Where does Jimmy Johnson rank amongst the greatest college football coaches?

deliveryman35

Hall of Fame
Jul 26, 2003
12,998
1,194
287
55
Gadsden, AL
I think he was very good, but I would not put him in the top 10 of top college coaches. I think it has to be taken into account that the foundation was already laid when he got to Miami and the Cowboys were ripe for a turnaround when they drafted Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, and Emmitt Smith in 89/90. Larry the cable guy could have coached those early '90s Cowboy teams and won at least two super bowls.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Not to be argumentative but......(and this is how I try to come to my conclusions)


I think he was very good, but I would not put him in the top 10 of top college coaches.
Totally agree because his body of work was insufficient. I can't put Pete Carroll there for the same reason.


I think it has to be taken into account that the foundation was already laid when he got to Miami
The problem with this argument is that he IMPROVED it. Not every coach does this. Spurrier had a monster that he handed off to Ron Zook and look what happened. Larry Coker inherited a national championship team and blew it up. So did Frank Solich, although I thought he was mistreated under the circumstances.

Yes, he had an advantage but he also took advantage of his opportunity.


and the Cowboys were ripe for a turnaround when they drafted Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, and Emmitt Smith in 89/90.
Larry the cable guy could have coached those early '90s Cowboy teams and won at least two super bowls.
Now remind me who drafted Aikman and Smith? Oh yeah, Jimmy Johnson did.

Landry drafted Irvin in the 1988 draft.

Compare the Cowboys roster of Landry's last year (1988) and Johnson's first Super Bowl champion (1992).

This is all he had left: Irvin, Nate Newton, Bill Bates, Jim Jeffcoat, Mike Saxon, and Mark Tuinei.

So even if we buy the argument that he inherited a title team in Miami (a fair point), he BUILT the Cowboys of the 1990s. I don't like the guy but it's hard to argue with that.

Sure, Larry the Cable Guy could have won with it. But could he have put it together in the first place?
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
I'll put Pete Carroll's run at USC ahead of Johnson's at Miami, but that's just me.
I agree. And had it not been for the stupidest play call this side of the 1997 Iron Bowl pass to Ed Scissum, Carroll (like JJ) would be a two-time (consecutive) Super Bowl champion.

Carroll inherited a worse mess and did more with it during a more competitive era. That makes him better in my view.
 

Bama Czar

1st Team
Sep 1, 2010
388
37
52
Woodstock, GA
I think you could possibly make an argument that if Jimmy Johnson had stayed at Miami & never left for the NFL, there is a good chance that UF or FSU would never would have risen to the level in the 90's that they did.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
I think you could possibly make an argument that if Jimmy Johnson had stayed at Miami & never left for the NFL, there is a good chance that UF or FSU would never would have risen to the level in the 90's that they did.
Also true.

On the other hand.....his 1985 team DID lose to Florida, which was one of the sore spots.
 

sanjosecrimson

Hall of Fame
May 18, 2007
5,838
3,840
187
San Jose, California
I think Jimmy Johnson and Pete Carroll fall in that weird, some of the greatest coaches of all time without really being one of the most prolific college or professional coaches.

You look at Jimmy did during his run at Miami and it is darn impressive. He only lost 4 games in 4 years and won a national championship. If that was his only act, then I could see calling it a fluke, but he goes on to win a couple of Super Bowls. He has to be considered an all time great coach, but he's one of only three coaches to win a NC and a Super Bowl, so it's hard to compare him to other coaches. No question though, he was a great coach and it sure seems like he could have had greater sustained success at either Miami or Dallas.

Then there's Pete Carroll. He wins a couple of NCs in college, has a fairly dominating stretch and then goes back to the NFL and turns Seattle into an annual contender and Super Bowl champions. Things are a little mirrored since Pete had more success in college and so far Jimmy has had more success in the NFL. Overall though, their careers were so split between pros and college that I think they could end up under-appreciated.

The third by the way, was Barry Switzer. He managed to stick around at Oklahoma long enough to really build a legacy though, winning three NCs and coming in at 12 on the list linked earlier. His Super Bowl victory is quite a bit less impressive though, since he just inherited what a well oiled Dallas machine, and if you really think about it, I'm not so sure it is easy to say Switzer was a better coach.

Johnson took Miami to new heights, and got Dallas back on track after they got derailed. Think about it this way, if you needed a coach and it was the late 80s, or early 90s, could you do much better than Johnson?

