Appears BOT will rubber stamp CJF extension/contract extended

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

And nothing but fine coaching led to those results (hint hint, nudge nudge, wink wink).

ha ha. Can't argue that. But if we could remove cheating from CFB, the list of top programs would look very different.

I'm proud of our program. But USC is rarely a fair standard for comparison, even when they're not setting the world on fire, which they have done several times.

 

[MJG-90]

Ok. "Pete Carroll era, which was only a few years"

9 full seasons isn't "a few years" and could only be deemed so minimal on a very long timeline. And it was one heck of a few years. Here they were:

2009 4 3 22 Pete Carroll (9-4) Emerald Bowl-W
2008 3 1 3 Pete Carroll (12-1) Rose Bowl-W
2007 1 1 3 Pete Carroll (11-2) Rose Bowl-W
2006 6 2 4 Pete Carroll (11-2) Rose Bowl-W
2005 1 1 2 Pete Carroll (12-1) Rose Bowl-L record adjusted to 0-1-0 by NCAA
2004 1 1 1 Pete Carroll (13-0) Orange Bowl-W record adjusted to 11-0-0 by NCAA
2003 8 1 1 Pete Carroll (12-1) Rose Bowl-W
2002 20 4 4 Pete Carroll (11-2) Orange Bowl-W
2001 Pete Carroll (6-6) Las Vegas Bowl-L

Note: the three numbers after the year are AP Pre-season, AP High and AP Post-season rankings. His first year was the only one where they weren't top-5 at some point.

Here's the top programs of all time:
https://soonersports.com/sports/2019/8/13/208798542.aspx

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...istory-alabama-fsu-nebraska-oklahoma-michigan
Here's also the top ten by decade. They showed up 3 times as top ten by decade. Not great considering their company. But as the author said, when they're good, they're on fire.

Even when they've struggled, they've rarely been worst than mediocre.

Am I reading that ranking incorrectly? Penn State doesn't show up in the 1980's -- the decade they won two national championships? Interesting way to rank teams I guess.

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

Am I reading that ranking incorrectly? Penn State doesn't show up in the 1980's -- the decade they won two national championships? Interesting way to rank teams I guess.

top ten by % required nearly 87% wins. We only had 3 seasons with a higher winning percentage.

83, 84, 87, 88 and 89 pulled down our overall performance over the decade. Weird, huh?

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/penn-state/index.html

 

[MJG-90]

top ten by % required nearly 87% wins. We only had 3 seasons with a higher winning percentage.

83, 84, 87, 88 and 89 pulled down our overall performance over the decade. Weird, huh?

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/penn-state/index.html

Weird and a stupid way to rank teams. We won two NCs and played for a third. That’s a dream decade. I’ll take the 8-4’s in between if you guaranteed me that for the next decade.

 

[Howie'81]

Ok. "Pete Carroll era, which was only a few years"

9 full seasons isn't "a few years" and could only be deemed so minimal on a very long timeline. And it was one heck of a few years. Here they were:

2009 4 3 22 Pete Carroll (9-4) Emerald Bowl-W
2008 3 1 3 Pete Carroll (12-1) Rose Bowl-W
2007 1 1 3 Pete Carroll (11-2) Rose Bowl-W
2006 6 2 4 Pete Carroll (11-2) Rose Bowl-W
2005 1 1 2 Pete Carroll (12-1) Rose Bowl-L record adjusted to 0-1-0 by NCAA
2004 1 1 1 Pete Carroll (13-0) Orange Bowl-W record adjusted to 11-0-0 by NCAA
2003 8 1 1 Pete Carroll (12-1) Rose Bowl-W
2002 20 4 4 Pete Carroll (11-2) Orange Bowl-W
2001 Pete Carroll (6-6) Las Vegas Bowl-L

Note: the three numbers after the year are AP Pre-season, AP High and AP Post-season rankings. His first year was the only one where they weren't top-5 at some point.

Here's the top programs of all time:
https://soonersports.com/sports/2019/8/13/208798542.aspx

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...istory-alabama-fsu-nebraska-oklahoma-michigan
Here's also the top ten by decade. They showed up 3 times as top ten by decade. Not great considering their company. But as the author said, when they're good, they're on fire.

Even when they've struggled, they've rarely been worst than mediocre.

