Some Coaching Changes Ludicrous

Expectations too great in BCS era

Nov. 28, 2007

College Football Preview: Week 14

> The Red Zone  |  Tape It Up  |  Strike The Pose  |  Breaking The Code
> B.J.: A Crazy 2007  |  Sorenson: 10 Questions  |   Braff: Easy Road To The Big Easy For Two
> Trev: Some Coaching Changes Just Ludicrous  |  Best Title Game Matchup   |  Roland: LSU Will Lose
> Palm: A Merciful End To The BCS  |  Blackburn: Here To Stay  |  Hart: Don't Count Out Mizzou
> Caparell: Daniel Driving Missouri On BCS Run  |  Crystal Ball: Weekend Predictions

By Trev Alberts

Special to



Trev Alberts is a football analyst for CSTV and
E-mail here!

You've got college football questions and CSTV football analyst Trev Alberts has answers and opinions. Each week Alberts will be answering questions and queries on the world of college football. So if you've got a question for Trev? Just ask him.


What coaching change has surprised you the most so far? Did Houston Nutt make the right move in jumping to Ole Miss? - Jesse, Tuscaloosa




Let me make something very clear: the presentation of Houston Nutt jumping to Ole Miss was a very nice ploy, but in my opinion, why would you say, "I've had enough of Arkansas, I'm going to go to Ole Miss?" He was pushed out at Arkansas; they were tired of his act. But the biggest, most foolish coaching change was what happened at Southern Miss.


These athletic directors have this infatuation with hiring and firing coaches. The one job for an A.D. is to hire a coach or fire a coach. And it's really frustrating to me because it really hurts the student-athletes when these coaches are let go. So Jeff Bower, who could have gone elsewhere, but stayed because of loyalty to the university, goes 7-5 and they push him out the door? You're Southern Miss! Who are you going to hire? What are you thinking? Now the program has been set back another five years. It makes no sense.


Is the fact that there are 32 bowl games now helping more coaches keep their jobs or causing more coaches to lose their jobs? - Jeff, D.C.


I don't agree with any of that at all. We've seen coaches who are 7-5 who are going to bowl games get fired and I think one of the real negative byproducts of the BCS is that it's an all-or-nothing system. At the end of the day, only two teams have a good year. And I know you can make that argument every year, but before the BCS, a 10-2 year and a Sugar Bowl appearance could maybe have meant a shot at the national championship.


We have a system now where you have a 10-2 Georgia team with fans saying if they had lost one more game there in the middle Mark Richt might have been in trouble. You're 10-2 in a really difficult conference with a young team and a young freshman running back and they're upset? That's one of the negative byproducts. Georgia's upset they're not playing in the national championship. That's ridiculous.


With the regular season about to come to an end, what did you learn most from the 2007 season? - P.S., California


It's interesting to me with all this talk about parity that Kansas and Missouri get back to the top, but a closer look shows that it's not at the expense of others. Five of the top 10 in the BCS have recently won national championships. Yes, we've seen some teams step up and be able to play, but that isn't replacing great teams.


It's not that if you were a great team in the past, you can no longer be a great team. It's not cyclical. Others have joined the party, but old-fashioned, solid programs are still in the Top 10.