Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I had to watch that clip again. 

So Russini is basically saying Sark and his agency had every right to be upset at her reporting and the timing of it, and that "unfortunately they never added that Steve Sarkisian wants to stay at Texas, right?" Then she confirmed her source was neither Sark or Sexton. 

It's like she's admitting to stirring the pot. Really weird. 

 

I think she is saying her source is legitimate. It wasn't Sark or Sexton. She understands why Steve is mad, but also she is pointing out that he isn't saying "I'm staying at Texas". That seems pretty fair to me. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
8 minutes ago, gurt said:

I'm not absolving Sark of any of the blame, I just think you are claiming to have insider info in order to gain attention on the internet.

It would be much easier to just tweet this shit for maximum attention rather share it here on a board that few people read much anymore. It’s a handful of peeps. Most of this site is like an echo chamber with a cabal. I don’t mess with.
 

If I wanted attention for myself I can certainly get that attention other ways. I consider this a family. I don’t shit on my family. I would not lie about stuff just to piss people off just for a little attention. Attention which so far has been so outrageously “positive” towards me it is tempting just to beg off and say someone hacked my account. And come back a few weeks later and pretend I wrote none of it. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, The Dog said:

Her source(s) were from the NFL and she wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't run with it. In fact, she'd be a complete idiot not to run with that considering the Texas brand and it's reach. 

This is a bunch of bullshit. Look, I'm not trying to be some homer Texas fan and Sark defender here. 

She basically admitted her reporting was a nothing burger. She tweeted out this Sark rumor the morning of a game day, it went very viral, and now she's just shrugging all of it off.

Relationships are a huge part of her business, but I guess she felt engagement baiting was worth it even if it pissed off Sark and Jimmy Sexton. If she considers that "doing her job", then she's a pretty shitty reporter. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, The Dog said:

Her source(s) were from the NFL and she wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't run with it. In fact, she'd be a complete idiot not to run with that considering the Texas brand and it's reach. 

Sark and Sexton have a right to be upset, but they need to be upset with the NFL people who leaked it to her. Her point was "hey I didn't get this from you - I got this from the people who were talking to you. take it up with them!"

Except no one wants to hear that. It sucks hearing that not only was he allegedly looking to get out right as the season began but that his asswater approach to the entire offseason caused his entire side of the ball to suck. Shooting the messenger is the only thing some people have right now. And it’s pretty obvious. Based on the fact it’s gotten personal. Which is something I haven’t done to anyone. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I think she is saying her source is legitimate. It wasn't Sark or Sexton. She understands why Steve is mad, but also she is pointing out that he isn't saying "I'm staying at Texas". That seems pretty fair to me. 

I don't agree. If you believe someone is lying about you, you don't validate the lie by giving that type of response. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I don't agree. If you believe someone is lying about you, you don't validate the lie by giving that type of response. 

 

Couldn’t the same be true about Sark’s non-denial denial? I mean it wasn’t exactly “I am not looking to leave UT for the NFL period” type of denial. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
30 minutes ago, HOOKEM4 said:

Can we just shut this thread down now? She is clearly just throwing shit against the wall and hoping it sticks. This entire story is complete bullshit. 

There is no world where Sark kneecaps himself and the program with a public wish/plea to go to the NFL. Get the fuck out of here. 

Shut this motherfucker down.

It wasn’t public.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I don't agree. If you believe someone is lying about you, you don't validate the lie by giving that type of response. 

 

Yeah, you just have your agent make the denial for you. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Couldn’t the same be true about Sark’s non-denial denial? I mean it wasn’t exactly “I am not looking to leave UT for the NFL period” type of denial. 

it's perfectly understandable to not give a full throated denial to a report you believe is completely bogus.  The accuser gets a win in that situation.

 

 

Edited by Hank Kingsley
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

it's perfectly understandable to not give a full throated denial to a report you believe is completely bogus. 

 

 

Agree.

Posted

If Sark wanted to leave Texas for an NFL HC gig I'd be bummed but I'd wish him luck. He'd be leaving the program in great shape and would make it extremely easy for Texas to replace him. 

If an NFL team is actually asking him if he would be interested in that then I wouldn't fault him at all for considering it. I don't know if it would be the right decision for him or not and as of now I'd still prefer he stay at Texas. 

