Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Atticus said:


The roster cost is part of our advantage. This is the era we play in.

It can get a hell of a lot worse. 

How do you think we pay for that roster advantage? I'm not saying he should or shouldn't be fired in that scenario, I'm saying I don't think the money would continue to back him, which means he would be gone. Are you under the impression that someone besides them would be making the call? 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

If we fire a coach who follows up two straight top 4 finishes with 9-3 and 9-3, we deserve the 7-10 years in the desert that follow. 

Damn, what did the aggies do in their past life?

Edited by Daichee Bell
Posted
11 minutes ago, BlackCat said:

You're talking about millions of donor dollars being completely wasted on the Arch era if we miss the playoffs again. The conversation will be do we want to commit millions more to this guy or do we want to start this next cycle with a new name of our choosing? I don't see whats silly about that considering we are sitting at home this year watching a bunch of teams we would most likely beat. I'd bet we are top 3 preseason again next year. Sark would likely be toast in that scenario and I don't see what is silly about that.

The big money guys  that could force a move, are a lot more realistic than the morons on the football board.  It'll take a lot of 9-3 seasons before they start putting pressure on Sark.  They want good football and a respectable program.  I could see the team being Sarks best team next year and 9-3 isn't a bad season.  You've got OSU, OU, at Tennessee, at LSU, at TAMU...Who knows what Ole miss will be next year.

 

As long as the wheels don't come off somewhere or Sark doesn't get hit with a scandal he could go 7-5 next year and he won't be fired.  His seat will be awfully hot, but he won't get canned.

Posted
28 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

A key question to ask ourselves is, would we trade coaching staffs with A&M or OU? Absolutely not. Actually I think that list is pretty short

Indiana, Georgia (though with boom here now maybe just Kirby), tOSU, that’s probably it. Maybe Lanning but that assumes he’d be SECx3 here instead of Pac10 whatever. Who else? No one. 

as long as Sark stays dialed in he’s here as long as he wants to be. 

Posted
49 minutes ago, scramblyn said:

Indiana, Georgia (though with boom here now maybe just Kirby), tOSU, that’s probably it. Maybe Lanning but that assumes he’d be SECx3 here instead of Pac10 whatever. Who else? No one. 

as long as Sark stays dialed in he’s here as long as he wants to be. 

Some of the overreactions also take for granted the floor that Sark has established. I’m much more interested in him working on areas of weakness than wholesale change. I hope he diagnoses well. 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

If we fire a coach who follows up two straight top 4 finishes with 9-3 and 9-3, we deserve the 7-10 years in the desert that follow. 

9-3 in a 9 game SEC conference schedule is not the same as 9-3 in B12 or the previous SEC.  
what we are going to witness next year is unprecedented in college football. Spread 8 more SEC losses around this year and things would have looked a lot different.  This is why there will be expansion to 16, no byes, first 2 rounds at home schools. 9-3 will be the new 10-2 imo. 

Edited by jdhorn92
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Just a question and I’m not saying fire him one way or another but if we go 9-3/10-2 repeatedly and get bounced first round year after year after year when do you decide that isn’t good enough? Because after all we Sark has set the floor according to some of your arguments 

Posted
2 minutes ago, jdhorn92 said:

9-3 in a 9 game SEC conference schedule is not the same as 9-3 in B12 or the previous SEC.  
what we are going to witness next year is unprecedented in college football. Spread 8 more SEC losses around this year and things would have looked a lot different.  This is why there will be expansion to 16, no byes, first 2 rounds at home schools

I don’t think first two rounds will be at home. I think first will then it will go to all the BCS/CFP bowls 

Posted
1 hour ago, jdhorn92 said:

9-3 in a 9 game SEC conference schedule is not the same as 9-3 in B12 or the previous SEC.  
what we are going to witness next year is unprecedented in college football. Spread 8 more SEC losses around this year and things would have looked a lot different.  This is why there will be expansion to 16, no byes, first 2 rounds at home schools. 9-3 will be the new 10-2 imo. 

I do think there is a major recalibration of expectations that will happen/needs to happen in the modern era of college football. Even this season, most of our fans yell and scream about how we obviously deserved to be in the playoffs over so many teams because of our schedule, and yet in the next breath say Sark is on the hot seat for not making the playoffs.

