Jump to content

This is who Steve Sarkisian is.


lilMAC25

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Skipper said:

In a season where we play Bama on the road?  Basically what you are saying are your expectations is making the playoff or fire Sark given our schedule next year. Yeah, Texas fans are realistic.

2 losses isn’t necessarily “making the playoffs”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Took me awhile but @Thatguy is a bot right?  This is a bit to drive clicks?  Amirite @immamac   Sly dog

 

3 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

I thought the consensus was @Thatguy is an aggy sock?

He is “P” from Shaggy. Always the smartest guy in the room. Always is laughing at how stupid and/or ignorant everyone else is and how only he sees it straight. Always defending mediocre coaches. I assume he’s an assistant high school coach in Pearland/Katy/Cypress or an energy trader or a codewriter. Same personality where everyone else around them is the problem, and never them, over and over again. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, gmr548 said:


Eh. At Alabama is a L and not really one to get worked up about as long as the game is competitive and not obviously lost by a coaching decision(s). That’s a better roster and a better coach, on the road.

Your bar therefore comes down to 8-1 in the conference with a relatively young defense and replacing the three most important components in the running game (including a generational talent in Bijan), which is the strength of the offense. Defense is probably going to take a step back and the offense is going to have to make people respect the downfield passing game, something teams haven’t had to do for two years, if it’s going to be successful, because Texas is going to be less able to impose its will running the ball than it is this year (which has not been automatic).

I think 9+ regular season wins was the bar for a categorical success this year. 7-5/8-4 is in line with where I expected the team to be, but feels underwhelming because two of the four losses thus far are just plain bad losses, no matter how you slice them, and even avoiding one could/would have given this team a shot at hardware for only the third time since 2009.

With the caveat that we don’t even know the schedule (lol), I think 8-9 wins would actually be a pretty good performance next year. Team’s going to have more holes and going to need to make bigger leaps than people realize.

Sorry man there is a portal, free transfers NIL. Those expectations in year 3 not unreasonable. If he does less with the talent. I literately quoted imma the other day with that bullshit excuse we will hear next year about defense.  Put up or shut up. 10 wins regular season or gtfo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hook me said:

Judging by the history of Texas football you're likely to be disappointed. Can't wait to read all the posts about how Sark isn't meeting a standard that's been fairly elusive at UT dating back to 1900. Should be a fun season.

He's either as good as the best 2 coaches in our history or we should give up on him in year 3 because he only won 9 games & made the conference championship game? Is that the train of thought here? I'm not convinced that Sark is the guy at this point, but if the team is improving & the results on the field are improving it seems fairly ridiculous to give up on him because he hasn't ascended to DKR/Brown levels by year 3. 

Absolutely get rid of him! This is not the 70's and 80's where coaches get to learn on the job for years. Today recruiting players be it from high school or the portal falls apart in an information age. If a move is delayed it is no longer patience it is now called delaying the inevitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beware the illusion: “10 wins” and we’re back scenario … after which the coach reverts to his mean and is fired. We've seen that 3 times in 32 years.

— McWilliams went 10-1 in Year 4 ("Shock the Nation"), then faced the 46-3 annihilation by Miami in the Cotton Bowl. Reverted back to his mean by going 5-6 the next year and resigned (or was fired).

— Mackovic went 10-1-1 in Year 4, then had embarrassing loss to Va Tech in the Fiesta Bowl (plus the whole Weaver-McElvey 40-year-old safety on the team. Lulz). Reverted to his mean over next two years, 8-5, 4-7, and was fired. He went from "Roll Left" to "Rout 66" in 12 quarters. 12!

— We all recall Herman going 10-4, then reverting to his mean, and being fired two years later.
 
In each case, the previous mean was the true measure, not the 10-win outlier.
Edited by BevoAbyss
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering all of the facts, "facts", and opinions sloshing around in this thread, I think it's quite clear that Steve Sarkisian is a smart guy, apparently even a good guy... but he is by no stretch of the imagination a great coach... yet.

