Question: What was the deal with Bill Curry??

UAinAthens said:

I can't possibly agree with this. Perkins has the excuse of dealing with the changeover from wishbone to traditional affecting his performance. Stallings took 3 years to get a national championship.

Click to expand...

Yes, and who recruited those seniors that won that championship and had them in the Miami game his first year? This board likes to point out that Les Miles won a national championship with Saban's recruits (which is true), but Stallings won his with Curry's. What did Stallings do on his own with his own recruits? But I'm sure that excuse will be "but we now know Terry Bowden was paying players."

And if I wanted to be a real jerk, I could point out Stallings's (lack of) action following the national title got us put on probation. But to be fair nothing is as simple as it seems.

UAinAthens said:

There is a strong argument that Homer Smith was the only reason we won anything while Curry was there. He gets credit for bringing him on but see Gene Chizik on where that puts him on the good coach scale.

Click to expand...

Little-known fact: Bill Curry had a better record with weaker teams at Georgia Tech and was crippled with a severe probation than Gene Stallings had at Texas A/M with better teams. A substantially better record, in fact (.423 vs .369). He also had three winning seasons in his seven at Tech while Stallings had seven losing seasons out of eight at ATM.

Curry isn't Nick Saban, but he isn't Gene Chizik, either.

UAinAthens said:

Ultimately, Curry's teams were soft. I remember watching games in 90, right after Stallings took over, and you could noticeably see the difference in the hitting, even before he found Barker and won his first game.

Click to expand...

Jay Barker was an utter disaster as quarterback as far as actually doing much of anything until his senior year. He had as many completions to Miami defenders as he did Alabama receivers in the national title game. Now....I'm not in any way trying to diss Jay, who just won. But it's funny to me - the argument beings with "but he won" and yet when Curry wins we have to have explanations as to why it didn't matter. My problem isn't with the opinions people have so much as it is the double standards used to arrive at that opinion. In fact, other than the "soft" argument, I suspect we agree on about 90% of stuff about Curry.

UAinAthens said:

In the 89 Auburn game, I remember my father and I watching and wondering why it looked like the defensive game plan was designed to make McCants ineffective. It was one of the most frustrating games I've ever watched.

Click to expand...

Well, Pat Dye was a better coach than Curry might have had something to do with that.....

UAinAthens said:

If you want to go there, I rank Curry near the bottom of the coaches in the window specified. Stallings 3, Perkins 4 and Shula 5, Curry above Franchione and Dubose.

Click to expand...

Ok, but it's the next comment I find the most telling

UAinAthens said:

(Shula had 3 years dealing with sanctions, and he had to deal with a team recruited to run that Big12 high school offense)

Click to expand...

Ok, let's knock this nonsense right out of the way immediately.

1) TCU was NOT in the Big 12 in 2000, they were in the WAC.

2) TCU didn't run a Big 12 high school offense in 2000, either.

PASSING STATS: 106 for 183 and 1600 yards, 16 TDs, 8 INT (average of 16.6 passes per game and an average of 145 yards passing per game)
RUSHING STATS: uh, LaDanian Tomlinson (avg 196.2 yards rushing per game and won the Doak Walker Award)

3) Even the stats from fRan at Alabama do not back up this claim
2001: 183 yards per game passing, 226.4 yards rushing
2002: 190.2 yards passing, 213.2 yards rushing

In fact, had Alabama been eligible to win the SEC in 2002, we probably would have. (This assumes Fran could have coached in games that actually mattered and - to be honest - there's no evidence supporting that assumption either). Shula may have taken over a team that had sanctions, but he also took over one good enough to have won the SEC in 2002. (The UGA game literally came down to the last play - anyone think Apostle Mark Richt wins a big game if he faces us?).

Shula did face challenges, no argument here. But Shula also had more support from the fan base and the PTB than Curry ever dreamed, too.

I think the Curry hire was a mistake on both sides. I think we were wrong in hiring him, and I think he was wrong in taking it (though who could blame him for it). If he'd stayed at Tech, he would have retired a near legend by their standards. No, they don't win it all in 1990 probably, but he'd still be viewed with more favor than he is.

selmaborntidefan said:

There are MANY legitimate criticisms of Bill Curry. He gave off a whiff of arrogance, he was not that good of an in-game coach, he seems to have been at least a little bit paranoid, and the graduation rate (after all the Joab Thomas pontificating) actually FELL during Curry's time here. But "soft teams" is not a legitimate criticism in my view.

