As I was grazing around on ESPN.com I noticed articles about the recent episode of college football coaches playing their own version of musical chairs. One article examined how and to what extent Lincoln Riley has “won over” recruits, alums and players at USC in a mere 3 weeks. Another looked at the overall picture of college football coaching changes and what it all could mean. Brian Kelly generated enthusiasm at LSU when he showed up and tried to speak with a southern twang. Mario Cristobal has been welcomed back at Miami as if he were the prodigal son. The common – and dominant – thread in all of the articles/reports on the subject is optimism; every school and every coach is positive that things are better today than they were a few weeks ago.
When Alan Greenspan was Chairman of the Fed, he warned investors about what he called “irrational exuberance”. Here in Curmudgeon Central, it is commonplace to see and call out situations that appear to exhibit “irrational exuberance” – – and the state of college football coaching seems to fit that bill this morning.
A year ago, there was another game of “College Coaching Musical Chairs”; and, last year, there was also widespread optimism throughout the land. So, how did all those coaching changes work out? Glad you asked; I can provide an overview – not a detailed analysis – of last year’s moves and it does not support any sort of feeling that is close to “irrational exuberance.”
Here are some of the coaches who changed jobs and generated unbridled glee just a year ago. This is not an exhaustive list; it is a list made up of new coaches I found with the time available to me to do searching. I present them here in alphabetical order lest anyone think there is a ranking here:
- Shane Beamer went 6-6 at South Carolina. That record may not look great, but no one had any expectation that the Gamecocks would be anything special. Two of those 6 wins came against Florida and Auburn; in both cases the Gamecocks were significant underdogs. On a grading scale, I would give Beamer a solid B+.
- Bret Bielema went 5-7 at Illinois. That is an improvement in the first year of a new program there and the Illini did beat Penn State in 9 OT periods. Given the improvement level, I would give Bielema a B.
- Jed Fisch went 1-11 at Arizona. Granted not much was expected from that team, but they got hammered too many times to call this anything but a stone-cold disaster. I give Fisch an F for his first year and I will put him on a hot seat for next year even before the ball drops in Times Square.
- Brian Harsin went 6-6 at Auburn. The first three-and-a-half quarters of the game against Alabama were mighty impressive until the clock struck midnight and Alabama came back to win the game. Other than that, Auburn was “Meh!” in 2021. I would give Harsin a Gentleman’s C.
- Josh Heupel was 7-5 at Tennessee. Instead of the Vols being an underperforming team for whom other schools throw a pity party, this team was competitive and there is hope for improvement in Knoxville. I give Heupel a solid A for year one on the job.
- Lance Liepold went 2-10 at Kansas. Considering that the Jayhawks won a total of 3 games in the last two seasons combined I would give Liepold another Gentlemen’s C.
- Steve Sarkisian went 5-7 at Texas – – including a loss to Kansas where the Longhorns gave up 56 points. This was dumpster-fire bad. I give Sarkisian an F for the season.
That is admittedly a small sample, but it would certainly seem as if new coaches should be cautiously welcomed to their new positions and not idolized before they have accomplished anything. The grades I put on those hirings from a year ago look more like grades on a bell curve than they do as unquestioned upgrades. My conclusion is that hiring a new coach is like a crapshoot; sometimes it works like a charm; other times you go bust. I am reminded here of author G. K. Chesterton’s view of optimism:
“… the noble temptation to see too much in everything.”
Moving on… I read a report where the NFL’s Chief Medical Officer said – among lots of other things – that there is no evidence that the coronavirus is transmitted on the field. I guess I should believe that statement as presented because I cannot imagine that anyone has tried to detect transmission under those conditions, nor can I concoct in my mind a controlled scientific test for such a hypothesis. For example, one test might be to take two teams with players who are totally clean after numerous covid tests and have them play a game – – but inject one of the players with a dose of the live virus. Then after the game, test all the players again for several days. Even something like that is not certain to answer the question posed here, but you can see that setting up such an experiment can involve lots of things that scientists would be reluctant to do.
We do know that one vector for covid transmission is airborne, and we logically conclude that proximity to someone who has the virus is more likely to lead to airborne transmission than what has come to be called “social distancing.” It surely seems to me that football is an activity that creates plenty of situations wherein random groups of players come into close proximity with one another on just about every play in the game.
So, while I believe there is no evidence of covid transmission “on the field”, it is illogical to me for anyone to conclude that playing football with or against another player who is infected with the coronavirus is a safe undertaking.
Finally, harkening back to the optimism generated by hiring a new coach, here is Dwight Perry’s view of how another of those hiring panned out:
“Jacksonville spinmeisters say coach Urban Meyer is out because of health reasons: Turns out the Jaguars were sick of him.”
But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………