It looks like some games are not taken seriously and see his team ill-prepared, and his coaching skills do not include making workable adjustments when opponents overwhelm the evident game plan. I lay most of the problems on the doorstep of his insisting on being OC as well as HC, and I believe that he will not be successful - i.e. will continue to lose WTF games - unless and until he gives up the OC job and finds a proper fit for it. I don't believe it is necessary for an OC to parrot him, but of course he would need to be competent. Right this instant, I'd go with Riley Minor, if he can be had. Quite a set of differences between Sark's and Riley's offensive philosophies, but I think they could work together very effectively. 

Bottom line: Sark should (and almost certainly will) be kept, but with a condition that he fully accepts his role as HC and hires a damned good OC to prepare and run that part of the team, and to run the O on Game Day. It's not a demotion, Steve, it's an acceptance of your promotion to HC. Until that happens, you're going to be just another middlin' coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BevoAbyss said:

Beware the illusion: “10 wins” and we’re back scenario … after which the coach reverts to his mean and is fired. We've seen that 3 times in 32 years.

— McWilliams went 10-1 in Year 4 ("Shock the Nation"), then faced the 46-3 annihilation by Miami in the Cotton Bowl. Reverted back to his mean by going 5-6 the next year and resigned (or was fired).

— Mackovic went 10-1-1 in Year 4, then had embarrassing loss to Va Tech in the Fiesta Bowl (plus the whole Weaver-McElvey 40-year-old safety on the team. Lulz). Reverted to his mean over next two years, 8-5, 4-7, and was fired. He went from "Roll Left" to "Rout 66" in 12 quarters. 12!

— We all recall Herman going 10-4, then reverting to his mean, and being fired two years later.
 
In each case, the previous mean was the true measure, not the 10-win outlier.

That’s why you keep him, but you do not EXTEND him until the end of regular season 4 (assuming he produces enough wins to warrant extending in Season 4).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

Bama is one game and our conference is a dumpster fire. Which team in the Big12 should we be losing to next year?

"Our conference is a dumpster fire" tells me all I need to know about your ability to evaluate football.  The worst team in the Big 12 beat a team playing in the Big 10 title game.  Big 12 top to bottom is behind the SEC currently and that's it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, hook me said:

By that list DKR & Mack are our 9th & 10th best coaches. 

Coaches with 20 or more games coached they are 3rd and 4th. 
 

Half the coaches ahead never made double digit games coached. 
 

Everyone around Charlie and Sark have coached 20+ 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I didn’t realize that this is the thread where the rationalizers and equivocators for Seven Win Steve were congregating until catching up. I knew they had to be somewhere. No matter the head coach, irrespective of performance, there will be a herd of posters climbing over each other to defend the guy. 

I don’t dislike Sarkisian. I’ve met with him. I’m not talking about a handshake in a line or any other shit like that. Spent time with the guy and have helped on things with the program. He’s a nice guy, he gets “it”, he’s recruiting well, he’s hired an above average staff, and he represents the program well in public. I like all of those things about him. 

That considered, my big issue is that the guy doesn’t know how to win. He’s inherently a loser. He chokes. He’s erratic. I think he needs help on gameday with the playcalling and maybe that would clear things up for him to get over the hump. 

Irrespective of performance, he’s getting 4 years. The administration is tired of change and so is the money backing facilities, and so is the money involved with NIL. Everybody wants to see the guy win. But no one is sitting around hoping to steady out at 8 wins. The expectation is being annually relevant at the end of the season in regard to the CFP. Don’t always have to make it, but if it is expanding to 12, got to be in it regularly. Sarkisian knows this and I’ve literally heard him talk about it. 

