So two head coaches walk into a bar with identical 46-7 records….

…who do you sit down to have a beer with:

Chip Kelly…..or…..Dan Lanning?

Both currently have or had 46-7 overall records as head coaches at Oregon.

Pretty interesting crossroads we quacks find ourselves at now.  At this point in Chip’s career he left to go to the NFL.  At this point in Lanning’s career he’s leaving to go find more assistant coaches to fill the spots that other teams will be poaching from Oregon in the next few weeks.  Lanning’s likely not leaving Oregon for a good long time still.

Is Chip’s success more due to his (at the time) unique offense?

Is Dan’s success more due to having a better quality roster, top to bottom, based on somewhat artificial HS recruiting rankings?

Which one is the better head coach?

What happened to the mantra heard on here and elsewhere that Dan and his coaches can’t develop players?  Can you really go your first two seasons in an arguably tougher conferences than the old Pac-12 like the B1G with only 1 loss, and that to a current #2 team in the nation, without having good assistant coaches who can develop players?

Or what about that Dan Lanning is and always will be a poor game-day coach?  (Admittedly he is still learning on the job, while Oregon’s old coach, Cristobal, apparently is not – feel free to check in with our Hurricane friends on that one….lol).  Despite all of his supposedly poor game-day decisions, this guy has only lost to 7 ranked teams, 0 unranked teams, in 4 seasons.

Just curious…..