Interesting:


https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...t-program/

Also receiving votes: Gary Patterson (TCU), Dabo Swinney (Clemson), Urban Meyer (Ohio State)*, Sonny Dykes (SMU), Pat Fitzgerald (Northwestern)

* coaches seem to distinguish payola from wife beating


One notices all the SEC programs on the list, or even receiving votes, even from other SEC coaches, amount to zero.

(08-17-2018 06:20 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Interesting:


https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...t-program/

Also receiving votes: Gary Patterson (TCU), Dabo Swinney (Clemson), Urban Meyer (Ohio State)*, Sonny Dykes (SMU), Pat Fitzgerald (Northwestern)

* coaches seem to distinguish payola from wife beating


One notices all the SEC programs on the list, or even receiving votes, even from other SEC coaches, amount to zero.

As one who for 20 years followed up on violations, just not for the NCAA, I can assure you there aren't very many clean programs and likely fewer than those cited on your chart. You should find it telling that the two most likely to be clean only got 17% of the recognition for it and then it is two of the more remote programs that others don't frequently compete with.

Another click bait stat.

(08-17-2018 07:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-17-2018 06:20 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Interesting:


https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...t-program/

Also receiving votes: Gary Patterson (TCU), Dabo Swinney (Clemson), Urban Meyer (Ohio State)*, Sonny Dykes (SMU), Pat Fitzgerald (Northwestern)

* coaches seem to distinguish payola from wife beating


One notices all the SEC programs on the list, or even receiving votes, even from other SEC coaches, amount to zero.

As one who for 20 years followed up on violations, just not for the NCAA, I can assure you there aren't very many clean programs and likely fewer than those cited on your chart. You should find it telling that the two most likely to be clean only got 17% of the recognition for it and then it is two of the more remote programs that others don't frequently compete with.

Another click bait stat.

And its coaches, not programs. I seem to recall UW having problems fairly recently, but I don't remember exactly what.

(08-18-2018 02:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  And its coaches, not programs. I seem to recall UW having problems fairly recently, but I don't remember exactly what.

When Sarkisian was the head coach there, one of his assistants (who is now the Alabama defensive coordinator) was accused of paying for tutoring and online classes for a recruit who needed to get his grades up to get into UW. The NCAA investigated but didn't bring charges.

Looks like this is mostly a list of which head coaches are either most liked or least disliked by other coaches.

A poll with Ohio State above Northwestern should not be taken seriously.

Not my list, Dennis Dodd's guys did this one. And as Dodd tends to do it could be many weeks or even months ago.

Note: Receiving votes is just that, receiving a vote or two. Maybe one of Meyer's buddies threw a vote his way. Doesn't mean he was anywhere near making the list.

Northwestern not getting votes is interesting, as both Stanford and Duke are pretty highly thought of here.

The SEC not voting for anybody in their ranks is interesting.

I also suspect that most of the coaches think the struggling programs, as well as the SEC type, are the most likely cheating, because they need to. In this sense the poll is worthwhile because it tells us of the coaches suspicions, including the current regime at Northwestern it seems.

(08-18-2018 04:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Not my list, Dennis Dodd's guys did this one. And as Dodd tends to do it could be many weeks or even months ago.

Note: Receiving votes is just that, receiving a vote or two. Maybe one of Meyer's buddies threw a vote his way. Doesn't mean he was anywhere near making the list.

Northwestern not getting votes is interesting, as both Stanford and Duke are pretty highly thought of here.

The SEC not voting for anybody in their ranks is interesting.

I also suspect that most of the coaches think the struggling programs, as well as the SEC type, are the most likely cheating, because they need to. In this sense the poll is worthwhile because it tells us of the coaches suspicions, including the current regime at Northwestern it seems.

You know what opinions are like. Everybody's got one. They mean nothing. Allegations mean a little. Sanctions mean a lot. It's like the law. Suspects are innocent until proven guilty.

These kind of pieces play to prejudices and gossip, and suspicious natures, and envy.

It means nothing. I would have to wonder if the SEC coaches even took the time to vote. Most of them leave those duties to the A.D. or a staffer in the athletics department, and do so for the coaches polls as well.

I'm much more interested in lists that address incidences of abuse and other lewd behavior. That's an issue worth worrying about.

Quite honestly, I don't care if kids get paid under the table. When it comes to "things that negatively impact the world," a college athlete getting a kickback is way, way down on the list.

