Brian "Body Kount" Kelly (HC Louisiana State)

[matcar]

I agree, but at Arkansas, he will be under extra pressure to out perform Houston Nutt, especially in the eyes of those who did not want to run Houson out of town on a rail.

Most people DID want to run HDN out of Arky, so Petrino has solid backing and I can tell you that most will be happy if his record is similar to that of Nutt so long as the offense includes passing formations and an occasional 10 win season. Mission accomplished on the first part...the second part...well that's not going to be easy, but goals never are easy...that's why they're goals.

As for Kelly, if rumors are to be believed that he is NOT a real candidate for ND, where would be the next stopping point for him?

 

[Woody1968]

Most people DID want to run HDN out of Arky, so Petrino has solid backing and I can tell you that most will be happy if his record is similar to that of Nutt so long as the offense includes passing formations and an occasional 10 win season. Mission accomplished on the first part...the second part...well that's not going to be easy, but goals never are easy...that's why they're goals.

As for Kelly, if rumors are to be believed that he is NOT a real candidate for ND, where would be the next stopping point for him?

If he doesn't get an offer at Notre Dame, I would expect to see him someplace like Colorado or Virginia. A BCS conference middle of the pack team. I actually think he would be a good fit at UVA. If he is a good recruiter, like people say, he should be able to land some of that tidewater area talent.

 

[Sportsbuck28]

Since Kelly is a hot name for some soon-to-be-vacant coaching jobs, I thought that I'd bump this thread.

Here are the before and after records of the last four hot shot Big East coaches to take the step up to big boy conferences:

John L. Smith
41 - 21 (.661) in 5 years at Louisville
22 - 26 (.458) in 4 years at Michigan State

Bobby Petrino
41 - 9 (.820) in 4 years at Louisville
11 - 11 (.500) in 1+ years at Arkansas

Rich Rodriguez
60 - 26 (.698) in 7 years at West Virginia
8 - 15 (.348) in 1+ years at Michigan

Mark Dantonio
18 - 17 (.514) in 3 years at Cincinnati
22 - 15 (.595) in 2+ years at Michigan State

So, of the four coaches who went from Big East to Big Ten or SEC schools, only Dantonio has had more success after the move, and the other three had significantly less success.

One word about Dantonio's performance ... in the years between the retirement of CFB Hall of Famer Sid Gillman in 1954 and the hiring of Mark Dantonio in 2004, the eleven head coaches for the University of Cincinnati football team had a combined record of 225-291-12 (.438), so Dantonio's was far better (nearly 20% better) than the Bearcats' average over the previous five decades. In addition, Brian Kelly has put together three straight 10-win seasons largely with Dantonio's players. Those two facts support the argument that Dantonio's level of success at Cincinnati was not adequately reflected in his overall record, and they should be kept in mind when comparing Dantonio's apparently greater success at Michigan State (.595 winning percentage) than at Cincinnati (.514 winning percentage). In other words, I feel that Dantonio is currently doing about the same at Michigan State than he did at Cincinnati, even though his records at both schools suggest that he has been even more successful since taking a step up in conference difficulty.

Yes, but how many of those "hot shot coaches" had as much success as Kelly did at previous head coaching stops up the ladder?

I checked, and those were the first head coaching jobs for both Dantonio and Petrino.

 

[xcrunner]

If ND/TSUN don't want him, perhaps he will replace the Zooker... his time at Illinois might be running short. If they're willing to put in the money, he'd be a good fit with midwest/ohio ties.

 

[sepia5]

If ND/TSUN don't want him, perhaps he will replace the Zooker... his time at Illinois might be running short. If they're willing to put in the money, he'd be a good fit with midwest/ohio ties.

I honestly don't know if Illinois would even be an upgrade, so long as UC is truly willing to develop their football program (read: spend money on it). There's something to be said for taking Ohio State's seconds and occassionally stealing a big time recruit, marching through a soft Big East schedule, and consistently sneaking into the top-10 and a BCS bowl as a result. At Illinois, you may be able to churn out a Big Ten title once a decade or so, but, on the whole, you're probably playing fourth fiddle to OSU, Michigan, and Penn State.

Let me ask this, and I'll try to be as narrow as I can with this question. When was the last time a coach actually elevated a mid-level program from the Big Ten, SEC, Pac-10, or Big XII to consistent, national-contender status? The Big East and ACC are second tier BCS conferences, IMO, so I'm not necessarily so concerned with them.

