When the controversy happened with Harbaugh and Cowherd I remember Bo Mattingly specifically stating that he thought that Arkansas would rather have Bret Bielema than Jim Harbaugh. He has even insinuated more than one time that Bret Bielema would end up in the NFL--that would be his next stop. So here we are in four games in with a Michigan program, that although very storied, has been bad for several years now yet Jim has his team 3-1 with a loss to what is proving to be a good Utah team. In those other three games Michigan has given up one score per game. Of course, the conversation is going to be that Bret plays better teams and overall Arkansas has probably played better teams in year three overall. Although, it's not overwhelming.
This is not intended to bash Bielema, who I am obviously not his biggest fan, but it seems that Mattingly's statement about Arkansas getting the better end of the deal with Bielema is already proving to be a dumb statement. The reason for the comparison is they play similar football. Is there anybody on this board that believes that this statement was a good one? Are we going to play similarly to what Harbaugh does? I would love to hear what separates the two coaches?
This is not intended to bash Bielema, who I am obviously not his biggest fan, but it seems that Mattingly's statement about Arkansas getting the better end of the deal with Bielema is already proving to be a dumb statement. The reason for the comparison is they play similar football. Is there anybody on this board that believes that this statement was a good one? Are we going to play similarly to what Harbaugh does? I would love to hear what separates the two coaches?
