[Terrabon98]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how you can logically believe that a coach is good because he can beat teams with less talent

[/ QUOTE ]

you're still missing my point. The fact that he builds these enormously talented teams makes him a great coach.

Michigan stat guys: i was under the impression Carr had a poor record against specific opponents, but overall his top10/top20 record was pretty respectable. Am i wrong about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't miss your point. My point is that it's not really all that hard to build an enormously talented tea at Michigan, because they consistently are infused with top players. They always had great talent before Lloyd was there, and they will continue to long after he's gone. So while Carr certainly deserves some credit for translating that talent into wins on the field, I don't think it's fair to call him a great coach because of it. It's something that most halfway decent coaches who have been around should be able to do with that type of skill.

I don't completely disagree with you though, he is very consistent in translating talent into wins...I just don't think he's utilizing his talent as much as he could be if he ran a less conservative, smashmouth offense.