TigerNet -- Blogs -- Mickey Plyler's Blog

Dabo's Tall Task
I am a little late this afternoon in posting the blog. I sometimes write the blog the night before but last night I went to Greenville for the Clemson-Furman soccer game and was disappointed in the Tigers 2-1 overtime loss.

And most of today I have spent going back and looking at the history of coaches and how much success the great ones have had and how early they had it.

I looked at every coach that has won a national title in the last forty years and I also took a look at the coaches at schools currently ranked in the top 25 of the latest BCS poll. I felt this data would give me a look at the legendary coaches and also a peek at the current coaches that are finding success in 2008.

What I found was that in many cases, very successful coaches had average to poor records in their first season and most turned things around in their second season. Many others continue to build greatness and years two through four are the best chances at a national title.

I was shocked to see how many of the current top coaches had poor records in year one. For example:
Nick Saban was 7-6 in his first year at Alabama and 6-5-1 in his first season at Michigan State.

Oklahoma State is currently ranked sixth in the BCS but Mike Gundy was 4-7 in his first season.

Utah’s Kyle Whittingham was 7-5 in his first season at Utah but now has the Utes ranked 11th.

Jim Leavitt’s first team and South Florida and Dave Wannstedt’s first squad at Pitt both went 5-6.

Bronco Mendenhall of BYU went 6-6 in his first season in Provo, Pat Fitzgerald went 4-8 in his first year at Northwestern , Mark Mangino went 2-10 in his initial season at Kansas and Tim Brewster went 1-11 in his first season at Minnesota but all are currently in the top 25.

Other top coaches that are not ranked had similar first seasons. Bobby Bowden went 5-6 in year one in Tallahassee. Tommy Tuberville’s first team at Auburn went 5-6. Butch Davis’ first team at North Carolina went 4-8. Jeff Tedford’s first team at Cal went 7-5. Rich Rodriguez is struggling at Michigan in his first season and his first West Virginia squad went 3-8.

History also tells us that many of the greatest coaches of yesteryear also got off to bad starts. Woody Hayes went 4-3 in his first season at Ohio State. Bear Bryant’s first Alabama team went 5-4-1 and his first team at Texas A&M was 1-9. Shug Jordan’s first team at Auburn went 5-5.

Year Two
The second season is where many of the top coaches started to see a return on their investment. Saban is now 7-0 in his second season at Alabama. Paterno went 8-2-1 at Penn State. Carroll went 11-2 at USC. Mark Richt went 13-1 in his second year at Georgia. Ohio State won a national title in Tressel’s second season as did Florida in Urban Meyer’s second season. Les Miles was 11-2 at LSU as was Bronco Mendenhall at BYU. TCU’s Gary Patterson went 10-2 in year two at TCU.

Year Three
Knute Rockne, Lou Holtz, Frank Leahy, Ara Parseghian and Dan Devine each won a national title of some sort in his third season at Notre Dame.

It seems the third season has been magical for many top coaches. Les Miles, Danny Ford, Barry Switzer, Dennis Erickson and Gene Stallings also won national championships in their third campaign.

Woody Hayes, Bear Bryant, Jimmy Johnson, Bobby Ross, Nick Saban and Pete Carroll had to wait until their fourth season to grab a national title while Bob Stoops picked up his first one in year two.

First Six Seven Weeks
The original point of the blog was to research and see how coaches did early in their coaching careers. I am not sure how many games Dabo Swinney has to win in his first seven weeks on the job but I was surprised how many great coaches failed in their first season.

Many failed because it was a total rebuilding job and that is not exactly what Dabo faces. However, those coaches had an entire spring and pre-fall camp to prepare and many still failed early.

I think Dabo has to win and win right away at Clemson. However, Woody Hayes, Bear Bryant, Bobby Bowden, Nick Saban, Joe Paterno, Bob Stoops, Pete Carroll, Mike Gundy, Mike Leach, JimTressel, Kyle Whittingham, Gary Patterson, Gary Pinkel, Jim Leavitt, Bronco Mendenhall, Mark Mangino, Tim Brewster, Tommy Tuberville, Butch Davis, Jeff Tedford and Rich Rodriguez would not have survived under the same situation. They were perhaps more qualified but their performance based upon wins and losses would not have cut it under this current Clemson scenario.

I am happy for Dabo and I think he has a chance to get the job. This is really the only scenario in which he would have gotten the Clemson job at this stage in his career, so he has to be thankful for the opportunity. However, winning early and turning around a team with problems obviously did not come easy for many great coaches.