Not to split hairs, but Pete Carroll only has 1 NC (2004) which was vacated later. the AP awarded him the NC in 2003 when the real Championship was being played by LSU ( Saban) vs. OU.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Not to split hairs, but Pete Carroll only has 1 NC (2004) which was vacated later. the AP awarded him the NC in 2003 when the real Championship was being played by LSU ( Saban) vs. OU.
The real national championship game was never played in 2003. Oklahoma had no business being in that game championship game or not. Getting boat raced by KSU is a lot worse than losing a thriller to Aaron Rodgers. I have no issue with giving Pete Carroll a share of the title that year.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Not to split hairs, but Pete Carroll only has 1 NC (2004) which was vacated later. the AP awarded him the NC in 2003 when the real Championship was being played by LSU ( Saban) vs. OU.
I don't think you're going to find many folks advocating that position. Carroll was 82-9 over a seven season span and produced three Heisman winners.
He was 6-1 in bowl games during that time span - and unlike 2-3 Jimmy, he didn't require a home field advantage to win a bowl game.

He also didn't inherit a national champion, either.

And as far as vacated, well, the NCAA didn't do that to football teams back then....if they did then Jimmy wouldn't have any, either.

Just a reminder - USC's case involved one football player (and one b-ball player). Miami's involved "more than $223,000 of impermissible financial aid dispensed among 141 football players" plus women's golf, tennis, and baseball. Miami's involved players being paid $20-$200 for big hits and touchdowns, USC's did not.

Oklahoma even making that game was a sick joke. It would NEVER have happened that way in the poll era, and it took the fluke of flukes to enable it to happen in 2003. I don't blame OU so much as the system as it was at the time, but it's preposterous that they were even in the game. (And to his credit, Stoops was even quoted during the game by the announcers as saying there SHOULD be a conference champion requirement and he would support one - but it's not his fault there wasn't).
 

BigGunn

1st Team
Dec 5, 2004
810
10
37
Pace, Florida
When the CFA was established, all coaches agreed unanimously that the championship would be from the top 2 in the coaches poll. USCW was not in the top two. But the AP had been slighted by the CFA and voted USC to the top spot in their poll. I guess the top coach of that one would defect whoever it was. USC traditionally accepted any invitation to the game any time they could and did it this time. They did not play for or deserve recognition as the champs.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
When the CFA was established, all coaches agreed unanimously that the championship would be from the top 2 in the coaches poll. USCW was not in the top two.
Actually, you have this wrong. USC WAS, in fact, number one IN BOTH POLLS (page 8).
They were NOT number one in the BCS poll (which is what I assume you're talking about here).


But the AP had been slighted by the CFA and voted USC to the top spot in their poll.
Also incorrect. The AP was part of the BCS poll in 2003.

The BCS has been used since 1998 to pick the teams for the four major bowl games - the Orange, Sugar, Rose and Fiesta - with the help of the AP poll of writers and broadcasters, the ESPN/USA Today poll of coaches and four independent computer polls.


I guess the top coach of that one would defect whoever it was.
I'm not sure I follow you here. USC was number one in both polls but because of the BCS matrix did not play in the game. The insanity of treating a triple overtime loss to Aaron Rodgers and a .500 Cal team as more egregious than OU getting clobbered by a huge three-loss underdog in a game that wasn't even as close as the 28-point final score is still utterly mind-boggling to rational people. It's not that OU lost - it's that they got absolutely boat raced by an average football team at a time sportswriters were declaring them the greatest team of all-time.



USC traditionally accepted any invitation to the game any time they could and did it this time.
USC got the Rose Bowl against #4 Michigan and beat them by two touchdowns. It was never close, they led 21-0 in the third quarter and cruised.

But USC no doubt would have taken a BCS invitation if they'd been given it, too.

What most folks don't realize is that what killed USC was the primary thing wrong with the BCS - they were undone by teams they had clobbered suddenly folding at the end of the season. Seriously, do you know what caused this?

1) the BCS - out of fear of coaches running up the score - did away with the 'margin of victory' component (this meant that USC's loss in OT and OU's four TD loss were counted as EXACTLY THE SAME, which is laughable)
2) Boise beat Hawaii
3) Syracuse beat Notre Dame
4) LSU's win over UGA for the second time in the season counted huge

USC had killed both teams in the regular season but those losses blew USC's strength of schedule to pieces. In fact, look at these OOC schedules:
Team A - Auburn, Notre Dame, BYU, Hawaii
Team B - ULM, La Tech, W Illinois, Arizona

The top is USC and the bottom is LSU.

