October 11, 201610 yr Texas...mostly because of the abundance of talent within a couple hours drive. Texas is more of a draw for High School Players in Texas than Notre Dame is for high school players anywhere in the country. Both at flagship programs and both have the resources to do what ever they want to do, I just think Texas is actually a better job...but Notre Dame isn't a scrub job by any stretch.
October 11, 201610 yr Author I'll say this about Texas. Austin, TX > South Bend, IN. But I'll give you what Nick Saban said with regards to Texas, "Why would I go there and have to deal with 20 boosters when I can go to Alabama and run the show myself?" I think that is the biggest knock on Texas. You aren't above the boosters in Austin.
October 11, 201610 yr The bias in me says Notre Dame. But, recruiting classes still show it's a pretty desirable place for youngsters.
October 11, 201610 yr Texas. They've got the cash. They've got the backyard recruiting. The boosters are probably annoying, but that can be overcome.
October 11, 201610 yr This is a very good question. Texas probably doesn't have the academic standards that ND has and that can't hurt when recruiting.
October 11, 201610 yr Define better job? Texas has better location to recruit top level 17-19 year olds. Texas has more money, even with ND's NBC contract. Texas can admit ANYONE that can run, pass, or block. However, as much as I loathe the Irish, Notre Dame is still Notre Dame. I think that means less today than it did yesterday, and means even less to an 18 year old kid from a coast, but there is still a mystique and romanticism around that program. Both great jobs. If I was a young up-and-comer, I think I'd rather coach Texas and would enjoy all of the interested rich dudes circling. However, if an older coach, I'd prefer Notre Dame and all that comes with it. Both great jobs.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.