Gamecock Fanatics

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Jake Bentley at Utah

kingofnerf

GCF Super Moderator
Messages
10,908
Fanatics Cash
52,176
Points
8,238
He's leading the Utes to a possible upset win over #21 Colorado on FOX right now.

24-21 in the 3rd quarter.

 
I wonder if Jake will take his mulligan and play a 6th year of college football? I don't see the downside, if they are interested.

 
Agreed. Our best coaches have always been able to make do with less. CWM seemed to have a team that was consistently LESS than the sum of its parts.
Here and at florida before we hired him. I think he'd be a great motivational speaker, because he has a track record of short term improvements. However, his ability to actually teach and grow talent seem pretty limited. 

 
Here and at florida before we hired him. I think he'd be a great motivational speaker, because he has a track record of short term improvements. However, his ability to actually teach and grow talent seem pretty limited. 
The crazy thing is that he always seemed to do that as a DC - he vastly improved the Auby defense, for example. But UF and USC under his leadership always played down, not up.

 
The crazy thing is that he always seemed to do that as a DC - he vastly improved the Auby defense, for example. But UF and USC under his leadership always played down, not up.
He didn't helped Auburn's defense that much the second time around. He lowered their points allowed from 26.7 to 26.0. His defense also gave up 34 to Idaho that year. FWIW, Auburn's defense did a about 7-10 points better the year after he left. Maybe we get the muschamp exodus bounce next year?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
He didn't helped Auburn's defense that much the second time around. He lowered their points allowed from 26.7 to 26.0. His defense also gave up 34 to Idaho that year. FWIW, Auburn's defense did a about 7-10 points better the year after he left. Maybe we get the muschamp exodus bounce next year?
From what I remember reading at the time, he got credit for instilling a new sense of toughness and fight to a unit that was sort of on the downswing, and when he left many players credited him with reignited that. As for the bounce, sign me up, lol - those guys need something. I know all eyes are on the OC, but the DC will be just as crucial a hire given how these guys regressed and the talent we lost to the NFL. Think about it: most projections have our starting CBs going in round 1 and round 2 ... our DL is STOCKED with 4- and 5-star talent. And we gave up, what, 120 points in three games?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
From what I remember reading at the time, he got credit for instilling a new sense of toughness and fight to a unit that was sort of on the downswing, and when he left many players credited him with reignited that. As for the bounce, sign me up, lol - those guys need something. I know all eyes are on the OC, but the DC will be just as crucial a hire given how these guys regressed and the talent we lost to the NFL. Think about it: most projections have our starting CBs going in round 1 and round 2 ... our DL is STOCKED with 4- and 5-star talent. And we gave up, what, 120 points in three games?
I'm just not a believer in the subjective positives of cwm. That's all we heard when we hired him. It smelled like shit then. Still does if you ask me. Also 34 points to Idaho?

Completely agree with needing a spark. Plenty of talent. Just need to ignite the fire

 
I'm just not a believer in the subjective positives of cwm. That's all we heard when we hired him. It smelled like shit then. Still does if you ask me. Also 34 points to Idaho?

Completely agree with needing a spark. Plenty of talent. Just need to ignite the fire
Yeah, it's not a quantifiable, for sure.

 
Yeah, it's not a quantifiable, for sure.
It's less that I don't believe in subjective influences in sports. More so that if Muschamp had all these non measurable positives, he would've won at Florida and we would never have had the chance to watch him fail here.

 
It's less that I don't believe in subjective influences in sports. More so that if Muschamp had all these non measurable positives, he would've won at Florida and we would never have had the chance to watch him fail here.
You have to wonder if a solid character and a set of these intangibles - or subjective influences as you call them - have kept CWM in coaching discussions ever since he was coach-in-waiting at Texas ... as opposed to quantifiable number-based success that is based on data.

 
You have to wonder if a solid character and a set of these intangibles - or subjective influences as you call them - have kept CWM in coaching discussions ever since he was coach-in-waiting at Texas ... as opposed to quantifiable number-based success that is based on data.
I think if he actually had those attributes he would have been more successful. Seems more likely that he has the ability to present himself as having these intangibles. At least that fits with someone who has initial success that they struggle to sustain (or early here and at Florida). 

More directly, it's easier to project yourself as something that you aren't during an interview than it is to be that person day in and day out. The rah rah starts to fade and you find yourself in the emperor's new clothes with a 2-8 record

 
More directly, it's easier to project yourself as something that you aren't during an interview than it is to be that person day in and day out. The rah rah starts to fade and you find yourself in the emperor's new clothes with a 2-8 record
Especially if the interviewer doesn't know the difference. But it ain't the first time an interviewer has been bamboozled and it won't be the last. 

 
Top