Jump to content

Who is next?


Pancho

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I love Traylor but I need to see way more before I want that to happen. Luckily we still get two more years of Sark to evaluate.

Honestly Patterson should take over immediately. 

At least Patterson would chew out the officials and the entitled divas on this squad like Worthy. 

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

Just now, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

I don’t know but I’ve cringed a lot every time somebody put “Got Arch” in the plus column for Sark.

Plenty of time for Arch to decide he has a brighter future elsewhere.

There’s also no guarantee that he’s even good. 
It’s insane thing to think about keeping a coach for kid that hasn’t ever played 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus H Tapdancing Christ… do some of you actually think Urban would be on the table again to land in Austin?  If so, this board needs to moderate and ban any mouthbreathing fuckhead that thinks this is a legit option….dude is a walking cancer, he already pissed on Belmont’s leg, and our high and mighty big cigars think this program is too good to stoop to him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just give the damn reigns to GP and let Marion call the plays and install his 2 back go go offense.

For all the shit Jimbo gets, Sarks offense hasn’t scored a TD in 8 of the last 10 quarters.  Just pathetic.  We have half the starters on offense are 5 star players.  I don’t want I hear it’s a talent problem.  This is a fucking coaching problem.

Edited by victory88
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, 936horn said:

It literally does not matter. We will hire some shitty coach because they fit our "image" and the BMDs will pat each other on the butt on a job well done. Maybe get a consulting firm or three involved, and we'll be right back here in three years. CDC is a loser, Sark is a loser, the big money guys are fucking losers. This University can not and will not do what it takes to win and everyone might as well just get comfortable with that. Our culture won't allow us to hire winners who happen to like fingerbanging co-eds like Urban, so we settle for losers like Sark. Well guess what - our fucking culture is just losing. That's it. That's our culture. Fucking losers who lose.

Speak Black Woman GIF by Robert E Blackmon

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went through this thought experiment a few months back when we lost to Tech.

To me, the minimum requirement for whoever we hire next should be that they have won a conference championship (or co-championship) at the P5 level in the last decade or so. This shows that they are capable of taking a program to some modicum of success, while playing against solid competition week-in and week-out. Additionally, both of the G5 coaching hires we've made in the last decade have either been mediocre or terrible, so we should avoid hiring directly from that level if possible.

 

I selected 2010 as the cutoff point for this list, as it was the start of the dark ages that UT Football currently finds itself in. This narrows down the list of potential hires to a little under 30 names:

image.png.23401922b6be007996d8963868151505.png

 

From this list, we can remove anyone is currently experiencing success at a powerhouse program, has been part of a major scandal, or is seemingly retired from coaching. These coaches would likely not be interested in coaching at UT, or inversely UT would not be interested in hiring them. That gives us the following names:

image.png.4c520ad32c8ad1ba24c5b56a99dd9533.png

 

From these 13 names, I think it's also safe to remove anyone who has not experienced some amount of success recently. Again this is subjective, but for my definition of success I'm going to say the coach needs to have won at least 10 games in a season in any of the past 5 complete seasons (2017-2021). Coaches that meet this requirement are as follows:

image.png.bec34eebfaaa0f5ed9cc86c28804e791.png

 

There's still quite a few stinkers on this list (namely Malzahn, Helton, and Franklin), but it should at least give us a starting point on who we theoretically should be going after if Sark gets canned. To me the best names are the coaches from the Big 12; Gundy, Patterson, and Aranda. If Sonny Dykes wins the Big 12 this year or Chip Kelly wins 10 games at UCLA this season they should also be under consideration.

 

TLDR:

The next football coach UT hires should have won a conference championship since 2010, and won at least 10 games in a season since 2017. Based on that criteria, the best options seem to be Mike Gundy, Gary Patterson, and Dave Aranda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Auto Driller said:

All I know is that whatever criteria we use to evaluate coaching candidates is wrong as fuck. I would honestly be happy to hire someone who won a bunch of championships in FCS or some shit. Anything different than what we have been doing.

Well McWilliams was totally unproven.  Mackovic was exactly what he was before.  So was Mack Brown-very good but almost always 2nd place.  Strong was unproven.  Herman was just like he was before.  Sark appears to be just like he was before.  Maybe we should hire somebody with some history, who at least has been very good before.  We keep betting on finding the next DKR, someone relatively young who will be something different than their history would suggest.

We're TEXAS.  We don't need to gamble on a coach.  We can hire someone proven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bullet said:

Well McWilliams was totally unproven.  Mackovic was exactly what he was before.  So was Mack Brown-very good but almost always 2nd place.  Strong was unproven.  Herman was just like he was before.  Sark appears to be just like he was before.  Maybe we should hire somebody with some history, who at least has been very good before.  We keep betting on finding the next DKR, someone relatively young who will be something different than their history would suggest.

We're TEXAS.  We don't need to gamble on a coach.  We can hire someone proven.

Who do you have in mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TX Wing Fan said:

I went through this thought experiment a few months back when we lost to Tech.

