-
Posts
3456 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by hpslugga
-
Ok so the way I read this question is that such a loss has to have a ripple effect on the losing team for a long period. In that respect, all the Nebraska wins should suffice because the first one marked the beginning of a steep decline for that program from which they've still not recovered. They had a 9-2 season under first year head coach Bob Devaney back in 1962. Between that and the inaugural Big 12 season of 1996 (34 years), they won at least 9 games in all but 2 seasons (went 6-4 in both '67 and '68). They won at least a share of the MNC 4 times in that period. Over their very loud objections about Texas joining the Big 12, they faced that same Texas in 1996. They did manage to win an MNC in 1997 and made an appearance in the 2001 game, but that 1996 Big 12 CCG marked the beginning of the end. After Miami tossed their limp corpse into the Pacific Ocean, they became an average program at best. Yes, that 1996 game certainly qualifies and I would rank that one ahead of the subsequent defeats. Aggy wins in 1995 and 2011 certainly qualify. 2006 Rose Bowl certainly qualifies, although I'll say the subsequent NCAA sanctions that came down on them also had a lot to do with their slouching into mediocrity. Here are some lesser known ones, largely because they weren't seen as significant wins by UT fans over an extended period: 2008 vs. Kansas. Kansas just came off a BCS bowl win in the previous year, had a solid team coming back the next year. Texas wins 35-7. That was their final loss of what wound up being an 8-5 season, and they haven't won more than 3 games in any year where Mangino was not the HC. Again, the impact of the win was mitigated by subsequent revelations of Mangino's conduct towards his players, which ultimately led to his ouster. 2009 vs. Texas Tech. Like Kansas the year previous, they were coming off the best season in school history. They lose to Texas by 10, ultimately lose 3 other games, Leach gets railroaded by alumni who were reluctant to increase his salary (in fact, the Chancellor of the University would go so far as to commit perjury in order to give the appearance of legitimacy of his for cause termination). Again, mitigating factors, but a loss to Texas is included and Texas Tech has still yet to win 9 games in a season since 2009. 1989 vs. Oklahoma. Gardere's personal first of four in a row, the team ultimately goes 5 out of 6 through 1994 and 7-2-1 to close out the decade of the 1990's, which was easily the worst decade for Oklahoma football. Of course they've since made it back, but it took quite a while .
-
You’re responding to a quote that’s clearly indicative a truly degenerate mind. We shouldn’t be wasting time responding to people whose values are such that they can justify the fucking invasion of Iraq. That’s about as depraved as it is possible to be.
-
Offensive line is still like watching a dentist pull teeth, defense was actually pretty damn good for about 45 minutes until those repeated 3-and-outs by the offense took their toll on them.
-
Carpetbagging weasel faced smarmy little bitch, Ted Cruz
hpslugga replied to Grade of D as in David's topic in Cloak Room
Hell, Tebow fucked her -
I’ve seen this video posted as if he changed tunes. What this video serves as is an indictment of the imperial mentality that is pervasive on both sides of the aisle, but certainly his side of the aisle. He’s sitting there speaking as if it was just a given that the US had the right to just waltz into Iraq (or any country) and overthrow the government. Never mind the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of civilian deaths that would inevitably follow, never mind that there’s no legal basis for using military force to overthrow a civilian government; his only concern was “too many players in the game, not worth that many dead American soldiers.” That’s about as cold and callous as it gets, fundamentally no different than Kissinger’s “anything that flies on anything that moves.” As to Powell, as someone already said, there are a lot of bad actors in that administration but he was certainly way down the list. The guy in the video was #1.
-
-
Correct
-
That’s the part that’s least understood by those who choose to walk with the shepherd.
-
Or, you know, six?
-
I am and that's shit, but why the fuck did Central Michigan have a shot to beat us at the end? It's inexcusable. It's pretty on-brand for us though and I stopped losing sleep over things like that years ago. I mean I get where your gripe is and I get that the culprit on the final play is the officials, but rightly or wrongly, when shit like that happens, the “victims” of such shenanigans have a tendency to view the other team as the perpetrators. Some instances are more true than others (again see Texas vs Baylor 1992), but that kind of shit goes with the territory.