In the Big Ten, I'd say OSU, Michigan, and Penn State are excluded from this conversation, because they have qualified as the type of national-contender program I'm talking about for some time now. Same goes for programs like Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas, and USC. Nebraska and arguably Tennessee were once on this list, though they've fallen on hard times right now. If you exclude those programs, we're probably talking about a handful of SEC teams. Georgia, LSU, and Auburn for instance. But even those three schools haven pretty storied histories. I'm thinking you may have to go back to Spurrier taking over at Florida, if you want to be completely honest.

I guess my point is that it isn't easy to take what is historically a mid-level program from the Big 10, SEC, Big XII or Pac-10 and convert it into a consistent top-10, conference and national championship contending program. A lot of things have come together. One thing worth pointing out is that you've probably got to have an abundance of in-state talent that you can lock up by convincing kids that you're going to stick around and alter the face of the program. I don't think Illinois will ever be a program that can consistently compete with OSU, PSU and Michigan. In fact, I'm not sure there's a school in the Big Ten that can. Barry Alvarez did his best at Wisconsin to make that leap, but I'm not sure he ever crossed the threshold, and Wisconsin certainly isn't on par with those three aforementioned programs these days. If Kelly can't land a gig at a Notre Dame, a Michigan, an Oklahoma, an LSU or a Nebraska, why not just stay at UC and bask in the glory of an easy road to the BCS most years? Seems better than coaching at Illinois or Arizona State to me.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Barry Alvarez did his best at Wisconsin to make that leap, but I'm not sure he ever crossed the threshold, and Wisconsin certainly isn't on par with those three aforementioned programs these days.

I would totally disagree. I think Wisconsin has absolutely risen to the top level of the conference and sustained it over the last twenty years. No B10 program, over that period, has had the run that Ohio State has had since 2002, but Wiscy has easily been the equal of Michigan and superior to Penn State.

Illinois has always been something of a sleeping giant. When they finally do get the right coach he either leaves or gets them put on probation. If they can avoid that with Kelly and Kelly can do a Tressel with in-state talent, Illinois very easily could rise to the top tier of the conference and be a national contender on a perennial basis.

 

[xcrunner]

I would totally disagree. I think Wisconsin has absolutely risen to the top level of the conference and sustained it over the last twenty years. No B10 program, over that period, has had the run that Ohio State has had since 2002, but Wiscy has easily been the equal of Michigan and superior to Penn State.

Illinois has always been something of a sleeping giant. When they finally do get the right coach he either leaves or gets them put on probation. If they can avoid that with Kelly and Kelly can do a Tressel with in-state talent, Illinois very easily could rise to the top tier of the conference and be a national contender on a perennial basis.

Agreed.

In many ways, Illinois is a step down from UC at the moment.
But--
1) Cinci is in big economic trouble. They can't even sell out their 30,000 seat stadium or whatever. At least Illinois has better resources.

2) Speaking of which, Illinois could probably draw Kelly with the big dollar, if they're willing to make that commitment.

3) Cinci relies on second-tier Ohio talent to be successful. Kelly's done a good job of that, but it's going to be hard as hell for any Ohio school to be perenially successful with Ohio State dominating in-state recruiting. Illinois has the advantage of being the state school, and it's possible to lock up that talent. Zook has gotten lots of talent there, he's just an awful coach.

4) I do think it's possible for a mid-tier B10 school to 'rise up'. There is a void right now, and has been for a little bit. If Illinois decides to make a commitment right now, they could build something special while TSUN is down.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Not to mention that Cincy is culturally a professional sports town. If the Bengals have really turned a corner and are on the verge of putting together a nice 5-6 year run, a lot of these newfound UC fanatics will suddenly lose interest and break out their dormant Bengal jerseys.

Illinois' is a flagship Big Ten university. While its alumni presence here in Chicago is somewhat diluted by the area's strong concentrations of the other Big Ten schools along with some other strong alumni presences (Texas in particular) and Chicago's historic ties to Notre Dame, Illinois has a much stronger OHio State like downstate presence, which shouldn't be overlooked.

The key to recruiting Illinois is not the city league. Illinois football talent is concentrated in the Chicago suburbs and downstate.

 

[sepia5]

I would totally disagree. I think Wisconsin has absolutely risen to the top level of the conference and sustained it over the last twenty years. No B10 program, over that period, has had the run that Ohio State has had since 2002, but Wiscy has easily been the equal of Michigan and superior to Penn State.

Illinois has always been something of a sleeping giant. When they finally do get the right coach he either leaves or gets them put on probation. If they can avoid that with Kelly and Kelly can do a Tressel with in-state talent, Illinois very easily could rise to the top tier of the conference and be a national contender on a perennial basis.