The Brad Hughes All-State Insurance Agency

Comments:

Mickey, you contradicted yourself. You said: "many failed because it was a total rebuilding job and that is not exactly what Dabo faces." Then you said, about Dabo's challenge, "...so he has to be thankful for the opportunity. However, winning early and turning around a team with problems..."

Your 2nd statement is accurate. We are I a rebuilding period. CTB lead our football program to the upper side of mediocrity. He allowed a once, smash-mouth football program to get soft in the trenches. He tried to "out-think" and "out-trick" rather than "out-play" and "out-work" your opponent.

Clemson may very well get well without getting sicker, but there is NOTHING about this situation that would suggest that it will. Your points about coaches needing a year to get programs on track is also accurate for Clemson given our problems on the OL. Because of that, I'm prepared (not happy) to go 6-6 next year before busting out a banner year in 2010. Thanks for your posts. I enjoy them daily.

Posted by RU4GOD2 on October 22, 2008 at 02:56 PM EDT #

Is it supposed to be a shock that coaches tend to take over teams in bad situations? More often than not, the prior coach leaves on unpleasant terms, ie, too much losing, not getting along with administrations, burnout, NCAA troubles, etc.

Of course many of them don't turn around a team in 12 games.

Posted by Justwannaread on October 22, 2008 at 03:35 PM EDT #

Good points.

I doubt that Frank Howard would have made it as many years as he did in todays culture. Clemson's record under Coach Howard was mediocre at best. But he stands out due to his longevity.

Posted by tigerfan40 on October 22, 2008 at 03:44 PM EDT #

I totally agree. Dabo is being asked to take a team that has mental and physical issues and turn them around in weeks. That is a tall order for any coach. So far he has done as well as can be expected. Unfortunately it will negatively affect his chances of getting the job if he doesn't win this year even though the one we hire may not have done any better.

Posted by jdwtiger on October 22, 2008 at 04:16 PM EDT #

Mickey,

I have to disagree with you. This blog is a further attempt by you to further your agenda. That agenda is, of course, pushing Dabo through as our next head coach. So should we just disregard his record over the next few games because most coaches have trouble in the beginning.

In my opinion, Dabo should not even be considered as the next head coach. Clemson should take this opportunity to hire the best possible head coach. A coach that gives us the best chance of winning now and future success. If you're playing the odds, there is no way Dabo is the guy you hire.

Posted by McRib on October 22, 2008 at 04:26 PM EDT #

Posted by McRib on October 22, 2008 at 03:26 PM EDT #

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Posted by CUTIGER3 on October 22, 2008 at 04:34 PM EDT #

Mickey,

Posted by McRib on October 22, 2008 at 05:45 PM EDT #

Tommy Bowden went 6-6 his first year and 9-3 his second year.

Posted by Tiger TC on October 22, 2008 at 05:55 PM EDT #

McRib,

Not that I disagree that we should hire the best coach available but if we had hired a guy the day after we fired bowden that was a nationally recognized coach and he finished the year winning 1 or 2 more games wouldn't you have given him a pass because he needed more time? Why would that be different with Dabo? Secondly, how do you know that Dabo is not a good coach? He has coached one week. I don't have any preference other than we win. just wondering how you know this stuff already?

Posted by jdwtiger on October 22, 2008 at 05:55 PM EDT #

Mickey,

Under this plan of yours, I beleive you have 80% of us CU fans behind you today. With every loss it will drop about another 20%. I like Dabo, the only way he stays is if we hire a DC now. That is his only shot. TDP may hire a HC, then I think he has very little chance of making it here. Kind of what happened to him at Al. For any of this to make since we need to lock someone down now....not wait for the tenn., syracuse, washingtons, ect to join the mix. You came up with this plan.....can you give us part 2....I'll wait by my computer. Waiting for everyone to uncommit, loose most of our games, and settle for an average coach is not the answer.