Click to expand...

I think the reason so many people keep talking about Curry's teams being soft had much to do with the style of play and attitude we ran on offense while he was at Bama. The offensive line was a little bit of a prelude to Bucket Step Bob but we ran an offense that the running game would cut back off that style of blocking between the tackles and we ran a ton of toss sweeps. But, that style hurt us tremendously against Auburn who had an aggressive style of attacking defense and were particularly strong in the d-line. I will give you two examples of where the "soft" issue on offense comes from. First, during the 87 game that we lost 10-0, our receivers from the 1st quarter on would go down field to "stalk" block the Auburn DBs and once the DBs read run (they played man all game till the late 4th quarter) they would literally grab our WRs by the shoulder pads, get in their face, and shove them back to the line of scrimmage. Something you would not see on tv but would see plain as day sitting in the upper deck swaying in the wind at Legion Field. Our receivers from Clay Whitehurst (who got knocked out late in that game), to Greg Payne, to Marco Battle, or Pierre Goode, they did nothing about it and we were flat out intimidated and were not strong enough mentally or physically that game or the next 2 in '88 and '89. The second example came in Stallings first year in '90 when after the game an Auburn d-lineman (maybe Lamar Rodgers or David Rocker) who was quoted in the Bham News as saying that they did not face the same Alabama offensive line as they had been "soft" each of the previous years they had played Alabama. The player said that they had not faced an offensive line that physical in an SEC game all year and that confirmed many people's suspicions that we were soft in the trenches of the O-line while Curry was here. I think that suspicion grew to the d-line over the years but we honestly had some tough guys in our front 7 when Curry was here.

UAinAthens said:

In the 89 Auburn game, I remember my father and I watching and wondering why it looked like the defensive game plan was designed to make McCants ineffective. It was one of the most frustrating games I've ever watched.

Click to expand...

Keith McCants had 19 tackles in that game.

What game were you watching?

Bama1985 said:

Alabama did not get rid of Curry. He left on his on volition. He refused to sign his contract presented to him by the UA president after the bowl game and left for Kentucky.

Click to expand...

Well......that's "literally" true, but not one member of this board would have signed that contract, either.

Let's take a look at those contract details and see if Curry was justified. This is how it was reported in the LA Times on February 11, 1990, after Curry had gone to UK (and coincidentally the same day Douglas knocked out Tyson). The writer is the well-respected Gene Wojciechowski. Remember that Curry had just won the first SEC title for Alabama in eight years and then get a load of the offer:

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-02-11/sports/sp-1102_1_alabama-football-coach/2

1) It included no mention of a raise
2) stripped him of his ability to hire and fire assistant coaches
3) relieved the university of all previous commitments to guarantee his outside income should Alabama decide to fire him, which, according to the contract, it could have at any time and without reason.

A football coach who cannot hire and fire who works for him is nothing but a figurehead for....someone else - and that imposition came about after Curry had been here three years and had won the SEC title. Curry was also the only coach in memory (at Alabama anyway) where a bunch of rich guys got together and offered to buy out the last four years of his contract after his first season.

And I want you to look at something else in that same article that rings like a warning shot given what came later. Keith McCants observes the problem of the Tide faithful wanting another Coach Bryant but not being able to find one (and seemingly unable to accept this fact). Curry then makes this haunting observation:

"That was right at the root of the fundamental differences I had (at Alabama)," Curry said. "I would not become what they seemed to need in a football coach. I further pray that no coach will, for the sake of the kids there." And lest anyone try to put this on our sometimes overly loyal fan base, Curry further elucidates: "He said his quarrel is not with the fans of Alabama football...His problem was with the power structure at the school"

But let's get back to the root of the issue.

Was Curry a "good" head football coach? He was average, not within miles of the Bryant-Saban class and nowhere close to Ears Whitworth/Mike Dubious territory, either.

Was he justified in leaving? Look at those contract details and then give me a name of a coach other than an under duress Bobby Petrino who would have signed that thing. Don't look at it as a partisan fan of Alabama, look at it as a business decision for your family.