Those sentiments are all assuming he doesn't quiet-quit on the way out and fuck over Texas somehow but that doesn't seem like his MO. iirc we hired him before he called his last game at Bama and then he put together a masterpiece to win the title. So far this season I think he's fucked a lot up but he appears to be working hard to fix it and keep the season alive. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Posted

Nothing in that interview leads me to believe that she made up the whole thing. She didn't backtrack from her reporting. She stated why it's a big deal and that Sark didn’t really refute her reporting by saying he was staying at Texas. She seems to be implying that we would just have to wait and see how it plays out. She also wanted to make it sound like it's understandable if Sark indeed wanted to coach in the NFL.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
58 minutes ago, MrBig said:

"...It really pisses me off that one person can make a report that, in turn, the entire media sports world runs with as factual ..."

He's saying it's not factual.

59 minutes ago, MrBig said:

"...the fact that everybody ran that as truth, is really embarrassing, okay."

He's saying it's not the truth.

But Surly wants a "full throated denial" because it's bored on a Tuesday.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

don't forget CTJ in here too

I haven’t read or posted in this thread since Saturday until being summoned by the quoted post below. So, no, I’m not a part of whatever is going on here. If the posts I wrote on Saturday are being questioned, I don’t care. If someone wants to question my bonafides on program info, that’s their right. I’m not being paid and I’m not a professional journalist, so it’s hard for me to get worked up about any of it. 

 

29 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If I remember correctly @closetojumping mentioned the bama rumors about his insobriety while at bama when we were in the process of hiring him or something 

You’re inferring something from posts at the time, because I don’t think I said something explicitly. 

That considered, anyone who believes the narrative that Sarkisian doesn’t drink anymore is living in fantasyland. The week of the SEC title game in 2020, Sarkisian went awol at Bama. Disappeared. The pressure between game prep, Auburn and Texas wanting interviews, it was all apparently too much. That came directly at the time from someone who worked with Saban and Sarkisian at Bama and was part of Saban’s inner circle as his longest-tenured Bama employee. 

Anyone who thinks the Texas job is less of a pressure cooker than that is making the choice of being willfully naive. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Posted
33 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If I remember correctly @closetojumping mentioned the bama rumors about his insobriety while at bama when we were in the process of hiring him or something 

I had heard the same from someone looped into the hiring process.  Specifically, that he had only been six months sober at the time of the hire (and his “public sobriety” was said to be much longer).  
 

It didn’t really warrant being passed along here, too gossippy.  

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I haven’t read or posted in this thread since Saturday until being summoned by the quoted post below. So, no, I’m not a part of whatever is going on here. If the posts I wrote on Saturday are being questioned, I don’t care. If someone wants to question my bonafides on program info, that’s their right. I’m not being paid and I’m not a professional journalist, so it’s hard for me to get worked up about any of it. 

 

You’re inferring something from posts at the time, because I don’t think I said something explicitly. 

That considered, anyone who believes the narrative that Sarkisian doesn’t drink anymore is living in fantasyland. The week of the SEC title game in 2020, Sarkisian went awol at Bama. Disappeared. The pressure between game prep, Auburn and Texas wanting interviews, it was all apparently too much. That came directly at the time from someone who worked with Saban and Sarkisian at Bama and was part of Saban’s inner circle as his longest-tenured Bama employee. 

Anyone who thinks the Texas job is less of a pressure cooker than that is making the choice of being willfully naive. 

Thank you for your response. You didn’t have to make one even with everyone trying to summon you. Most people are ready to scalp me not you but gracias. 

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

If I remember correctly @closetojumping mentioned the bama rumors about his insobriety while at bama when we were in the process of hiring him or something 

People can doubt him, he’s certainly an asshole and blowhard on the board at times, but it’s not his style to claim inside info just for fun.  According to him he has/had a couple friends in Sabans inner circle  at Bama long before we hired Sark.
 

 The day we hired him he said something along the lines that his insiders liked Sark but we would be trading one addict for another and that he wasn’t exactly living up to the narrative posed by the media.

I don’t think he specified booze or drugs but he certainly implied as much based on conversations with friends of his who were around Sark on a daily basis.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Nothing in that interview leads me to believe that she made up the whole thing. She didn't backtrack from her reporting. She stated why it's a big deal and that Sark didn’t really refute her reporting by saying he was staying at Texas. She seems to be implying that we would just have to wait and see how it plays out. She also wanted to make it sound like it's understandable if Sark indeed wanted to coach in the NFL.

Yup. I'll also add, I see her response as more of a protective move for her sources that may be upset if the reporting has a negative effect on any potential deal.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Hookem10 said:

I must be the only one here that saw a 9-3 or 8-4 record. We are a very young team and I just accepted we were just gonna get better each game and be a really good team at the end. Arch and the oline will be much better next year and we’ll  get better each snap with experience.  Lil did I know it was sark that was sabotaging the season and coaching us to fail cause he hates Texas winning - go figure. 

