[JJJ]

I'm posting this rather reluctantly because I don't really agree with it, but it discusses coaches near and dear to our hearts (as well as those who aren't).

“Everything we did was designed to help get us into that league,” said Hill, who included Rice-Eccles Stadium (opened: 1998) in that formula. “We wanted to be dressed and ready.’’

Which begs the question: What if Utah hadn’t hired Meyer 15 years ago?

Hill declined to reveal the identities of the three other finalists, but it’s doubtful any would have produced the sizzling results or signed the personnel that fueled the wondrous three-year stretch — the stretch that unfolded just when the Pac-10 was casting its expansionist eye to the east.

Maybe the conference would have grabbed Utah anyhow. It fit the model as a large, secular research institution in a new TV market.

But of this there is no doubt:

Meyer’s tenure in Salt Lake City was the foundation that would make the Pac-10’s decision easy, that would eliminate any doubt.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/12/12/ut...ing-hires/

[JJJ]

I'm posting this rather reluctantly because I don't really agree with it, but it discusses coaches near and dear to our hearts (as well as those who aren't).

“Everything we did was designed to help get us into that league,” said Hill, who included Rice-Eccles Stadium (opened: 1998) in that formula. “We wanted to be dressed and ready.’’

Which begs the question: What if Utah hadn’t hired Meyer 15 years ago?

Hill declined to reveal the identities of the three other finalists, but it’s doubtful any would have produced the sizzling results or signed the personnel that fueled the wondrous three-year stretch — the stretch that unfolded just when the Pac-10 was casting its expansionist eye to the east.

Maybe the conference would have grabbed Utah anyhow. It fit the model as a large, secular research institution in a new TV market.

But of this there is no doubt:

Meyer’s tenure in Salt Lake City was the foundation that would make the Pac-10’s decision easy, that would eliminate any doubt.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/12/12/ut...ing-hires/

[BostonCard]

Hmmm. I think he way overranks Kelly.  Kelly came on as OC for what was already an excellent Duck team in 2007.  He was then OC for two years and head coach or four.  But he left to the NFL, where he basically was a bust, and Helfrich took over.  Four years later Helfrich was fired, Oregon went in a different direction and they're now on their third coach in three years.  His legacy in Oregon wasn't long lasting.  And while his legacy on the game of college football was immense, I think if not Oregon, he would have been hired at some other program.

In contrast, the same year as Kelly became OC at Oregon, Harbaugh took over a 1-11 team, transformed it into a powerhouse, and handed the reigns off to Shaw four years later.  Seven years after that, 11 years after Harbaugh took over, we are still riding this incredible wave.  The transformation of the program cannot be denied.

BC 

[BostonCard]

Hmmm. I think he way overranks Kelly.  Kelly came on as OC for what was already an excellent Duck team in 2007.  He was then OC for two years and head coach or four.  But he left to the NFL, where he basically was a bust, and Helfrich took over.  Four years later Helfrich was fired, Oregon went in a different direction and they're now on their third coach in three years.  His legacy in Oregon wasn't long lasting.  And while his legacy on the game of college football was immense, I think if not Oregon, he would have been hired at some other program.

In contrast, the same year as Kelly became OC at Oregon, Harbaugh took over a 1-11 team, transformed it into a powerhouse, and handed the reigns off to Shaw four years later.  Seven years after that, 11 years after Harbaugh took over, we are still riding this incredible wave.  The transformation of the program cannot be denied.

BC 

[JJJ]

Hmmm. I think he way overranks Kelly.  Kelly came on as OC for what was already an excellent Duck team in 2007.  He was then OC for two years and head coach or four.  But he left to the NFL, where he basically was a bust, and Helfrich took over.  Four years later Helfrich was fired, Oregon went in a different direction and they're now on their third coach in three years.  His legacy in Oregon wasn't long lasting.  And while his legacy on the game of college football was immense, I think if not Oregon, he would have been hired at some other program.

In contrast, the same year as Kelly became OC at Oregon, Harbaugh took over a 1-11 team, transformed it into a powerhouse, and handed the reigns off to Shaw four years later.  Seven years after that, 11 years after Harbaugh took over, we are still riding this incredible wave.  The transformation of the program cannot be denied.

BC

You're preaching to the choir, but yes, I thought both Shaw and Harbaugh were undervalued by Wilner (shocking!).

[JJJ]

Hmmm. I think he way overranks Kelly.  Kelly came on as OC for what was already an excellent Duck team in 2007.  He was then OC for two years and head coach or four.  But he left to the NFL, where he basically was a bust, and Helfrich took over.  Four years later Helfrich was fired, Oregon went in a different direction and they're now on their third coach in three years.  His legacy in Oregon wasn't long lasting.  And while his legacy on the game of college football was immense, I think if not Oregon, he would have been hired at some other program.

