Bellotti third best Pac-10 Coach and Autzen number 9
by pointguard10 on Aug 6, 2008 11:39 AM PDT
Email
PrintTed Miller went in depth about ranking the Pac-10 coaches from top to bottom.
I agree with him that Pete Carrol is the obvious choice for the number one coach in the Pac-10. I personally don't have much respect for Dennis Erickson because of how bad of job he did for the 49ers. As far as college goes he picks up a good amount of wins every year. I just don't see how he is better than Bellotti maybe that is just my bias. Bellotti is third followed by Tedford from Cal and then Riley at OSU. I also know about Rick Neuheisel's at UW, but I don't see him making a impact that quickly at UCLA. USC has all the recruiting power down in Southern California and the rest of the country.
Ted Miller wrote another article about MIke Stoops and Ty Willingham being on the hot seat in the Pac-10. I think Stoops is done after this yer unless he puts together a nice bowl run. I don't think Willingam has to make it to a bowl game this year for him to keep his job. UW starts the season with UO, BYU and Oklahoma. I believe the Huskies will start 0 and 3 but if those games are close and UW gets within a game of making a bowl game I think UW will give Willingham one more year at least. Just my opinion though.
I just came across this because I have no life other than surf the web about Oregon. Autzen is ranked #9 amonst toughest places to play. Michigan is 8. What the hell? Michigan should not even be mentioned in the top 10 after what happened last year.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or the Addicted To Quack Moderators. FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable Oregon fans.
25 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Seriously....SERIOUSLY?!?
I know it’s a “popular” opinion because of OSU’s recent overachievements recently, but until he starts pulling in better recruits, he’s not going to ever break into the next level of coaching. He does a good job with what he has, but that is similar to Bellotti when he started out. Let’s wait a few years to see if he can bring Oregon State above mediocrity or even compete for a Pac-10 title. Best coaches don’t get blown out on the road by teams they should beat.
Seriously…
His work is commendable, but he has a lot of work to do to be even close to be considered as the best coach in the Pac-10.
I would not trade Riley straight up for Bellotti, and I’m pretty certain that ASU, USC, and Cal fans wouldn’t either. Until he proves move, he’s holding steady at #5.
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
Do you know how much more attractive Eugene is than Corvallis?
I mean, the only other place in the Pac that has a longer way to go in recruiting is WSU.
Mike Riley works his ass off, and works wonders with what he has. The recruiting is not very relevant to him, he’s not the one that put Corvallis is, decided the climate, and founded the city.
I’d put Riley at 1 or 2. Pete Carroll did a helluva job getting the dynasty at SC started, now he’s just reaping the benefits of the ensuing snowball effect.
Your friendly neighborhood placekicker.
Erickson did a pretty good job in Corvallis...
I’m not saying that Mike Riley isn’t a good coach, but if you build a good program, you can get good kids to come regardless of location. Erickson did a good job while he was there, though he had his previous laurels to rest on.
So while you can say, look at what’s he’s done with what he’s had, I don’t think that’s enough. Riley has worked on Erickson’s success, has new facilities to work with, etc. It’s not like he’s that poor off.
I don’t think he has all that much in Xs and Os over other coaches, but he gets the most out of his kids. That’s partially due to how they recruit, and that’s fine.
1) OSU won’t take the “next step” without better recruiting.
2) Riley doesn’t hold a coaching advantage in Xs and Os.
3) He hasn’t really done that much, really. Sun Bowl is great, but all other coaches have at least been to the Holiday Bowl and competed for a Pac-10 title.
He can motivate, but Bellotti did that when his talent was less. He doesn’t have the Xs and Os of Tedford, and Carroll is THE master motivator in the Pac-10.
Right now, he’s a very good coach. But you build a program through being a great coach. We will see over the next few years if that happens. If OSU starts competing for Pac-10 titles, move him up. If not, he stays where he is.
