Jump to content

BOOM MOTHER FUCKER - Will Muschamp's Triumphant Return


Recommended Posts

Posted
6 hours ago, MrBig said:

Why didn’t Muschamp join when Sark was initially hired? I keep seeing that he was Sark’s 1st choice but don’t know why it took him 5 years to get here. 

Wife didn't want to leave while kids were in school. It has been discussed a lot in this thread. 

Posted
On 12/19/2025 at 5:28 PM, chainsaw said:

I honestly believe this decision was made in Sark's mind the moment he saw Kirby Smart tell recruits that Texas is soft in the postgame presser.

I figure they've been planning it for a year or more.

Posted

And that's alright. I liked PK but it's not like he was the guy Sark wanted. That whole summer of hiring was obvious misplanning on everyone's part, but it did work out pretty well for the most part. 

Posted
On 12/20/2025 at 2:11 AM, Candi Fisther said:


Akina was hired before PK?

You’re done after your first sentence. Just shut up and watch. Pay for season tickets or let them go to someone else that has balls, or at a minimum the ability to pleasure your wife. If she’s left you already, feel free to pay for an OB subscription, they have a great match program for sodomitic-prone individuals.

Off the top mother fucking rope lol

Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Wife didn't want to leave while kids were in school. It has been discussed a lot in this thread. 

Great listen but long. He talks about Austin and family throughout the 20-35+ minute mark.  I stopped about there I don’t have 90 mins for a coach talk.

I don’t know the guy and we often project on to public figures but this fella seems like he actively loves his wife and sons in ways that led him to step back. It also sounds like to me he could be here a long while and that this might be the place for him for a good while. All dependent upon winning and what happens with sark, but it sounds like of all the places they like Austin is at the top of the list. 

the guy is also SEC through and through and one knock on Texas the first time around was the Big 12 and with us in the SECx3 now, it just might be his and his wife’s ideal spot. 

BOOM M’fer!

Edited by scramblyn
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
On 12/20/2025 at 10:06 AM, someguy said:

PK should be remembered fondly as a great DC who oversaw some excellent Texas defenses and left the defense in a much better place than he found it.

But it is undeniable that tying the secondary to the front was a persistent issue, and the only truly excellent defense Texas fielded had Barron, Mukuba, and Taaffe - three highly intelligent, very experienced players - running the secondary.

PK's greatest strength was in his willingness/ability to collaborate.  He was truly a low ego coach in a profession and era where egos run rampant.  The downside of his approach is that the defense often suffered from the "too many cooks in the kitchen" dynamic.  You know that old saying, that a camel is a horse made by committee?  The Texas defense frequently embodied that saying, in my view.

FWIW, I am a fan of this move.  I think it takes guts to move on from a very successful coordinator, and I understand it can be read as either bold or desperate.  I do think PK's bend don't break style is a better match for teams without access to elite talent, and not as effective against disciplined, talented offenses that top teams tend to have.  One of my low key bigger worries for next year was having Tennessee and Miss St on the schedule, given PK's known struggle against the veer and shoot (especially with TN being the first road game of the year).  I will never, ever, ever understand why Texas didn't pressure a gimpy Lagway - and in some ways, that decision/gameplan/unwillingness to adapt cost Texas the playoff.

Staff continuity is a good things in many ways, but it can also lead to stagnation.  Texas had gotten too comfortable, in my opinion, and since Bo Davis left lacked a true ass kicking voice.  I think - beyond just being a good and experience coordinator - Muschamp will bring a lot of needed intangibles to the program.

Well said. It's a risky move but I don't mind it anymore. PK has been great, no doubt, and I actually don't think the D has been a problem against good opponents (think about both tOSU games, OU, A&M, most of UGA, etc). That said, last year was the outlier in pass defense. It's been an issue more often than not under PK.

The intangibles you hit on are big. The team seemed to lack the same intensity this year that they had the previous two. Muschamp should bring back some of that fire.

The biggest thing I like about this, IF true, is that Sark claims it will allow him to focus more on the offense. I've been saying for a long time that if he wants to be the OC, he needs to take other shit off his plate. In his presser, he said twice that Muschamp will be "HC of the defense" allowing Sark to spend more time on the offense. We'll see if that actually happens, and I have some skepticism, but it could be huge for the offense. 

Imo his biggest problem as OC is that he is probably spending 30% of his time on offense vs. the 100% an actual OC would spend. With that in mind, OF COURSE he isn't going to be as good at it. It would be the case for anyone. When the defense is on the field, an OC is looking at stills of what the defense is doing, talking to the QB, and thinking about the next playcalls. With Sark, he's coaching the defense and not doing any of that stuff. That makes the OC job a whole lot harder. This won't get him to 100% time but the more the better. 

