Jump to content

Bodacious Bevo

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    2251
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Bodacious Bevo

  1. Locked on has a show for every major sports league and school (like barstool). They claim one million daily views across the network so they’ll get some sponsors for sure. Not really sure how that trickles down to the small hosts if at all. i haven’t liked the shows I’ve tried from them
  2. Jake Smith Especially after the first half of his freshman year when he was more productive on a per-snap basis then Duvernay
  3. Alright, fine, let’s break down Choice’s RB recruiting at Texas. First, the context: - He inherited Robinson, Johnson, Robinson, Brooks, Blue, and Red. 4 of them went pro after three years, which means the backs that he recruited played earlier in their careers than would be expected of other positions. - NIL: It’s not my impression that Choice has lacked appropriate support (hence Baxter and Gibson) but we’ve also heard that some RBs have been taken off the board due to their asks (e.g., Davison). That is probably something that’s especially important to consider for his RB2 takes. The signees: - 2023: Baxter (#1 RB in the class), Wisner (#28) - 2024: Gibson (#3), Clark (#42) - 2025: Simon (#9), Stewart (#58) Total production: Some scattershooting takeaways based on the six player-seasons we’ve seen from his signees so far: He signed a top ten RB recruit every year. 2 of the player-seasons were lost to injury. Baxter was the first ever true freshmen RB to start opening day for Texas and was a solid contributor on the 2023 team. Wisner contributed on special teams and had a couple flashes as a true freshman that he then translated to a 1000 yard season as RB3. Gibson looked really good but had fumble issues. They are all culture fits. There were some understandable frustrations with Baxter’s and Gibson’s freshman years due to injury and fumbles. Gibson looks really good as a short yardage back. I just don’t see a reason to complain about his recruiting. That one guy completely missed Choice’s point when he said he didn’t want to recruit a guy from the portal. It wasn’t about not wanting to recruit a college player; it was about liking his guys better. I’m sure NIL is also a factor there. Do you want to go pay for a guy to compete with Baxter, Gibson, and Wisner, or do you want to retain Manny Muhammad/add Travis Shaw/sign Justus Terry?
  4. Ah, I see BOW is at his BOW-iest tonight
  5. I’m with Texifornia. I want to go to as many home games as possible but I’m (probably) not going to make three straight trips for directional schools. Home slate as a whole is pretty meh this year minus A&M.
  6. 3/4 of his new hires (Baker, Jackson, Choice, not Nansen) have been guys that he hasn’t worked with previously. He seems to cast a net for recommendations then trust that + the interview. I like the process, though it does render fan wishcasting moot
  7. Somewhat related - I’ve seen similar stuff to the tweet below going back for years. The cutoff ranking that really seems to matter lies somewhere around the top 100-150 recruits (for 247, that’s around their .95 rating for individual recruits and 950 for team talent). Prospects rated above that have better results, as do teams that stack those prospects. https://surlyx.com/jbuddavis/status/1886521561081131323?s=46 edit: I did my best with surlyx but I’m on mobile and I failed Here’s the graphic
  8. I think Gerry has said his system is 5* ~top 30, 4*++ ~top 75, 4*+ ~top 150(?). I’m less sure about the last one so someone correct me if I’m wrong
  9. I'm not even 30 yet, bitches Someday ctj and SC will be among the geriatrics that we bully off the board. Then me and my fellow youths will finally be able to instill our culture of love, acceptance, patience, natties, and just asking questions.
  10. It’s just interesting that you conflate your willingness and availability to watch a player with how good they are and then share that opinion so confidently But to get back to the original comment - Sellers is the 4th freshman. The upperclassman in that group is the least exciting of them. Looks like we’re finally past all the 24 year olds in CFB
  11. Sterns was pretty good straight away. Kinda felt like his first six games here were the best of his career, but part of that feeling was probably the general malaise of the Herman years
  12. Didn’t Derek Williams enroll in the summer? He was playing quality snaps by the end of the year. Just a data point. I don’t expect Jonah to have an impact this year. The safety room is in a much better spot than when Derek came in, obviously.
  13. The most interesting part to me is that he presumably watched their OL last year and chose 3 of them plus a draw.
  14. Sounds like we got really lucky. A&M, UF, and OSU all decided he wasn’t worth bidding on. Logically that should mean our initial offer was his only option so we got him on the cheap.
  15. Lmfao I dont think I’ve seen anyone use 3 year old high school scouting reports when talking about upperclassmen before.
  16. I saw that in some of the screenshots but it seems weird that Liucci would initially be so adamant that Hudson would be welcome back with open arms if that were the case
  17. Haven’t checked on this thread since page 1549 on October 5th I can’t wait to see our boy Graham’s takes on the second half of the season!
  18. Zelus Hicks skipping his entire senior year to be an early enrollee is extra insane
  19. TexAgs briefly had some kind of partnership with The Athletic awhile back
  20. Maybe, but there needs to be more nuance than 10 5*s, 10 3*s, and a hundred 4*s every cycle. I still wish OTF would do their rankings based on their perception of priority for the staff, but it's still valuable to see how Gerry (read: the people he talks to) views prospects.
  21. Pros of 10 days between games: player health, time for travel plans Con: matchup thread has gone to shit before a normal game week thread would have been posted
  22. … wouldn’t this math have put ASU up 31-24 with 2 minutes left? Tennessee has a really good front seven too. Difference for us needs to come from the secondary. I personally don’t put any stock in the Michigan game. Ohio State care more about sending a message than playing their best and got burned for it. They seemed to have learned their lesson. This is a lot of anger considering a decision hasn’t been made yet. They’ll likely be told “No” and “Too bad” too. Hell, just because Sankey asked doesn’t mean it’s being considered.
  23. There’s a policy process term for this: policy bubble, when suppressed change in a policy area finally occurs and over-corrects so that the solution to a problem becomes a problem itself. It’s part of a larger policy process theory called punctuated equilibrium theory, which is a way of explaining why most governance systems change very slowly with occasional periods of large, explosive changes (i.e., why you don’t often see moderate, reasonable change in government). PET looks at agenda-setting and information processing to show how the desires and values of the general population get distorted in the policy-making process. In the case of CFB, the NCAA was a policy monopoly. They had complete control over the rules of collegiate athletics. Anybody that wanted to create change had to do it through their system. They used that power to dampen such efforts. Grievances with the system slowly accumulated as the difference between the NCAA’s rules and the wants of players/fans/coaches/etc grew. Eventually people found an alternative way to create change: the courts. The introduction of a new policy venue opened up all of collegiate athletics’ institutional rules to change and attracted tons of new policy actors: TV networks, collectives, agents, private equity, etc. They all have their own agendas that may or may not align with what the original stakeholders wanted. The processes of negative feedback that used to suppress change were replaced by positive feedback that encourage it. We’ve completely flown past the moderate change that was originally desired and find ourselves in a policy bubble.
  24. I’m not sure Arnold is better than Thorne. Thorne just has an uncanny ability to throw horribly disastrous INTs. Arnold can do that too and adds in fumbles to match
  25. Can’t wait for Brauny’s next post where he cries because Braxton was at his wedding
×
×
  • Create New...