Gary Pinkel still had a losing record at the end of his 5th season, 29-30. Odom is at .500 in year 4, good chance at going 7-5.
Barry Odom has a better record than Gary Pinkel did at this same point in their Mizzou careers. Gary Pinkel had a losing record in 3 of his first 4 seasons.
Pinkel didn't win his first bowl game until the end of Season 5. Odom lost his bowls, but Pinkel took 5 years to get to two bowls, while Odom did it in 3.
Do you excuse Gary's bad start because he was a head coach before he got here? Because that should actually be a strike against him in my book. If he already knew how to do the job, shouldn't it have taken him less time to turn the program into a winner? Some here say that earned him time that Odom shouldn't get- that's a clear indicator of bias and searching for a way to excuse those who you like and punish who you don't.
Just wondering how you guys stay consistent about the dire need to fire Odom when Mizzou history makes such great arguments AGAINST you. Correct my math here for me if I made a mistake.
Barry Odom has a better record than Gary Pinkel did at this same point in their Mizzou careers. Gary Pinkel had a losing record in 3 of his first 4 seasons.
Pinkel didn't win his first bowl game until the end of Season 5. Odom lost his bowls, but Pinkel took 5 years to get to two bowls, while Odom did it in 3.
Do you excuse Gary's bad start because he was a head coach before he got here? Because that should actually be a strike against him in my book. If he already knew how to do the job, shouldn't it have taken him less time to turn the program into a winner? Some here say that earned him time that Odom shouldn't get- that's a clear indicator of bias and searching for a way to excuse those who you like and punish who you don't.
Just wondering how you guys stay consistent about the dire need to fire Odom when Mizzou history makes such great arguments AGAINST you. Correct my math here for me if I made a mistake.