Okay, time for me to totally shoot you down with real facts:

USC Record by Decade Since 1980 (that's 40 years):
Wins Losses Ties Win %
80 - 89 78 36 3 67%
90 - 99 68 49 4 56%
00 - 09 102 26 0 80% (2001 - 2009 were Pete Carroll years)
10 - 19 86 44 0 66%
40 years 334 155 7 67%

A cursory glance at these numbers 100% supports what I said about USC's mediocrity outside the Pete Carroll years. 100%. And 40 years is a long time. Ask Pitt.

Would PSU fans accept their decade of the 80's at 67%? No!
Would PSU fans accept their decade of the 90's at 56%? Hell no!
The next decade was the Pete Carroll years which I originally acknowledged were terrific, but not Bama terrific.
And from 10 to 19, they reverted back to 1980s mediocrity after Petey left.

And even with the 9 years of Petey, USC has a 40 year win % of 67%. As I said in the first place. Mediocre. Certainly no juggernaut program.

One more stat: If you subtract the decade of 00 - 09, 9 of which were the Petey years, USC has a win percentage of 64% for the other 30 years. And the boneheads here cry over 10 - 2. Frankly, I wouldn't want to be USC.

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

Weird and a stupid way to rank teams. We won two NCs and played for a third. That’s a dream decade. I’ll take the 8-4’s in between if you guaranteed me that for the next decade.

I completely agree with the perspective, which is why I took issue with the point about USC's periods of mediocrity above. Being competitive on a regular basis (like almost always having winning seasons and mostly staying above 8 wins) and occasionally setting the world on fire is the MO of nearly every top program.

Nearly every top program has had droughts--we even had a few in arguably our greatest decade. USC had some last longer than expected but they keep rising back up and setting the world on fire. I'll disagree with anyone who suggests a program like that isn't a threat to PSU. They're not getting our coach. But let's not assume they couldn't steal some other top program's coach, or that some other top program couldn't steal ours, even if that program is in a drought.

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

Okay, time for me to totally shoot you down with real facts:

USC Record by Decade Since 1980 (that's 40 years):
Wins Losses Ties Win %
80 - 89 78 36 3 67%
90 - 99 68 49 4 56%
00 - 09 102 26 0 80% (2001 - 2009 were Pete Carroll years)
10 - 19 86 44 0 66%
40 years 334 155 7 67%

A cursory glance at these numbers 100% supports what I said about USC's mediocrity outside the Pete Carroll years. 100%. And 40 years is a long time. Ask Pitt.

Would PSU fans accept their decade of the 80's at 67%? No!
Would PSU fans accept their decade of the 90's at 56%? Hell no!
The next decade was the Pete Carroll years which I originally acknowledged were terrific, but not Bama terrific.
And from 10 to 19, they reverted back to 1980s mediocrity after Petey left.

And even with the 9 years of Petey, USC has a 40 year win % of 67%. As I said in the first place. Mediocre. Certainly no juggernaut program.

One more stat: If you subtract the decade of 00 - 09, 9 of which were the Petey years, USC has a win percentage of 64% for the other 30 years. And the boneheads here cry over 10 - 2. Frankly, I wouldn't want to be USC.

We have very different perspectives on what it means to be mediocre. What you wrote leads me to the opposite conclusion. You view 67% as mediocre. Meanwhile, there are only 12 programs with winning percentages above 67%. And there are only 13 programs above 67 in the last 50 years. USC is 7th at .723 and we're 6th at .731

https://247sports.com/LongFormArtic...gest-programs-50-years-130939670/#130939670_2

And they beat us in the Rose Bowl during this current fantastic era under CJF.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Howie'81]

We have very different perspectives on what it means to be mediocre. What you wrote leads me to the opposite conclusion. You view 67% as mediocre. Meanwhile, there are only 12 programs with winning percentages above 67%. And there are only 13 programs above 67 in the last 50 years. USC is 7th at .723 and we're 6th at .731

https://247sports.com/LongFormArtic...gest-programs-50-years-130939670/#130939670_2

And they beat us in the Rose Bowl during this current fantastic era under CJF.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

A 1 game barnburner in a head to head is your sample size and you want me to take you seriously. Please!

