Im not basing it on a single moment. It just highlights what we are working with. Carr's career is highlighted by numerous highly talented teams that should atleast play for a national championship only to suffer from his incompetence. Last time I checked, Chizik only had one team that was capable of winning a championship from the start of the season, and he made the most of it while playing in the toughest subdivision of football, with the best players, and best coaches. He wasn't playing paper tigers.
Yeah and Alabama hired a 27-45-1 coach with one winning season at a more premier college, and hadn't been in college football in 19 years over Bobby Bowden.
Not really. Chizik was an accomplished defensive mind, and more of a team player than Tubberville. Auburn was always going to hire an Auburn man to replace Tubberville. Basically they were looking for someone that Lowder and Dye could get along with
Yes, but So was Carr, but Chizik never handcuffed himself to make a championship needlessly more in doubt than it was already.
Chizik was a mediocre head coach, and Carr was an average on. But plain and simple, Carr had far more talented teams that should've been in national championship discussions than underachieved than Chizik ever had in national championship talk period. Chizik coached to his limitations and won with his only really good team, while Carr often coached well below his limitations, and lucked into one. We are basically talking about a lucky Dubose vs Chizik, one underachieves (Dubose) while the other over achieves (Chizik). I usually side with the overachiever than the underachiever unless there are multiple championships involved (Erickson). But circumstances are everything. Had Chizik been a Michigan from 95-07 then he probably has atleast Carr's record, and Carr probably was the whooping dog at Auburn.