Hootie Ingram basically got rid of Curry by making Curry walk the plank with an unacceptable offer that Ingram knew would be unacceptable. Hootie had only gotten there in September after Sayers had gotten Steve Sloan to bolt. My suspicion is that the hiring of Ingram was to set the stage for Bowden to come to Alabama in 1990, the assumption being that Bowden wanted it and could work with Hootie, who had been over FSU as AD from 1981 to 1989. Numerous things went wrong in this plan, though, starting with Curry winning the SEC. I'll bet this insulting contract offer was probably decided by Sayers (or at least someone else) and Hootie was the hired hit man.

Does anyone here remember who the 1989 preseason SEC favorite was? Well, we can surmise that one by looking at the pre-season polls:

7) LSU
8) Auburn
16) Alabama
26) Georgia

The preseason favorites were LSU and Auburn, which made sense since those two teams had combined to make five of the previous six Sugar Bowl appearances (LSU's 1984 was because Florida was later stripped of the title) and won the previous 3 SEC championships (there was no title game then, of course). Auburn had won the title in both 1987 and 1988....despite losing to LSU in 1988. It's amazing how few fans recall that the 1987 Iron Bowl was for the SEC championship (we had one SEC loss to Florida and Auburn had none in conference - but a head-to-head win would have won it for us since Auburn had a tie and we had beaten LSU).

So pretty much nobody thought Alabama was going to win the SEC in 1989 BEFORE the season. And I think that's where the historical revisionism comes in. "Oh, if only the 1989 Iron Bowl had been played in Birmingham." I've never bought that argument. When Curry called a fake field goal in the first quarter while trailing 7-3, was that being 'soft' or was it being aggressive? Oh, and let's not forget that Auburn had 12 men on the field when they scored their first touchdown. For Pete's sake, Alabama had 428 yards of offense against the nation's #6 defense (268.7 ypg). Ten players from that Auburn team were drafted into the NFL (14 from Alabama were drafted).

I think this whole "we would have won the Iron Bowl" based on the site kinda refutes the argument if one alleges Curry wasn't any good. After all, Curry was still going to be coaching the game even if it had been played at the South Pole. And Miami was tons better than us in 1989 and STILL needed help that would be overturned nowadays (several fumbles we recovered that were called "ground caused").

In short, I think Curry left because he knew he wasn't wanted and no coach would have signed that contract save for one who needed the money and nothing else. But give the man this much: unlike a certain Aggie who bolted, Curry DID address the football team before he left. And for all he has said bad about this place, he was one of the loudest condemning Franchione for how he left us (I heard him do it on "Mike and Mike").

Bama1985 said:

Alabama did not get rid of Curry. He left on his on volition. He refused to sign his contract presented to him by the UA president after the bowl game and left for Kentucky.

Click to expand...

Truth be told, we were glad to get rid of him... :cool2:

GreatMarch said:

I think the reason so many people keep talking about Curry's teams being soft had much to do with the style of play and attitude we ran on offense while he was at Bama.

Click to expand...

Curry was not a good recruiter.

I remember going to A-Day and shaking my head at some of the "athletes" that he recruited for us...

We had several mediocre players on his teams. That should never have happened at the Capstone. :cool2:

NoNC4Tubs said:

Curry was not a good recruiter.

Click to expand...

??????

Curry recruited Eric Curry, Siran Stacy, Prince Wimbley, Antonio London, George Teague, Derrick Lassic, and quite a few others.

NoNC4Tubs said:

I remember going to A-Day and shaking my head at some of the "athletes" that he recruited for us...

We had several mediocre players on his teams. That should never have happened at the Capstone. :cool2:

Click to expand...

Well not every coach recruits the 2011 Alabama defense....not every year and not even the guy who recruited that one.

NoNC4Tubs said:

truth be told, we were glad to get rid of him... :cool2:

Click to expand...

Yep. That part is definitely true.

81usaf92 said:

But who did Bowden play on a regular basis? Miami was the best team he played and he pretty much was Johnson's and Erickson's whipping boy. It really wasn't until the later years of Erickson and pretty much all of Davis's years that he righted the ship. Yes he beat Spurier more than Spurier beat him, but Spurier always came into that game after playing Tennessee, UGA, and Buster Brown.

Click to expand...