Posted by GWC on October 22, 2008 at 05:57 PM EDT #

McRib,I agree.The school really needs to start over.I like Dabo & wish him well.But the school and its fans deserve to do it right this time. #21

Posted by Prime T.+Tiger on October 22, 2008 at 06:14 PM EDT #

Some very good points made by all. However, we should not apply any undue burdens on Dabo and the team members by continuing to hound on his inexperience. He I think is trying very hard to do a job that he knows his chances of getting is tenous at best. Also, I haven't seen a list of big name coaches jumping up and down volunteering for this job. I would be hard pressed to put the CU job in the top 10 or maybe the top 20 in the country. I love the Tigers and have pulled for them even when I had to listen on a transistor radio to get the games (years ago). I will always be a Tiger but maybe the ESPN guys were right, our expetations are too high. The closest we ever came was under Danny (which by the way had no head coach experience). Mellytiger

Posted by mellytiger on October 22, 2008 at 09:59 PM EDT #

You know --it's amazing. No matter what place we are, so many people are unhappy or disturbed. There is no need to worry about things or circumstances which MAY happen. IMHO, we need to focus on what is best for this team. It .may be Dabo--it may not. If you are qualifying potential for success, perhaps you should accept Dabo's audition for what it is and not continue to harp on all the reasons you can think of to, despite what you claim, disrespect the man. Give the man a chance

Posted by Watcher on October 22, 2008 at 10:14 PM EDT #

This is exactly what I tried telling the TB lovers for years, but they kept using Beamer as their benchmark and coming up with excuses why TB needed more time. They ignored that VT was a nobody before Beamer, with none of the things Clemson has that make it a top job for most coaches.

The lovers also like to dance around TB's 9-2 record in his 2nd season and marginalize the fact that RichRod. was the OC on that teams' staff.

Ironically, that 9-2 record in only his 2nd season fueled the expectations that TB ultimately couldn't live up to and led to his demise.

Posted by flatiger66 on October 22, 2008 at 10:28 PM EDT #

MellyTiger,

I truly don't understand people like you. Do you know how many kids are the first in their family to graduate from college every year? Do you know that 28 years ago Clemson had more tradition and football success than Miami, FSU, VaTech, Wisconsin, Rutgers, Texas Tech, Kansas, KState, OK State, and others COMBINED!!!! Do you think Miami, FSU, VaTech, and others have unrealistic expectations? I'm sick & tired of losers like you putting down our traditions & accomplishments. Do you not read quotes from those in the know that have been saying for years that Clemson is a great job, that Clemson is a sleeping giant in college football, etc.???? It's pathetic that coaches, AD's, and media folk across the country have higher expectations and better opinions of our potential than many of our own fans!! I hope people like you don't have children, because it's that kind of attitude that creates losers and children with low self-esteem and emotional issues.

Posted by flatiger66 on October 22, 2008 at 10:43 PM EDT #

MellyTiger and others ....

Read and learn!!! This is what many outside Clemson think & believe, and this was written by a man that rarely says anything good about Clemson!!

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20081022/COLUMNISTS05/810220407/1002/rss02

Posted by flatiger66 on October 22, 2008 at 10:51 PM EDT #

Why not hire Lane Kiffin NOW and stop the recruiting losses? Kiffin would be crazy not to keep Swinney and Napier. Best of both worlds.

Posted by Razzmatazz on October 23, 2008 at 02:57 AM EDT #

Flattiger I don't understand your parallelism with single family graduates, the football program or Clemson tradition but I'll address that later. I don't know what game you were watching when th GT/Clemson game was on, but theirs and your stated opinions of what they think are totally different. Before, when talk about getting rid of Bowden was running rampant, the Burning question from the analysist then was who can they get that will do better. Clemson has never had a string of 10 win seasons or 9 for that matter and as stated earlier about Frank Howards mediocre record, "His Legacy was 3 yards and a cloud of Dust" He even had a losing record to none other than our arch rival, USC.

Posted by mellytiger on October 23, 2008 at 09:26 AM EDT #

Mickey ---

Practically everybody who frequents Tigernet appears to be convinced that the "right coach" is just out there waiting on our call and that he will be identified and hired.

Even more telling is that there is a solid conviction that once hired, this person will immediately begin winning big at Clemson.

What you research points out more than anything else is the stark reality that even if we ARE lucky enought to identify and hire the "right guy", chances are excellent that we are still in for a rocky season or two.

What will be "interesting" (I won't say "fun", lol) to watch will be the reaction of Tigernet next season to the trials and tribulations of whatever "right guy" we hire.

Apex

Posted by apextiger on October 23, 2008 at 12:07 PM EDT #

mellytiger is wrong about the string of 9+ win seasons. Between 1987 and 1991, Clemson had 4 straight 10-2 seasons and a 9-2-1 season.