No, you're just wrong. If USC is better than mediocre, then PSU is freaking fantastic. More numbers over the past 4 decades only this time I'll show you PSU's record and this includes the dark years of 2001 to 2004 and the scandal/sanction ridden years of 2010 to 2019:

80 - 89 Wins - 89 Losses - 28 Ties - 2 W% - 75%
90 - 99 Wins - 97 Losses - 26 W% - 79%
00 - 09 Wins - 77 Losses - 46 W% - 63% (half this decade was the dark years, but much better than USC's decade of the 90's)
10 - 19 Wins - 86 Losses - 42 W% - 67% (this decade with scandal and sanctions equals USC's 40 year W%)

40 years Wins - 349 Losses - 142 Ties - 2 W% - 71%

Penn State exceeds USC in every decade except 2000 - 2009, which were the Petey years versus our dark years early in the decade. Penn State far exceeds USC in the 80's and 90's and is even slightly better in this decade despite draconian sanctions. I know USC dealt with some sanctions too, but not nearly to the level PSU did.

So since you love USC's program so much, you must be crazy about PSU's. If you're not, then maybe you're a little cockeyed in your analysis. Oh, and since you added the 70s to USC's resume, PSU was terrific in the 70's too.

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

A 1 game barnburner in a head to head is your sample size and you want me to take you seriously. Please!

No, you're just wrong. If USC is better than mediocre, then PSU is freaking fantastic. More numbers over the past 4 decades only this time I'll show you PSU's record and this includes the dark years of 2001 to 2004 and the scandal/sanction ridden years of 2010 to 2019:

80 - 89 Wins - 89 Losses - 28 Ties - 2 W% - 75%
90 - 99 Wins - 97 Losses - 26 W% - 79%
00 - 09 Wins - 77 Losses - 46 W% - 63% (half this decade was the dark years, but much better than USC's decade of the 90's)
10 - 19 Wins - 86 Losses - 42 W% - 67% (this decade with scandal and sanctions equals USC's 40 year W%)

40 years Wins - 349 Losses - 142 Ties - 2 W% - 71%

USC Record by Decade Since 1980 (that's 40 years):
Wins Losses Ties Win %
80 - 89 78 36 3 67%
90 - 99 68 49 4 56%
00 - 09 102 26 0 80% (2001 - 2009 were Pete Carroll years)
10 - 19 86 44 0 66%
40 years 334 155 7 67%
Penn State exceeds USC in every decade except 2000 - 2009, which were the Petey years versus our dark years early in the decade. Penn State far exceeds USC in the 80's and 90's and is even slightly better in this decade despite draconian sanctions. I know USC dealt with some sanctions too, but not nearly to the level PSU did.

So since you love USC's program so much, you must be crazy about PSU's. If you're not, then maybe you're a little cockeyed in your analysis. Oh, and since you added the 70s to USC's resume, PSU was terrific in the 70's too.

I added the 70s because running 50 year searches made my research easier when arguing mediocrity over decades.

Yes, I am VERY proud of Penn State's performance over the past 4, 5, and 6 decades. And that includes the early 00s. So I have to ask, are you? PSU's achievements have been darned impressive by all objective measures. I'm no USC fan. I'm a Penn State fan. But unless you view PSU's performance as much worse than I do, you shouldn't have a very far look down your nose at them.

I'll give this little baby to you again: There are only 13 programs above 67 in the last 50 years. USC is 7th at .723 and we're 6th at .731

 

[Howie'81]

I added the 70s because running 50 year searches made my research easier when arguing mediocrity over decades.

Yes, I am VERY proud of Penn State's performance over the past 4, 5, and 6 decades. And that includes the early 00s. So I have to ask, are you? PSU's achievements have been darned impressive by all objective measures. I'm no USC fan. I'm a Penn State fan. But unless you view PSU's performance as much worse than I do, you shouldn't have a very far look down your nose at them.

I'll give this little baby to you again: There are only 13 programs above 67 in the last 50 years. USC is 7th at .723 and we're 6th at .731

Okay, then what's the problem? People come here all the time saying USC is a better place than PSU for football. That's delusional based on the last 40 or 50 year history. PSU has out performed them. So if PSU isn't considered "elite" whatever the hell that means, then USC certainly isn't.

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

Okay, then what's the problem? People come here all the time saying USC is a better place than PSU for football. That's delusional based on the last 40 or 50 year history. PSU has out performed them. So if PSU isn't considered "elite" whatever the hell that means, then USC certainly isn't.

