Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, gmr548 said:

I understand the urge to rationalize in the face of surprising ,potentially detrimental news, but this is giving major "I didn't want that #1 prospect we lost out on anyway!" energy.

PK has been a very good DC his entire career. Losing him when we're already looking at significant roster turnover isn't great. Now we've got to install a system  and re-rectruit guys too. Muschamp has also been a very good DC. He knows the SEC and perhapshis more agressive style will be a nice change of pace. Change can be good and bad, even simultaneously. We'll just have to see how it goes.

Let's pause for a second and look at this rationally. Our defense was piss poor in every game after the Kentucky game (and was bad against Florida too). They regressed as the season went on. Once our offense started picking up, they started to slack and the drop off was noticable. We really only looked good against aggy in the back half of the season. I am not surprised at all to see this move. I wouldve been fine with him getting another year but this is a move to make us better and will pay dividends as soon as next year. Maybe Sark was tired of stupid fucking penalties extending drives for the defense and felt more discipline was needed. Whatever he's looking for, Muschamp will bring it and I am in support of that move. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
57 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

You guys are asking like we dug up and hired Buddy Ryan. He was Co-DC of the best team in the country TWO years ago and has remained there as an analyst since then. Christ 

Maybe if our OC goes all brakes, no gas for a long stretch this year, we'll get our own Buddy Ryan moment.

GAMEDAY THREAD: Texas Tech @ Houston | 6PM | ESPN - Page 47 - Football -  CoogFans - Houston Cougar Football, News and Forums

  • Haha 3
Posted

My guess is that PK will hang it up.  He looked old and haggard on the sideline this year.  Maybe he’s had enough.  I’m sorry he’s gone though.  His defenses are tough and tackled well.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

The defense has been the strength of our team the last few years. I don’t know that this is the area where we most need a shake up. Seems kind of weird and sudden, to the point that I wonder if something else is going on. That said, on paper Muschamp is an upgrade over pretty much anyone not named Saban or Smart, so I’m not exactly worried about it either.

Personally I’d be more encouraged if Sark had fired himself and hired a great OC to call plays while he does HC things. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Surly Bevo said:

Sounds like Boom may be coaching in the bowl game

Interesting. I wonder if that is a portal saving move. Get guys like Lefau back into the fold and hold onto any guys who were thinking of bailing. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
7 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

why would he leave a DC role ?

For more money and a position as CO-DC at his Alma-Mater with a promise to move to DC when/if BOOM moves on.

Posted
8 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

why would he leave a DC role ?

GT is losing their OC and QB in waiting after getting the HC a pay bump. They likely cant match what texas is offering

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Are PK and Akina in anyway connected? I don't know of one, but haven't dug into their pasts to look for crossover. 

If PK wanted an out, he'd likely already have had one unless it was for an HC gig, which isn't impossible but seems unlikely.

PK was connected to Nansen in the past.
Nansen worked with Akina at Arizona.

What happens to Nansen?

Posted
43 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Not every coach who gets fired now is because they were having sex with an assistant. 

Correct. The rest of them never got caught. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted

 

11 minutes ago, Nigel Tufnel said:

It’s not binary.  A lot of people (including Saban) think that PK’s D and Sark’s O were not the best fit.  

In the sense that one is usually really good and the other is often really not good? 

  • Haha 6
Posted
Just now, Sir Ulrich said:

GT is losing their OC and QB in waiting after getting the HC a pay bump. They likely cant match what texas is offering

Nansen is already a Co-DC. We’re gonna have three or are we making up more titles or is Sark also moving on from Nansen? 
 

Posted
1 minute ago, horny_gunman said:

Nansen is already a Co-DC. We’re gonna have three or are we making up more titles or is Sark also moving on from Nansen
 

I'd be okay letting Muschamp make that call. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Does this mean Collin Simmons goes back to attacking and leaving pass coverage to LB's and DB's?

Asking for a friend of a friend.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 minute ago, horny_gunman said:

Nansen is already a Co-DC. We’re gonna have three or are we making up more titles or is Sark also moving on from Nansen? 
 

Soft landing spot or just make up the titles needed to justify the pay. AHC DC Muschamp with DC run/pass game coordinators for the other two. Really all semantics

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

He’s not coaching the OL here. 

And, I mean, at least they are actually blocking someone vs the literal turnstiles we had in the interior this year? 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, AllenTx75 said:

Defense was not the problem except against Georgia. The defense held up against Oklahoma when the offense stalled against OU's defense. 

Maybe but the defense needed to change especially the secondary. 12th in the SEC against the pass. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Too many people are stuck on "I can't believe PK got fired. He didn't deserve to be fired. He was the best coach on the staff" yada yada

All potentially true statements.... But that doesn't mean that he couldn't be upgraded. Sark obviously thinks that Muschamp is an upgrade and I'm sure many people agree with him. 

PK wasn't fired because he was bad at his job. Back channel conversations asked if Muschamp would be interested and he said yes. So the switch was made. I guarantee if Muschamp says no he's not interested, then PK is still the DC. So he wasn't fired per se in the way that Chad Scott was, because he didn't do a good job. Sark found out that Muschamp was available and willing so he made the switch.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, TheBryMan81 said:

Too many people are stuck on "I can't believe PK got fired. He didn't deserve to be fired. He was the best coach on the staff" yada yada

All potentially true statements.... But that doesn't mean that he couldn't be upgraded. Sark obviously thinks that Muschamp is an upgrade and I'm sure many people agree with him. 

PK wasn't fired because he was bad at his job. Back channel conversations asked if Muschamp would be interested and he said yes. So the switch was made. I guarantee if Muschamp says no he's not interested, then PK is still the DC. So he wasn't fired per se in the way that Chad Scott was, because he didn't do a good job. Sark found out that Muschamp was available and willing so he made the switch.

People have been screaming for Sark to make upgrades

Sark made an upgrade.  Now everyone hates him.  It's like recruiting over a good player for a better player via the portal.  You do what you do to make the team better. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
2 minutes ago, AllenTx75 said:

Defense was not the problem except against Georgia. The defense held up against Oklahoma when the offense stalled against OU's defense. 

How'd the defense do against Mississippi State, Vandy, Georgia, and Arky?  That was four straight games of asswater.

Can't pick and choose.  Across the whole season, this was a good-but-not-elite defense that had elite personnel.  I was good with PK, but I have no doubt we'd have been a better D with Muschamp.

We're going to slay people next year.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, TexArcher said:

How'd the defense do against Mississippi State, Vandy, Georgia, and Arky?  That was four straight games of asswater.

Can't pick and choose.  Across the whole season, this was a good-but-not-elite defense that had elite personnel.  I was good with PK, but I have no doubt we'd have been a better D with Muschamp.

We're going to slay people next year.

This Up Here GIF by Chord Overstreet

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Maybe Muschamp is better. But the D wasn’t the problem this year. No running game, receivers that can’t catch or get open, and Arch throwing the ball to dirt/air were the problem. Fix those and we’re a contender for the whole thing, even with the issues on D this year.

Ask ou and aggy what they think of our D the last two years.

Absent additional info to change my mind, this seems like a huge self awareness problem for Sark to me.

We’ll see I suppose.

  • Hook 'Em 4

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...