For the record, OU had N Texas, Alabama (4-9), Fresno, and UCLA.


They did not play for or deserve recognition as the champs.
I'm sorry, but since AP's title was recognized at the time I have no problem with this. The team that had no business playing was Oklahoma.

Krazy and I have gone back and forth, and I'm persuaded by MANY of his points. Let me reiterate one of his strongest ones, a point that Ohio State proved conclusively this past year: the ENTIRE argument was always about "who is number four?" Every controversy we ever had involved a THIRD team that had something of a claim (most notably Auburn in 2004) but never a fourth one.

A lot of people say that Alabama should NOT claim the 1973 UPI title because we lost to Notre Dame. But that's how titles were determined back then, for better or worse (why don't they say Coach Bryant should get the 1950 title when OU lost their bowl game, huh?).

And in 2003, the AP still had clout. They don't any longer but they did back then.

I have no qualm with it. And while I realize that 'vacating wins' has become a big deal, it's a meaningless punishment. Fans who saw the games know what happened. Does anyone here think the vacated 2004 title changes how sick Sooner fans felt the night USC tore them to shreds, as if maybe it never happened?

well - it DID happen.


Even if Auburn had been stripped of the 2010 title in the Cam Newton scandal or the 2010 Iron Bowl - we ALL saw it happen.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Before anyone says it - yes, I know Washington was ranked fourth......but be honest with yourself because YOU KNOW the whole debate was over whether Penn State OR Ohio State got in. They were not going to leave out a one-loss conference champion who pulverized their opponent in the conference title game.
 

sanjosecrimson

Hall of Fame
May 18, 2007
5,838
3,840
187
San Jose, California
The real national championship game was never played in 2003. Oklahoma had no business being in that game championship game or not. Getting boat raced by KSU is a lot worse than losing a thriller to Aaron Rodgers. I have no issue with giving Pete Carroll a share of the title that year.
be that as it may, OU did played LSU for the 2003 NC. you ain't changing history because of your dislike for OU.
 

sanjosecrimson

Hall of Fame
May 18, 2007
5,838
3,840
187
San Jose, California
I don't think you're going to find many folks advocating that position. Carroll was 82-9 over a seven season span and produced three Heisman winners.
He was 6-1 in bowl games during that time span - and unlike 2-3 Jimmy, he didn't require a home field advantage to win a bowl game.

He also didn't inherit a national champion, either.

And as far as vacated, well, the NCAA didn't do that to football teams back then....if they did then Jimmy wouldn't have any, either.

Just a reminder - USC's case involved one football player (and one b-ball player). Miami's involved "more than $223,000 of impermissible financial aid dispensed among 141 football players" plus women's golf, tennis, and baseball. Miami's involved players being paid $20-$200 for big hits and touchdowns, USC's did not.

Oklahoma even making that game was a sick joke. It would NEVER have happened that way in the poll era, and it took the fluke of flukes to enable it to happen in 2003. I don't blame OU so much as the system as it was at the time, but it's preposterous that they were even in the game. (And to his credit, Stoops was even quoted during the game by the announcers as saying there SHOULD be a conference champion requirement and he would support one - but it's not his fault there wasn't).
Selma, I am not debating if Carroll was a great NCAA coach or not, I was simply pointing how many titles he actually won. he played for 2 titles in 2004 and 2005. he's 1-1.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
be that as it may, OU did played LSU for the 2003 NC. you ain't changing history because of your dislike for OU.
I neither overally dislike or like OU, but it doesn't change the fact that the BCS got it wrong, and USC was #1 in two of the major components ( AP and Coaches) before the national championship. So the AP national championship was still a legit system at that time. It only became illegitimate after 2005.
 
Last edited:

sanjosecrimson

Hall of Fame
May 18, 2007
5,838
3,840
187
San Jose, California
I neither overally dislike or like OU, but it doesn't change the fact that the BCS got it wrong, and USC was #1 in two of the major components ( AP and Coaches) before the national championship. So the AP national championship was still a legit system at that time. It only became illegitimate after 2005.
I have no dog in this fight and I agree with you and most that OU had no business playing for the NC after that loss to KState in the BIG 12 Championship. Furthermore I understand the criteria for the AP and Coaches' poll. but the fact remains that USC played Michigan in the Rose Bowl knowing very well it was just another game between the winners of their respected conferences while the real Championship was being play in the BCS Sugar Bowl between LSU and OU. let's be honest here, you and I and everyone else watching the BCS Sugar Bowl that evening knew very well we were watching the NCAA Football Championship game.
the USC/ Michigan game was played in the afternoon with conference pride on the line, not for any championship at stake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Sugar_Bowl
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
I have no dog in this fight and I agree with you and most that OU had no business playing for the NC after that loss to KState in the BIG 12 Championship. Furthermore I understand the criteria for the AP and Coaches' poll. but the fact remains that USC played Michigan in the Rose Bowl knowing very well it was just another game between the winners of their respected conferences while the real Championship was being play in the BCS Sugar Bowl between LSU and OU. let's be honest here, you and I and everyone else watching the BCS Sugar Bowl that evening knew very well we were watching the NCAA Football Championship game.
the USC/ Michigan game was played in the afternoon with conference pride on the line, not for any championship at stake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Sugar_Bowl
I'll let Selma explain it again if he so chooses, but the point is USC has a legit claim on the title due to the time.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Selma, I am not debating if Carroll was a great NCAA coach or not, I was simply pointing how many titles he actually won. he played for 2 titles in 2004 and 2005. he's 1-1.
You're confusing BCS championship games with national titles. Those are two different things.

http://www.ncaa.com/history/football/fbs

I hate both USC AND OU, but I also cannot deny reality. Furthermore, all we have to do to prove this is look at news articles written AT THE TIME. If the AP was a nothing title, it would have been noted but just the opposite was true.

USC shunned despite being number one

Bowled Over By Controversy

USC, third in the final BCS standings, will try to win The Associated Press title with a win on New Year's Day in the Rose Bowl against Michigan. Oklahoma and LSU, the top two teams in the BCS, will play in the Sugar Bowl on Jan. 4 with the coaches' poll championship at stake.

"I don't think anyone will know who the legitimate national champion is unless all three teams in consideration get the opportunity to play one another," LSU coach Nick Saban said.


"You would like the No. 1 and No. 2 team to be playing each other, but USC still has a chance to win a share of the national championship," LSU quarterback Matt Mauck said. "I think it is kind of messed up, but there's still a chance for everyone who thinks they are deserving to have a part of it."

When even LSU's coach and quarterback are talking about it, we don't get to go back and say "no, that doesn't count."

BCS Chaos Reigns


In that scenario, the Trojans would play No. 4 Michigan in the Rose Bowl but could still win a share of the national championship. While AP voters can pick any team No. 1, the USA Today/ESPN coaches' poll automatically gives its top spot to the winner of the BCS title game.


Articles at the time make crystal clear (pardon the pun) of the possibility of the split national championship. The BCS was, in fact, the championship game but IT DID NOT determine the champion in and of itself. The coaches poll was contractually obligated to vote for the winner of the game (although in 2003, three coaches - Lou Holtz, Mike Bellotti, and Ron Turner of Illinois - broke the agreement and voted for USC).

The AP withdrew after the 2004 season and their prestige is completely gone and irrelevant nowadays. But that was not the case in 2003.
 

BamaJama17

Hall of Fame
Sep 17, 2006
16,365
8
47
34
Hoover, AL
You should have asked him how it felt to have his all-time great coach (Bowden) go 1-4 against Jimmy and basically lose the 1987 national title to him then......or how Bowden lost to Jimmy, 31-0, to start the 1988 season.




Since you asked for history, I will gladly oblige.

Jimmy was on a trajectory to be the Coach Bryant or Coach Saban of his generation as far as winning went. The problem is that he did it the dirty way, he didn't teach his players respect for opponents, and when called on for his nonsense, he dealt race cards about the old "white people not understanding black people" argument (set aside for a moment that black players at other schools were not the on-field lawless punks that were tolerated and paid for at Miami).

I can present it cynically or I can present it with hyperbole. I'll try and be objective even though I thought he was a horse's backside back in the day.

Jimmy was a .500 coach at Okie State when the Big Eight was Nebraska, OU, and the Little Six. In his first job in a cheap conference (Colorado was not even that good during JJ's time in Stillwater), he was basically .500. (By contrast, Saban took a team on probation in a tougher conference with Michigan St and never had a losing season. Note that the sanctions actually began AFTER Saban's first year, so he bore the brunt of it).