All good and everyone can have opinions and predicting the future is pure folly. But there is zero reason or justification to be giving the guy the benefit of the doubt regarding being a championship level head coach. There is nothing that can be said factually that merits that belief and anyone here writing with that level of certitude cannot defend themselves when it comes to slinging arrows at the doubters. It’s laughable. Hope in him may wind up paying off, and I hope he gets it done, but hope is all we have. 

PS - Anyone wishing to question the importance of NIL, tell that story to the 3 main men’s head coaches at Texas or to the guys covering recruiting locally or nationally. It’s the first, second and third things portalers and recruits and families are asking about and making decisions on. It isn’t that other schools can do it too (no fucking shit), it’s that it enables Texas to actually participate on a level field from here forward. If you have a different position, that’s great, but that’s your opinion that you’re attempting to pit against facts and you’re telling the rest of us that you don’t know jack shit about the landscape now. 

I expect (barring scandal and/or another 5-7 type season) that Sark will get a minimum of 4 seasons. I HOPE we win 9 this year and 10 or more next.

 

 


You are 100% correct about the defenders. Or maybe we should dub them “clingers”, because they’re clinging so desperately to the hope that he can win that they’ll do things like insist Charlie Strong was forced out too early or other similar fucktardery.

Edited by lilMAC25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

Absolutely get rid of him! This is not the 70's and 80's where coaches get to learn on the job for years. Today recruiting players be it from high school or the portal falls apart in an information age. If a move is delayed it is no longer patience it is now called delaying the inevitable.

Are you under the assumption that our recruiting will somehow get WORSE if we win more games, show more consistency, & make the Big 12 championship game next year? Herman isn't our coach anymore so I don't see how that would happen but yes, if Sark somehow manages to become Herman & pisses off every donor & top recruit he comes in contact with his time is probably deservedly short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

All good and everyone can have opinions and predicting the future is pure folly. But there is zero reason or justification to be giving the guy the benefit of the doubt regarding being a championship level head coach. There is nothing that can be said factually that merits that belief and anyone here writing with that level of certitude cannot defend themselves when it comes to slinging arrows at the doubters. It’s laughable. Hope in him may wind up paying off, and I hope he gets it done, but hope is all we have. 

I don't see many here giving him the benefit of the doubt.  I'm hopeful for the reasons you listed and doubtful for the other reasons you listed.  I have no idea how the next 2 years will go.  I think next season's success is largely dependent on whether or not QE decides it's time to dedicate an off-season working on fundamentals necessary to become an elite QB (and I have no idea what his work ethic is like).  My issue are the people on this thread drawing lines in the sand without any context (i.e., 9-3 next year (which likely makes the Big 12 title game) = Fired regardless of outcome from there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Skipper said:

I don't see many here giving him the benefit of the doubt.  I'm hopeful for the reasons you listed and doubtful for the other reasons you listed.  I have no idea how the next 2 years will go.  I think next season's success is largely dependent on whether or not QE decides it's time to dedicate an off-season working on fundamentals necessary to become an elite QB (and I have no idea what his work ethic is like).  My issue are the people on this thread drawing lines in the sand without any context (i.e., 9-3 next year (which likely makes the Big 12 title game) = Fired regardless of outcome from there.

Seinfeld What GIF by HULU
 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Coaches with 20 or more games coached they are 3rd and 4th. 
 

Half the coaches ahead never made double digit games coached. 
 

 

4th* & 5th* & that doesn't make it THAT much better because winning percentages only gets you so far. The point is well received that Sark has not been good so far, & I'm certainly not one to argue that he has been. I'm just trying to say if he can win 9 regular season games & make the CCG next year that's not a bad year. If he beats BU & wins the bowl game, then goes 9-3 next year his winning percentage will be the same as Hermans heading into his 4th year. Sark will have a .622% DKR was at .688 & Mack was .710 heading into their 4th years. Obviously he has as much of a chance (probably more of a chance) of losing to BU & only winning 7 or 8 next year in which case he'll likely be fired or at least have a very short leash in his 4th year & we can screw up another hiring process while heading to the SEC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Are there people on this thread saying with some level of certainty saying Sark is the next great coach at UT?  Have I missed those posts?  