I would make the argument that Bowden's sudden success at FSU against Miami didn't happen until the Canes got socked with a devastating probation in August 1995. Starting from the rise of his dynasty in 1987, he was 2-6 against Miami - and to make it worse, Miami actually won the national title in one of those two years Bowden beat them. They get probation and he beats them five years in a row. The moment they recover from the probation:

2000 - Miami wins on Wide Right III
2001 - Miami blows them out
2002 - Miami edges them again
2003 - Miami by eight
2004 - Miami beats them in the opener of the season

So he won 5 in a row then lost 5 in a row to make his overall record 7-11 right up until both schools got rather mediocre. He went 3-2 the rest of the way.

81usaf92 said:

Then look his national championship games:

93: vs Nebraska W 18-16. This isn't the juggernaut that Nebraska Osborne had from 94-97 just yet. But this is the FSU team that finally beat Miami to get to a championship

Click to expand...

And if you saw that game, the refs pretty much gave it to them. That was the closest I've ever come to thinking the entire thing is rigged. It was terrible.

81usaf92 said:

96: vs UF L 20-52. How do you win a thriller against a team and then get boatraced a month later by the same team. Even LSU kept it close against us in the rematch.

Click to expand...

Mostly because Florida only lost because they fell behind 17-0 in the first game real early thanks to a special teams faux pas and a Wuerffel pick. Danny still threw for 362 yards despite getting dropped six times by the pass rush.

81usaf92 said:

98: vs Tennessee L 16-23. This just the oddest thing ever. Lose Peyton, finally beat Spurier,and win a championship for the great pumpkin . Can't say more than that

Click to expand...

Not to take Bowden's side but wasn't their starting QB injured before the game and they played a backup? If Weinke hadn't got hurt.....????

81usaf92 said:

99: vs VT W 46-29. The one problem here is that had Alabama and Michigan had coaches that were halfway competent then odds are FSU doesn't win that year. Dubose is an obvious case. Carr is a little different. Carr played the please the fans game in regards of whether to go with a capable and dependable starter ( a guy by the name of Tom Brady) or go with an unproven talent that can't decide whether he is going to play in the MLB or be Michigan's qb (Drew Henson) Carr was only 2 years removed from a championship and playing these stupid games.

Click to expand...

If we don't give up the TD to La Tech, we play that game and Chris Samuels plays that game and I think we beat FSU.

81usaf92 said:

00: vs Oklahoma L 2-13. A game no one remembers. Bowden losing to big game bob.

Click to expand...

And looks worse now than it did then....

81usaf92 said:

Bowden would pretty much fizzle out after that. Point is while I think Bowden would have a good run at Alabama from 86-07, I just can't see more than 2 championships with a way harder schedule and who he probably would have to play to win them. You may say "wait what about 93" well maybe you forget we had to have David Palmer play qb in one game because Barker got hurt, and we lost considerable ground when we tied Tennessee.

Click to expand...

Well, if Bowden comes here in 1987, I seriously doubt Jay Barker is the quarterback at Alabama. Ever. I doubt he even ATTENDS Alabama if Bowden is here.

And I'm guessing we don't win it all in 1992 since he couldn't beat Miami.....

81usaf92 said:

Then you say "what about 94?" Okay let's say Bowden doesn't have a brain fart like CGS had in the 94 SECCG and either allows Barker to try to hit one of the wide open receivers that were running circles around Florida defenders, or be strategic enough to see an extra point was going to do us no good. Then let's say that by some voting miracle we get to play Nebraska. This isn't the same Nebraska from the year before. This is a team that started to blow folks out. Point is odds are we don't win that game.

Click to expand...

The catch would actually be getting there. Something suggests to me that Bowden probably loses the Georgia game because of a wide right mediocre field goal kicker.

81usaf92 said:

Again this is not to suggest Bowden isn't a good coach or shouldnt have been the choice over Curry. This is more to say that your point that we would be on #20 right now isn't a hardcore fact if we had Bowden.

Click to expand...

I think if Bowden came here in 1987 that our overall record would have been MUCH better.....and we'd have exactly ONE more national title than we have now.

And maybe less......anyone think Bowden leaves on his own in 2006?

selmaborntidefan said:

If we don't give up the TD to La Tech, we play that game and Chris Samuels plays that game and I think we beat FSU.
Well, if Bowden comes here in 1987, I seriously doubt Jay Barker is the quarterback at Alabama. Ever. I doubt he even ATTENDS Alabama if Bowden is here.