Consider the context of the discussion, which is (really, was) about other top programs that may seek to lure our coach away. Part of your point re: USC was their decades of mediocrity. I disagreed. But on-field performance is only one factor in whether a top job would appeal to a top coach. Look at USC's advantages in recruiting, weather and glitz of LA, resources and without nearly the same on-field or recruiting challenges B1G, SEC, Florida or Texas programs deal with. Seriously, what don't they have? The place is full of advantages, including advantages over PSU?

The current on-field elite talk is different. Yes, PSU is an elite program. But it's not where anyone currently wants it to be. CJF wants to get where Carroll, et al are or have been. So the discussion wasn't about whether the situation at PSU is a great or even top one, whether he's succeeding, etc.. The issue is where is the best place for top talent, given all each place has to offer. If one would consider a cross-country move, it's hard to imagine a more advantageous place.

 

[Howie'81]

Consider the context of the discussion, which is (really, was) about other top programs that may seek to lure our coach away. Part of your point re: USC was their decades of mediocrity. I disagreed. But on-field performance is only one factor in whether a top job would appeal to a top coach. Look at USC's advantages in recruiting, weather and glitz of LA, resources and without nearly the same on-field or recruiting challenges B1G, SEC, Florida or Texas programs deal with. Seriously, what don't they have? The place is full of advantages, including advantages over PSU?

The current on-field elite talk is different. Yes, PSU is an elite program. But it's not where anyone currently wants it to be. CJF wants to get where Carroll, et al are or have been. So the discussion wasn't about whether the situation at PSU is a great or even top one, whether he's succeeding, etc.. The issue is where is the best place for top talent, given all each place has to offer. If one would consider a cross-country move, it's hard to imagine a more advantageous place.

Okay, we're nearly in agreement except for one thing: If USC has these advantages, why hasn't it translated to better performance? It's a really great question because as I've shown, for 40 years or so, they haven't, on the whole done as well as PSU. Had a great run under Petey, but pretty mundane before and after that.

 

[grad83psu]

You're a weird dude.

Probably not a dude, but she's working on it!!!

 

[butchnitt]

Too funny - he gets more money and then walks to FSU - they must be drinking too much swamp water down there.

Didn’t Bill O’Brian do just that?

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

Okay, we're nearly in agreement except for one thing: If USC has these advantages, why hasn't it translated to better performance? It's a really great question because as I've shown, for 40 years or so, they haven't, on the whole done as well as PSU. Had a great run under Petey, but pretty mundane before and after that.

Well for starters, I still don't agree on mundane. The're 5th all-time, ahead of Notre Dame, Nebraska and us. And they're just behind us at 7th over the past 50 years.

But if you're asking why they still lost games and weren't as consistent at the top as others, I don't have your answer. They've played respectable schedules and the PAC hasn't been as top-heavy as other conferences and there used to be more overall parity in college football (elite has changed, recruiting nationally, etc.), but that doesn't explain it. One factor at various times was likely competition from the NFL, which is returning, but I really dunno... except to still disagree with the premise they're not elite. If they're not, how is Penn State?

 

[PSU123281]

I agree with you. What does that have to do with wishing Franklin (and staff) was a better in-game football coach and tactician?

I don’t agree with the idea that he gets out coached on a weekly basis. There are obvious ways to improve, but I don’t agree it’s as bad as some on here make it sound.

 

[heckmans]

Well for starters, I still don't agree on mundane. The're 5th all-time, ahead of Notre Dame, Nebraska and us. And they're just behind us at 7th over the past 50 years.

But if you're asking why they still lost games and weren't as consistent at the top as others, I don't have your answer. They've played respectable schedules and the PAC hasn't been as top-heavy as other conferences and there used to be more overall parity in college football (elite has changed, recruiting nationally, etc.), but that doesn't explain it. One factor at various times was likely competition from the NFL, which is returning, but I really dunno... except to still disagree with the premise they're not elite. If they're not, how is Penn State?

As they say, lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Just to be clear, your stats are for 50 years which would include 3 claimed NCs in the 70s. I'd probably lump the 70s in with their 2 NCs in the 60s as a period of being elite.
Howie and others have noted that, looking at the 40 year period since USC won their last NC (1978), they have been clearly mediocre except for the "cheating years" under Petey that saw a BCS championship vacated.
Measuring over the previous 40 years, PSU certainly has been more successful than USC.