I’m sorry, I guess “giving him the benefit of the doubt” means something different to you than it does to me.

 

IMO, Sark needs the benefit of the doubt to be considered anything above a mediocre head coach, and there are a shit ton who claim he’s better than mediocre.


People would need drugs to think he’s the next great coach at TEXAS.

Edited by lilMAC25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hook me said:

4th* & 5th* & that doesn't make it THAT much better because winning percentages only gets you so far. The point is well received that Sark has not been good so far, & I'm certainly not one to argue that he has been. I'm just trying to say if he can win 9 regular season games & make the CCG next year that's not a bad year. If he beats BU & wins the bowl game, then goes 9-3 next year his winning percentage will be the same as Hermans heading into his 4th year. Sark will have a .622% DKR was at .688 & Mack was .710 heading into their 4th years. Obviously he has as much of a chance (probably more of a chance) of losing to BU & only winning 7 or 8 next year in which case he'll likely be fired or at least have a very short leash in his 4th year & we can screw up another hiring process while heading to the SEC.

You have guys who have coached 200+ games for Texas 4th and 5th in terms of winning percentage. You trying to downplay the amount of games coached while having .774 and .767  winning percentages is at best retarded  


The guys you’re using to try and bolster your dog shit opinion all coached before world war 2. 3 of them prior to the 1900s. 4 totaling single digit games coached, 2 others fewer than 20.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, hook me said:

Are you under the assumption that our recruiting will somehow get WORSE if we win more games, show more consistency, & make the Big 12 championship game next year? Herman isn't our coach anymore so I don't see how that would happen but yes, if Sark somehow manages to become Herman & pisses off every donor & top recruit he comes in contact with his time is probably deservedly short.

I was responding to your statement that it is ridiculous to get rid of Sark if he has not risen to DKR and Mack levels by year 3. Well DKR and Mack won 9 games by year 3. That means Sark won at most 8 games next year. Don"t think that regular season record gets you to B12 CG.  It verifies that even at Texas and sober Sark is stuck in mediocrity. That will make recruiting in the top 5 very hard.

Edited by DanTheHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Loop 1604 said:

Re: clock management. It’s been situationally pretty terrible actually. Many games I’ve watched us inexplicably let the clock roll off at the end of the half with 3 timeouts available. 

Sometimes I think people want Sark to use timeouts just to say they used them, or to have another thing to second guess (i.e.) used them the wrong time.  

  • 5/11 games, we have scored a TD with under a minute remaining in the half.
  • 8/11 games, we  scored TD(6) or FG (2) with under 4 minutes remaining

Whether he uses TO or not, seems pretty good at closing out 1st halves with a score.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I didn’t realize that this is the thread where the rationalizers and equivocators for Seven Win Steve were congregating until catching up. I knew they had to be somewhere. No matter the head coach, irrespective of performance, there will be a herd of posters climbing over each other to defend the guy. 

I don’t dislike Sarkisian. I’ve met with him. I’m not talking about a handshake in a line or any other shit like that. Spent time with the guy and have helped on things with the program. He’s a nice guy, he gets “it”, he’s recruiting well, he’s hired an above average staff, and he represents the program well in public. I like all of those things about him. 

That considered, my big issue is that the guy doesn’t know how to win. He’s inherently a loser. He chokes. He’s erratic. I think he needs help on gameday with the playcalling and maybe that would clear things up for him to get over the hump. 

Irrespective of performance, he’s getting 4 years. The administration is tired of change and so is the money backing facilities, and so is the money involved with NIL. Everybody wants to see the guy win. But no one is sitting around hoping to steady out at 8 wins. The expectation is being annually relevant at the end of the season in regard to the CFP. Don’t always have to make it, but if it is expanding to 12, got to be in it regularly. Sarkisian knows this and I’ve literally heard him talk about it. 