In contrast, the same year as Kelly became OC at Oregon, Harbaugh took over a 1-11 team, transformed it into a powerhouse, and handed the reigns off to Shaw four years later.  Seven years after that, 11 years after Harbaugh took over, we are still riding this incredible wave.  The transformation of the program cannot be denied.

BC

You're preaching to the choir, but yes, I thought both Shaw and Harbaugh were undervalued by Wilner (shocking!).

[BostonCard]

I can understand why not Shaw.  Stanford was a different place when Harbaugh left than when he got here.  And if you are already going to a BCS bowl, you don’t want a transformational coach.  Not to underplay what Shaw has done, but his promotion was relatively predictable, and while making the team his own, he didn’t remake the team.  The Harbaugh hire was transformational.

By the way, the more I think about Carroll, the less I think he was #1.  He took a talented and underachieving program, turned it into a talented and appropriately achieving program, then left with a cloud of ncaa sanctions at the door, and USC went back to being talented but underachieving. 

BC

[BostonCard]

I can understand why not Shaw.  Stanford was a different place when Harbaugh left than when he got here.  And if you are already going to a BCS bowl, you don’t want a transformational coach.  Not to underplay what Shaw has done, but his promotion was relatively predictable, and while making the team his own, he didn’t remake the team.  The Harbaugh hire was transformational.

By the way, the more I think about Carroll, the less I think he was #1.  He took a talented and underachieving program, turned it into a talented and appropriately achieving program, then left with a cloud of ncaa sanctions at the door, and USC went back to being talented but underachieving. 

BC

[CTcard]

I can understand why not Shaw. 

Well, Shaw did make #6 - supposedly among all hiring decisions for head coach or coordinator positions in the western third of the country in the last 17 years. That's not exactly "not Shaw".

And Shaw should definitely be in there somewhere; these are supposedly "the top hiring decisions of the past 17 years", not necessarily the most transformational.

By the way, the more I think about Carroll, the less I think he was #1.  He took a talented and underachieving program, turned it into a talented and appropriately achieving program, then left with a cloud of ncaa sanctions at the door, and U$C went back to being talented but underachieving. 

Maybe.
Carroll did stay 9 seasons at $C and produced the best teams/best dynasty that the west has seen over the 17 years in question. I would guess the local fan base thinks that was a pretty good hire. But the best is tough.

I would think that the most questionable inclusion on this list was San Jose State hiring Mike MacIntyre. He only lasted three years there and only gave them one good season. And it's not like he built anything that lasted after he left. [At least as far as wins go, I have heard that he improved the academic profile and attitude of the team and perhaps that lasted.]
A better choice would probably be Colorado's hiring of Mike MacIntyre, though how many good seasons he's going to produce there is still up in the air.

[CTcard]

I can understand why not Shaw. 

Well, Shaw did make #6 - supposedly among all hiring decisions for head coach or coordinator positions in the western third of the country in the last 17 years. That's not exactly "not Shaw".

And Shaw should definitely be in there somewhere; these are supposedly "the top hiring decisions of the past 17 years", not necessarily the most transformational.

By the way, the more I think about Carroll, the less I think he was #1.  He took a talented and underachieving program, turned it into a talented and appropriately achieving program, then left with a cloud of ncaa sanctions at the door, and U$C went back to being talented but underachieving. 

Maybe.
Carroll did stay 9 seasons at $C and produced the best teams/best dynasty that the west has seen over the 17 years in question. I would guess the local fan base thinks that was a pretty good hire. But the best is tough.

I would think that the most questionable inclusion on this list was San Jose State hiring Mike MacIntyre. He only lasted three years there and only gave them one good season. And it's not like he built anything that lasted after he left. [At least as far as wins go, I have heard that he improved the academic profile and attitude of the team and perhaps that lasted.]
A better choice would probably be Colorado's hiring of Mike MacIntyre, though how many good seasons he's going to produce there is still up in the air.

[BostonCard]

My point was that I could understand why Shaw was not more highly valued by wilner.

On Carroll, I also weigh the NCAA sanctions against him being a “good hire”.  How many of his wins were vacated?  And again, while you might argue that getting USC to “dynasty” status is something, you have to put it in context of program potential. 

It’s beyond the period described, but I would put Mike Price as the best hire in the last 30 years.

BC

[BostonCard]

My point was that I could understand why Shaw was not more highly valued by wilner.

On Carroll, I also weigh the NCAA sanctions against him being a “good hire”.  How many of his wins were vacated?  And again, while you might argue that getting USC to “dynasty” status is something, you have to put it in context of program potential. 