In fact, I recall seeing that Clemson had one of the best records in the 80's. A while ago for sure, but there is a tradition of excellence. Combined with the great facilities and fan support, Clemson should be considered a Top 20 job.

Posted by sbrannan on October 23, 2008 at 12:11 PM EDT #

Hey flatiger would you say CU has more tradition than Princeton, Yale, or even Harvard ? 24,19,and 10 are the numbers of National titles these schools have won between them. In CU's 111 years of playing football (112 counting this season) CU has played in 30 bowls with a record of 15-15, not exactly setting the woods on fire I'd say. Since Coach Ford left the scene CU is 5-9 in bowls and has not won a conference title since 1991, nor have they played for one. Clemson ranked 28th all-time in wins coming into this season tied with that powerhouse Navy, so I ask you flatiger, who is the Messiah to awaken this sleeping giant of which you speak ? Just because CU has alot of support and wear alot of orange does not a tradition make. The numbers just do not support your argument.

Posted by DocHolliday on October 23, 2008 at 08:15 PM EDT #

MellyTiger,

'81 (12-0) '82 (9-1-1) '83 (9-1-1) '87 (10-2) '88 (10-2) '89 (10-2) '90 (10-2) - Ford coached 11 years and had 6 seasons with 9+ wins, and 5 ACC titles, 2 more that didn't count in '82 & '83.

How are 1st time family graduates like success in sports or life? Simple, It all goes back to "expectations". If you don't try, you'll never achieve. And the past has no bearing on the future, unless you let it.

Posted by flatiger66 on October 23, 2008 at 08:49 PM EDT #

Doc,

You're being asinine and you know it. First, the Ivy League schools don't participate in Div I-A. Years ago they did, but like ESPN wrote about Alabama, titles before the 1946 are fabricated. Bama doesn't have 12, but 4 to 6, depending how you count them. Army & Navy were powers until the 60s, but the world, and football, have changed much since then. If you think CU doesn't have tradition you're woefully wrong.

Besides, I NEVER said others don't have tradition, but you know that. You're simply trying to put words in my mouth and spin things to be negative about Clemson. You must be a coot!!

Bottom line, no one questions the expectations of VT, Miami, or FSU. Yet the facts are, 28 years ago, before Clemson had it's greatest string of success, it already had more tradition than those 3 schools combined. So to say their expectations are realistic, but Clemson's aren't, is nothing but BS!!

Posted by flatiger66 on October 23, 2008 at 08:51 PM EDT #

I would tell you flatiger that Furman has more 10+ win seasons in school history (9) than CU's (7). It just amazes me that just because someone has a viewpoint that differs from someone as learned as yourself then they clearly must be a coot. I do not speak in conjecture flatiger I back up my opinion with fact. The fact is CU has not been relevant on the national stage in football in more than 20 years, I know that is hard for you to take, but to come on this forum and act as though you are the only CU fan with a take is BS my friend. I am a life long CU fan and need not make my claims to the likes of you but anytime you want to talk facts such as numbers that do not lie, let me know. Let me know the last time CU won a game of importance on the national stage, not just some meaningless bowl game played in the middle of the afternoon.

Posted by DocHolliday on October 23, 2008 at 09:22 PM EDT #

Flattiger, If the past has no bearing on the future, why keep bringing it up. By the way, Isn't tradition based on the past?? You want tradition, look at ALABAMA (What was that score this year?) which by the way is where I live. Too many coots like yourself north of the border. By the way, you better look east for your next winning program, appox 90 miles east. That school has a tradition also. Mellytiger

Posted by mellytiger on October 23, 2008 at 09:24 PM EDT #

Flatiger since you brought up Miami, VT, and FSU in your reply to my original post let me give you a few facts about these 3 programs you may not know. Since CU's only national title Miami has won 5 national titles. Since joining the ACC in 1992 FSU has won 2 national titles and 12 ACC titles. Since joining the ACC in 2004 VT has won 2 ACC titles and played for a third. Are you really trying to compare what these programs have accomplished to what has been done at CU in recent history ? Who's being asinine ?

Posted by DocHolliday on October 23, 2008 at 09:44 PM EDT #

Doc, what an effin moron, thank you for proving my point. Exactly! Look what those 3 programs have done in the past 28 years when they didn't have what we did. Ergo, we can do that they have if we really wanted too. When I was a student we beat VT every year 45 & 55 to zip! So now they are great, we suck, and we should just accept it? Jesus what a moron!!