All good and everyone can have opinions and predicting the future is pure folly. But there is zero reason or justification to be giving the guy the benefit of the doubt regarding being a championship level head coach. There is nothing that can be said factually that merits that belief and anyone here writing with that level of certitude cannot defend themselves when it comes to slinging arrows at the doubters. It’s laughable. Hope in him may wind up paying off, and I hope he gets it done, but hope is all we have. 

PS - Anyone wishing to question the importance of NIL, tell that story to the 3 main men’s head coaches at Texas or to the guys covering recruiting locally or nationally. It’s the first, second and third things portalers and recruits and families are asking about and making decisions on. It isn’t that other schools can do it too (no fucking shit), it’s that it enables Texas to actually participate on a level field from here forward. If you have a different position, that’s great, but that’s your opinion that you’re attempting to pit against facts and you’re telling the rest of us that you don’t know jack shit about the landscape now. 

Negged, post is far too calm and rational for this thread. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

You have guys who have coached 200+ games for Texas 4th and 5th in terms of winning percentage. You trying to downplay the amount of games coached while having .774 and .767  winning percentages is at best retarded  


The guys you’re using to try and bolster your dog shit opinion all coached before world war 2. 3 of them prior to the 1900s. 4 totaling single digit games coached, 2 others fewer than 20.

 

My issue with you and others focusing on 10 win regular season as a standard are doing so without any context of why 10 win seasons with our current (or next years schedule) is not = to most of the 9-10 win seasons Mack racked up.    In Mack's tenure of racking up 10 win seasons, we played 4 non-conference games (almost always consisting of 3 absolute cake walks and 1 mid level Power 5 team we definitely should beat but sometimes didn't (i.e., UNC, Stanford, NC State, Ark. etc.).  And back then, the Big 12 was a decent but EXTREMELY top heavy conference.  There were at least 2-3 scheduled in-conference wins.   Basically every single season we had 6 scheduled wins (easily 3-6 TD favorites in each) + 2-4 games we definitely should win (14+ point favorites) and then 2-4 games that would make or break the season (OU plus whomever was scheduled and good that year out of Nebraska, KSU, Colorado, A&M).  It's really no different than what Michigan and Ohio St. have been able to do this year or some of the "fools gold" season Aggy has racked up.  SEC teams have built their entire conference superiority legacy around non-conference cupcakes, scheduled wins and an unbalanced conference.

Focusing solely on wins and losses without context isn't helpful.   That being said, I don't think Sark met expectations this season largely because of the OSU loss.  Because in context (how many starters they were missing to injury) that team had no business keeping it within 2 scores.  

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

This.  And Sorrell was a Herman recruit who committed before we made the coaching change.

I think the current freshman class is going to be good, and Sark’s next class looks good, too.  But we’re really putting the cart before the horse in crediting him for the roster.  Banks, Watts and Worthy (I guess) are the only guys he’s brought in that we even know are good yet.  

You could add Finkley, K Rob, Jaylon G, Hutson and then maybe Brooks, and Jordan to the list. Still a short list tho. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Nope. 10 regular season wins with a chance to get to 11 or 12 wins via ccg or bowl. 
 

 

that’s two losses in the regular season AT MOST

Since 1970 Texas has won 10 or more games 17 times, in 52 years. 33% lmao. You’re a fucking whiny bitch fan who knows almost nothing of reality. Mack had 7 years with two of the greatest college QB’s of all time and won two conference championships. It’s fine to want nice things but a whole bunch of bullshit to expect it to be the bar for which we gauge a coach. It’s happened with Darrel Royal and no one else.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Skipper said:

My issue with you and others focusing on 10 win regular season as a standard are doing so without any context of why 10 win seasons with our current (or next years schedule) is not = to most of the 9-10 win seasons Mack racked up.    In Mack's tenure of racking up 10 win seasons, we played 4 non-conference games (almost always consisting of 3 absolute cake walks and 1 mid level Power 5 team we definitely should beat but sometimes didn't (i.e., UNC, Stanford, NC State, Ark. etc.).  And back then, the Big 12 was a decent but EXTREMELY top heavy conference.  There were at least 2-3 scheduled in-conference wins.   Basically every single season we had 6 scheduled wins (easily 3-6 TD favorites in each) + 2-4 games we definitely should win (14+ point favorites) and then 2-4 games that would make or break the season (OU plus whomever was scheduled and good that year out of Nebraska, KSU, Colorado, A&M).  It's really no different than what Michigan and Ohio St. have been able to do this year or some of the "fools gold" season Aggy has racked up.  SEC teams have built their entire conference superiority legacy around non-conference cupcakes, scheduled wins and an unbalanced conference.

Focusing solely on wins and losses without context isn't helpful.   That being said, I don't think Sark met expectations this season largely because of the OSU loss.  Because in context (how many starters they were missing to injury) that team had no business keeping it within 2 scores.  

 

You sound like a loser. Focusing on wins is the only thing that matters in a game where wins is what gets you to championships. But hey let’s use the time we back doored into a conference championship game as a coping mechanism. Win every conference game you make the ccg it’s that simple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WinningIsHard said:

Since 1970 Texas has won 10 or more games 17 times, in 52 years. 33% lmao. You’re a fucking whiny bitch fan who knows almost nothing of reality. Mack had 7 years with two of the greatest college QB’s of all time and won two conference championships. It’s fine to want nice things but a whole bunch of bullshit to expect it to be the bar for which we gauge a coach. It’s happened with Darrel Royal and no one else.  

I’m pretty sure 9 wins in the 70s was the standard. In the 90s 10 wins was about national championship level. In 2022 national championship level is 11-12 wins. 
 

we have been dog shit most years post 1983 Akers. So yeah that explains why we haven’t won 10 games.

 

 

especially when we hire mackovic, McWilliams, Charlie strong, Tom Herman, and Sark. Mack has been the exception going on 40 years. 
 

 

got damn you and others have low standards for a program with our resources and recruiting bed. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 But hey let’s use the time we back doored into a conference championship game as a coping mechanism. Win every conference game you make the ccg it’s that simple. 

WTF are you talking about dude.  Trying to discuss any kind of nuance with people like you is a waste of fucking time. I'll just leave you to being miserable and yelling at clouds.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Skipper said:

WTF are you talking about dude.  Trying to discuss any kind of nuance with people like you is a waste of fucking time. I'll just leave you to being miserable and yelling at clouds.

 

And I’ll leave you to wonder why we continually are mediocre program with your pussy ass expectations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

10 wins is not some huge accomplishment in the modern game. You can lose 4 times and win 10 games. 
He also has 3 years of NIL. It shouldn’t take him 4,5, or 6 years to win 10 games especially in a conference with no one in it.

Exactly. Excluding the covid season, the last 3 full seasons of college football resulted in 28,28 and 25 teams finishing with 10 or more wins. Asking Sark to win 10+ games in his third season is basically  the same thing as asking him to field a team capable of finishing a season in the top 25. Fucking lulz at some of his defenders claiming that is an unfair burden. "Ooohhh but we have Alabama on our schedule, no way we should expect to win 10 games." Why the fuck not??? We're likely playing 13 games even without a CCG

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

There are optimists, realists, pessimists and every shade in between on the fandom spectrum, including fans that oscillate in between different categories. Not to mention, the infinite number of ways one can interpret the current and past results through ones own shade of fandom. There is no right or wrong answer.

This is unequivocally right. Or wrong. It’s definitely one of those two. Maybe. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skipper said:

"Our conference is a dumpster fire" tells me all I need to know about your ability to evaluate football.  The worst team in the Big 12 beat a team playing in the Big 10 title game.  Big 12 top to bottom is behind the SEC currently and that's it.