It’s beyond the period described, but I would put Mike Price as the best hire in the last 30 years.

BC

[CTcard]

It’s beyond the period described, but I would put Mike Price as the best hire in the last 30 years.

Possibly. Given the degree of difficulty his 5 bowl games in 14 years was very good.

Still, I'd probably go with Harbaugh, the turnaround he engineered is amazing. And it stuck, though that part is not necessarily due to Harbaugh himself. Still, hiring Harbaugh got us Shaw.

[CTcard]

It’s beyond the period described, but I would put Mike Price as the best hire in the last 30 years.

Possibly. Given the degree of difficulty his 5 bowl games in 14 years was very good.

Still, I'd probably go with Harbaugh, the turnaround he engineered is amazing. And it stuck, though that part is not necessarily due to Harbaugh himself. Still, hiring Harbaugh got us Shaw.

[lex24]

1. Harbaugh. No one else is close. He took a program headed for D1A and turned it into a power.

2. Petersen. He’s been a great coach at two Western schools.

3. Shaw. He took what Harbaugh left and improved on it. A winning pct about .25 percent higher than the collective record over the last 50 years. And 3 Championships In 7 years - at a school that had won 3 the previuos 40.

4. Kelly

Carroll- Wilner might have considered the carnage he left in his wake. A disqualification.

[lex24]

1. Harbaugh. No one else is close. He took a program headed for D1A and turned it into a power.

2. Petersen. He’s been a great coach at two Western schools.

3. Shaw. He took what Harbaugh left and improved on it. A winning pct about .25 percent higher than the collective record over the last 50 years. And 3 Championships In 7 years - at a school that had won 3 the previuos 40.

4. Kelly

Carroll- Wilner might have considered the carnage he left in his wake. A disqualification.

[CTcard]

2. Petersen. He’s been a great coach at two Western schools.

Carroll- Wilner might have considered the carnage he left in his wake. A disqualification.

Well, the list wasn't the best coaches of the past seventeen years, but "the best hiring decisions". Petersen moving on to UW presumably lessened the quality of the decision of Boise to hire him; but not so much, he lasted a good amount of time at Boise.

Of course Wilner himself lumps in Petersen's time at UW, but consistency has never been his thing (despite trying ever so hard).

I think the hiring of Meyer by Utah might be considered along with Stanford hiring Harbaugh.
Meyer made Utah good, was succeeded by his defensive coordinator Whittingham, and the combination made Utah good enough to get into the Pac 12. That is probably a bigger consequence than simply making Stanford good long term.
However, Meyer only lasted two years at Utah, and it is debatable whether Meyer really brought Utah Whittingham as Whittingham had also been DC for seven years under McBride - before Meyer.

So ... I would still go with Harbaugh.

[CTcard]

2. Petersen. He’s been a great coach at two Western schools.

Carroll- Wilner might have considered the carnage he left in his wake. A disqualification.

Well, the list wasn't the best coaches of the past seventeen years, but "the best hiring decisions". Petersen moving on to UW presumably lessened the quality of the decision of Boise to hire him; but not so much, he lasted a good amount of time at Boise.

Of course Wilner himself lumps in Petersen's time at UW, but consistency has never been his thing (despite trying ever so hard).

I think the hiring of Meyer by Utah might be considered along with Stanford hiring Harbaugh.
Meyer made Utah good, was succeeded by his defensive coordinator Whittingham, and the combination made Utah good enough to get into the Pac 12. That is probably a bigger consequence than simply making Stanford good long term.
However, Meyer only lasted two years at Utah, and it is debatable whether Meyer really brought Utah Whittingham as Whittingham had also been DC for seven years under McBride - before Meyer.

So ... I would still go with Harbaugh.

[Mick]

Agree with Lex and CT.  The impact that Harbaugh had was tectonic.  It reversed the direction of a 1-11 program with no hope whatsoever, that had made two horrifically bad hires in a row, and brought David Shaw back to the fold as a long-term, better-than-Pop-Warner coach.  That is threading one hell of a needle.

[Mick]

Agree with Lex and CT.  The impact that Harbaugh had was tectonic.  It reversed the direction of a 1-11 program with no hope whatsoever, that had made two horrifically bad hires in a row, and brought David Shaw back to the fold as a long-term, better-than-Pop-Warner coach.  That is threading one hell of a needle.

[Goose]

Agree with Lex and CT.  The impact that Harbaugh had was tectonic.

Agree also. However, Napoleon was right, it is better to have a general who is lucky than one who is good. Harbaugh was both.

[Goose]

Agree with Lex and CT.  The impact that Harbaugh had was tectonic.

Agree also. However, Napoleon was right, it is better to have a general who is lucky than one who is good. Harbaugh was both.