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
you believe in a lot of duck folklore....
but until he starts pulling in better recruits, he’s not going to ever break into the next level of coaching.
He has pulled in GREAT recruits. OSU puts more players on the Pac-10 All-Conference team than any team besides USC. OSU also had the most NFL Pro Bowlers of any Pac-10 team last year, including USC. If they weren’t good recruits, how could any of that be possible??? Tell me that James Rodgers, Mike Hass, Alexis Serna, were 1 star recruits and that Colvin was a 5 star, and that you still believe in recruiting rankings. Cam Colvin’s 5-star career=Mike Hass’ (1-star) 2 best games. OSU is the 2nd most talented team in the conference, based on recruiting results.
I would not trade Riley straight up for Bellotti, and I’m pretty certain that ASU, USC, and Cal fans wouldn’t either. Until he proves move, he’s holding steady at #5.
Nice cherry picking of stats...
Keep that up.
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
Bellotti has a LOSING record against current Pac-10 coaches.
Like I said, OSU puts more players on the Pac-10 All-Conference team than any team besides USC. If that’s not talent, then…suggest an alternative method of evaluating which players are better??
I’m not sure why you would say having the body of coaches selecting the best players in the conference is cherry picking?
There are plenty of stats for coaching record that you could use...
Here’s another, overall record:
Mike Riley: 47-38
Mike Bellotti: 106-52
The stat you used had an incredibly small sample size, again, taking into account only 1/3 of total games played.
As far as the all-conference teams, I’ll give you that. I guess I didn’t realize how much talent OSU had besides looking at the stars. OSU has done a very good job of producing over their “star rating.” But when I looked back over the All-Conference teams, I was actually very shocked at the amount of all-conference players that OSU had. It shocked me because if you look at that, in some ways, they have underperformed. In 2003, they had 5 1st team all conference players, and finished 4-4 in conference.
And here’s the thing I guess…I won’t take Oregon State under Riley all that seriously as a conference or national player until they can actually compete for a Pac-10 title. Mike Riley has never been better than 4-3 in conference play going into the final 1 or 2 conference games. And that is not competing.
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
Just one way as to why this is an example of cherry picking stats
Riley left OSU in 98, just when Willingham was starting to really make some noise with Stanford, and right before Neuheisel goes to UW. So Sure if Riley dodges Willingham at his top and the rise of Neuheisel he looks pretty good.
And here’s the thing I guess…I won’t take Oregon State under Riley all that seriously as a conference or national player until they can actually compete for a Pac-10 title. Mike Riley has never been better than 4-3 in conference play going into the final 1 or 2 conference games. And that is not competing
Oregon State had no chance to win the conference when it lost to USC. With 3 Pac-10 games remaining, it was mathematically impossible.
Go Duckies!
NFL Pro Bowlers for 1 year and 1 star recruits
The Former is extremely small sample and may very well include players Riley didn’t recruit, I lack the interest to find out.
The later is a great job of coaching and finding gems, but usually 1 star player is much worse than a 5 star player, of course exceptions can be found, well done on that one. I can’t imagine any coach saying something like, “No, 5 star players aren’t for me, give me the 1 star players!” That is, simply put, absurd.
This is beginning to look like a Lost in Translation piece.
The ENTIRETY of UO’s 2007 offensive line had a total of 3 scholarship offers coming out of high school—not 3 from u0, 3 total. u0 fans were ALL OVER these guys last year, saying how fantastic they were. “The best line in the country.” Right?? Weren’t they?? I sure thought they were pretty damn good (for about 8 games, anyway).
If you don’t like the single year of Pro Bowlers, then we can pick a different year, or we could choose several years, or whatever measure you want. OSU will continue to have more Pro Bowlers, and OSU will continue to place MORE players on the all-conference team.
Mike Bellotti will CONTINUE to have a losing record against coaches CURRENTLY in the conference. I knew he sucked, but I didn’t think he actually had a losing record against the current coaches.u0 will continue to be better known for their fashion mistakes than their football success.
