Somebody take a look at my TCU team in Knight and tell me how I am not even qualified for a job at Radford or Southern!  I don't want those jobs, but give me a break.  4 out of 5 conference championships, a trip to the big dance and a pretty solid track record.  Don't tell that in the real world Radford wouldn't want me.

That is a joke.  I realize it might be hard to move up, but some of the schools that won't even consider me are awful.  I am pretty close to pulling the plug on this thing and this is probably the number one reason. 

Your track record isn't all that impressive to be honest. One sub-90 RPI season. One NT berth based on winning the CT.

And why do you even want to move up to Radford or Southern? What are you going to do at those schools you can't do at TCU?

He said he doesn't want to go there, however, he should at least be QUALIFIED for them.

I missed that. So why is he upset about it anyway?

Really don't think his track record is good enough to be upset about it.

I am upset that I seem to be farther away from being qualified for a decent job than I was when I started.  It shows a flaw in the system when I wouldn't even be able to land those jobs if I wanted them.  While my performance hasn't been stellar it is pretty good for what I have to work with at TCU. 

Your prestige currently (C+) is lower than Radford's (B-) and probably a lower C+ than Southern's.  You're likely qualified for all jobs at a C prestige and below, right (and "keep looking" for a portion of the C+ jobs)?  When you first started, Radford was a D, but they've had good results and have moved up to B-, so that comparison isn't really fair.

The job logic just doesn't seem to let you jump up in prestige with a move.

I don't think it's unrealistic that you're farther away from being qualified for a "decent job" than you were when you moved up to D1.  I doubt you were qualified for more jobs from your crappier D1 gig, but maybe if you'd stayed in D2 a little longer and built up that Bakersfield program you would have been.  All the time you see low-majors and mid-majors hiring young, hotshot 20-win coaches out of D2 and even D3 rather than lower-D1 coaches with a lot of years of experience.  The hope is that the young guy will be young and exciting and appeal to potential recruits.  How does "I coached a bunch of seasons at TCU and one time we actually got to play in the national tournament" sound sexy to high school kids trying to choose a school?  And if it doesn't, how else does that mediocre resume of yours at TCU make your a more attractive option than some young guy who's been winning 20 games a season for 3 or 4 years at D2?  Frankly, I'm no more impressed with your resume than pjbrankin.

There are problems with the jobs process.  Big ones.  Yours is not one of them.

hey lets not make fun of that Radford team I spent a lot of time building it up hahaha. good luck with the job hunt.

We will have to agree to disagree.  In my opinion I have improved TCU and made them the 2nd best program in their conference.  Wyoming is tough to get past which is why TCU has only been able to make it to the NT one time. Again, I am not saying I have a stellar record, but I would grade it above mediocre. 

i dont think the jobs program looks at things like becoming the 2nd best program in a conference or why a team doesnt get to the NT.

I think trips to the NT are key.  I think wins are important.  I think trips to the PIT help.  I think that the program - at least when last I was looking to move up - doesnt try to look at competitive environment, progress relative to conference (other than wins and postseason), recruiting and competition or the like.  Those would be real world factors.  I can imagine a coach who look a team that had multiple winless seasons and brought them up to .500 in a tough competitive situation (not your case, but a good hypothetical) getting job offers based on the improvement - even without an NT trip.  That isnt this game.