[washingtonismoney]

That idea -- that Boise State coaches underperform -- been bandied around a lot and I've always felt it's silly, for a few reasons:
1. Two coaches failing is no trend at all, especially since a pretty large percentage of coaching hires are assessed, in retrospect, to be failures.
2. Petersen had a much richer record than either Hawkins or Koetter. He won more, and for more years, than either of them. He's likely a better coach!

And of course if Petersen fails, it's not necessarily a judgment on him. (A really negative judgment, that is.) As Rich Rodriguez can tell you, coaching success and failure is heavily influenced by environment and factors outside of your control. Petersen failing against a division with Helfrich, Shaw, Andersen, Leach and, uh, that guy who coaches the 59ers is much different than Koetter struggling to dispatch a pretty mediocre Pac-10 at the time.

[washingtonismoney]

That idea -- that Boise State coaches underperform -- been bandied around a lot and I've always felt it's silly, for a few reasons:
1. Two coaches failing is no trend at all, especially since a pretty large percentage of coaching hires are assessed, in retrospect, to be failures.
2. Petersen had a much richer record than either Hawkins or Koetter. He won more, and for more years, than either of them. He's likely a better coach!

And of course if Petersen fails, it's not necessarily a judgment on him. (A really negative judgment, that is.) As Rich Rodriguez can tell you, coaching success and failure is heavily influenced by environment and factors outside of your control. Petersen failing against a division with Helfrich, Shaw, Andersen, Leach and, uh, that guy who coaches the 59ers is much different than Koetter struggling to dispatch a pretty mediocre Pac-10 at the time.