Great analysis, I would love to see Cooper's record of losses for comparison’s sake.
It really comes down to what you prefer, the big game coach that wins most of his 'big' games but then stubs their toe too frequently to lesser competition. Or a coach that wins most of the games he should win, rarely losing to lesser teams, but then losing in the big games.
I can see why people prefer the Carroll type coach. You can thump your chest at the big wins, but then when you lose to a Stanford or UCLA, you at least can rest on the fact that you were the more talented team. Versus never losing to lesser teams, but losing in most of your big games, the fans then don’t have a chance to gloat after big victories and you have questions on whether your team has the talent to win the big games.
It really comes down to what you prefer, the big game coach that wins most of his 'big' games but then stubs their toe too frequently to lesser competition. Or a coach that wins most of the games he should win, rarely losing to lesser teams, but then losing in the big games.
I can see why people prefer the Carroll type coach. You can thump your chest at the big wins, but then when you lose to a Stanford or UCLA, you at least can rest on the fact that you were the more talented team. Versus never losing to lesser teams, but losing in most of your big games, the fans then don’t have a chance to gloat after big victories and you have questions on whether your team has the talent to win the big games.
Upvote
0