To me, the minimum requirement for whoever we hire next should be that they have won a conference championship (or co-championship) at the P5 level in the last decade or so. This shows that they are capable of taking a program to some modicum of success, while playing against solid competition week-in and week-out. Additionally, both of the G5 coaching hires we've made in the last decade have either been mediocre or terrible, so we should avoid hiring directly from that level if possible.

 

I selected 2010 as the cutoff point for this list, as it was the start of the dark ages that UT Football currently finds itself in. This narrows down the list of potential hires to a little under 30 names:

image.png.23401922b6be007996d8963868151505.png

 

From this list, we can remove anyone is currently experiencing success at a powerhouse program, has been part of a major scandal, or is seemingly retired from coaching. These coaches would likely not be interested in coaching at UT, or inversely UT would not be interested in hiring them. That gives us the following names:

image.png.4c520ad32c8ad1ba24c5b56a99dd9533.png

 

From these 13 names, I think it's also safe to remove anyone who has not experienced some amount of success recently. Again this is subjective, but for my definition of success I'm going to say the coach needs to have won at least 10 games in a season in any of the past 5 complete seasons (2017-2021). Coaches that meet this requirement are as follows:

image.png.bec34eebfaaa0f5ed9cc86c28804e791.png

 

There's still quite a few stinkers on this list (namely Malzahn, Helton, and Franklin), but it should at least give us a starting point on who we theoretically should be going after if Sark gets canned. To me the best names are the coaches from the Big 12; Gundy, Patterson, and Aranda. If Sonny Dykes wins the Big 12 this year or Chip Kelly wins 10 games at UCLA this season they should also be under consideration.

 

TLDR:

The next football coach UT hires should have won a conference championship since 2010, and won at least 10 games in a season since 2017. Based on that criteria, the best options seem to be Mike Gundy, Gary Patterson, and Dave Aranda.

Sure makes it look like a really short list.  Patterson is too old and Gundy with his mullet is all Okie St.  So Aranda or Chip Kelly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

i still don't understand why we don't pull 2 guys to pave the way for bijan go right, left, right, left.

what about all the window dressing to set up flips and slants

when you are losing the box man to man you have to disguise the creation of a numerical advantage at the point of attack

i've seen sark call it once or twice in the first half every game and then never goes back to it

/loud noises

We tried it. Either Bijan would get impatient and blow past his lead blocker or the lead blocker, Conner, was too slow to get out to the LB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Why would anyone logically think that hiring Patterson to be HC makes any sense? TCU fired him, and is undefeated with their new guy. Think about that.

Because he has a track record of success over many years? Sometimes it gets stale. Ask Mack

Btw, I’m not saying he should be the guy. I do however think we would be better off letting him coach until we find someone else but I doubt he wants to do that

Edited by hobbes2702
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Because he has a track record of success over many years? Sometimes it gets stale. Ask Mack

Btw, I’m not saying he should be the guy. I do however think we would be better off letting him coach until we find someone else but I doubt he wants to do that

So you're saying he baked the cake? I just think the dude is kinda old and the game has passed him by, and that he doesn't have what it takes to be a successful HC anymore. He'd rather be semi-retired, and good for him.

Edited by Pam Cummings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, TX Wing Fan said:

I went through this thought experiment a few months back when we lost to Tech.

To me, the minimum requirement for whoever we hire next should be that they have won a conference championship (or co-championship) at the P5 level in the last decade or so. This shows that they are capable of taking a program to some modicum of success, while playing against solid competition week-in and week-out. Additionally, both of the G5 coaching hires we've made in the last decade have either been mediocre or terrible, so we should avoid hiring directly from that level if possible.

 

I selected 2010 as the cutoff point for this list, as it was the start of the dark ages that UT Football currently finds itself in. This narrows down the list of potential hires to a little under 30 names:

image.png.23401922b6be007996d8963868151505.png

 

From this list, we can remove anyone is currently experiencing success at a powerhouse program, has been part of a major scandal, or is seemingly retired from coaching. These coaches would likely not be interested in coaching at UT, or inversely UT would not be interested in hiring them. That gives us the following names:

image.png.4c520ad32c8ad1ba24c5b56a99dd9533.png

 

From these 13 names, I think it's also safe to remove anyone who has not experienced some amount of success recently. Again this is subjective, but for my definition of success I'm going to say the coach needs to have won at least 10 games in a season in any of the past 5 complete seasons (2017-2021). Coaches that meet this requirement are as follows:

image.png.bec34eebfaaa0f5ed9cc86c28804e791.png

 

There's still quite a few stinkers on this list (namely Malzahn, Helton, and Franklin), but it should at least give us a starting point on who we theoretically should be going after if Sark gets canned. To me the best names are the coaches from the Big 12; Gundy, Patterson, and Aranda. If Sonny Dykes wins the Big 12 this year or Chip Kelly wins 10 games at UCLA this season they should also be under consideration.

 

TLDR:

The next football coach UT hires should have won a conference championship since 2010, and won at least 10 games in a season since 2017. Based on that criteria, the best options seem to be Mike Gundy, Gary Patterson, and Dave Aranda.

I think you should factor in sub fbs national championships into this formula somehow. Tressel and kelly are both guys who were national championship coaches sub-fbs level before making the jump.


 

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...