Lou Holtz got canned after the 1983 season by Frank Broyles, in large part due to politics (by which I mean actually being involved in them - and I'll leave it there). Broyles called Johnson in (he was on the 64 co-title team there along with Jerry Jones) for an interview but didn't tell him that Ken Hatfield had already been hired. It boosted Jimmy's portfolio and when Howard Schnellenberger took a job in the USFL that turned out to not exist (Howard later went to Louisville and smoked us in the 1991 Fiesta Bowl).

Miami hired Jimmy Johnson, who inherited a national championship team. Note that Jimmy was hired on June 5, 1984 - something that would probably never happen today barring a Mike Price type thing. So we probably need to spot Jimmy the 1984 season, when he did not even oversee spring practice.


He also had what Miami would make sure to not have anymore - a rather tough schedule. Take a look:

1984 Miami Schedule
Auburn (Kickoff Classic, defending SEC champions with junior Bo Jackson)
Florida (five days later, only team to beat Miami in 1983 - 28-3 - and generally considered best team of 1984)
Michigan (one week later in Ann Arbor, a contender, lost the 84 Sugar to Auburn by 2)
Purdue (these four games within 20 days)
Florida St (coming off a 7-5 season and on their way to being the Bowden dynasty)

That's their first five games and they went 3-2. Then they blew a 31-0 lead over Maryland, the biggest collapse in college football history, and lost to Frank Reich (who later did that to the Oilers as you recall).

And then Doug Flutie hit them with the Hail Mary.


So Jimmy lost five games in 1984. They wouldn't lose another home game for ten years. (It'll be important in a few minutes).




It was 1985 where Jimmy began to carve out his reputation as a jerk. He did have one point. As the season headed towards the end, Miami was fourth in the polls behind unbeaten Penn State, one-loss OU, and one-loss Iowa. Johnson had a legitimate beef - OU's one loss was to....Miami, 27-14 in Norman no less (Troy Aikman was injured for OU in that game and gave way to wishbone QB Jamelle Holieway). Given that this was the day of polls and teams with bowl game obligations, Jimmy.....intentionally ran up the score on Notre Dame in hard luck Coach Gerry Faust's last game, 58-7.

I'm not going to debate the merits/demerits of that decision. In those days, it was somewhat more defensible given how hard it was to move in the polls with the same record. And let's be honest: it only became an issue because it was Notre Dame and oh, their former coach (Ara) just happened to be calling the game with Brent Musberger on CBS and made an issue of it. (Few Bama fans saw it because that was the day Van Tiffin became the greatest citizen ever of our state).

Besides - even after that moved Miami up to number two in the (then) UPI poll, the consensus was that Miami "had to blow out Tennessee," meaning he was being told to do exactly what he was getting bashed for. However, Johnson made it worse by insinuating that he would blow Tennessee off the field if the opportunity presented itself

Tennessee 35 Miami 7


In 1986, Miami ran the table and wound up meeting Penn State in the Fiesta Bowl. Miami was a huge favorite, and it really was this game that showed us all what the future BCS/playoff title games could be like. The game was moved to January 2 (Friday) and they put on a show.

Miami outgained Penn State, 445-162....and lost, 14-10 thanks to five Vinny T interceptions. Jimmy's inability to show class came out during this insanity. Many of the Canes players showed up wearing fatigues at the joint team steak dinner.....a dinner at which they walked out after an alleged racial remark by the late John Bruno, whose punting kept Penn St in the game. That's the most remembered issue. But several players also showed up at a Fiesta Bowl luncheon in warmup outfits and several of their players were insulting Penn State fans as they prepared to go onto the field for the Fiesta Bowl.


Jimmy came back from Japan and publicly apologized after being threatened by the school President. (With no Internet in those days, he wasn't aware of the ruckus until he returned to the US).

In 1987, Jimmy finally won a national title. But it came with a cost. It was supposed to be their year of shedding the thug image and yet three incidents marred the season. First, Maryland got so angry for what they felt was a run up the score move that they vowed to not play Miami again. Second, in a 24-0 beating of Notre Dame, the Hurricanes got flagged repeatedly for late hits and Heisman winner Tim Brown stated they were "classless."

The third was when South Carolina announced after the game they would no longer schedule Miami due to their cheap shots, including such things as hitting receivers from behind after the play was over.


The problem was that Johnson seemed to give off the vibe that he APPROVED of this....or at least tolerated it.

In 1988, Jimmy did very well, losing only the infamous "Catholics-Convicts" game to Notre Dame. He also went back to his other past time of whining. Heading into the bowl games there were two unbeaten teams: #1 Notre Dame and #3 West Virginia, led by Jeff Hostetler's father-in-law. Just as he did in 1985, Jimmy starting whining before the game that if West Virginia won then #2 Miami should be the national champion.