Mike Riley will continue building his already superior program.
In any given year, THE MAJORITY of starters on UO (OSU, too) are 2 star guys (see: Chung, Patrick—he’s your best player, right? Sammie Stroughter, also “2 stars”...STEVEN JACKSON was a 2 star guy, if you can believe that). Last year, on “the greatest team in the history of the universe that woulda, coulda, shoulda not made you cancel your New Orleans travel plans” it was the same thing, mostly 2 star guys.
It’s all about coaching and development.
You are correct
A lot of our best players are 2-star players, and that probably won’t change. Both Oregon and OSU have done great jobs building teams with lower star players.
But at the same time, if you want to win conference titles against USC, or national titles, you must also get the 4 and 5 star players and develop them as well.
But like it or not, to be really successful, to take the program to that next level, you pretty much need to have the cream of the high school crop. SMQ did a really good job a while ago breaking this down.
Riley has done a great job of getting every ounce he can out of certain players. I just don’t see OSU making the jump to the next level anytime soon.
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
Building or barely mainting
On the 1* – 5* difference
Way to put words in my mouth:
I said its a great coaching job to make 1* guys good, but if you want to evaluate recruiting ability, then the best barometer is level of recruits brought in. Most of the time, a 5* player will be better than a 1* player.
On the how to measure successes from college to pros:
How about number of pros coached mostly by the COACH not the school. I have no doubt Erickson has an eye for talent and the ability to coach them up, but Riley should not get credit for that. Bye, bye Chad Johnson, T.J. Houshmandzadeh (they were jco transfers Erickson brought in as I recall – correct me if I’m wrong). As far as the actual numbers go, Riley has 13 players (counting Dwan Edwards, Steven Jackson – who Riley coached for only 2 years) in 7 years for an average of 1.8 players going to the NFL, Bellotti has about 28 in 13 years for an average of 2.15 players going to the NFL per year.
I have to eat crow on the all-conference teams, like JTLight said and see my above post on how lame the coaching record stat is.
Finally, it seams to me that OSU reached its height under Erickson, can you really argue that Riley is building OSU up when they took a step back when he arrived?
You could say the same thing about Bellotti...
uh…he who inherited a Rose Bowl team, to never return them?
(Of course the Fiesta Bowl counts, but…if you’re going to make a ridiculous argument, I might as well echo it) OSU has improved since Erickson left. Riley’s record is better than what Erickson’s was. He hasn’t gotten back to the Fiesta, but…2006 was pretty close (one touchdown away from probably playing in a BCS bowl), 2008 might be a good year, too.
To both of you, a history lesson:
Erickson has many reputations, one of them is his reputation (similar to Bellotti and especially, Neuheisel) for focusing on skill position players, but neglecting to recruit linemen. Washington State fans will tell you that. Miami fans will tell you that. OSU fans will agree—that’s what he left Riley with (no cornerbacks, either!). There will always be discussion about how much Riley 1 had to do with Erickson’s success, and how much Riley 2 owes to Erickson.
There’s a big difference between Riley 1 and Riley 2, as far as what OSU football was and who OSU was able to recruit. It’s beyond night and day. Riley 1 came in and changed everything from the bad old days of losing with a wishbone offense into a pro-style offense, brought in the 2nd leading rusher in the history of the conference and got some momentum going. Riley 2 has been more about filling in the depthchart to be able to overcome adversity, and continuing to improve the strength of the program from the ground up—and it’s hard to argue with the 2nd most wins in the conference over the last two years as a barometer of him making the program more successful as time goes on.
Keep in mind, OSU replaced the most starters of any team in the conference last year and also lost 2 All-Americans early in the season, but still managed to finish 3rd with very poor first year quarterback play. That’s a pretty good barometer, too. We’ll get to see what happens when 7 departed starting seniors from the defensive front are replaced with 4 seniors and 2 juniors, but I don’t think it will be a dramatic drop off.