Click to expand...

I am not sure we get into the BCS game against FSU over Va Tech. I think they were undefeated and we would have had one loss to Tennessee (even with a win over La Tech) that year at home plus a previous year blow out to Va Tech that the media would harp on if we had gone ahead of an undefeated Va Tech.

And, you do know that Barker was actually going to FSU in 1990 until Stallings came in and offered him a schlorship at the last minute in early February 1990. Stallings felt like he needed QBs and offered Barker from Trussville, Steve Christopher from Anniston, and Jason Jack from Oxford. Barker may have been recruited to play Safety or LB at FSU, but once Bama offered, even Bowden knew he was going to Alabama. And, I think Bowden would have signed him to Alabama but not as a QB.

GreatMarch said:

I am not sure we get into the BCS game against FSU over Va Tech. I think they were undefeated and we would have had one loss to Tennessee (even with a win over La Tech) that year at home plus a previous year blow out to Va Tech that the media would harp on if we had gone ahead of an undefeated Va Tech.

Click to expand...

We would have been a shoo-in. We faced BY FAR the toughest schedule in the country and Va Tech faced the #53 schedule. Florida State lost a head-to-head game with Miami in 2000 but because they had a MUCH stronger SOS, they played in the game. Now, I realize that the argument will be "but VT was undefeated" but if your argument is "they lost to Va Tech" in 98 well, our loss in the year that counted was to the defending national champs of 98, too.

GreatMarch said:

And, you do know that Barker was actually going to FSU in 1990 until Stallings came in and offered him a schlorship at the last minute in early February 1990. Stallings felt like he needed QBs and offered Barker from Trussville, Steve Christopher from Anniston, and Jason Jack from Oxford. Barker may have been recruited to play Safety or LB at FSU, but once Bama offered, even Bowden knew he was going to Alabama. And, I think Bowden would have signed him to Alabama but not as a QB.

Click to expand...

Actually, I did not know that. But I seriously doubt he plays quarterback.

selmaborntidefan said:

Yes, and who recruited those seniors that won that championship and had them in the Miami game his first year? This board likes to point out that Les Miles won a national championship with Saban's recruits (which is true), but Stallings won his with Curry's. What did Stallings do on his own with his own recruits? But I'm sure that excuse will be "but we now know Terry Bowden was paying players."

And if I wanted to be a real jerk, I could point out Stallings's (lack of) action following the national title got us put on probation. But to be fair nothing is as simple as it seems.



Little-known fact: Bill Curry had a better record with weaker teams at Georgia Tech and was crippled with a severe probation than Gene Stallings had at Texas A/M with better teams. A substantially better record, in fact (.423 vs .369). He also had three winning seasons in his seven at Tech while Stallings had seven losing seasons out of eight at ATM.

Curry isn't Nick Saban, but he isn't Gene Chizik, either.



Jay Barker was an utter disaster as quarterback as far as actually doing much of anything until his senior year. He had as many completions to Miami defenders as he did Alabama receivers in the national title game. Now....I'm not in any way trying to diss Jay, who just won. But it's funny to me - the argument beings with "but he won" and yet when Curry wins we have to have explanations as to why it didn't matter. My problem isn't with the opinions people have so much as it is the double standards used to arrive at that opinion. In fact, other than the "soft" argument, I suspect we agree on about 90% of stuff about Curry.



Well, Pat Dye was a better coach than Curry might have had something to do with that.....



Ok, but it's the next comment I find the most telling



Ok, let's knock this nonsense right out of the way immediately.

1) TCU was NOT in the Big 12 in 2000, they were in the WAC.

2) TCU didn't run a Big 12 high school offense in 2000, either.

PASSING STATS: 106 for 183 and 1600 yards, 16 TDs, 8 INT (average of 16.6 passes per game and an average of 145 yards passing per game)
RUSHING STATS: uh, LaDanian Tomlinson (avg 196.2 yards rushing per game and won the Doak Walker Award)

3) Even the stats from fRan at Alabama do not back up this claim
2001: 183 yards per game passing, 226.4 yards rushing
2002: 190.2 yards passing, 213.2 yards rushing

In fact, had Alabama been eligible to win the SEC in 2002, we probably would have. (This assumes Fran could have coached in games that actually mattered and - to be honest - there's no evidence supporting that assumption either). Shula may have taken over a team that had sanctions, but he also took over one good enough to have won the SEC in 2002. (The UGA game literally came down to the last play - anyone think Apostle Mark Richt wins a big game if he faces us?).