-
You are aware that under the rules of the NCAA, y’all actually won that game, are you not?
-
Of course. I think that's the point though. The posts on this board for six years have been overwhelmingly 'Fuck Okie Lite' when in reality the hate should all be directed at the refs. I mean I guess Boone may have paid them off... but he's dead. Of course what you’re saying is true, but be honest in answering the following: When I say the words “Central Michigan,” what image immediately comes to mind?
-
I want to say this unequivocally about the 1992 Baylor game: Yeah, the officiating was beyond horrible. It’s actually on YouTube in its original broadcast (with commercials, evidently what you Austinites all saw if you watched on TV judging by the ads). I actually took notes on the very obvious calls: -Two ridiculous holding calls on Brockermeyer, and he evidently was so pissed off that Mackovic had to take him out. -Clear fumble by Baylor recovered by Texas, ruled down by contact. -Defensive pass interference on Texas that shouldn’t have been called and if anything should have been called on Baylor (this is the flea flicker play for those somewhat familiar with the game) -Baylor receiver catches a pass on the flat, fumbles it clearly in bounds, Texas recovers, but the ref marks him out of bounds. It wasn’t a forward progress thing either because the hit that jarred the ball loose was instant and the first replay shown was with sound and you can clearly hear the whistles well after the ball was rolling on the ground. -Touchdown Baylor (the last one), ball never broke the plane. -Personal foul face mask on Texas when it clearly was incidental. Was on a play where Baylor was stuffed for a 5 yard loss on 2nd and 9. It’s actually a stretch to say this was even a penalty, but if it was, the correct ruling is incidental face mask, 5 yards on the end of the run, and that makes it 3rd and 9 instead of an automatic first down. -There was also a play early in the game where Baylor gained 4 yards on first down, Texas gets flagged for a 5 yard face mask, it gets tacked onto the play and repeat the down, so 1st and 1?! But with all that said, Texas had two chances to win the game at the end and Peter Gardere sucked shit through a straw. Baylor went for it on 4th down with like 6-7 minutes to play on their own 40, got stuffed because the QB dropped the snap. Gardere picked up 2 yards on the 1st play. But then, he doesn’t call mayday and back out of a pass play where a middle blitz is clearly coming, somehow bounces off the blitzer but in doing so he spins into the arms of the rush end for a 9 yard loss. He then drops back on 3rd and 17, tries to hit Duke on a 12 or so yard stop on the sideline but he’s well covered. On the replay, you can clearly see Baylor was using a soft cover 2 (this was back when zone coverages played out exactly as they’re drawn and it was beyond easy to beat it if you called the right play and had adequate protection) and Mike Adams was clear as day wide open in the middle void. Now, does he get the first if he gets the pass? Maybe and maybe the safeties rally and stop him short. But even if he’s stopped short, Texas is back in field goal range and you’re talking about Scott Szeredy with the wind at his back. The next series was even worse as Gardere just kept forcing passes into tight coverage. So yeah the ref fuckery had a lot to do with it, but our beloved Peter Peter the Sooner Beater absolutely blew it at the end.
-
Seriously that play was like that cop-cam video showing a dude surrendering to the police well before they approached, they beat the living fuck out of him and when other cops asked how he came to be bleeding so much, they said “he was resisting.” And the cop who asked the question just goes “oh.” Like case closed, no more questions, nothing to see here, show’s over folks. ”Why’d you drop your hat?” ”Oh I thought he stepped out but the wind is really bad and it dried my eyes and I now remember seeing the defender pushing him out.” ”Oh…”
-
Can anyone do that for the 1992 Baylor game?
-
I haven’t read the thread but this is the reason that I post the grading the teams performance chart every week.
-
It’s not nearly as pronounced and egregious as it is in the Big 12. If Alabama vs A&M was a Big 12 game last night, no way aggy wins that.
-
My thoughts exactly. They’re going to have to fundamentally change how they coach offensive linemen once that move is done. If not, those 2008 Florida, 2012 A&M and 2018 Alabama games are going to be damn near week-to-week occurrences.