 

[Art]

Didn’t Bill O’Brian do just that?

Took him a year. But he got his buyout reduced in the interim.

 

[Howie'81]

Well for starters, I still don't agree on mundane. The're 5th all-time, ahead of Notre Dame, Nebraska and us. And they're just behind us at 7th over the past 50 years.

But if you're asking why they still lost games and weren't as consistent at the top as others, I don't have your answer. They've played respectable schedules and the PAC hasn't been as top-heavy as other conferences and there used to be more overall parity in college football (elite has changed, recruiting nationally, etc.), but that doesn't explain it. One factor at various times was likely competition from the NFL, which is returning, but I really dunno... except to still disagree with the premise they're not elite. If they're not, how is Penn State?

I gave you the modern numbers. PSU has exceeded USC.

 

[PSU&Trout]

I gave you the modern numbers. PSU has exceeded USC.

Wait!! this huge thread compares USC and PSU and barely mentions the fact that USCs success was done with an insane amount of cheating that essentially forced the NCAA to close down the Pety years. That says a lot about the "standards" of the participants in this thread!

 

[AWS1022]

Wait!! this huge thread compares USC and PSU and barely mentions the fact that USCs success was done with an insane amount of cheating that essentially forced the NCAA to close down the Pety years. That says a lot about the "standards" of the participants in this thread!

Some posters on here don’t care about cheating....they only care about winning.

 

[Art]

Wait!! this huge thread compares USC and PSU and barely mentions the fact that USCs success was done with an insane amount of cheating that essentially forced the NCAA to close down the Pety years. That says a lot about the "standards" of the participants in this thread!

So this "insane amount of cheating" involves what beyond the Reggie Bush case? And in the case of Bush, how did USC gain an unfair advantage? The payments to Bush occurred after Bush wasalready at USC and an established star.

 

[Chris92]

It's getting real now. Apparently we flew in our booster with a suitcase full of cash from Teterboro. @PeetzPoolBoy

flightaware.com/live/flight/N517PD

 

[nittany119]

Getting back to contracts for a moment, I just read what Rutgres is throwing at Schiano between money and perks. If mediocrity is the standard, in comparison for the moment, CJF is way undervalued. As a N.J. resident I am appalled they are throwing this kind of money at this guy.

 

[nittany119]

It's getting real now. Apparently we flew in our booster with a suitcase full of cash from Teterboro. @PeetzPoolBoy

flightaware.com/live/flight/N517PD

That was me. Very smooth flight today. I’m here to close the deal.

 

[Nitwit]

So this "insane amount of cheating" involves what beyond the Reggie Bush case? And in the case of Bush, how did USC gain an unfair advantage? The payments to Bush occurred after Bush wasalready at USC and an established star.

Steroids

 

[Art]

Steroids

One player, Cushing, who was juicing in HS, knowledge of which didn't stop PSU from recruiting him.

 

[Harrisburg Dave]

Okay, then what's the problem? People come here all the time saying USC is a better place than PSU for football. That's delusional based on the last 40 or 50 year history. PSU has out performed them. So if PSU isn't considered "elite" whatever the hell that means, then USC certainly isn't.

Our coach said, just last year, that we are not elite. Ask him what the hell he was thinking! Franklins rant was the single dumbest statement I ever heard from a college football coach. It was used against him in recruiting, and nobody can complain about that. He served up that softball and has only himself to blame.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Our coach said, just last year, that we are not elite. Ask him what the hell he was thinking! Franklins rant was the single dumbest statement I ever heard from a college football coach. It was used against him in recruiting, and nobody can complain about that. He served up that softball and has only himself to blame.

Quit your crying already. It’s a boring act.

 

[AWS1022]

Franklins rant was the single dumbest statement I ever heard from a college football coach.

Just started watching college football I guess.

 

[PSU123281]

Our coach said, just last year, that we are not elite. Ask him what the hell he was thinking! Franklins rant was the single dumbest statement I ever heard from a college football coach. It was used against him in recruiting, and nobody can complain about that. He served up that softball and has only himself to blame.

Asking fans to lower their expectations seems dumb as well.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Asking fans to lower their expectations seems dumb as well.