"'I just want to bring attention to the fact we had a very difficult schedule,' said Johnson, whose team's only loss was to Notre Dame. 'When No. 2 wins and No. 1 loses, Ithink No. 2 moves up. I feel we've got as much a chance to be No. 1 as anybody. I'm just saying that after the bowl games, vote for the best team in the country." Note that at least in 1985, he had a legitimate beef since he'd actually beaten Oklahoma.

He blew out Nebraska in the Orange Bowl in what turned out to be his last game at Miami, although none of us knew it at the time.


How do we rate Jimmy?

The good - he had a 52-9 record in five years and a 44-4 record in the final four years (his first staff was holdover from Schnellenberger, which also caused problems since they weren't his guys). Those are Saban-type numbers over a brief period of time, although we can put the 1994-97 Tom Osborne (49-2) or 1980-83 Vince Dooley (43-4-1) and close to 1961-66 Bryant (60-5-1). He produced a LOT of NFL players. Yes, he inherited a championship team, but he made them better. And he started their long home winning streak.

The bad - set aside the whining, seeming approval of thuggery, and jack ash personality and what's bad about his record? Well, he couldn't win bowl games that weren't home games. His Miami bowl record was 2-3, with two Fiesta Bowl losses, a blowout Sugar Bowl loss in 1985, and two wins in the safe confines of the Orange Bowl against overrated Big Eight teams. In big games, he was 15-9 because he won a lot in his last two years.


Oh - and he did it in a rather dirty way, too......:

A total of 141 football players were reported to have received more than $223,000 in what the committee called impermissible financial aid. Fifty-five football players were among a total of between 60 and 77 athletes to receive $212,969 in Pell Grant funds based on fraudulent applications.

Miami had maintained that the firing of Tony Russell, a former academic adviser, demonstrated that the problem had been isolated and solved. But the N.C.A.A. replied that a lack of institutional control allowed Russell to operate.

The violations also included cash awards ranging from $20 to $200 that football players received in a period from 1986 through 1992, from a pool created by athletes and at least one former athlete. Miami was also found to have violated its own drug-testing policy by allowing three football players to play without facing the disciplinary measures listed in the regulations.


If Jimmy had stayed, he'd have had to leave with a "show cause" most likely. On the other hand, he likely would have won a couple of more national titles, too.




The problem is that Johnson's body of work is simply too small. He was 4-0 against Bowden when he had HIS staff on board, and I think we'll all agree Bowden was a top ten or certainly top 20 coach. However, if Jimmy had stayed then he would have lost recruits to Spurrier (and vice versa), which would have affected both programs. But I've also stated my view of the Miami teams of that era as well - it was a carefully crafted 'dynasty.'

In 1984, they played five games against teams with nine wins or more and went 2-3.
In 1985, they did the same and went 3-2, both losses coming to SEC schools.
In 1986, they softened their schedule and went 1-1 against such teams.
In 1987, they played three but also played two eight-win teams and did all those consecutively and went 5-0.
In 1988, they went 5-1 against nine wins or better teams....conveniently having a week off before 4 of them (this includes the start of the season and the bowl game).

So he starts 6-6 against good teams and finishes out 10-1. The catch is - we cannot ASSUME he would have kept it going OR that he would not. As much as I hate to say it, they were probably the best team in the country in 1986-87-88 - certainly in 1987.


Here's who I would put ahead of him just off the top of my head (no hate, these are NOT in order)
Bryant
Saban
Urban Meyer
Eddie Robinson
Knute Rockne
Bob Neyland
Bud Wilkinson
Woody Hayes
John McKay
Lou Holtz
Bobby Bowden
Guy Who Let Sandusky Run Loose
Barry Switzer (who was 0-3 against Miami during JJ's run there)

He was a much better in-game coach than either Stoops or Spurrier, neither of whom is worth a damn if they get in a close game. I'd rate him way ahead of Tom Osborne if we don't count his last five years as coach and I think Jimmy was still a better coach.


I think overall he's in the top twenty or damn close to it based solely on what he did do. If he's not in the top 20 (and folks can bring in names like Bo Schembechler, Fielding Yost, or Frank Kush), he's just a cut below it.
You left out Earl "Red" Blaik and Bob Devaney.
 
Last edited:

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.