Shula did face challenges, no argument here. But Shula also had more support from the fan base and the PTB than Curry ever dreamed, too.

I think the Curry hire was a mistake on both sides. I think we were wrong in hiring him, and I think he was wrong in taking it (though who could blame him for it). If he'd stayed at Tech, he would have retired a near legend by their standards. No, they don't win it all in 1990 probably, but he'd still be viewed with more favor than he is.

Click to expand...

Curry teams were soft, physically and especially mentally, which is exactly why we never really had a chance to beat Auburn in his three attempts

The guy was not a little bit arrogant, he reeked of it, and was a complete phony, exemplified by his self-serving grabbing of prince wimbley's face mask in the 1990 Sugar Bowl

selmaborntidefan said:

Actually, I did not know that. But I seriously doubt he plays quarterback.

Click to expand...

Funny that you say that about Barker as I graduated the same year as Jay from high school. He played in a basketball tourney after he signed with Alabama in a game after we had played before them. We were getting the winner of the Trussville game so I stuck my head in the gym to catch a few minutes before heading home to take care of Calculus homework. High school problems, right. As I sat there I overhear two guys watching Jay (who was a big boy) set screen after screen for their top scorer as they agree, "This Barker kid will never play a down at QB for Alabama. No way he beats out Steve Christopher over the next couple of years." So those two guys might have agreed with you in Jay's QB skills had Bowden been the coach.
I bring that up in the thread because Bowden loved Jay as a person and an athlete and Curry would not give Jay the time of day. Not even sure he was willing to have him in for an official visit. Might have, but I just don't remember Curry going after Jay for any position.

Bill Curry in 7 years at tech

31 wins
1 season with more than SIX wins
1 bowl game

AND THIS PHONY BOZO WAS WORTHY OF EVEN SNIFFING AN ALABAMA APPLICATION?

Just a note here. I think evaluations of Bill Curry are exactly why statistics are only a barometer, a guide, and not something to which we can be a slave. Curry was better at GT than Stallings was at ATM. That's not even a debatable point. However - I still have no doubt that Stallings was a SUBSTANTIALLY better head football coach than Curry.

I think Curry WAS mistreated by an influential proportion of the fan base. I also think he made things worse himself.

He did give off what has been called a "sanctimonious" air at virtually all times. I never thought he was a great in-game strategist, either.

Go look VERY closely at Curry's tenure.

1987 - yes, he was 7-5. He should have beat Memphis and the Michigan game was an exciting toss-up, so he could have gone 9-3. On the flip side, we scratched out a winning TD in the final minute against both Vandy AND Miss St, the two worst teams in the SEC that year NOT on probation, so we very easily could have gone 5-7. We were incredibly good in the Penn St, Vols and LSU games and incredibly bad in other situations. (I know we only lost 10-0 to Auburn but that one felt like LSU's BCS performance against us - with us as LSU). In fact, given that five wins never got you a bowl game then, this would have been a 5-6 year.

1988 - okay, we were 9-3. A field goal lost the LSU game in the final minute and both Ole Miss and Auburn really owned us (the final score of the IB was against artificially close). So 10-2 in 1988 could have happened. On the other hand, we needed a desperate comeback against Kentucky, played mediocre against the Vols, blew a 15-0 lead to LSU in that loss, played eleven vs Derrick Thomas with Penn State, and needed some special teams help to put down Army. This team very easily could have been 6-6 yet again.

1989 - everyone recalls this year and he was 10-2. We bumbled our way through the Vandy and Kentucky games, fell behind Ole Miss 21-0 early, and scraped by ULL. And we needed a flat out miracle to hold off Penn St. We easily could have lost at least four of those games, leaving us 6-6 with no SEC title (and no loss to Miami). Oh, and let's talk about Penn State.