JRsec,

The SEC has a reputation of being the most cutthroat league. Some really good coaches have been fired because they could not beat Saban, and before that Meyer. Saban has only intensified that image and added a sense of heightened paranoia. My guess is no coaches in the SEC voted for any coaches in the SEC because they are all paranoid.

It's just fascinating to see how the underbelly of the SEC reputation as the best in college football means it is assumed, even by those coaches in the SEC to have all the worst behavior of the sport (whether true or not). Saban has given them all have his paranoid world view.

Personally I don't think the SEC is any dirtier than the ACC or B1G or P12. But I do think it's more paranoid. And I think that is what the poll of coaches suggests.

Consider the source not Dodds, other coaches.

Never met a coach who wasn't pretty sure he was the best coach around, certainly one of the 5-10 best in the country and if not at a top 5 job that's the fault of ADs.

Coaches as a group never believe they were out-recruited.

The other school had more cool uniform combinations. They have an indoor facility. They have mahogany lockers instead of pine. The chairs in the locker rooms have phone chargers built in. They play better warm up music. They are a Nike/Jordan/Adidas school. They fly on trips we would bus. And the grand favorite, they must have slipped him some money.

I watched a lot of the social media churn over Trooper Taylor. For some reason no one could understand why their white assistant who looked like he came off the brochure for a country club could go into a black kid's home and be the living embodiment of "the dream" (college educated, married, wife with an advanced degree, living in the same home with both his children) won the trust of so many of these kids and their families. He had to be passing cash because no way they'd sign with that pudgy, loud, little dude with his hat on backwards over Biff or Chip.

I don't claim college recruiting is clean, but over the years I have heard too many coaches grouse that they and only they aren't cheating and yet they are never exactly sure how the other guy is cheating.

(08-18-2018 11:59 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  JRsec,

The SEC has a reputation of being the most cutthroat league. Some really good coaches have been fired because they could not beat Saban, and before that Meyer. Saban has only intensified that image and added a sense of heightened paranoia. My guess is no coaches in the SEC voted for any coaches in the SEC because they are all paranoid.

It's just fascinating to see how the underbelly of the SEC reputation as the best in college football means it is assumed, even by those coaches in the SEC to have all the worst behavior of the sport (whether true or not). Saban has given them all have his paranoid world view.

Personally I don't think the SEC is any dirtier than the ACC or B1G or P12. But I do think it's more paranoid. And I think that is what the poll of coaches suggests.

Stugray, the SEC doesn't have paranoid coaches. It has 14 guys making more money than they ever could have dreamed of making. And 14 guys who compete extremely hard in everything they do. In those regards it is no different than the Big 10 except for maybe 1 or 2 million a year on average in the salary figure.

The SEC gets picked on because we dwell in the richest pot of 5 star players in the nation and every coach in the nation who is worth a hoot recruits the Southeast. When they don't land enough of our homeboys to compete they cry foul. They claim we cheated, that we had to somehow manipulate the choices of kids who grew up down the road in order to get them to stay in the conference that has put more kids into the NFL than any other conference around us for the past 30 years. So in part the accusations are a form of projection because those who try to land our 5 star athletes are the "most likely" suspects to have offered an inducement to a kid who grew up watching and idolizing SEC teams and players, and who want mom and dad to be able to watch them play. So when those kids choose out of their own self interest to stay at home to play, somehow we cheated.

Now you submit that our coaches are paranoid and therefore were reticent to vote for each other. That's hooey! The SEC coaches have coached in the college ranks all of their lives with the hyper-competitive nature of recruiting the Southeast. Quite frankly they just don't give a damn about coaches polls, surveys, and most don't even like talking to reporters. Over the course of their year recruiting consumes most of their time. Game preparation is a welcomed break from recruiting the way it is a welcomed break for the players from practice.

It's called envy! And when the other coaches recruiting the area lose their excuses are always that the other guy cheated. We've been used to that kind of treatment for decades down here. The Southeast is still underrepresented in the national media and since the Civil War we've been blamed for about everything.

USC nearly gets hammered for major violations but its the SEC that cheats. SMU gets the death penalty but its the SEC that cheats. Barry Switzer runs one of the dirtiest programs ever but the SEC cheats. Major atrocities are committed against children and athletes at Penn State and Michigan State, and now there appears to be a sexual deviant in the staff at Ohio State a school that had its own recruiting scandal under Tressel but the story is the SEC cheats. North Carolina offers fraudulent classes to keep players eligible and the SEC cheats. Notice a pattern here?