Yes Saban did that too though.....fans expectations are crazy out of control. Look at someone like H Dave...he's an idiot. There are 3-4 coaches in the country right now that have more wins than Franklin the last 5 years and he walked into a depleted roster with 9 OL in year one. It took Dabo 9 years to win a MNC with no handicap and a much better pay for play scheme....yet we need to ditch JF after a 10 win season and another NY6 bowl game more than likely in year #6. H Dave would have chased Dabo off much like the idiots in Cleveland and NYJ chased of Belichick. There is no honest way a sane person looks at what CJF has done and says.....we need him to go. It's just stupid and there is no other way to really label it.

 

[Judge Smails]

Look at someone like H Dave...he's an idiot.

He's a troll. Put him on ignore and keep moving.

 

[Howie'81]

Our coach said, just last year, that we are not elite. Ask him what the hell he was thinking! Franklins rant was the single dumbest statement I ever heard from a college football coach. It was used against him in recruiting, and nobody can complain about that. He served up that softball and has only himself to blame.

Try to stay with the conversation.

 

[4rosco]

If only we could find someone to donate a lake to but next to the Lasch building.

I am sure Dambly would be willing to put in a man-made lake if the price was right

 

[marshall23]

I don’t agree with the idea that he gets out coached on a weekly basis. There are obvious ways to improve, but I don’t agree it’s as bad as some on here make it sound.

Who here has the knowledge, experience and qualifications to determine with certainty that our coaches get "out coached?" I could wait for the submission of resumes......but I'll take a guess. The answer is not a single person.
Getting out coached is what? Not winning by the fanboys desired margin? Losing.....God forbid, a game that Vegas had us winning?
Do our coaches out coach the opposition when they lose by less than the spread? LOL
If our coaches can improve.....do posters improve along with them?

 

[AWS1022]

Who here has the knowledge, experience and qualifications to determine with certainty that our coaches get "out coached?" I could wait for the submission of resumes......but I'll take a guess. The answer is not a single person.
Getting out coached is what? Not winning by the fanboys desired margin? Losing.....God forbid, a game that Vegas had us winning?
Do our coaches out coach the opposition when they lose by less than the spread? LOL
If our coaches can improve.....do posters improve along with them?

Having the benefit of judging after the fact makes everyone an expert.

 

[Howie'81]

Yes Saban did that too though.....fans expectations are crazy out of control. Look at someone like H Dave...he's an idiot. There are 3-4 coaches in the country right now that have more wins than Franklin the last 5 years and he walked into a depleted roster with 9 OL in year one. It took Dabo 9 years to win a MNC with no handicap and a much better pay for play scheme....yet we need to ditch JF after a 10 win season and another NY6 bowl game more than likely in year #6. H Dave would have chased Dabo off much like the idiots in Cleveland and NYJ chased of Belichick. There is no honest way a sane person looks at what CJF has done and says.....we need him to go. It's just stupid and there is no other way to really label it.

Absolutely.

 

[PSU87]

Yes Saban did that too though.....fans expectations are crazy out of control. Look at someone like H Dave...he's an idiot. There are 3-4 coaches in the country right now that have more wins than Franklin the last 5 years and he walked into a depleted roster with 9 OL in year one. It took Dabo 9 years to win a MNC with no handicap and a much better pay for play scheme....yet we need to ditch JF after a 10 win season and another NY6 bowl game more than likely in year #6. H Dave would have chased Dabo off much like the idiots in Cleveland and NYJ chased of Belichick. There is no honest way a sane person looks at what CJF has done and says.....we need him to go. It's just stupid and there is no other way to really label it.

Mic drop

 

[MJG-90]

Who here has the knowledge, experience and qualifications to determine with certainty that our coaches get "out coached?" I could wait for the submission of resumes......but I'll take a guess. The answer is not a single person.
Getting out coached is what? Not winning by the fanboys desired margin? Losing.....God forbid, a game that Vegas had us winning?
Do our coaches out coach the opposition when they lose by less than the spread? LOL
If our coaches can improve.....do posters improve along with them?

Some Ohio State fans probably think Day got out-coached by Franklin because they didn't cover the spread. This nonsense is at every level. Tomlin is in a similar position with the Steelers. No matter how many times I point to his career record, and now the remarkable job he's doing with a depleted roster, I can't get my friends past he can't beat New England. Well, show me someone who can and let's hire that coach instead. These idiots always know the problem but can't ever tell you the solution.