Anyone actually recall anything about this game OTHER than Rayam blocking Tarasi's kick? (Most of y'all don't even know Tarasi). Right before halftime, we drove the ball down the field against Penn St. Curry absolutely botched it. Listen to this coaching sequence. The score is 3-3. The game is in Happy Valley. Third and three at our own 36 with 40 seconds left. We have two timeouts (remember that - it's about to be very important). Handoff up the middle to Siran Stacy for 13 yards and a first down at the Penn St 49 (this was a great call by Homer Smith, right by the book because Penn St has three timeouts themselves). Now with 32 seconds left, we line up in the hurry up. Hollingsworth in shotgun. He tosses it downfield to the Penn St 36 to Prince Wimbley with 21 seconds left and another first down. Clock starts. Running play to Siran, who takes off and Penn State tackles him out of bounds at the two-inch line with two seconds left.

Now with the clock stopped we use one of the timeouts. OK, I GET this.

Why the hell not use a timeout a bit earlier? First and goal at the two-inch line and Martin Houston gets stopped. You have two seconds left against a team that has yet to surrender a rushing TD on the year (and it's the last Saturday in October for Pete's sake), you botch the clock, you have the best field goal kicker in America....and Curry opts for the run up the middle, probably the only play that wouldn't have worked given their alignment. Penn St goes in with the game tied and the momentum. So he botches the timeout sequence and gets ONE shot instead of 2 or 3 from that close. Had he preserved some seconds, he likely comes away with some points. Pat Haden took up for Curry's aggressiveness on the road, but my problem was he had messed it up before the final play choice. (And don't even come back at me with "But Saban messed up the end of the 2012 SECCG." Yes, he did and admitted it....but he's done it right plenty of other times through the years, too).

If we get something there, nobody depends on Thomas Rayam's play, and we likely play the defense a bit differently since we knew a field goal was enough for them to win.

If Curry had records of 5-6, 6-6, and 6-6........well, I could actually see why Ingram would have offered him that contract. He's probably fired as our version of Gerry Faust.

Yes, Gene Stallings had MANY close games, too many.......but he also won a lot of them and certainly enough of them.

I'm getting depressed just re-living this stuff.......

PitMaster said:

Bill Curry in 7 years at tech

31 wins
1 season with more than SIX wins
1 bowl game

AND THIS PHONY BOZO WAS WORTHY OF EVEN SNIFFING AN ALABAMA APPLICATION?

Click to expand...

Gene Stallings in 8 years at ATM
27 wins (and 45 losses)
1 season with more than FIVE wins
1 bowl game

This is why argument by stats doesn't make much sense to me in the hiring of a football coach.

The very same fans are saying to me the guy with BETTER numbers shouldn't be in the discussion and his numbers disqualify him.....but the guy with WORSE numbers is not disqualified by those worse numbers......I cannot follow this line of reasoning.

And how does Ray Perkins get an interview using that logic?

23 wins in four years in the NFL.......during a 16-game schedule (well, okay not in 82)
1 playoff appearance in four years, a 1-1 record

Look, I get that stats are only a PARTIAL measure of the whole thing. Context around them is another thing. Curry ADMITS in the article I linked a few posts back that he DID NOT GET how big football was in Alabama (neither Perkins nor Stallings had that particular problem).

The hire should have been Bowden - we can thank Joab and the BOT for the BOT-chery that got us Bill Curry.

selmaborntidefan said:

Just a note here. I think evaluations of Bill Curry are exactly why statistics are only a barometer, a guide, and not something to which we can be a slave. Curry was better at GT than Stallings was at ATM. That's not even a debatable point. However - I still have no doubt that Stallings was a SUBSTANTIALLY better head football coach than Curry.

I think Curry WAS mistreated by an influential proportion of the fan base. I also think he made things worse himself.

He did give off what has been called a "sanctimonious" air at virtually all times. I never thought he was a great in-game strategist, either.

Go look VERY closely at Curry's tenure.

1987 - yes, he was 7-5. He should have beat Memphis and the Michigan game was an exciting toss-up, so he could have gone 9-3. On the flip side, we scratched out a winning TD in the final minute against both Vandy AND Miss St, the two worst teams in the SEC that year NOT on probation, so we very easily could have gone 5-7. We were incredibly good in the Penn St, Vols and LSU games and incredibly bad in other situations. (I know we only lost 10-0 to Auburn but that one felt like LSU's BCS performance against us - with us as LSU). In fact, given that five wins never got you a bowl game then, this would have been a 5-6 year.