As of 1993, the year Penn State began conference play in the Big Ten, these are the overall results:

Team - conference record - conf. winning % - overall record - overall winning %

1. Ohio State - 105-29-1 - .781 - 168-43-1 - .795
2. Michigan - 94-41-0 - .696 - 146-63 - .699
3. Penn State - 85-50-0 - .630 - 145-62 - .700
4. Wisconsin - 79-53-3 - .596 - 142-65-4 - .682

Big Ten Championships since 1993:

Ohio State - 3 championships (assuming we win tomorrow); 6 co-championships.

Michigan - 2 championships; 3 co-championships

Penn State - 1 championship; 2 co-championships

Wisconsin - 1 championship; 2 co-championships



A few other things:

• If you want to go back a full 20 years to 1989, Michigan won championships in 1989, 1991, and 1992 (and if you go back to 1988, they won one that year, too). They won a co-championship in 1990.
• Although Wisconsin has been routinely competitive since Alvarez won his first conference championship in 1993, they haven't won a Big Ten championship for 10 years now. Michigan has won 3 championships since 1999; Penn State has won two.
• Since Alvarez came to Madison, Wisconsin has won exactly one Big Ten championship when a guy named Ron Dayne was not taking the hand offs.

I hate scUM as much as the next guy, but there's no way Wisconsin has been their equal over the course of the last 20 years.

It's a closer call with Penn State, but I still think Penn State has been slightly better for a variety of reasons, and, if we're talking about program strength, there's no question Penn State has an advantage in the recruiting column. If you want to go back 20 years and look at how each program performed on a national level, consider this:

Top 10 finishes since 1989 (year and final ranking), per the AP, which I use since the BCS has only been around since 1998:

Penn State - 1991(3), 1993(8), 1994(2), 1996(7), 2005(3), 2008(8)
Wisconsin - 1993(6), 1998(6), 1999(4), 2006(7)

So Wisconsin has never been as serious a national title contender as PSU was in 1994.

Alvarez elevated Wisconsin, but I don't know that he put them in the category I'm talking about. Seems to me that, on the whole, it's Ohio State and Michigan in the Big Ten, with Penn State just behind, and Wisconsin in another category a step lower.

And as far as Illinois goes, I don't see any foundation for calling them a "sleeping giant," but that's a whole nother conversation. My larger point in all of this, though, is that a coach could probably attain more success--in terms of BCS appearances and wins and losses--at a top-flight Big East school like Cincinnati than at a mid-level Big Ten, Pac-10, Big XII or SEC school like Illinois or Arizona State or Texas A&M. And that, in addition, even the most promising of coaches often are unable to convert a mid-level power-4 conference program into a perennial conference and national championship contender. In other words, if Kelly can't land a job at a Notre Dame, or a Michigan, or an Oklahoma, or an LSU, I think he'd be better served staying at UC, continuing to pound that competition and recruit Ohio and the Midwest well, and eventually get his shot at one of those already-established programs.

 

[sepia5]

Not to mention that Cincy is culturally a professional sports town. If the Bengals have really turned a corner and are on the verge of putting together a nice 5-6 year run, a lot of these newfound UC fanatics will suddenly lose interest and break out their dormant Bengal jerseys.

I see what you're saying, and there may be some truth in it as that argument pertains to UC, but as a general matter, I actually think it helps a strong college program NOT to have to compete with a pro team. Think about the big time college football programs that can fill massive stadiums: Ohio State, Mighigan, Penn State, Tennessee, Florida, LSU, Oklahoma, Texas. They're all schools that don't have a major pro football team in the same city with which to compete. Now consider and compare the fan bases at other college football programs located in NFL markets that have had a general level of success over the course of the past 20 years or so. BCS conference football schools that exist in major NFL markets don't always get the support that schools that are located in non-NFL markets get (think USC, Miami(FL), Georgia Tech, Boston College, etc.)

 

[sepia5]

4) I do think it's possible for a mid-tier B10 school to 'rise up'. There is a void right now, and has been for a little bit. If Illinois decides to make a commitment right now, they could build something special while TSUN is down.

That's an interesting argument, but I would probably counter with the Big XII as an example. The historical powerhouses in that conference have been Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska. Nebraska has fallen on hard times like scUM has, but have been in that position for several years now. In the meantime, Oklahoma and Texas have dominated, but I don't know that anyone else has really stepped up to their level. Texas Tech has been pretty good, but not consistent enough and they've really done it with scheming, something that accomplishes both big wins and horrible losses. Oklahoma State has probably improved as a program marginally, but they still aren't a perennial contender, IMO. It's just not an easy thing to do. It's not unprecedented, as the Florida example proves, but it's very rare.

