dont blame others you dont understand whats going on.
I understand perfectly what's going on. Unfortunately, it appears you didn't as you got yourself banned. So remind me again.....who doesn't understand what's going on? As to the topic at hand, there has been so much change in college football since Hayden coached and retired that it does get difficult to compare. But given that, here's my two cents worth: 1. Hayden did a much better job at beating the teams he should beat compared to Ferentz. 2. Ferentz has done a better job of upseting teams than Hayden did. 3. Hayden recruited better than Ferentz has, but Ferentz has done a better job of getting the most out of his talent. 4. Personally, I enjoyed Hayden's approach to assistants better than I have Ferentz's. But Hayden's only works when you're able to replace the talent that leaves with equal or better talent. He wasn't able to do this in his later years. 5. Hayden played better out of conference teams, but Ferentz has had a tougher conference to contend with. 6. Fry's teams finished better in conference (3 firsts, 2 seconds and 4 thirds) his first 13 years than Ferentz has (2 firsts, 1 second and 1 third). All in all, I'd give the edge to Hayden, simply because he had more to overcome when he arrived....lack of facilities, lack of a winning culture, lack of a national brand, etc. Ferentz has had the fortune of taking over what Hayden put into place, plus having the benefit of exposure via ESPN, BTN and other national media outlets. This has allowed more money to flow into athletic department coffers which in turn has given him top flight facilities, a completely renovated stadium and other things which has helped to narrow the recruiting disadvantages. In all actuality, I'd say that given the additional funding available and all the other advantages that Hayden put into place, I'd say that we've probably slightly underperformed during Ferentz's tenure. Not by much, but only 4 top 3 finishes in 13 years is probably under what should be expected.