Yes the SEC has had its share of sanctions over the years and I'd be the last one to say that cheating never happened in the SEC. But even Hugh Freeze's very public evidence of offering inducements has paled in comparison to the out of control nature of college football in other regions of the country.

The whole truth of this public perception is that we win, win a lot, have the most highly rated recruits within our native footprint, land most of them, and win with them, so all of the other coaches out there are going to stick to their stories that we cheat and they don't.

Where I come from we call that denial and the accusations we call projections. It's motivated out of envy and the need to make excuses. And that is the long and the short of it and this fluff, ill conceived, or possibly contrived click bait piece wasn't worth the time we've taken to discuss it.

(08-19-2018 12:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2018 11:59 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  JRsec,

The SEC has a reputation of being the most cutthroat league. Some really good coaches have been fired because they could not beat Saban, and before that Meyer. Saban has only intensified that image and added a sense of heightened paranoia. My guess is no coaches in the SEC voted for any coaches in the SEC because they are all paranoid.

It's just fascinating to see how the underbelly of the SEC reputation as the best in college football means it is assumed, even by those coaches in the SEC to have all the worst behavior of the sport (whether true or not). Saban has given them all have his paranoid world view.

Personally I don't think the SEC is any dirtier than the ACC or B1G or P12. But I do think it's more paranoid. And I think that is what the poll of coaches suggests.

***************************************************************************************************
arkstfan said:
As the noose started tightening around Long and Bielema at Arkansas phrases that suddenly got worked into statements to the press like "doing things the right way" popped up implying that Arkansas was handicapped by playing by the rules.

Coaches aren't going to admit they get out-recruited or out-coached.

***************************************************************************************************

JR said:

Stugray, the SEC doesn't have paranoid coaches. It has 14 guys making more money than they ever could have dreamed of making. And 14 guys who compete extremely hard in everything they do. In those regards it is no different than the Big 10 except for maybe 1 or 2 million a year on average in the salary figure.

The SEC gets picked on because we dwell in the richest pot of 5 star players in the nation and every coach in the nation who is worth a hoot recruits the Southeast. When they don't land enough of our homeboys to compete they cry foul. They claim we cheated, that we had to somehow manipulate the choices of kids who grew up down the road in order to get them to stay in the conference that has put more kids into the NFL than any other conference around us for the past 30 years. So in part the accusations are a form of projection because those who try to land our 5 star athletes are the "most likely" suspects to have offered an inducement to a kid who grew up watching and idolizing SEC teams and players, and who want mom and dad to be able to watch them play. So when those kids choose out of their own self interest to stay at home to play, somehow we cheated.

Now you submit that our coaches are paranoid and therefore were reticent to vote for each other. That's hooey! The SEC coaches have coached in the college ranks all of their lives with the hyper-competitive nature of recruiting the Southeast. Quite frankly they just don't give a damn about coaches polls, surveys, and most don't even like talking to reporters. Over the course of their year recruiting consumes most of their time. Game preparation is a welcomed break from recruiting the way it is a welcomed break for the players from practice.

It's called envy! And when the other coaches recruiting the area lose their excuses are always that the other guy cheated. We've been used to that kind of treatment for decades down here. The Southeast is still underrepresented in the national media and since the Civil War we've been blamed for about everything.

USC nearly gets hammered for major violations but its the SEC that cheats. SMU gets the death penalty but its the SEC that cheats. Barry Switzer runs one of the dirtiest programs ever but the SEC cheats. Major atrocities are committed against children and athletes at Penn State and Michigan State, and now there appears to be a sexual deviant in the staff at Ohio State a school that had its own recruiting scandal under Tressel but the story is the SEC cheats. North Carolina offers fraudulent classes to keep players eligible and the SEC cheats. Notice a pattern here?

Yes the SEC has had its share of sanctions over the years and I'd be the last one to say that cheating never happened in the SEC. But even Hugh Freeze's very public evidence of offering inducements has paled in comparison to the out of control nature of college football in other regions of the country.

The whole truth of this public perception is that we win, win a lot, have the most highly rated recruits within our native footprint, land most of them, and win with them, so all of the other coaches out there are going to stick to their stories that we cheat and they don't.

Where I come from we call that denial and the accusations we call projections. It's motivated out of envy and the need to make excuses. And that is the long and the short of it and this fluff, ill conceived, or possibly contrived click bait piece wasn't worth the time we've taken to discuss it.