Riley learned a lot when he played for Bear Bryant, and he’s building a program in a similar way.
Throwing out the records against current coaches only proves how weak and circular your argument is. It’s a measure of how good they are compared to their better peers (those who have staying power). It includes when Riley didn’t even win a conference game in ‘97 and only won a couple in ‘98. Throwing it out minimizes how much better he is than his peers, especially now that he has comparable talent. You don’t have to throw it out though, I suppose you could just take their head to head records?? What about bowl records? Don’t think that one matters, either?
It’s too early to say very much about the 2nd Riley administration, as far as what those players will do in the pros, but he already has 2 successful NFL quarterbacks, which is 2 more than Bellotti will ever have.
Until oregon can win close games that are decided by special teams play, it won’t be a factor. If you want to hype the coaching staff who was sending in the field goal unit when its quarterback with one game under his belt knew he should spike the ball, then you may hype them at your leisure, gentlemen.
I’ll just take the winner and the guy who’s not a douche.
Wow – take off the orange colored glasses
So the 1st statement you throw out a comment that is wrong, and the next you admit it’s wrong.
As for your history lesson – I’m not sure how the recruiting reputation helps your argument (if it’s true). So Neuheisel, Erickson and Bellotti do the same thing? Erickison took OSU to a fiesta bowl and took Miami to two national titles. Neuheisel took UW to two Holiday bowls and a Pac-10 win with Rose bowl. As much as I may not like either of them they are good coaches. Bellotti has gone to a bowl 11 out of 13 years with one conference championship, plus being ranked in the top 5 in two separate seasons. So you’re saying three good coaches (I would argue Erickison is an elite coach) recruit differently than Riley, I’m not sure this helps your argument.
Riley put in two loosing seasons then Erickson took them to 3 bowls in 4 years and tie for the conference championship. He leaves with an 8 win season preceded by a 5 win. Two numbers Riley hovers near.
On your paragraph about Riley 1 and 2:
Interesting details most of the way through, I’m not an OSU fan (obviously) and I didn’t know them, so in all sincerity thanks for them. However, your last statement you make the point that the last 2 years have been good. So how many times do we have to mention the problems with generalizing about sample size? Seriously do they teach statistics at OSU or do you only learn about how to apply it to sheep (cheap shot, but I couldn’t resist).
Next paragraph –is about what OSU overcame last year – all good points, but not sure if bad QB play is a good barometer for coaching ability?
Next sentence is a pointless post about playing for bear Bryant – no comment, I don’t know who Bellotti played for and I don’t care.
Next sentence you imply that what follows will show how our arguments are circular – but you don’t really make it clear that it is, if you’re going to accuse us of something demonstrate it too.
Next is about the utility of records against current coaches. Why do the current coaches necessarily have staying power, two are, by all accounts on the hot seat, 1 is in his 1st season another in his 2nd, wow incredible staying power there. And surprise, surprise, It also happens to work sooo favorably as far as match ups go for Riley, he didn’t face Neuheisel at UW, or Willingham at Stanford, or Erickson at OSU (obviously). But just for the sake of argument lets go with the notion that current coaches record is a measure of record against "those who have staying power." If that’s the case what does it mean that Riley’s record gets worse when you account for people who have left the pac-10 (or those who do not have staying power). Shouldn’t it get better? Or is Riley worse against inferior coaches? I’d don’t think so but that is the implication of your argument.
This next part is a little hard to follow, I think because you change what "it" refers to
You say "It includes when Riley didn’t even win a conference game in ‘97 and only won a couple in ’98." Now I’m assuming by "it" you meant career record – why shouldn’t Riley’s two worst seasons be counted? If it wasn’t for all those time I got out I would have batted 1.000 in little league. Just had to check and yes both those arguments are absurd.
