LSU had some great years and more than you seem to recall in the 60's, 70's and 80's. I won't argue that they didn't win a National Title in those eras but they had many one or two loss seasons.

 

LSU was not a household name when it came to football until Saban arrived. I've been an SEC fan for a very long time and I don't even recall hearing much from LSU until Saban got there. They have always had phenomenal talent but as far as a program on a national scale I don't think they were relevant.

 

Saban's numbers don't lie. He's been in the title hunt every year since 2008. Loss 3 games only once during that time.

LSU was not a household name when it came to football until Saban arrived. I've been an SEC fan for a very long time and I don't even recall hearing much from LSU until Saban got there. They have always had phenomenal talent but as far as a program on a national scale I don't think they were relevant.

 

Saban's numbers don't lie. He's been in the title hunt every year since 2008. Loss 3 games only once during that time.

 

So you missed their loss to Nebraska by 1 point in the Orange Bowl in '83 with Dalton Hilliard?

 

You missed Alexander's RB career in the 70's?

 

History of LSU Tigers football - Wikipedia

 

I don't even like LSU but to think they weren't nationally known or respected is not true.

 

That's like saying no one knew Florida State until 1993. They had 11-0 and 10-1 back to back seasons in '79 and '80.

 

Or no one knew Penn State until 1986. Or Texas until Vince Young. You get the picture.

 

FWIW I think Saban may very well be the best ever. I just think there's a debate worth having.

So you missed their loss to Nebraska by 1 point in the Orange Bowl in '83 with Dalton Hilliard?

 

You missed Alexander's RB career in the 70's?

 

History of LSU Tigers football - Wikipedia

 

I don't even like LSU but to think they weren't nationally known or respected is not true.

 

That's like saying no one knew Florida State until 1993. They had 11-0 and 10-1 back to back seasons in '79 and '80.

 

Or no one knew Penn State until 1986. Or Texas until Vince Young. You get the picture.

 

FWIW I think Saban may very well be the best ever. I just think there's a debate worth having.

 

Every team has a one or two loss season. I'm talking about a nationally respected and relevant program that would be in the national conversation almost every year. Locally and maybe in the southeast LSU was a relevant program. You can't put LSU, Texas, and Penn State in the same breath. Texas and Penn State are blue bloods of college football. Texas is the biggest brand name in college football. I've looked at the history of LSU football, and nationally nobody really cared for LSU until Saban got there. Starting in the 30's until about the year 2000 LSU had 4 double digit win seasons. That doesn't make you a nationally relevant program.

Every team has a one or two loss season. I'm talking about a nationally respected and relevant program that would be in the national conversation almost every year. Locally and maybe in the southeast LSU was a relevant program. You can't put LSU, Texas, and Penn State in the same breath. Texas and Penn State are blue bloods of college football. Texas is the biggest brand name in college football. I've looked at the history of LSU football, and nationally nobody really cared for LSU until Saban got there. Starting in the 30's until about the year 2000 LSU had 4 double digit win seasons. That doesn't make you a nationally relevant program.

 

Double digit win seasons were rare prior to the 1970's. Prior to that 10 and 9 game seasons were norm. 1966 Notre Dame and Michigan State are considered two of the greatest of all time. They were both 9-0-1. No double digit win season there.

 

But we are talking semantics here. You need your statement to be true to show how great Saban is and that's fine. Personally I think he doesn't need his LSU record to show how great he is. But you want to show him winning it at 2 different programs which is impressive.

 

But if we are looking at holistic snapshots; His pro career stunk and make's Barry Switzer's look better because he has 3 titles, (another if they weren't on probation), and a Super Bowl Title. :lol2:

I would agree. Except that in this modern era it also gives a coach and team a chance at redemption despite a bad performance. How many titles has Saban won because there was a "2nd chance" under this system? Two? Three?

 

In the old system an upset loss at home to LSU or at Auburn would put them out of contention even if they were the best team in the land. In the current playoff structure there is more room for error or a bad game.

So there are pros and cons as far as comparing the different eras and how a national champion is decided. Either way I still don’t think it’s even close.

Double digit win seasons were rare prior to the 1970's. Prior to that 10 and 9 game seasons were norm. 1966 Notre Dame and Michigan State are considered two of the greatest of all time. They were both 9-0-1. No double digit win season there.

