Here is a link to all the coaches who were hired in 2012, the same year as Tuberville. So this is a good idea of what the coaching market was like that year. At the very least, we would have been going way outside the box (probably in a bad way) to hire anyone else. I didn't count schools that are way above UC*:

Bryan Harsin: 38-13 at Arkansas State and Boise (he had previously been an assistant at Boise)
Rod Carey: 36 - 19 at Northern Illinois
Bobby Petrino: 34-10 at WKU & Louisville
Skip Holtz: 30 - 22 at Louisiana Tech
P.J. Fleck: 30 - 21 at Western Michigan
Tommy Tuberville: 29 - 22 at UC
Matt Rhule: 28 - 23 at Temple
Matt Wells: 28 - 25 at Utah State
Dave Doeren: 24 - 26 at NC State
Willie Taggart: 24 - 25 at USF
Steve Addazio: 23 - 27 at Boston College
Brian Polian: 23 - 27 at Nevada, (fired this year)
Mark Stoops: 19 - 29 at Kentucky
**** edit 12/6 ***** - this is about where I'd rank Tuberville's total performance given what he inherited - which is what I said in the text below but apparently no one is reading the text I put **** /edit ****
Ron Caragher: 19 - 30 at San Jose State, (fired this year)
Sean Kugler: 18 - 31 at UTEP
Paul Petrino: 14 - 33 at Idaho
Scott Shafer: 14 - 23 at Syracuse (fired in 2015)
Todd Monken: 13 - 25 at Southern Miss (fired in 2015)
Paul Haynes: 12 - 35 at Kent State
Doug Martin: 10 - 38 at New Mexico State
Ron Turner: 10 - 30 at FIU (fired this year)
Trent Miles: 9 - 38 at Georgia State, (fired this year)
Darrell Hazell: 9 - 33 at Purdue, (fired this year)

11 of these 22 clearly did worse than Tuberville (already fired or less than 19 wins). Petrino & Holtz had way too much baggage. The other 9:

5 were so inexperienced it would have caused an uproar if UC hired them: Matt Wells & Rod Carey had never been head coaches and had no NFL or P5 coaching experience. They were only hired because they were the OC at their school when their coach left. P.J Fleck had never even been a been a coordinator at any level and was only 31 years old. Rhule & Harsin were only slightly more experienced than the other 3, and are from other areas of the country. Rhule had already been an assistant at Temple for 6 years.

Doeren & Addazio wouldn't have come to UC. Addazzio was at another AAC school (Temple), and Doeren was in very high demand after going 23-4 at NIU.

The leaves Taggart & Stoops. Both were hired before Butch Jones left UC. And I doubt either would have come here anyways. Taggart is from Tampa, and Stoops got an SEC job.


My point is that the coaching market in 2012 was pretty bad. Even though it didn't work out, I actually think Babcock made a decent decision when he hired Tuberville.

Hindsight is 20/20, but Tubs did better here than any other realistic option that was available.

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/coach..._2013.html
* Note - of the 8 other schools that hired coaches that year, 1 (Wisconsin) had their coach quit, 1 has already fired their coach (Oregon) and 4 are on very hot seats (Texas Tech, Cal, Tennessee, Arkansas). The only decent hires were Gus Malzahn at Auburn and Mike MacIntyre at Colorado.

Wow, I still want to blame Whitless. Cannot say that I see a better candidate on that list. May be some coordinators that would be interesting.

Just because those were the coaches hired, doesn't mean they were the only coaches available.

If all you're looking at is the W-L for the period as a whole, you're looking at it wrong. I don't know how you can make any intelligent analysis based on what you just posted.

Those won loss numbers are a bit misleading. TT lost more games toward the end of his tenure than Taggart, Rhule and Fleck for example. But yeah, he finished 7 games over .500. So there is that.

(12-05-2016 11:15 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Those won loss numbers are a bit misleading. TT lost more games toward the end of his tenure than Taggart, Rhule and Fleck for example. But yeah, he finished 7 games over .500. So there is that.

My point was more that the only ones who you can make an argument that they did a better job (like those 3) would never have even been considered at UC.

Taggart was already off the table, and wouldn't have come to UC anyways (he's from Tampa).

Rhule is an east coast guy through-and-through, and he was only hired because he had a 6-year interview at Temple. Even if he was on our radar he wouldn't have picked us over Temple.

The UC fanbase would have revolted if we had hired someone with Fleck's credentials. He was 31 and had never even been a coordinator.