I saw an 8-4/9-3 type season as possible, but as more of a floor type outcome. Thinking being that there was a lot to be excited about, but we were replacing a ton of talent, so any step back on the DL, young QB struggles from Manning, and maybe a bad bounce or two could lead a few tough losses the likes of which we'd managed to avoid in 2023-24. 

I did not expect to be sitting here at the end of October thinking 9-3 is the hard ceiling if absolutely everything goes right. Young and/or inexperienced players having upsand downs is one thing. The OL being the worst in P4 and the QB flirting with that level at times is another thing entirely. Spectacular failure of evaluation and development that can only be laid at the feet of the coaching staff.

Posted
2 hours ago, Da Fino said:

She's had some hilarious tweets. It's hard to trust someone who called Rex Ryan going back to the Jets, Mike Tomlin being shopped for a first round picks to Carolina, and last month with this detailed report regarding CJ Stroud, "“There are some things going on behind the scenes that I think we are going to find out about soon.” 

why hasn't belmont/sark/sexton sued her for slander?  how about tortious interference?  or negligent infliction of emotional distress?

anything that asserts in a legal document that she was "patently false and wildly inaccurate"

we're in the post-fact era; current regime out front should have told ya

file the suit, announce the filing, stir the shitstorm through the overnight news cycle, and withdraw in 24 hours

also, announce that the athletic's belmont/dkr press credentials have been suspended until further notice

right now, without any kind of counter-attack, the athletic has the high ground and 100% credibility

Posted
9 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I had heard the same from someone looped into the hiring process.  Specifically, that he had only been six months sober at the time of the hire (and his “public sobriety” was said to be much longer).  
 

It didn’t really warrant being passed along here, too gossippy.  

To be clear, as this post was likely written while the one I posted before you was being posted, both posts are correct. Sarkisian's meltdown and alleged bender during SEC championship week was completely covered up by Saban and the Bama friendly media. Texas had no idea about that episode and while several media members on the Texas end do know about it, what the fuck were they supposed to do? 

3 minutes ago, Jimbob said:

People can doubt him, he’s certainly an asshole and blowhard on the board at times, but it’s not his style to claim inside info just for fun.  According to him he has/had a couple friends in Sabans inner circle  at Bama long before we hired Sark.
 

 The day we hired him he said something along the lines that his insiders liked Sark but we would be trading one addict for another and that he wasn’t exactly living up to the narrative posed by the media.

I don’t think he specified booze or drugs but he certainly implied as much based on conversations with friends of his who were around Sark on a daily basis.

That sounds like something I would have said when we were dismissing the Sarkisian rumors before NYD, 2021. It all sounded unbelievable, but I called one of my friends there. They literally said "there's no way" and then told me the SEC Champ week story and said what you referenced, "why would Texas go trade one addict for another?" Obviously we were all wrong and pretty shocked that Texas would, indeed, trade one addict for another. 

Also, while we're discussing various Bama/Saban stuff in regard to Sarkisian, I believe I did post that Saban, allegedly, was using Sarkisian's past against him on the recruiting trail. He was showing literal receipts to some folks, including the Manning family. Sarkisian and Saban publicly talk about mutual respect, but that was a low blow that allegedly hurt Sarkisian in very normal, human ways. Saban is a sociopath and a master at handling his public persona. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted

All this talk about takes from back when Sark was hired. We all had'em. Some were right, some were wrong, most were a bit of both. And yet as we sit here today, one Real Man of Genius appears to be firmly in the lead for most accurate take:

 

On 1/4/2021 at 3:57 PM, Helobious said:

Flawed poll. There’s scenarios where he’s successful but only stays 3-4 years if the NFL comes calling.  I think he only stays 4 or 5 seasons but delivers 1 or 2 big 12 titles and a CFP appearance.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 7
Posted
5 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

I saw an 8-4/9-3 type season as possible, but as more of a floor type outcome. Thinking being that there was a lot to be excited about, but we were replacing a ton of talent, so any step back on the DL, young QB struggles from Manning, and maybe a bad bounce or two could lead a few tough losses the likes of which we'd managed to avoid in 2023-24. 