Bellotti vs. Riley’s H2H is 3 – 4, sucks for us, but a 1 win lead isn’t much to stand on, which is why you don’t emphasize it – also nice job of Riley on the bowl wins, I was unaware and that is impressive, though again I have to point out 4 is not much of a sample size. Bellotti has missed 2 bowls in 13years, Riley has missed 3 in 7 years.
Your next paragraph you make the point that 2 of Riley’s QBs have had more success than any Bellotti’s . . . in the NFL. I don’t really think it makes much sense to credit a coach for the success of his players in the NFL. To me what seems like a better reflection of the coach is number of players who have been in the NFL and where they are drafted. The reason for this is when a player does well in college he usually gets a shot in the Pro’s, when a player does really well in college he gets drafted high. I actually think it’s a negative when a players does better in the pro’s than college (though I admit this logic is a little convoluted, and while most people may disagree with the point below, I think the point above makes a lot of sense). Take Tom Brady as an example, Michigan had one of the top 10 QBs all time and only started him 1 year, and in that year he didn’t put up big numbers? I guess that means Michigan didn’t recognize his potential and didn’t coach him up to it. Turning back to OSU, Derrick Anderson had an incredible year for the Browns, at a higher level of play he looked even better than he did at OSU. What does that say about Riley?
Next you say "Until oregon can win close games that are decided by special teams play, it won’t be a factor." Again I have to ask what "it" is, though it is kind of a ridiculous statement Bellotti coached teams have won numerous close games decided by special teams play.
Then you say "If you want to hype the coaching staff who was sending in the field goal unit when its quarterback with one game under his belt knew he should spike the ball, then you may hype them at your leisure, gentlemen." How do you know he knew he should spike ball? He only had one game under his belt – and he didn’t play the whole game? I don’t see how an in the heat of the moment mistake by our 5th string QB is a very poor of a reflection on the coaching staff – Not many 5th string college QBs will play perfectly in pressure situations.
I know you have problems with the coaches record metric because it has the audacity of including Riley’s bad seasons and also has the largest sample size (damn you statistical power!) but I’ll close with it:
Mike Riley: 47-38 – 55%
Mike Bellotti: 106-52 67%
I’ll take the coach who didn’t leave his team with the better record. And notice I do it with out name calling and only 1 sheep reference (I guess that makes 2, damn).
last sentence looks a tad confusing
My bad – should have read:
I’ll take the coach who didn’t leave his team and who has the better record. And notice I do it with out name calling and only 1 sheep reference (I guess that makes 2, damn).
Not to burst the bubble on this point...
“Then you say “If you want to hype the coaching staff who was sending in the field goal unit when its quarterback with one game under his belt knew he should spike the ball, then you may hype them at your leisure, gentlemen.” How do you know he knew he should spike ball? He only had one game under his belt – and he didn’t play the whole game? I don’t see how an in the heat of the moment mistake by our 5th string QB is a very poor of a reflection on the coaching staff – Not many 5th string college QBs will play perfectly in pressure situations.”
This kinda shows that he did know what to do.
Blame it on who? Maybe the kicking team was eager to be the hero…
Maybe it was a mix up on the sideline…
Regardless, he says he knew what to do. And Bellotti signaled for him to spike it.
Go Duckies!
I was drinking
So that point wasn’t the best – but I still don’t think one mistake a by the special teams makes Bellotti fall to the level of Riley
I would reply more, but Brad pretty much nailed it...
I will make one final point though…
Neither Brad nor I are completely throwing out coaching records vs. current Pac-10 coaches. It is a usable metric. You, CV, choose to throw all your eggs in one statistical basket. I have seen this in your writing over and over again. Whether or not it be rushing (OSU and 1000 yard rushers, coaching records, whatever) choose the statistic that is most beneficial to the Beavers. Both of us explained why we look at more than just current coaching mathcups, which while damning for Bellotti, does not line up well with the entire body of work, which is why it doesn’t concern us greatly.
