Okay this is made mostly because it never fails when DeBoer loses a game some posters fly on here and say “Dabo should have received a call and offer”. And this usually hinges on 3 facts. 1) Dabo fields SEC comparable talent 2) Dabo is a Bama boy and 3) Dabo has 2 national championships. Well the first two facts I really have nothing I can counter with… but the third fact i actually do…. Dennis Erickson.
In the history of college football there are many lucky 1 off championship winning coaches. But very few coaches who win two that aren’t hyped up to oblivion. But one guy that everyone seems to forget about is Dennis Erickson. Mostly because everyone who knows the name knows he inherited a monster team and played very manageable schedules. Dabo did upgrade Clemson from the Tommy Bowden era but Clemson never lacked a substantial talent advantage over 90% of the ACC under Bowden. But my argument centers around the fact that both of Dabo’s championships had generational talented quarterbacks behind center from the state of Georgia. Aside from that run he has had far too many Tommy Bowden like seasons in which Clemson loses to vastly inferior ACC teams. Yet we keep seeing Bama fans posting and saying “Dabo should have gotten a call because of those two national championships” and “How the heck does DeBoer have a job after losing to Vandy, Oklahoma, and FSU of the world”
Dabo is a good coach imo, but to me he far more like Erickson in that context is very important when comparing him to coaches that don’t currently have a NC. I mean Clemson was ranked 1 and 2 by most polls entering the year and has 5 losses with only one of those losses to teams currently in the top 25.
I think the question as to whether or not Dabo is the "new Dennis Erickson" turns on what is meant by the question, "How are we defining Dennis Erickson?" It seems like the PRIMARY consideration is, "Hey, the guy won two national championships," which is true, but I think there are more differences than similarites, too.
1) Clemson was Dabo's first head coaching job; Erickson had 7 years at 3 schools.
While I realize it wasn't in the elite of CFB, Erickson took over a 3-8 Idaho and won 9 games the first year. After 4 winning seasons, he took over Wyoming (3-8) and turned them into 6-6 in one season. He then went to Wazzu and followed two 3-win seasons with a 3-7-1 and then a substantially better 9-3 and their first bowl win since 1916. Erickson had had time to work out problems and things he shouldn't have done as coach before Miami called.
Dabo, meanwhile, got hired at Clemson because Tommy Bowden had once been his position coach. Nothing wrong with that, it's how most guys start. But Dabo basically took over a generic 9-4 program and took 5 years to do better than that - IN THE ACC!!!
2) "Erickson inherited....."
Okay, that's true so far as it goes - but what does it REALLY mean? Erickson had a team in the national title picture in 1994, long after the guys who were there the day he arrived had left. Erickson WAS NOT a part of the Miami infrastructure that had been built by Howard Schnellenberger and reinforced by Jimmy Johnson, he was a stranger from the western US that only got the job because the athletic director at Miami (Sam Jankovich) had been on staff with Erickson at Montana State in the early 70s.
A lot of guys inherited and did well: Tom Osborne, Larry Coker, John Robinson, Barry Switzer in the NFL. But even more guys inherited and did poorly - Les Steckel, Phil Bengston, and God help us, Mike DuBose. Erickson didn't inherit in the sense that he was there and just put on the headset, he did have to make some personal adjustments. He didn't inherit a powerhouse at Oregon State, and he turned them into a top 5 team (11-1) his second year there. He couldn't sustain it, but he did it.
It's fair to point out a guy inherited, but when he's winning years after everything he inherited left, he had to get at least some credit. It's always funny to me how nobody EVER says "Jimmy Johnson inherited a national champion at Miami," but he did.
3) Some important differences
What makes Dabo better overall IN MY OPINION is that Dabo actually had to win his national championships on the field. And say what you want about the abilities of teams in the ACC, Miami used to play a carefully parsed scheduled as an Independent and when invited to join the SEC along with FSU in 1990, decided that forming a new Big East conference was a better route to winning for them. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I don't have very much respect at all for the careful scheduling Miami engaged in during the Johnson-Erickson time frame. Their tough games more often than not followed either bye weeks for themselves, the opponent facing Miami as the second straight powerhouse or - in some cases - both. Then look at their two phony national championships.
Miami won the 1989 championship. Go look at their schedule. They played Michigan State seven days after Sparty had to face #1 Notre Dame. They played Florida State after an off week and lost - and while Miami was off, FSU was playing #11 Auburn. The played a pretty good Pitt team....the week after Pitt played Notre Dame. Then they hosted Notre Dame AFTER the Irish had gone on the road to Penn State. They played TWO REALLY GOOD teams (and went 1-1), to pretty good teams, and a pile of hot garbage. On top of all that, their win over Alabama in the 1990 Sugar Bowl was laughable given they had two fumbles that the refs missed and scored on both drives in a game the won by only 8. Yet after all that, "Well, they beat Notre Dame head-to-head so they must be the champs."
Then in 1991, Miami literally ducked and dodged #3 Florida in the Sugar Bowl to play an above average at best Nebraska team in their home stadium in the Orange Bowl. Given they got steamrolled by SEC teams in the Sugar Bowl in 1986 and (later) 1993 as well as more fight than they bargained for in 1990, it's understandable why Erickson and Miami wouldn't want to play a team that had a much easier time with FSU than Miami did. You can't even say money as the Sugar Bowl payout was more than the Orange that year.
So the question's answer:
Dabo Swinney is indeed the new Dennis Erickson if we mean someone who won a couple of national championships but was otherwise a coach that ranged from pretty good to mediocre for a course of years. But Dabo is also a more accomplished coach than Erickson in a tougher time, too. Erickson's felonious program - which, yes, he inherited that as well - wound up on a brutal probation and the inspiration for some of the scenes in the James Caan movie, "The Program." By all accounts, Dabo (at Clemson) has run what appears to be a clean program.