-
Always dread these. Always dread turning in a solid offensive performance that goes with a loss against the big rival. The offense was by no means perfect. Line of scrimmage play was a huge issue which is what ultimately led to the red boxes next to 3rd and 4th down plays. But at the same time, fuck. Turning in 48 against those dick lickers should always be sufficient to win. Line of scrimmage play on offense? C-. Line of scrimmage play on defense? What’s worse than F? I haven’t read any of the board here but I heard it in the stands: people bitching about LB play. Look, if your DL are a non-entity in the run game, it really doesn’t matter what the fuck your LB’s are doing. If you’re Overshown or Brockermeyer, you’ve got far too much ground to cover to hope to be adequate. Brian Urlacher would have looked like shit out there yesterday. Block shedding? Hardly ever saw it. The flow was going exactly where they wanted it to, so it’s not like the Texas front overpowered any one. And this isn’t a scheme issue, either. It’s a talent issue that negates coaching advantages. Special Teams: goddamnit, stop returning fucking kickoffs 6 yards deep. When you do that and when you get it out to the 22, you didn’t net 28 yards on a return: you lost 3. And when you fumble it, no one can write that off to “well he was just trying to make a play.” That’s bullshit. Admire and applaud the effort, but all that game did was expose how thin Texas is on the interiors. In fact I don’t think I’ve ever seen a set of skill players and a set of interior players on offense with that much disparity between them like the Texas offense has. It’s depressing but not near as depressing as the defensive front.
- 1 reply
-
- 3
-
-
-
I imagine that was the case for many, which sucks so fucking hard
-
SIAP as a topic, but just wanted to get a gauge at your histories of in person attendance. For me, tomorrow will be 30 in a row (and I do not count the 2018 Big 12 CCG, I’m only talking about the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair).
-
That’s correct. And this isn’t the first time we’ve seen hysteria expresses with such bewildering inanities in stark opposition to learning. -We went through this when various states actually did ban the teaching of evolution, and also when they went down kicking and screaming when such laws were deemed unconstitutional. To this day we still have a large chunk of people who cannot for the life of them tell you what it is. -We went through this when schools were desegregated. -We’ve been going through this lately with dishonest religious fanatics trying to sneak creationism into biology classes by calling it “intelligent design.” -There’s also the fact that any time some institution wants to teach about Karl Marx, it’s met with fanatic hysteria. -Do I really need to mention the Abstinence Only movement? -We now have people who want to teach the things I mentioned earlier (the constitution is rooted in mosaic law, Africans were brought here as guest workers, etc). This is all hysteria that’s whipped up by people in power to keep those not in power fighting with each other. Critical thinking to which the Republican Party, at least the one in Texas, is literally opposed. And IMO, you can only punt on the whole “meet new ideas head on with cogent arguments” issue so many times before you forfeit your privilege to be listened to. Legislating shit out of existence because it makes you feel funny just seems so…Bret Bielema-ish. I would also add to that “but it’s not like you can’t be an agent of change to reverse that, either.” I mean that part is there, but what do you expect when this education system of ours has been failing multiple generations? It’s not like this is a new thing. But at the same time, you’re right in that it’s what ultimately leads to the turning of the tide in that same field. Vicious cycle.
-
I’m only going to touch one aspect of what was said above because the rest of it reads like a very poor confession beneath its facade. Amazing. We’re posting on a discussion about people who want to ban the teaching of a subject, which even you concede they know next to nothing about, in public schools (when it’s not even being taught in public schools), and you’re accusing me of wanting to control how other people think. That’s just pitiful.
-
That’s a dodge. Truth isn’t property. It doesn’t belong to me anymore than it belongs to you. Truth has to be demonstrated. That’s why intelligent design is considered a joke. It was falsified in a court of law. Its falseness is a matter of public record; not that I simply “dislike it.” That’s a straw man. And in that society, its truths have to be demonstrated. If they aren’t, they aren’t truths. The way it works is: Positive claims require positive evidence, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and what is asserted without evidence is dismissed without evidence. THAT is why the “ban CRT!” crowd is a collective failure. They cannot demonstrate the truth of what they say, and it’s very likely because there is no truth to what they say. Imagine that.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... COOKIE MONSTER!