The conference is full of average to above average teams. There are zero elite teams in this conference. The top of basically every other conference would stomp the top of this one. Our 8th team is 500. Cool. We should beat those teams. But we dont

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The conference is full of average to above average teams. There are zero elite teams in this conference. The top of basically every other conference would stomp the top of this one. Our 8th team is 500. Cool. We should beat those teams. But we dont

For me that’s not a dumpster fire but to each his own. I’m also not convinced that TCU gets it handed to them in the playoff. Georgia might do that, but they’re a cut above all else.

TCUs skill guys are very good, have some diverse skill sets and depth. The Oline is mature and experienced. That always give the potential to be competitive.

But last years OSU, BU, and OU threesome was pretty strong and made the conference much more difficult from a survival standpoint.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Had Enough said:


For me that’s not a dumpster fire but to each his own. I’m also not convinced that TCU gets it handed to them in the playoff. Georgia might do that, but they’re a cut above all else.

TCUs skill guys are very good, have some diverse skill sets and depth. The Oline is mature and experienced. That always give the potential to be competitive.

But last years OSU, BU, and OU threesome was pretty strong and made the conference much more difficult from a survival standpoint.

It’s a conference that a school like Texas should sit at the top of. You know like Michigan and Ohio St. do in that shitty conference. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

The conference is full of average to above average teams. There are zero elite teams in this conference. The top of basically every other conference would stomp the top of this one. Our 8th team is 500. Cool. We should beat those teams. But we dont

 

7 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

It’s a conference that a school like Texas should sit at the top of. You know like Michigan and Ohio St. do in that shitty conference. 

Don’t bother. They’re too busy making bullshit excuses as to why Texas can’t do something. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Blotto said:

 

Exactly. Excluding the covid season, the last 3 full seasons of college football resulted in 28,28 and 25 teams finishing with 10 or more wins. Asking Sark to win 10+ games in his third season is basically  the same thing as asking him to field a team capable of finishing a season in the top 25. Fucking lulz at some of his defenders claiming that is an unfair burden. "Ooohhh but we have Alabama on our schedule, no way we should expect to win 10 games." Why the fuck not??? We're likely playing 13 games even without a CCG

Nah man unfortunately for Sark that is just too much to ask for. He needs 6 years to rebuild in the NIL/portal era. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

In this thread someone pointed to a Win over Kansas as a sign of progress

The only thing you can take from the Kansas game is the way the team responded after the tcu loss. We are expected to beat Kansas obviously but I thought the absolute domination was nice to see. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

While you’re at it count how many time OU has won 10 in the same time period. 

If you do the 9 game in the 70’s and 10 for the rest then Texas has 21 in 52 years lol. Oklahomas has won 9 or more in the 70’s and 10 or from then on 32 fucking times. They also have 16 conference championships in my lifetime. They are better at focusing on football than us, clearly. But Yeah we should just flip a switch and be more like Ohio state because our history says we (checks notes) win 5 conference titles in 36 years. CTJ just said we are about to level the playing field with NIL. That should completely change our problems and fix a lot of the garbage issues mack and herman couldn’t get past like OL recruiting. Saying “we’re Texas” doesn’t mean dick. Mouthy fucking cunt, you’re like a teenager. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

It’s a conference that a school like Texas should sit at the top of. You know like Michigan and Ohio St. do in that shitty conference. 

It took Michigan 7 years to "sit atop" a shitty conference with Harbaugh. Before that they placed second in their division once & 3rd or worse 5 other times. I would expect Sark would have to make the conference championship game before year 7 in order to stick around.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hook me said:

It took Michigan 7 years to "sit atop" a shitty conference with Harbaugh. Before that they placed second in their division once & 3rd or worse 5 other times. I would expect Sark would have to make the conference championship game before year 7 in order to stick around.

They finished 10-3 his first two seasons and there’s this other team I mentioned that is pretty good.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...