(12-05-2016 10:36 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  Here is a link to all the coaches who were hired in 2012, the same year as Tuberville. So this is a good idea of what the coaching market was like that year. At the very least, we would have been going way outside the box (probably in a bad way) to hire anyone else. I didn't count schools that are way above UC*:

Bryan Harsin: 38-13 at Arkansas State and Boise (he had previously been an assistant at Boise)
Rod Carey: 36 - 19 at Northern Illinois
Bobby Petrino: 34-10 at WKU & Louisville
Skip Holtz: 30 - 22 at Louisiana Tech
P.J. Fleck: 30 - 21 at Western Michigan
Tommy Tuberville: 29 - 22 at UC
Matt Rhule: 28 - 23 at Temple
Matt Wells: 28 - 25 at Utah State
Dave Doeren: 24 - 26 at NC State
Willie Taggart: 24 - 25 at USF
Steve Addazio: 23 - 27 at Boston College
Brian Polian: 23 - 27 at Nevada, (fired this year)
Mark Stoops: 19 - 29 at Kentucky
Ron Caragher: 19 - 30 at San Jose State, (fired this year)
Sean Kugler: 18 - 31 at UTEP
Paul Petrino: 14 - 33 at Idaho
Scott Shafer: 14 - 23 at Syracuse (fired in 2015)
Todd Monken: 13 - 25 at Southern Miss (fired in 2015)
Paul Haynes: 12 - 35 at Kent State
Doug Martin: 10 - 38 at New Mexico State
Ron Turner: 10 - 30 at FIU (fired this year)
Trent Miles: 9 - 38 at Georgia State, (fired this year)
Darrell Hazell: 9 - 33 at Purdue, (fired this year)

11 of these 22 clearly did worse than Tuberville (already fired or less than 19 wins). Petrino & Holtz had way too much baggage. The other 9:

5 were so inexperienced it would have caused an uproar if UC hired them: Matt Wells & Rod Carey had never been head coaches and had no NFL or P5 coaching experience. They were only hired because they were the OC at their school when their coach left. P.J Fleck had never even been a been a coordinator at any level and was only 31 years old. Rhule & Harsin were only slightly more experienced than the other 3, and are from other areas of the country. Rhule had already been an assistant at Temple for 6 years.

Doeren & Addazio wouldn't have come to UC. Addazzio was at another AAC school (Temple), and Doeren was in very high demand after going 23-4 at NIU.

The leaves Taggart & Stoops. Both were hired before Butch Jones left UC. And I doubt either would have come here anyways. Taggart is from Tampa, and Stoops got an SEC job.


My point is that the coaching market in 2012 was pretty bad. Even though it didn't work out, I actually think Babcock made a decent decision when he hired Tuberville.

Hindsight is 20/20, but Tubs did better here than any other realistic option that was available.

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/coach..._2013.html
* Note - of the 8 other schools that hired coaches that year, 1 (Wisconsin) had their coach quit, 1 has already fired their coach (Oregon) and 4 are on very hot seats (Texas Tech, Cal, Tennessee, Arkansas). The only decent hires were Gus Malzahn at Auburn and Mike MacIntyre at Colorado.

you can't just compare wins and losses - you have to factor in the situation - was it a rebuild, etc? - in uc's case, it was a good situation, that TT turned into a hot, steaming pile of crap

to the OP

You did a lot of work here and you definitely have given this debate a new look and something to think about.

However:
-Not every coach listed here were the only available ones at the time.
-The w-l numbers are a bit misleading because you also have to take into account state of program when each coach took it over...

For example, UC was in GREAT shape having won 10 games five of the prior six years and its not a fair comparison to many of the other teams on the list, which were dumpster fires when those coaches arrived. So to be more fair, you would need to list the records of the programs listed above for the prior x number of years. We could use the prior six year window since I cited UC winning 10 games or more during that span five times but you could use a 10 year window just to be fair to everybody on the list. I bet the records of some of those teams would be pretty bad during that window as opposed to UC's, which would have been a great record and thus, CTT actually did a terrible job vs some of those other coaches, even ones with worse records.

just my two cents

"Hindsight is 20/20, but Tubs did better here than any other realistic option that was available."

What is missing is what the new coaches inherited. Coaches that inherited a pile cannot be compared to CTT who inherited a winning program and turned it into a pile. More menaingful data would how their teams changed when the new coaches arrrived.

That list has Tubby in front of a guy who has beaten UC by about 75 points collectively the past two years. LOL.

Lets build Tubby and Whit an arm in arm statute on campus to thank them for their time here.

The coach on that list that really surprises me is Hazell. He did great things at Kent which is simply a great accomplishment. How he bombed so badly at Purdue may say more about Purdue than Hazell.

(12-06-2016 07:11 AM)Bcatbog Wrote:  The coach on that list that really surprises me is Hazell. He did great things at Kent which is simply a great accomplishment. How he bombed so badly at Purdue may say more about Purdue than Hazell.