I did not expect to be sitting here at the end of October thinking 9-3 is the hard ceiling if absolutely everything goes right. Young and/or inexperienced players having upsand downs is one thing. The OL being the worst in P4 and the QB flirting with that level at times is another thing entirely. Spectacular failure of evaluation and development that can only be laid at the feet of the coaching staff.

same, but we were wildly unpopular were those types of takes around here surrounded by ARCH BACK TO BACK BABY 

the main part this year that has surprised me is what appears at resistance at even trying to leverage whats working on offense 

Posted
1 minute ago, gmr548 said:

All this talk about takes from back when Sark was hired. We all had'em. Some were right, some were wrong, most were a bit of both. And yet as we sit here today, one Real Man of Genius appears to be firmly in the lead for most accurate take:

 

 

missing a back to back playoff appearance and still get fired in year 5 option ya simps ! 

Posted
9 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Also, while we're discussing various Bama/Saban stuff in regard to Sarkisian, I believe I did post that Saban, allegedly, was using Sarkisian's past against him on the recruiting trail. He was showing literal receipts to some folks, including the Manning family. 

If that were true, why would Arch come to Texas?

Posted
9 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

All this talk about takes from back when Sark was hired. We all had'em. Some were right, some were wrong, most were a bit of both. And yet as we sit here today, one Real Man of Genius appears to be firmly in the lead for most accurate take:

 

 

 

On 1/4/2021 at 6:11 PM, ztejas said:

My o/u would be 5. Helobious brings up a good point. 

I don't think he winds up being a disaster. I do think he will peak higher than Herman. Ultimately I think he has an Akers type career here. 

Hey would you look at that, too.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If that were true, why would Arch come to Texas?

Cause that hurt bama with the Mannings, it was very off-putting to them that he would do that. And Sark found out about it from them

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

To be clear, as this post was likely written while the one I posted before you was being posted, both posts are correct. Sarkisian's meltdown and alleged bender during SEC championship week was completely covered up by Saban and the Bama friendly media. Texas had no idea about that episode and while several media members on the Texas end do know about it, what the fuck were they supposed to do? 

That sounds like something I would have said when we were dismissing the Sarkisian rumors before NYD, 2021. It all sounded unbelievable, but I called one of my friends there. They literally said "there's no way" and then told me the SEC Champ week story and said what you referenced, "why would Texas go trade one addict for another?" Obviously we were all wrong and pretty shocked that Texas would, indeed, trade one addict for another. 

Also, while we're discussing various Bama/Saban stuff in regard to Sarkisian, I believe I did post that Saban, allegedly, was using Sarkisian's past against him on the recruiting trail. He was showing literal receipts to some folks, including the Manning family. Sarkisian and Saban publicly talk about mutual respect, but that was a low blow that allegedly hurt Sarkisian in very normal, human ways. Saban is a sociopath and a master at handling his public persona. 

I’m glad you brought this up.  I’ll add it to the list of trolls when discussing “Saint Nick” amongst the low IQ hoopleheads.  Lane seems to be the only guy that has Sark’s back from what I can see.

Edited by Fondren & Main
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If that were true, why would Arch come to Texas?

Well with the rumors about Arch maybe he tought Sark would be cool to party with.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

Lane seems to be the only guy that has Sark’s back from what I can see.

I think he and Kirby like each other fine. As much as is possible with their rivalry so far. 

Posted

Sark doesn’t have some buddy relationship with Saban. He calls him the old man and he laughs about how fast Saban wanted out once NIL was firmly in place. I don’t think they like each other that much. 

  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, BlackCat said:

Sark doesn’t have some buddy relationship with Saban. He calls him the old man and he laughs about how fast Saban wanted out once NIL was firmly in place. I don’t think they like each other that much. 

pretty clear when Smart and Kiffen are the primary coaching tree examples he or others (his wife) uses. Sark is never in that short list. I've always thought that odd or at least telling.

  • Like 1
Posted
22 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm a shade over 60 and even *I* understand the common use of the word "cuck", but sure, the Olde English apparently defines it as any dude whose wife or partner cheated on him.  We need to rename this site "pedantichorns".

How about just going with “Land of a billion dipshits”?

Posted
1 hour ago, mwaadeeb said:

He's saying it's not factual.

He's saying it's not the truth.

But Surly wants a "full throated denial" because it's bored on a Tuesday.

The issue is that Sark has a history of conflicting statements regarding his NFL coaching prospects.

In 2007, ESPN reported Sark was offered the Oakland Raiders job but turned them down to remain at USC. The Raiders then issued a statement in response to the ESPN story saying they never offered Sark the job as they were still doing their due diligence on him. 

After the Raiders issued the statement, Sark publicly confirmed the ESPN story was incorrect and he would remain at USC. Fast forward to a video of 2020 of Sark at a coaching clinic saying how he was offered the Raiders job but turned it down because it wasn’t the right fit for him. So which is it Sark? Were you offered the job or not? 

  • Hook 'Em 2

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...