We choose to look at the full body of information, not just that which benefits our own team.
I would also encourage you to learn what circular reasoning is. Don’t accuse people of logical fallacies that you don’t understand.
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
Also...
I really hope Arizona goes 6-6 and goes to a bowl game, and they extend his contract. That would be friggin hilarious. 4 more years!
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
Kind of off-topic
But last time Arizona played at Autzen, my friend and I sat right down front in the GA and talked smack to Antoine Cason.
BAD IDEA. Lesson learned.
That said, I’d love to get a win against them. It’s been a couple years, and we’ve lost so much in Tucson the last few times. Kellen breaks leg, DD goes in. Next play, DD gets a concussion. And then two years later, Dennis catches his foot in that cursed desert grass.
I’ve never respected any member of the Stoops family, so I’m hoping they have a miserable year and he gets run out of Tucson. Then they’d hire a decent coach and the league would get that much better.
mm....
Riley continues to improve the strength of his program. (By the way, lumping in Riley’s record from 97-98 is the worst example of cherry picking in this conversation. Everything in Corvallis is different now. It’s not the same place.)
Meanwhile, Bellotti is just 9-9 over the last two years of conference play. Mediocre and middling when it matters.
Jt’s circular reasoning: “I just don’t see OSU making the jump to the next level anytime soon.” So, your reason is…just because. Okay. That’s a good reason for not seeing them ‘make the jump’ I suppose.
BradL’s suspect reasoning: “Finally, it seams to me that OSU reached its height under Erickson, can you really argue that Riley is building OSU up when they took a step back when he arrived?”
Duh. They’re way better off than where Erickson left the Beavs. Are you kidding? Riley has won more games, more bowl games, more conference games, more road games, more everything.
I know, I know. You guys are “right” because you’re “right.” That is what’s circular, dears.
There’s nobody outside of the little green bubble who agrees with you though.
OK...
Let’s go over circular reasoning. It goes something like this… A implies B, but B implies A.
In fact, NOTHING any of us said was circular. You may have not liked our opinion or agreed with our reasoning, but that doesn’t make is circular. We pretty much just stated our opinion without bothering to write in depth on our reasoning behind them. But that’s not circular…at all. I’m not naive enough to think that anything I say is true.
I have a personal opinion that I don’t think Oregon State will make the jump to Pac-10 contender anytime soon. That is based on the fact that Mike Riley has never been better than 4-3 going into his 8th Pac-10 game, among other things. Until he actually competes for a Pac-10 title, I won’t take OSU too seriously. You may not like that, but that is not circular.
I’ve seen you say before this is an important year, as this is Riley’s first year with all his own players. I’m interested to see how OSU performs this year. If they can finish in the top 2 of the Pac-10, or beat Penn State and Utah on the rad, I will be greatly impressed, and give credit where credit is due. But I’ll believe it when I see it.
And it’s not like these opinions are only held here. Most reputable previews are doubting OSU can be above mediocre this year. I’m sure you don’t care about this, and sure, it doesn’t mean jack squat what anything thinks now, but it not like these opinions are blindly homeristic (unlike yours). We actually try to be reasonable around here.
As far as Riley vs. Bellotti goes, since 2002, they have the same number of wins and Bellotti has one less loss. I don’t know how you can say that only the last 2 years count. Most people like to actually take a decent sample size. Usually one that includes most of the data available. Riley could very well surpass Bellotti on the coaching list, but he’s not there yet, and this year will go a long way to proving how good of a coach he is. Again, until he actually competes for a title and gets to some decent bowl games (Holiday at the worst), I can’t have him higher on my list. He may have more potential, but he still has quite a bit to prove.
Be a homer over at BuildingTheDam all you want, but please, bring a little perspective next time you drop by these parts.
We are the power. We are the flower. We are the awesome blossom.
--www.AddictedToQuack.com
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
