Which is the better hire?

[anon1758050382]

Not who is the better coach, which is the better hire?

 

[85Bears]

There is really no way to answer that. Lebby could be a major flop, and there’s no way to answer that after a year, two years. I think Elko is a safe hire and will probably elevate them, but there’s no way to judge Lebby until 3 years in IMO.

 

[msudawg200]

Lebby is a fine hire for State. Not overwhelming but not underwhelming either.

Elko to A&M feels underwhelming for them.

 

[eckie1]

Aggy never makes a good hire. No matter how it looks. So, there ya go…. Lebby. #logic

 

[Old Dawg]

Who cares, the answer changes nothing. Support the Bulldogs and quit whining about what can't be changed

 

[Maroon Eagle]

Since I previously mentioned that I favored Elko at State, of course I voted for aTm.

 

[PBRME]

Elko is very underwhelming for A&M. Even more than Stoops would’ve been.

 

[anon1758050382]

There is really no way to answer that. Lebby could be a major flop, and there’s no way to answer that after a year, two years. I think Elko is a safe hire and will probably elevate them, but there’s no way to judge Lebby until 3 years in IMO.

Of course you can answer that. You just may realize in three years that you were wrong.

 

[anon1758050382]

Who cares, the answer changes nothing. Support the Bulldogs and quit whining about what can't be changed

Who’s whining?

 

[85Bears]

Of course you can answer that. You just may realize in three years that you were wrong.

Yea I guess you can do that. I think you have to give a coach time for a rebuild. Fans don’t like to do that but there will be signs good or bad.

 

[TXDawg.sixpack]

Elko was a desperation hire by a terrible AD after his first choice flopped and was publicly denigrated by their fan base.

By default, that makes Lebby the better hire.

Lebby may end up flopping, but I like the direction of our program WAY more than the direction TAMU’s heading.

Lebby feels like the next Mullen.

Bjork’s gonna Bjork…

 

[tenureplan]

Of course you can answer that. You just may realize in three years that you were wrong.

There's ways to tell if a team is well coached outside of wins and losses. I was far from a fan of this hire but now that it is done I will say that if we are losing but look well coached, he has to get at least 2 years due to how young we will be.

 

[GloryDawg]

I said this in another thread. A&M will have the same problem no matter who the coach is. The Old SWC teams were run by boosters. They donate the money they want a say as to what happens in all aspects of the program. Arkansas has the same problem. All those teams that was in the SWC is like that and will always be like that. Their ADs are just figure heads. If any other SEC schools had what A&M has had since joining, they would have won the SEC several times. The coaches' hands are tied. I suspect both A&M and Texas will be average SEC schools.

 

[Dawgbite]

There is really no way to answer that. Lebby could be a major flop, and there’s no way to answer that after a year, two years. I think Elko is a safe hire and will probably elevate them, but there’s no way to judge Lebby until 3 years in IMO.

We judged Arnett on ten games. While I agree with your 3 year timeline and I agreed with firing Arnett, he really wasn’t given a fair chance if 3 years is a full sample size.

 

[patdog]

Proven P5 head coach who won at freaking Duke vs never been a head coach before. I think both are good hires on paper, but you have to say Elko is better because of P5 head coaching experience.

 

[Anon1669338224]

I think it's about the same. Lebby brings a little more excitement, but Elko has HC experience.

 

[Anon1669338224]

We judged Arnett on ten games. While I agree with your 3 year timeline and I agreed with firing Arnett, he really wasn’t given a fair chance if 3 years is a full sample size.

He didn't get a chance bc it looked that bad with a shitload of starters back from a 9-4 season.