Competitive for the playoffs should be the expectation every year. We met that expectation this year. Other teams are spending real money on players, too, including teams we beat this year. 

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, BlackCat said:

You're talking about millions of donor dollars being completely wasted on the Arch era if we miss the playoffs again. The conversation will be do we want to commit millions more to this guy or do we want to start this next cycle with a new name of our choosing? I don't see whats silly about that considering we are sitting at home this year watching a bunch of teams we would most likely beat. I'd bet we are top 3 preseason again next year. Sark would likely be toast in that scenario and I don't see what is silly about that.

The last time Texas contended for a NC 3 straight seasons was 1968-1970. Doing that is fucking hard. Sark is allowed to have a season like he just had and yes it would have to be a couple in a row before his seat is hot. 

I mean you just said it yourself -"watching a bunch of teams Texas would likely beat". That kind of implies that Texas is doing a lot of stuff right still despite having an off season. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Just a question and I’m not saying fire him one way or another but if we go 9-3/10-2 repeatedly and get bounced first round year after year after year when do you decide that isn’t good enough? Because after all we Sark has set the floor according to some of your arguments 

Bounced?  I'm fairly confident we would have beat any of the 1st round teams this year....but yeah compared to what 85% or so of what longhorn football has looked like in my 45 years on this planet....this year as the "bad year" doesn't sound too shabby.

  • Like 1
Posted
7 hours ago, scramblyn said:

There’s like 4 people who think he’s on the hot seat. Many ignore the clear change in behavior last year and this spring and what’s going on now too. I have no doubt he got a talking to. He appears to have responded.  His bullshit lost any “feel goods” with me. Win or GTFO. 

I don't believe he's on the hot seat like some have suggested, especially considering we were just in the CFP the late two years, and we can still win double digit games this year. That's a down year I'll take that all day over the shit we got served for 13 years.

I'm sure CDC had a talking to him about why hiring friends doesn't workout. I don't know how it went, but my imagination says CDC said "get your shit together or else it won't be looking good for you within the next 2 seasons. Fix the issues or find another job. This is University of Texas, not Iowa. You are held to a higher standard at a blue blood. Fix it or put in your resignation if you want to text the NFL waters . If not, you have a lot of stuff to fix, and I'm glad you got a good RB coach, and an elite DC. Now let's work on finding an OL coach, safeties (even though Muschamp coaches them), and a WR coach who can develop."

Posted
2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Just a question and I’m not saying fire him one way or another but if we go 9-3/10-2 repeatedly and get bounced first round year after year after year when do you decide that isn’t good enough? Because after all we Sark has set the floor according to some of your arguments 

If I had to take a guess, if he did that 3 years in a row I bet CDC would fire him. Taking into account that he got us there, but we're Texas, we should expect to be there and win it, and if we keep getting bounced CDC will have an aneurysm and promptly terminate him.

He did the same with Amge Kelly, who the year before won the conference, but this year she had no more grace left. She has underachieved constantly. You can only do so much before it's time to change the guard. 

Posted
54 minutes ago, TexasRenegade said:

Bounced?  I'm fairly confident we would have beat any of the 1st round teams this year....but yeah compared to what 85% or so of what longhorn football has looked like in my 45 years on this planet....this year as the "bad year" doesn't sound too shabby.

Reread the post and get back to us with your answer. 

Posted
5 hours ago, BlackCat said:

You're talking about millions of donor dollars being completely wasted on the Arch era if we miss the playoffs again. The conversation will be do we want to commit millions more to this guy or do we want to start this next cycle with a new name of our choosing? I don't see whats silly about that considering we are sitting at home this year watching a bunch of teams we would most likely beat. I'd bet we are top 3 preseason again next year. Sark would likely be toast in that scenario and I don't see what is silly about that.

Donors better get ready to spend every year. Don’t waste arch or dia or Lacey or future qb years. Price is gonna go up every year. Not just for arch 

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, BlackCat said:

You're talking about millions of donor dollars being completely wasted on the Arch era if we miss the playoffs again. The conversation will be do we want to commit millions more to this guy or do we want to start this next cycle with a new name of our choosing? I don't see whats silly about that considering we are sitting at home this year watching a bunch of teams we would most likely beat. I'd bet we are top 3 preseason again next year. Sark would likely be toast in that scenario and I don't see what is silly about that.

Millions of dollars are going to be spent on the roster regardless to who QB1 is. I think some of you set your own selves up to be disappointed thinking it was a given we’d win a championship with Arch, who to date, hasn’t really played like a championship caliber QB. It’s possible the next guy is better, our chances don’t die once Arch moves on. 

Edited by SarkAfterDark
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Just a question and I’m not saying fire him one way or another but if we go 9-3/10-2 repeatedly and get bounced first round year after year after year when do you decide that isn’t good enough? Because after all we Sark has set the floor according to some of your arguments 

December 21st, 2028

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 12/20/2025 at 3:11 AM, Bevo said:

FIFY - Akina was of no help. 

And that's why we're watching the playoffs on TV instead of the sidelines.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

And that's why we're watching the playoffs on TV instead of the sidelines.

We’re watching because our HC refused to use the bye week to make the necessary change at OL before Florida. And he also had us so unprepared vs Florida. 

Posted
2 hours ago, William Bludworth said:

I'm sure CDC had a talking to him about why hiring friends doesn't workout. I don't know how it went, but my imagination says CDC said "get your shit together or else it won't be looking good for you within the next 2 seasons. Fix the issues or find another job. This is University of Texas, not Iowa. You are held to a higher standard at a blue blood. Fix it or put in your resignation if you want to text the NFL waters . If not, you have a lot of stuff to fix, and I'm glad you got a good RB coach, and an elite DC. Now let's work on finding an OL coach, safeties (even though Muschamp coaches them), and a WR coach who can develop."

Yeah I'm not sure that's the vibe between CDC and Sark considering Sark makes more money and is a more valuable commodity. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
30 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

We’re watching because our HC refused to use the bye week to make the necessary change at OL before Florida. And he also had us so unprepared vs Florida. 

The offense isn’t the reason we lost that game. 21 points should have been more than enough to beat that Florida team. I’m pretty sure they scored the most points they scored all year in SEC play against us. PK got out schemed.

Posted
The offense isn’t the reason we lost that game. 21 points should have been more than enough to beat that Florida team. I’m pretty sure they scored the most points they scored all year in SEC play against us. PK got out schemed.

Yeah, that was PK’s worst called game in 2 years. Not pressuring Lagway and not stacking the box off the bat was criminal.

Anyway….
Posted
33 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Yeah I'm not sure that's the vibe between CDC and Sark considering Sark makes more money and is a more valuable commodity. 

That's what I hoped it would be. Regardless of money, CDC is still his boss. He's the only person he reports to daily, I believe. So even if Sark makes more money, that would take a massive hit if he were terminated for cause, and all companies know how to do that. Do I believe that's what happened? No. Do I believe CDC had a talk with him about everything that went wrong last and it would be in his best interest to make some changes. 

I've never seen Sark he this proactive before. He seems to be on a mission, and that mission is to get Arch and the program another trophy. All CDC cares about is winning, and especially the Director's Cup. That's his baby, and he isn't letting anyone get complacent on his watch from this time on. Nice guy, but can be cutthroat when he has to play bad cop. He's done too much good for our university to just say "just win and the rest will take care of itself. He thinks longer picture. If in 2 years we are still fighting to not lose 3 games (16 team playoffs or not, we need new, fresh blood, and he should have one loss minimum). 

We are not bereft of talent. At all. The defense was only abysmal when the DB's ate sitting back 10 yards off of the WR. Our secondary outside of 23/24 CFP we were fire red. We had some hasty dawgs suit up for us. 

Another thing that's been bothering me is the firing PK. The guy who helped raise us from the dead. Was he perfect? No lol. But he did do a god enough job for two CFP appearances, CCG appearances with 1 win. Muschamp is legit insane. These football players may be in for a shock about being held accountable. He isn't going in slowly, he's going in no Vaseline.next season our D will look formidable. This is where I think Simmons can break his own records of 8, 11, and next season I bet he makes it to 15. Bo Barnes and Tyler Atkinson will feast. Since Lefau is in the portal that gives Atkinson time to learn it at the college level since that's his spot. Now I want to know if Muschamp is going to continue to coach safeties or if he'll bring someone. I'm so stoked he's back. He's like a 55 year old man in a 25 year old body and mind. We're going to kill people and set a new record for most sacks in a season by a team.

Posted
2 hours ago, SarkAfterDark said:

Millions of dollars are going to be spent on the roster regardless to who QB1 is. I think some of you set your own selves up to be disappointed thinking it was a given we’d win a championship with Arch, who to date, hasn’t really played like a championship caliber QB. It’s possible the next guy is better, our chances don’t die once Arch moves on. 

He has one more season, let's see how he does now that he knows the game and it has slowed down. I still believe we can win a NC with him. He got his feet wet, and now he knows where to go, which read, and has confidence. 

Posted
9 hours ago, BlackCat said:

Im not worried about the portal. I think we will have a roster built to win the SEC. I worry more about Sark doing what makes sense as a coach vs wanting to execute his dream offense. 

Yep, a dichotomy of what's right and what he would like to try down by 6 jut to see if it works. It's fucking annoying. I don't trust Sark at all because all of his good will is gone. He's shown to be incompetent a lot of the time, and just inept on a good say, 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

He has one more season, let's see how he does now that he knows the game and it has slowed down. I still believe we can win a NC with him. He got his feet wet, and now he knows where to go, which read, and has confidence. 

Sark dumbed down the offense for him. But he came here to run a pro style offense which is also the offense Sark prefers. So it’ll be interesting to see how we start the year offensively. At least we get a tune up before a big game next season.

Posted
8 hours ago, TexasRenegade said:

So a school that stomached 3 losing seasons of Charlie Strong is suddenly going to fire a coach that took them to the CFP twice because he has back to back 9-3 seasons in which he sweeps OU, Arkansas, and A&M? 

No one cares about beating our rivals. That doesn't even count towards anything other than bragging rights for us. If he continues to beat his rivals but also continues to lose to the sisters of the poor, rivalry doesn't mean shit. He has too much talent (that he personally picked out on offense, btw) to go back to 9-3 or else something has gone wrong. These guys are bigger, faster, stronger and should have no issues going against their peers. If we're losing games we shouldn't (UK, MSU, Arky, aggy, etc) CDC will know it's time to show Sarkisian the door. You can only make the CFP so many times before you either finally win it, or you have reached the apex of your abiities.

Posted
2 minutes ago, SarkAfterDark said:

Sark dumbed down the offense for him. But he came here to run a pro style offense which is also the offense Sark prefers. So it’ll be interesting to see how we start the year offensively. At least we get a tune up before a big game next season.

Yeah, exactly. He came here to run a specific offense, and he's been a good to great teammate and hasn't complained, but it's time for Sark to stop talking and get Arch whatever he needs to make Thi work. If that means Sark hands off the headset to allow someone else to call in a play, fine. We have enough evidence to show he can't be a HC/OC. He's not Chip Kelly, Lane Kiffin, Lincoln Riley, Josh Heupel, Eli Drinkwitz. If we had someone to take over PC duties, our offense would be awesome. But, instead we get the same 4 plays for 60 mins, and we are retarded in the RZ, 

Posted
27 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

That's what I hoped it would be. Regardless of money, CDC is still his boss. He's the only person he reports to daily, I believe. So even if Sark makes more money, that would take a massive hit if he were terminated for cause, and all companies know how to do that.

CDC is barely his boss. He doesn't have the authority to fire him and shouldn't be telling him what to from a football standpoint. If Sark was actually interested in the NFL it's CDC's job to convince him to stay, not to threaten to fire him. Sark is only fired if there's an actual scandal (not some retarded thread on a message board) or he quits winning enough and the money says they're out. 

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, ztejas said:

CDC is barely his boss. He doesn't have the authority to fire him and shouldn't be telling him what to from a football standpoint. If Sark was actually interested in the NFL it's CDC's job to convince him to stay, not to threaten to fire him. Sark is only fired if there's an actual scandal (not some retarded thread on a message board) or he quits winning enough and the money says they're out. 

I actually thought the AD and president both had the powers to terminate coaches. Well that sums that up. Sark and CDC are very close, so I don't see him being an asshole so much as reminding him that this job isn't supposed to be easy. We're a blue blood. We're 5th in all-time wins, 10 behind ND and 20 behind Bama. This isn't a job for the feignt of heart. Flagship program or not, we're held to a higher standard, and when the coaches talk to recruits about academics we know they mean it.

I'm excited to see how things progress over the spring and summer. Kill everybody. Time to open a can of kick ass and kill 'em all. Let the paramedics sort them out. 

Edited by William Bludworth
  • Like 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

Yeah, exactly. He came here to run a specific offense, and he's been a good to great teammate and hasn't complained, but it's time for Sark to stop talking and get Arch whatever he needs to make Thi work. If that means Sark hands off the headset to allow someone else to call in a play, fine. We have enough evidence to show he can't be a HC/OC. He's not Chip Kelly, Lane Kiffin, Lincoln Riley, Josh Heupel, Eli Drinkwitz. If we had someone to take over PC duties, our offense would be awesome. But, instead we get the same 4 plays for 60 mins, and we are retarded in the RZ, 

The only person on that list that has a higher high as a head coach is Chip Kelly and that was 15 years ago. Outside of that, as of right now I’m not sure any sane person wouldn’t take Sark over each and every one of those names on your list.

Posted
Just now, SarkAfterDark said:

The only person on that list that has a higher high as a head coach is Chip Kelly and that was 15 years ago. Outside of that, as of right now I’m not sure any sane person wouldn’t take Sark over each and every one of those names on your list.

No way, and they shouldn't. He's proven absolutely nothing in terms of running an offense during the games. He's constantly squatting, looks dazed, looks like he wants to be anywhere else. Maybe with this new shake up it will reinvigorate his love for the game, and allegedly he won't have to coddle other coaches. If he can prove he can run the offense he wants while Muschamp is chewing out everyone from special needs kids to the McDonald's drive-thru lady for not putting in that extra ketchup he asked for, it's already a win. 

Texas State - doomed 

Ohio State - dead

UTSA - see above 

Tenn - they're losing because they're not good and Heupel is still their HC 

OU - It's Venebals. They're losing.

Florida - We win at home 

Ole Miss - toss-up. If we can smother them early and often while also scoring more than 2 TDs we're good

Miss St - good team, but this won't be a PK defense they can throw chunk balls at. We'll be much, much more disciplined 

Mizzou - DOA

LSU - DOA

Arky - yeah, they're losing bad. 

Aggy - same as it ever was. We leave Kyle Field planting our flag to let them know daddy stopped by. 

Honestly, we could realistically go undefeated with this schedule. No Georgia. We're much tougher than Ohio State with all the freaks we have on defense and another year under Arch. 

I don't see a single game where we will be the underdog. This schedule couldn't have set us up better. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
12 hours ago, BlackCat said:

Yes. This is the NIL era, and if Sark misses the playoffs two years in a row because of his own incompetence then I think the $$$ will replace him. I dont think its going to happen though. Sark messed up bad this season and still almost made the playoff. I also think it would be nearly impossible to replicate the shit show surrounding Sark's personal life, but who knows. The guy is a self destructive fuck up and has been for a long time. I think we will field a better roster all around in 26, have a strong campaign, and move forward with Sark for the Dia Bell cycle. 

Can you elaborate on these off the field problems, or DM them to me?  I am still under the impression he’s on the straight and narrow.

  • Fuck You 1
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, SarkAfterDark said:

The offense isn’t the reason we lost that game. 21 points should have been more than enough to beat that Florida team. I’m pretty sure they scored the most points they scored all year in SEC play against us. PK got out schemed.

That was a collective effort of suckage--the offense went 3/11 on third downs, rushed for 52 yards at 2.0 ypc, gave up a safety off a blocked punt, Manning was sacked 6 times by a team that only had 3 sacks total up to then (4 games), 70 yards worth of penalties (albeit not all on offense), and 2 ints. Sark was lucky Manning wasn't seriously injured in that game.  In the first half, the offense scored all of 7 points.  And despite it all, Texas still had a slim chance to stay alive at the end.  