In a lot of ways the MAC is a terrible training ground for the P5 coach. A ton of teams with similar talent and you win by creating some tactical advantage or else creating enough culture and energy to win with intangibles. In the Big 10, the talent gaps from team to team are mountains and you can really only win by assembling a team of all stars to compete. What examples do we have of coaches winning in the big 10 with a system or better energy or anything like that? You win at that level with players.

(12-06-2016 08:12 AM)uccheese Wrote:  

(12-06-2016 07:11 AM)Bcatbog Wrote:  The coach on that list that really surprises me is Hazell. He did great things at Kent which is simply a great accomplishment. How he bombed so badly at Purdue may say more about Purdue than Hazell.

In a lot of ways the MAC is a terrible training ground for the P5 coach. A ton of teams with similar talent and you win by creating some tactical advantage or else creating enough culture and energy to win with intangibles. In the Big 10, the talent gaps from team to team are mountains and you can really only win by assembling a team of all stars to compete. What examples do we have of coaches winning in the big 10 with a system or better energy or anything like that? You win at that level with players.

Yes, I agree with your analysis. Historically, Indiana has not produced lots of top tier college football talent either. So you are forced to recruit elsewhere. In the Great Lakes area, IU and PU must then go head to head for talent in tradition rich states such as OH, MI and PA where flagship schools dominate and get first pick of the best high school talent.

(12-06-2016 08:12 AM)uccheese Wrote:  

(12-06-2016 07:11 AM)Bcatbog Wrote:  The coach on that list that really surprises me is Hazell. He did great things at Kent which is simply a great accomplishment. How he bombed so badly at Purdue may say more about Purdue than Hazell.

In a lot of ways the MAC is a terrible training ground for the P5 coach. A ton of teams with similar talent and you win by creating some tactical advantage or else creating enough culture and energy to win with intangibles. In the Big 10, the talent gaps from team to team are mountains and you can really only win by assembling a team of all stars to compete. What examples do we have of coaches winning in the big 10 with a system or better energy or anything like that? You win at that level with players.

Disagree, that is what makes the MAC a great place to train a coach. Maybe it doesn't translate to Purdue but it works in a lot of places. Urban Meyer, Brian Kelly, and Butch Jones all came from the MAC with a midpoint stop at schools in between the MAC and elite programs. The stop between the MAC and an elite program in my view is the real key. In the Big East/American/Mountain West level a coach can still out scheme most of the schools. Real coaching is taking similar talent and winning without the big advantages that elite schools have. The issue with lower level power five schools has to do with ability to attract real talented players which is why very few coaches have won at schools like Purdue, Indiana, Northwestern, Vandy, Kentucky, Duke, and Wake Forest. Give me a MAC coach that had success at another stop and put them at mid or upper level power five program and I feel like they should do ok.

(12-06-2016 08:24 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(12-06-2016 08:12 AM)uccheese Wrote:  

(12-06-2016 07:11 AM)Bcatbog Wrote:  The coach on that list that really surprises me is Hazell. He did great things at Kent which is simply a great accomplishment. How he bombed so badly at Purdue may say more about Purdue than Hazell.

In a lot of ways the MAC is a terrible training ground for the P5 coach. A ton of teams with similar talent and you win by creating some tactical advantage or else creating enough culture and energy to win with intangibles. In the Big 10, the talent gaps from team to team are mountains and you can really only win by assembling a team of all stars to compete. What examples do we have of coaches winning in the big 10 with a system or better energy or anything like that? You win at that level with players.

Disagree, that is what makes the MAC a great place to train a coach. Maybe it doesn't translate to Purdue but it works in a lot of places. Urban Meyer, Brian Kelly, and Butch Jones all came from the MAC with a midpoint stop at schools in between the MAC and elite programs. The stop between the MAC and an elite program in my view is the real key. In the Big East/American/Mountain West level a coach can still out scheme most of the schools. Real coaching is taking similar talent and winning without the big advantages that elite schools have. The issue with lower level power five schools has to do with ability to attract real talented players which is why very few coaches have won at schools like Purdue, Indiana, Northwestern, Vandy, Kentucky, Duke, and Wake Forest. Give me a MAC coach that had success at another stop and put them at mid or upper level power five program and I feel like they should do ok.

I agree with a lot of this, but what you're basically saying is that top MAC coaches will do well anywhere talent is similar. I agree with that completely. Purdue is not one of those places and neither are about half of the B10 jobs. I guess that is why I was saying guys like Hazell and Brohm are going to go from "great coaches" to "bad coaches" there.

In terms of fit, it would have been better for everyone for a recruiter like Miles, Strong, or Kiffin to take the Purdue job and Brohm to come here. Purdue has to at least get that roster to a point where they're not getting physically manhandled every week and that's not really the resume of almost any MAC/G5 coach. At UC, we just need a guy who can bring the right energy and Xs and Os to win with similar talent.