If these guys wanted to play it "safe" then they would still be coaching at some junior high school. Coaches want a challenge and taking LSU back to the top would be a challenge that I think both of these coaches would love to tackle.
Refer to his point though, that we're not in a time where it is easy for any particular team to dominate for a length of time. Assuming this is mostly true, which it seems to be IMO, the differences between the potential offered at the two programs isn't much different...
For those of you that dont know, this Neal McCready guy is NOT an Alabama homer. I lived in Mobile for several years before coming to Birmingham and this guy is an Auburn and OlePiss lover. I think he may have even gone to OlePiss. But dont be mistaken, this guy is not an Alabama lacky.
if expecting an LSU team to do well makes me a bad fan then so be it. its not like LSU baseball won the NC's in the 50's, we are talking about the 90's here. should we not expect the football team to stay at the level it is now, playing for SEC championships on a regular basis? i'd much rather be apart (player/coach/fan) of a team that expects to win then a team thats satisfied with being middle of the pack. sorry if that makes me apart of the worst fan base in the country. how about we give DUHnardo a few more years? he won as much as Smoke.
Funny for a writer from Alabama to make comments like this when Bama fired Bill Curry for doing nothing but winning football games. They were already ready to dump Shula when all did was come in and save them from the ultimate disaster of firing a strip bar junkie coach. Point is, I lived in Alabama for 10 years and LSU fans are no tougher, I say even less tough, on coaches than Alabama and Auburn or Florida or Tennessee is. It's overblown. Smoke was an unlikeable guy and the program declined every year he was here in multiple ways. Feel sorry for the guy if you want to, but he deserved to go and he got it. Now with Bianco or Wells I think we'll be fine. We just need to go get them.
Just by reading the excerpts, this guy is an idiot. First, he contradicts himself left and right---wouldn't coaches with "big egos" *want* to go to a school that bankrolls its program, giving the coach all the weapons necessary to dominate? Using his logic, a whip-smart young football coach at, say, a mid-major school who is lord of his realm (kinda like Dan Hawkins at Boise St) shouldn't take the Alabama job (?) In a stud conference like the SEC--where previously #1 ranked Florida didn't even make the NCAAs--coaches need every edge they can get to be competitive every season. Why stay in a place like Oxford and shoot pop-guns when you can go to Baton Rouge and have freaking howitzers in your arsenal, capice? Makes no sense...and what's with the insinuations that Bertman, well, cheated some sort of way? "Steroids", "aluminum bats"? What a jackhole.
I don't think either would be a "loser" if they don't come to LSU. If offered, both may have valid reasons for remaining at Ole Miss and Bama. But the writer refers to each of them playing it "safe" by remaining where they are. That is a "loser attitude." I doubt that either of these coaches wouldn't come to LSU because it presents too much of a challenge for them. Quite frankly, I don't want a coach here that doesn't fully believe he can come here and win big and be successful. Any coach who believes the LSU job is too much of a "challenge" can stay where he is !
so an Ole Myth homer calling LSU fans unrealistic? who was that football team that fired its most successful coach in 40 years, 1 year removed from a 10 win season? oh right... lefire:
