The point isn't to decide who has been better. As you said, apples and oranges. The point was to show that both have had similar amounts of success in their respective sports. Since that's the case, the "Fire Carmody" outcries are a bit unfair if fans are going to proclaim Fitz as the best coach in the country. The same is true the other way around, too.
It's a pretty good comparison. When you look at the postseason, making the Tournament is more akin to making a New Year's Day/BCS bowl, not just any bowl. We upsold ourselves into the Outback so that's borderline; I would give a slight edge to Fitz for those 9-4 and 8-5 (with NYD bowl) seasons.
~340 D1 BBall teams for 64 NCAA tourney spots + a few play-in spots ~120 FBS FBall teams for about 64 bowl spots (really more like ~20 quality bowls spots)
Mental masterbation if you ask me. I could give you a laundry list of why Fitz is better and a similar list of why Carmody's better. It's simple apples and oranges. People can be emotional about this based on the people involved and what sport they like better, but truth is both guys have vastly different jobs despite the optical similarities... and the obstacles for both are vastly different. While both have academic hurdles, the simple math of how many kids on the roster gives one guy alot less room for mistakes and/or uncovering diamonds in the rough. I simply just don't see the point.
And you have to admit, Trahan's response was pretty funny given the article title.