Who’s the better coach?

[Phalanx]

Just bumping for some perspective. I think most here had it right, but I am curious if those who thought Mario was a better coach than Chip still think so. For me, the lesson here is wait and see before comparing to the best coach in Oregon history.

[chapelhillduck]

Mario is a pantheon level recruiter and an average or worse in game coach


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Alan]

Without a doubt in my mind Kelly is the benchmark

[buckmarkduck]

Without a doubt in my mind Kelly is the benchmark

Unpopular opinion to Kelly fans. If he left for Syracuse and Bellotti stayed as HC, we have the same 4 year run.

[Phalanx]

Without a doubt in my mind Kelly is the benchmark

Unpopular opinion to Kelly fans. If he left for Syracuse and Bellotti stayed as HC, we have the same 4 year run.

I don't agree, but seems like a moot point, since Bellotti was tired of coaching. Giving way to Chip was Mike's own idea.

[squintsdd]

Without a doubt in my mind Kelly is the benchmark

Unpopular opinion to Kelly fans. If he left for Syracuse and Bellotti stayed as HC, we have the same 4 year run.

Disagree. Kelly's offense put Oregon on the map. Even though Kelly hated recruiting, he significantly bumped up expectations for higher level recruiting classes.

[buckmarkduck]

Couple of false statements. Bellotti still had a higher class than Kelly ever had, and it was a big part of the 09-10 teams. Almost all of those teams are Bellotti recruits. What has he proven since leaving UO and not benefiting from what Bellotti build and left him on the roster?

Also MB wasn’t tired of coaching, he was basically forced out by boosters not wanting to lose Kelly.

I loved Kelly as HC, but have since lost respect for the guy. Let’s check- he did everything he could to get Helfrich the HC job. Big, big mistake on his part. Then after firing Helf, he told UO he would take the job, only to back out in the morning. Then a year later he again was about to take it, but backed out again.

As a HC, he has 4 awesome years at UO, and has been blah since.

[squintsdd]

Couple of false statements. Bellotti still had a higher class than Kelly ever had, and it was a big part of the 09-10 teams. Almost all of those teams are Bellotti recruits. What has he proven since leaving UO and not benefiting from what Bellotti build and left him on the roster?

Also MB wasn’t tired of coaching, he was basically forced out by boosters not wanting to lose Kelly.

I loved Kelly as HC, but have since lost respect for the guy. Let’s check- he did everything he could to get Helfrich the HC job. Big, big mistake on his part. Then after firing Helf, he told UO he would take the job, only to back out in the morning. Then a year later he again was about to take it, but backed out again.

As a HC, he has 4 awesome years at UO, and has been blah since.

I would argue that those belotti classes wouldn't have happened without chip and his offense. I would also argue he didn't get a fair shake while in Philadelphia. I'm not saying he would've succeeded, but he definitely didn't get the type of players that would've made his offense what it should've been

[webfoots2001]

Why are we using Kelly’s NFL and Ucla performances to evaluate his coaching tenure at Oregon, which was the question.

[dd10snoop28]

Chip is the greatest duck football coach of all time. nobody is close

[Phalanx]

I have no special info, but Canzano at the time wrote an article saying he was tired of coaching, and I note that he never coached again, despite what I assume would have been numerous offers to do so. If he was all fired up to keep coaching, it seems like he would have done so.

[OregonFan4Life]

What would be considered more successful, 4 years consistently in the top 5 with a national championship loss and a couple big bowl wins, or a national championship season surrounded by 3 fairly good seasons where the team
Is consistently in the top 20 but nothing special outside of that national championship season.

[Duck07]

What would be considered more successful, 4 years consistently in the top 5 with a national championship loss and a couple big bowl wins, or a national championship season surrounded by 3 fairly good seasons where the team
Is consistently in the top 20 but nothing special outside of that national championship season.

This board has pretty much shown a desire for the baseball-style "Flags Fly Forever" mantra of being able to win it all. Sure, sustained success at the top would be nice, but how many want to see "that" banner raised?

[wlduck]

What would be considered more successful, 4 years consistently in the top 5 with a national championship loss and a couple big bowl wins, or a national championship season surrounded by 3 fairly good seasons where the team
Is consistently in the top 20 but nothing special outside of that national championship season.

This board has pretty much shown a desire for the baseball-style "Flags Fly Forever" mantra of being able to win it all. Sure, sustained success at the top would be nice, but how many want to see "that" banner raised?

There’s a new poll question. What would we trade a NC for? A winless season? Multiple sub 500 seasons? 12 straight losses to the Fuskies? How low would we go in exchange for that one magical season?

[rockthief]

MC is not even close to CK. They were both stubborn, but CK wins. MC is not innovative.CK was and it was wonderful.