Comments on: SEC Headlines 1/13/2013

By: John at MrSEC

John at MrSEC — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:46:01 +0000

@maylmiiler

I gave my opinion and apparently you’re upset that I don’t throw ENOUGH love Nick Saban’s way. I remember taking crap after his 7-6 2007 season for calling him the best coach in the SEC. I’ve consistently said he’s the best in the league and I believed he would do at Alabama what he did at LSU. He has… and more.

But I have a hard time putting someone with a decade’s worth of wins ahead of two men with multiple decade’s worth of wins who (in Bryant’s case) won more national titles and (in Spurrier’s case) literally changed the way the SEC plays football.

If for some reason, my opinion, makes you angry or teary-eyed or in need of posting again, well, that’s on you.

Enjoy your opinion. It’s a fine one. It’s just not mine at the moment.

John

By: maylmiiler

maylmiiler — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:12:10 +0000

@John at MrSEC

With all the years Spurrier has had to win national championships, he’s done it only once. With much fewer chances Saban has done it four times. Who’s the better coach? And Saban has the higher winning percentage. And higher bowl game winning percentage. Saban’s SEC and national championships have come at two different schools.

The run first, pass first issue is meaningless. It has nothing to do with how good a coach is. Football is a game of imitation and any little success by anyone will be imitated by others. And you don’t have to be Tim Tebow, AJ McCarron or Johnny Football to know that it’s not a pass first league anymore. Even spurrier isn’t pass first anymore, is he? So who then is the great coach that gets all the wonderful credit for making the SEC a run first league again?

And if Saban wins another national championship next year, a total of five, four in the last five years, your logic would still say Spurrier is the better coach. Spurrier will still have more sec titles and more sec wins and he’ll have changed the league to pass first. So doesn’t that right there tell you something’s wrong with your logic?

Great coaches win championships.

By: John at MrSEC

John at MrSEC — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 20:08:19 +0000

First, Mike Mitchell did the headlines today, not me. I only do headlines on Mondays and Fridays.

Second, neither this website not this story have anything to do with the television or radio work I do.

Third, if you heard that I said something but you didn’t actually hear it yourself, it’s probably best not to comment on it.

Fourth, I wrote this piece earlier this week: http://www.mrsec.com/2013/01/time-to-add-sabans-face-to-the-secs-mt-rushmore/#

I believe Nick Saban is the best coach in college football today. When he retires, I believe he’ll be looked back upon as the best SEC coach in history. But as it stands, Bear Bryant has more national titles, SEC titles and SEC wins. Steve Spurrier has more SEC titles and SEC wins and he changed the SEC from a run-first league into a pass-first league in the 1990s, which was a HUGE change for the entire conference. Saban has dominated the league, Spurrier changed it.

For now, I’d put Bryant and Spurrier ahead of Saban for those reasons. My opinion. But I firmly believe that if Saban coaches for another five or six seasons, he’ll retire as #1 on my all-time SEC list.

I’m not trying to convince anyone. Everyone’s free to their opinion. But so am I.

And any TV or radio work I do has nothing to do with headlines on this site which are usually written by someone else.

Many thanks for reading the site,
John

By: maylmiiler

maylmiiler — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 18:49:15 +0000

John, someone told me you said on your tv show today you thought Steve Spurrier with ONE national championship is a better coach than Nick Saban with FOUR national championships. Spurrier has 2 more sec championships, but clearly only because he’s older. Sabans winning percentage is higher than Suprrier’s. And national championships, four to one. Not twice as many. Four times as many!

Saban’s second in the nation only to Bryant, only a blind person couldn’t agree with that?