It also doesn't help Illinois that their football program is going to have to compete with, and probably lose to, the basketball program. At Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, LSU, Florida, Alabama, USC, etc., there may be basketball success every now and then (more often than not at some schools (OSU, Texas, Oklahoma)), but it's no secret which sport is king. I have a hard time thinking football will reign supreme at Illinois anytime in the near future. I'm aware that the same problem exists at UC, I'm just observing this as a general challenge for anyone that wants to coach at Illinois.

 

[Oh8ch]

Brian Kelly has put together three straight 10-win seasons largely with Dantonio's players.

For the record (and using Scout depth charts as my source), Cincy starts 8 Seniors and 3 Juniors on Offense, 7 Seniors and 4 Juniors on D. ALL of their skill position starters are Seniors.

Explains why he wasn't anxious to leave last year and might be hell bent on getting out of Dodge this time around.

(By way of comparison, Texas starts a total of 8 Seniors, OSU 7, Florida 6.)

 

[xcrunner]

That's an interesting argument, but I would probably counter with the Big XII as an example. The historical powerhouses in that conference have been Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska. Nebraska has fallen on hard times like scUM has, but have been in that position for several years now. In the meantime, Oklahoma and Texas have dominated, but I don't know that anyone else has really stepped up to their level. Texas Tech has been pretty good, but not consistent enough and they've really done it with scheming, something that accomplishes both big wins and horrible losses. Oklahoma State has probably improved as a program marginally, but they still aren't a perennial contender, IMO. It's just not an easy thing to do. It's not unprecedented, as the Florida example proves, but it's very rare.

It also doesn't help Illinois that their football program is going to have to compete with, and probably lose to, the basketball program. At Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, LSU, Florida, Alabama, USC, etc., there may be basketball success every now and then (more often than not at some schools (OSU, Texas, Oklahoma)), but it's no secret which sport is king. I have a hard time thinking football will reign supreme at Illinois anytime in the near future. I'm aware that the same problem exists at UC, I'm just observing this as a general challenge for anyone that wants to coach at Illinois.

Your basketball point is well-noted, and a good one.
But--
Consider the difference between Florida and Okie St/TTech. Specifically- the coaches. Florida, with a historically not-particularly-impressive football team, followed on the success of Spurrier with the notion "we are going to become a perennial power", hired Zook, and then fired him because that success was not enough--and hired Meyer. In essence, they made the decision to put the $$ in and build a football program, got a great coach, and now they're reaping the benefits. The Big 12 schools did not do this.

If Illinois wants to become a 'power'--not as good as Florida, but a big step up from where they are right now--they might want to consider courting Kelly.

 

[sepia5]

Your basketball point is well-noted, and a good one.
But--
Consider the difference between Florida and Okie St/TTech. Specifically- the coaches. Florida, with a historically not-particularly-impressive football team, followed on the success of Spurrier with the notion "we are going to become a perennial power", hired Zook, and then fired him because that success was not enough--and hired Meyer. In essence, they made the decision to put the $$ in and build a football program, got a great coach, and now they're reaping the benefits. The Big 12 schools did not do this.

If Illinois wants to become a 'power'--not as good as Florida, but a big step up from where they are right now--they might want to consider courting Kelly.

Well, ok. Maybe they just didn't spend the money well.

One last thing I'll say about the idea of Illinois rising up while scUM is down. While I agree that it is possible that a mid-tier Big Ten football program could get to the next level if it played its cards right, what I've seen so far is that the remaining two elite conference powers--OSU and PSU--seem to be benefitting the most from scUM's floundering. I think a lot of Michigan-caliber recruits are choosing to attend OSU and PSU, in particular, rather than Michigan. Maybe that is more attributable to the change in player RichRod is targetting nowadays (you know, MAC-level talent and 165 pounders), but I think it's happened to some extent because of the instability and uncertainty in Ann Arbor.

 

[ScriptOhio]

Cincinnati coach Brian Kelly was given a chance to give the Urban Meyer "I'm here as long as they'll have me" answer at his press conference Tuesday. He didn't. But he downplayed talk about his future, i.e, the Notre Dame job. "I can only be honest with (the players). This is the silly season. We've been having this conversation the last two years. The truth is this happens every year. It will continue to happen while I'm at the University of Cincinnati because nobody thinks Cincinnati is a destination job. It just happens that way." Kelly has talked with schools about openings in the past. "The process is after the season. . . after you're done, looking at what are the best opportunities for you, your family and your program. It comes back to the same thing: Cincinnati is a great place to be. "I don't know where there's Skyline. I don't know where there's Graeter's."

Entire article: Cincinnati.Com | Cincinnati Enquirer | UC Athletics Blog ? Kelly on his future, QB situation, Illinois