 

But we are talking semantics here. You need your statement to be true to show how great Saban is and that's fine. Personally I think he doesn't need his LSU record to show how great he is. But you want to show him winning it at 2 different programs which is impressive.

 

But if we are looking at holistic snapshots; His pro career stunk and make's Barry Switzer's look better because he has 3 titles, (another if they weren't on probation), and a Super Bowl Title. :lol2:

 

More to the point that LSU wasn't a household name....and Switzer had nothing to do with that super bowl win....lol

More to the point that LSU wasn't a household name....and Switzer had nothing to do with that super bowl win....lol

 

:lol2:

 

Just out of curiosity, who was a household name in your opinion prior to the Bowl Championships?

Does Ara Parsegian get consideration?

 

What about Frank Lehey from Notre Dame?

 

Tom Osborne?

 

Saban has been great. I can’t vote vs him but what good is a discussion without some differing opinions. :idunno:

It's funny how Saban was being written off a few years ago. All he did after that was win 2 out of the next 3 titles (and it could have easily been 3 in a row).

 

For me it's really hard, when I was a kid Alabama seemed to be on more that any other team and I became a fan of them and especially Coach Bryant. What Saban has done is remarkable, but it is more impressive than winning over .700 at Kentucky including a Sugar Bowl win over the #1 team in the country?

 

The old saying about Bryant was that he could take his and beat yours or take your team and beat his.

It's funny how Saban was being written off a few years ago. All he did after that was win 2 out of the next 3 titles (and it could have easily been 3 in a row).

 

For me it's really hard, when I was a kid Alabama seemed to be on more that any other team and I became a fan of them and especially Coach Bryant. What Saban has done is remarkable, but it is more impressive than winning over .700 at Kentucky including a Sugar Bowl win over the #1 team in the country?

 

The old saying about Bryant was that he could take his and beat yours or take your team and beat his.

I guess this question depends on how much emphasis on recruiting in the job description. Just the other day I saw the anonymous coaches poll where one guy ranked Saban as the most overrated coach in the country because anyone could win when you always have the best players in the country (I paraphrased the quote). The way I look at it, recruiting is arguably the biggest part of the job description. Take Dabo for instance, he’s almost unanimously ranked as one of the 3 best coaches in the country. Dabo isn’t a great X’s and O’s guy. Never has been. But he’s a heck of a recruiter. So maybe Bryant would beat Saban in a head to head battle if you gave them teams with equal talent. But there’s so much more to it then that now.

I guess this question depends on how much emphasis on recruiting in the job description. Just the other day I saw the anonymous coaches poll where one guy ranked Saban as the most overrated coach in the country because anyone could win when you always have the best players in the country (I paraphrased the quote). The way I look at it, recruiting is arguably the biggest part of the job description. Take Dabo for instance, he’s almost unanimously ranked as one of the 3 best coaches in the country. Dabo isn’t a great X’s and O’s guy. Never has been. But he’s a heck of a recruiter. So maybe Bryant would beat Saban in a head to head battle if you gave them teams with equal talent. But there’s so much more to it then that now.

 

So you don't think Saban is a great "Coach" just really a great recruiter.

 

Anonymous quotes like that could be from jealousy as much as actual opinions.

So you don't think Saban is a great "Coach" just really a great recruiter.

 

Anonymous quotes like that could be from jealousy as much as actual opinions.

No Saban is a great coach. Whether he’s a better X’s and O’s Coach than Bryant is what it seemed like you were trying to debate. I have no idea how great of an X’s and O’s coach Saban is. Obviously he’s pretty good at it but comparatively I’m clueless. My point is simply it’s better to be a great recruiter than it is to be a great X’s and O’s coach.

No Saban is a great coach. Whether he’s a better X’s and O’s Coach than Bryant is what it seemed like you were trying to debate. I have no idea how great of an X’s and O’s coach Saban is. Obviously he’s pretty good at it but comparatively I’m clueless. My point is simply it’s better to be a great recruiter than it is to be a great X’s and O’s coach.

 

I think he's a much better recruiter than an X's and O's guy. But I agree recruiting is a huge part of coaching in college.

I think he's a much better recruiter than an X's and O's guy. But I agree recruiting is a huge part of coaching in college.

Football responsibilities for a head coach in 2018 in order from most to least importance.

1) Recruiting

2) Hire great assistants

3) Be great X's and O's