Melly, you're an even bigger moron than Doc! Me a coot? Right, that's why I've been in IPTAY since my senior year in '88, senior year @ CLEMSON! And USC has ZERO tradition, unless you count losing, steroids, scandal, and being a coaching graveyard as "tradition". And again, stop twisting facts - Which is why teams with no tradition can be great, but so can teams like us that have tradition, yet have gotten off track for a while.

Posted by flatiger66 on October 24, 2008 at 04:29 AM EDT #

you are the reason people hate CU.

Posted by DocHolliday on October 24, 2008 at 07:31 AM EDT #

Hey moron, CU has never beaten VT by 45 or 55 points for that matter. Once again you have let the facts get in the way of a good story. You wouldn't by any chance be an Obama supporter would you ?

Posted by DocHolliday on October 24, 2008 at 08:13 AM EDT #

Jess Christ you are effin retarded. '89 27-7, '88 40-7. Ok, I was technically wrong, I didn't look it up, but I knew we dominated and whipped VT back then, which we did, and I was there. That's two consecutive ass beatings we gave VT with 20 & 33 point wins in games that were even bigger whippings than those scores indicate because of our low scoring ball control offense.

You keep ignoring the point, like the retarded TB lovers with their facts, and the point being - Back then VT was a nobody, now they have NC expectations almost every year and no one says their fans expectations are unrealistic. Yet people say our expectations are unrealistic despite us having more tradition & success than VT, Miami, & FSU combined 28 years ago. And for 15 years we were a legit Top 20 program with NC potential, yet because we haven't done it recently we are stupid to want and expect better. That's BS!!

Posted by flatiger66 on October 24, 2008 at 03:17 PM EDT #

Why do you keep talking about what happened under Coach Ford, if you haven't noticed he has been gone since 1989. The tradition that the ground work was laid for under Coach Ford has long since left the program. Those programs of which you speak still have lofty goals and expectations as well and if you lived in those areas I am sure you would hear about them on a daily basis. I too was in Blacksburg the last time a CU team won up there which was in 1989 under Coach Ford. Expectations are one thing and I do expect more from CU than I have seen lately but you have to be realistic as well, this tradition you have been harping on is just not there sir. It may have been started under Danny Ford back in the late 80's but that ship has sailed, it has not been cultivated under Hatfield, West nor Bowden despite how ever many tantrums you may have. CU is due a new fresh face to perhaps rekindle what Coach Ford started but the tradition you seem to cling to is no more.

Posted by DocHolliday on October 24, 2008 at 04:41 PM EDT #

Doc,

You kill me. We had plenty of tradition before Ford. John Heisman, the '56 Sugar Bowl vs. LSU, the Hill & the Rock, etc. Clemson is NOT a Johnny come lately or merely a Ford driven identity. Right now Clemson still has FAR more tradition and recognition than VaTech. Clemson is a much more attractive job than GaTech, VaTech, and others that may have more recent success on the field.

Get your head out your ass and demand success. It's people like you with low expectations that we don't need. My expectations are NOT unrealistic. We can be as good, or even better, than we have ever been. And the experts and others in college football agree with me, not you. Read what others are writing in the newspapers.

Either way, I'm done arguing with you because you're a douche that has made up your mind, regardless of the facts, but one day you'll realize how pathetic of a fan you are, just like the TB lovers.

Posted by flatiger66 on October 24, 2008 at 06:16 PM EDT #

Flathead, oops Flattiger, If you don't under sarcasism when speaking of the school 90 miles east having tradition, then perhaps I understand your misguided sense of thinking. By the way, You ignored the Bamma / Cu score when CU's tradition had them at #9 nationally and lowly Bama was somewher in the distance. To remind you, it was 34 to 10 or was it 35 to 10. Makes no difference anyway as it was the total A-whipping on both sides of the ball. No sarcasism intended or implied. Mellytiger in Alabama. PS Oh, by the way, I believe tradition steeped CU is 0 for 5 against the last 5 SEC Bowl teams they played.

Posted by mellytiger on October 24, 2008 at 06:37 PM EDT #

To Doc Holiday, I believe flattiger is ignoring the facts. Lifetime, CU has appox 60% winning percentage. A few more L games and they would be one of those what do you call medeocre programs and all that tradition would be gone. Thank goodness for L Tech, SC state, Citadel, Furman, Virginia (for 28 years) etc which by the way accounts for 2 of the 3 wins this year.

Posted by mellytiger on October 24, 2008 at 06:49 PM EDT #