This was a game that effectively helped begin to reshape Sark's offensive scheme for the rest of the year, along with the offensive line.  Had Sark won, who knows what dumb shit we would've witnessed against OU.        

And while I like the Muschamp hire, I hope in the end, PK serves as a stop gap coach in the grand scheme, a defensive coach that bridged between roaming the desert and an eventual championship defensive hire.  But Sark's still going to have to fix his offense, and it starts with blocking.

Edited by Mdhorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
49 minutes ago, Babytime said:

Can you elaborate on these off the field problems, or DM them to me?  I am still under the impression he’s on the straight and narrow.

I know he missed Jr. Day but was under the impression that was due in part to an illness. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Babytime said:

Can you elaborate on these off the field problems, or DM them to me?  I am still under the impression he’s on the straight and narrow.

Only speculation but the man has had a rough marriage. Going from getting divorced, ok we're going to work on it to having a kid. Anyone that has been married for a bit of time knows such a public getting divorced to all the other things is very odd. I've seen these things break people for a time.

His job is hard. There are no days off. Stress can beat you down from this alone add in the above stuff. He may have just needed a mental break.

He's also a recovering alcoholic. There's a reason those support groups have mentor type people. That never goes away. Maybe he needed a bit of time with recentering himself considering how much he was dealing with. 

Or shit, maybe he had COVID.

All just ideas - no facts. But those are things that can beat a person down. I really like Sark and how he represents Texas. I'm cheering for him and respect the man. Now there has to be a badass OL coach we can money whip out there? 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

Edit: His kid or wife good have been ill. Anyone that's had a child or decent wife knows how this can scare you. I do realize there are a fair portion on you that wife sick - cha-ching let that bitch suffer some.

Fairly certain he needed a bit of time for one or a combo of those. I never knew he took a bit of time but hope it helped him.

Edited by hornlife
Posted
9 hours ago, SarkAfterDark said:

The offense isn’t the reason we lost that game. 21 points should have been more than enough to beat that Florida team. I’m pretty sure they scored the most points they scored all year in SEC play against us. PK got out schemed.

Dude go rewatch the game. The offense and defense were both so garbage. We scored late to make it look closer but the offense was dominated just like the defense. 

Posted
8 hours ago, William Bludworth said:

No one cares about beating our rivals. That doesn't even count towards anything other than bragging rights for us. If he continues to beat his rivals but also continues to lose to the sisters of the poor, rivalry doesn't mean shit. He has too much talent (that he personally picked out on offense, btw) to go back to 9-3 or else something has gone wrong. These guys are bigger, faster, stronger and should have no issues going against their peers. If we're losing games we shouldn't (UK, MSU, Arky, aggy, etc) CDC will know it's time to show Sarkisian the door. You can only make the CFP so many times before you either finally win it, or you have reached the apex of your abiities.

Well seeing as we’re in a conference with our 3 rivals and those rivals are our permanent opponents they are very important 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Boy, the driveling buffoonery has exploded all over this page. Good grief. I scrolled through and half the page is on ignore and the quoted posts by others certainly reminds me why. 

4 hours ago, Mother mopar said:

I know he missed Jr. Day but was under the impression that was due in part to an illness. 

Come on, man. This has been discussed on other threads. A head coach doesn’t miss Jr Day because they’re sick. They miss Jr Day because they are selfish assholes who let their demons get the better of them and then they have to go somewhere and get help drying up again. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Boy, the driveling buffoonery has exploded all over this page. Good grief. I scrolled through and half the page is on ignore and the quoted posts by others certainly reminds me why. 

Come on, man. This has been discussed on other threads. A head coach doesn’t miss Jr Day because they’re sick. They miss Jr Day because they are selfish assholes who let their demons get the better of them and then they have to go somewhere and get help drying up again. 

Glad you have time to read all the posts, some of us don't. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Mother mopar said:

Glad you have time to read all the posts, some of us don't. 

Ha. This is quality shade. 

That said, I feel like the “what happened with Steven & 5 in the offseason?” discussion has become sort of ubiquitous and not something niched away somewhere.

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.



Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...