1988 - okay, we were 9-3. A field goal lost the LSU game in the final minute and both Ole Miss and Auburn really owned us (the final score of the IB was against artificially close). So 10-2 in 1988 could have happened. On the other hand, we needed a desperate comeback against Kentucky, played mediocre against the Vols, blew a 15-0 lead to LSU in that loss, played eleven vs Derrick Thomas with Penn State, and needed some special teams help to put down Army. This team very easily could have been 6-6 yet again.

1989 - everyone recalls this year and he was 10-2. We bumbled our way through the Vandy and Kentucky games, fell behind Ole Miss 21-0 early, and scraped by ULL. And we needed a flat out miracle to hold off Penn St. We easily could have lost at least four of those games, leaving us 6-6 with no SEC title (and no loss to Miami). Oh, and let's talk about Penn State.

Anyone actually recall anything about this game OTHER than Rayam blocking Tarasi's kick? (Most of y'all don't even know Tarasi). Right before halftime, we drove the ball down the field against Penn St. Curry absolutely botched it. Listen to this coaching sequence. The score is 3-3. The game is in Happy Valley. Third and three at our own 36 with 40 seconds left. We have two timeouts (remember that - it's about to be very important). Handoff up the middle to Siran Stacy for 13 yards and a first down at the Penn St 49 (this was a great call by Homer Smith, right by the book because Penn St has three timeouts themselves). Now with 32 seconds left, we line up in the hurry up. Hollingsworth in shotgun. He tosses it downfield to the Penn St 36 to Prince Wimbley with 21 seconds left and another first down. Clock starts. Running play to Siran, who takes off and Penn State tackles him out of bounds at the two-inch line with two seconds left.

Now with the clock stopped we use one of the timeouts. OK, I GET this.

Why the hell not use a timeout a bit earlier? First and goal at the two-inch line and Martin Houston gets stopped. You have two seconds left against a team that has yet to surrender a rushing TD on the year (and it's the last Saturday in October for Pete's sake), you botch the clock, you have the best field goal kicker in America....and Curry opts for the run up the middle, probably the only play that wouldn't have worked given their alignment. Penn St goes in with the game tied and the momentum. So he botches the timeout sequence and gets ONE shot instead of 2 or 3 from that close. Had he preserved some seconds, he likely comes away with some points. Pat Haden took up for Curry's aggressiveness on the road, but my problem was he had messed it up before the final play choice. (And don't even come back at me with "But Saban messed up the end of the 2012 SECCG." Yes, he did and admitted it....but he's done it right plenty of other times through the years, too).

If we get something there, nobody depends on Thomas Rayam's play, and we likely play the defense a bit differently since we knew a field goal was enough for them to win.

If Curry had records of 5-6, 6-6, and 6-6........well, I could actually see why Ingram would have offered him that contract. He's probably fired as our version of Gerry Faust.

Yes, Gene Stallings had MANY close games, too many.......but he also won a lot of them and certainly enough of them.

I'm getting depressed just re-living this stuff.......

Click to expand...

Mike Ramil actually made the play that made that field goal block possible. He was a hero on the strip that week after

And that Curry soft defense was getting gutted by the Penn State running game on that last drive if they had three more seconds Blair Thomas would have probably ran it out the back of the endzone

Well, maybe you can get this Selma

You just essentially said you don't understand why quoting stats should be reason for argument, and then you quote stats to try to make your argument

Gene Stallings only coached for seven years at Texas A&M, so even your stats are incorrect

Also not that you would mention it because you want to paint your own arguments in the best possible light but Texas A&M was not integrated Georgia Tech was while Bill Curry was coaching. Might have made a difference in the win column for CGS, no?

You can be preachy and pontificate all you want, but some of us don't buy everything

PitMaster said:

Well, maybe you can get this Selma

You just essentially said you don't understand why quoting stats should be reason for argument, and then you quote stats to try to make your argument

Gene Stallings only coached for seven years at Texas A&M, so even your stats are incorrect

Also not that you would mention it because you want to paint your own arguments in the best possible light but Texas A&M was not integrated Georgia Tech was while Bill Curry was coaching. Might have made a difference in the win column for CGS, no?

You can be preachy and pontificate all you want, but some of us don't buy everything

Click to expand...

Yet you totally made Selma's point in this post. Selma's point of " quoting stats" is more of a pro Stallings pov and an anti Curry.