Posted

I've been frustrated over the years that Sark is never talking to QBs or offense on the bench during games. He clearly has too much on his plate on game days.. He's the QB guru and OC, but when the O is struggling and sitting on the bench, Sark is still always fully focused on what's happening on the field. Him admitting to that being an issue is good, because it's been an issue.

If this allows Sark to converse more with QB and offensive players in the middle of the game, that's a win for us. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted
I've been frustrated over the years that Sark is never talking to QBs or offense on the bench during games. He clearly has too much on his plate on game days.. He's the QB guru and OC, but when the O is struggling and sitting on the bench, Sark is still always fully focused on what's happening on the field. Him admitting to that being an issue is good, because it's been an issue.
If this allows Sark to converse more with QB and offensive players in the middle of the game, that's a win for us. 

It’s amazing to me that a throwaway line in a PC is now being taken as gospel. We need Sark as head coach, all phases.
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:


It’s amazing to me that a throwaway line in a PC is now being taken as gospel. We need Sark as head coach, all phases.

This is why there are so very few HCs that are coordinators. It’s been proven not to work in the past and so most HC’s don’t do that. A HC should be a CEO. Not just the OC. But he wants the title of HC and to be paid like a HC and also the ability to make excuses for things that fall on his side of the ball. 
 

I want this to work. I need it to work. We all want to win. This is his compromise. But to me that’s not what a HC is. At the end of the day all that matters to us is if it works. And if it doesn’t he needs to go bc there are plenty of successful HCs that absolutely can focus on both sides of the ball and give up being a coordinator in order to win. Hope it works! 🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼

Posted
1 minute ago, Eskimohorn said:


It’s amazing to me that a throwaway line in a PC is now being taken as gospel. We need Sark as head coach, all phases.

LOL, "throwaway line". It's literally the first point he brings up when he discussed why he hired Mushcamp. This how KVUE covered it. 

 

Posted
7 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Too many of y'all are dreaming of a Sark that doesn't exist. He calls plays. It's why he got the job and it's why he wants to coach. 

 

I agree with you on this. I’d posit further if there were such beings as the Football Gods and they could grant things that if they came before sark and offered him 5 MNCs as a HC but only if he gave up being the OC he wouldn’t take the deal. He’s said numerous times play calling is his superpower and why he was sought after he will never give it up. Not purely not completely. So our fate rides on that and the historical odds of that working aren’t great. I’ve been consistent as a poster from his first season here that he either needs to get in the booth and delegate stuff on The field to a DC (and what he’s doing now is as close as we’re likely to get to that) or give up play calling and just be HC or go back to being solely an OC. Praying it works. One MNC in 50 years sucks balls. 

Posted

I mean, we've been talking about this for years. 

Outside of this past offseason, Sark has been an excellent off the field coach. Generally made good coaching hires, top tier recruiting classes, and effective portal additions with solid player retainment.  In that role as "CEO", he's generally been very good. The culture feels like its still in a good place even after this very rocky season. 

His biggest issues have been on game day. Whether it's been poor second half adjustments, play calling, or overall game management and decision making. That's where the warts come out. 

Probably the lowlight example of all this was the Georgia game in Austin last year. Benching Ewers in the first half felt like a total panic move to me. Quinn was terrible, don't get me wrong, but the way that was handled was really poor. IMO it was a sign that Sark was overwhelmed in that moment. 

He's gonna be the playcaller, period. So lightening his overall responsibilities on game day makes sense. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
54 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I mean, we've been talking about this for years. 

Outside of this past offseason, Sark has been an excellent off the field coach. Generally made good coaching hires, top tier recruiting classes, and effective portal additions with solid player retainment.  In that role as "CEO", he's generally been very good. The culture feels like its still in a good place even after this very rocky season. 

His biggest issues have been on game day. Whether it's been poor second half adjustments, play calling, or overall game management and decision making. That's where the warts come out. 

Probably the lowlight example of all this was the Georgia game in Austin last year. Benching Ewers in the first half felt like a total panic move to me. Quinn was terrible, don't get me wrong, but the way that was handled was really poor. IMO it was a sign that Sark was overwhelmed in that moment. 

He's gonna be the playcaller, period. So lightening his overall responsibilities on game day makes sense. 

That sounds great, it really does. This theory only works if you believe that Sark was “babysitting” the defensive coach with 30 years of experience. That’s the issue most of us have lol. I think it’s a lie and was a good way to blame PK for sark not being able to “focus” on what he’s really good at. $11 million a year to make excuses. 

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...