one-up Chopper instead of actually debate the facts.

Where did I ignore or reword anything?  I've only either quoted you, or copy and pasted from the article YOU linked.  I didn't reword shiitake.  

I mean.  You say you understand what he meant.  So what's your point here?

The facts are, Chopper, for the eleven billionth time, that all of what you added didn't substantially change, alter, clairfy or enhance what he SAID. 

We can all debate what he probably meant, and we all know what he probabluy meant.  But I've read it several times and what you, me, Orville Reddenbacher or Captain Kangaroo think he meant to say is (drumroll, please) NOT what he said. 

Quit trying to argue that it is.