Hank Chinaski

Oh, I’m old enough that I don’t have to imagine it (hornfans). It was exactly what you’d expect - people calling for Mack’s head, saying he couldn’t get over the hump, etc. Nobody - absolutely nobody - predicted after that game that Texas would win 24 of the next 25 games and a national title. That’s what I’m saying about how we are much worse than we think we are at predicting what happens next.

Christ. No matter how firm you may be in your belief that Sark will be a failure at Texas, nobody knows. There are good reasons to think that he won’t cut it here. There are good reasons to think he has a shot. They’ve all been hashed and rehashed a million times in this thread. Me, I think there is reasonable doubt to the notion that he’ll fail. That doesn’t mean I think it’s more likely that he’ll “succeed,” whatever that may mean to you. It just means that I don’t think you can rule it out based on what we know. Also, humans are terrible at predicting the future. And we know that college football coaches can be deeply flawed and still win; I mean, we live in a world in which Les Miles, Gene Chizik, Jimbo Fisher and Ed O have won national titles in the last 15 years. Of course that doesn’t mean we want a subpar coach; it just means that there is only one Saban and all the rest are flawed.

Man I liked this character because I actually did this as a kid. I’d repeat myself under my breath after saying something. Had to kind of train myself to stop doing it. (There wasn’t a “spectrum” back in the 80s but in adulthood it’s become clear where I fall on it.)

Conspiracy theorists are psychologically fascinating. this has to be a joke though, right?

This photo should put the “2022 Texas is ultra-talented” notion to fucking bed. Reminder that Brian fucking Orakpo was a backup on that team.

Jesus, no it isn’t. How are you defining “talent?”

I didn’t see the Tech game, but bad, bad QB play is a huge reason for the other two losses. Again, some of that is on Sark, some is on QE. I don’t know how to quantify that ratio. But a reason for “expecting” something like 8-4 in the preseason was “freshman QB won’t always be awesome.”

To me, this entire argument comes down to two main things: how “talented” is the roster in reality, and how much of QE’s seeming lack of progression is squarely in Sark? On the talent issue - I think of “talent”, as an overall measurable of an 80+ man roster, as a little more nuanced than the count of 3/4/5-star ratings from high school. (Yeah I know those rating mean something at a population level.) But I would posit that “talent” at some positions is more critical than others, and that experience is a great equalizer. We start 2 freshmen on the OL. They are very talented. Are they better players right now than 4th or 5th year guys who had lower ratings 4 or 5 years ago? Even though it is a lagging indicator, couldn’t we say that players drafted is a pretty good proxy for the intersection of experience + talent? Texas had zero players drafted last year. The second issue, to me, is the most worrisome. The whole value proposition of Sark was supposed to be that we’d get excellent QB play, which makes all the difference in college FB. And QE’s “talent” is obvious; as he plays more, I think it is fair to expect him to generally improve - not necessarily on a linear trajectory, because that’s not how real life typically works, but overall. Strangely, he seems to be getting worse. Is that all on Sark? I have no idea why QE appears to be regressing, and while I don’t think it is 100% coaching, it is a damning data point for Sark. It was easy to excuse last year and say “well, CT and HC just aren’t good QBs, but now it’s getting more difficult to make that argument. Some of QE’s struggles are surely on QE, but it is Sark’s job to correct them and that isn’t happening. Here’s what I like about Sark: I generally like the coaching staff he hired. You can see development at both lines, the defense overall is better (I don’t give a shit if you want to credit PK or GP, all I care about is the result), the RB and WR coaches were terrific hires, etc. Strong didn’t do that, Herman didn’t do that. And in 2 years Sark has addressed the talent on the lines, which has been a huge issue. And I generally like his offense, though I’m not sure what is going on with QB play, because that is limiting it right now. I don’t think Sark is a great head coach. I do think he does enough stuff well to be a good head coach. I thought 8-4 was about right for this year (I don’t see the massive talent advantage that others do) and freshmen are gonna do freshmen things. Sark has fucked up some stuff this year, no doubt. Again, I don’t think he’s a great head coach, but I’m not convinced that he’s not a good one.

lol, no holding on that play, but targeting for touching the QB with an elbow. This sport has turned into a goddamn slap party.

All I want to know is why thatguy’s posts always begin with a single space before the letters start.

Every time I read the sentiment about how they “should” fire Jimbo, I think about that contract and I think of this:

Meh. The one Buxton is wearing is nice, but not a fan of the new M cap - looks like the Stanton-era Marlins cap. This is a case of fixing what wasn’t broken.

You think he’ll be fired after this season if he loses to a 6-4 Kansas team on the road? I think it will be yet another data point that tells us he’s probably not going to ever get it done, but he’s almost certainly not getting fired after this year, even if we lose tomorrow and the next two as well.

Fired when?

That’s 7 too many times.

Dubon is fine, just bat him 8th or 9th and not 2nd for christs sake. That’s all.

…and Herman tried his absolute best in 2019.

Counterpoint - he was open-minded enough to take feedback he received related to uniform fabric and make the necessary recommendations in an effort to ensure the comfort his players. He can’t be that unlikable.

Crazy how people don’t see a completely hypothetical scenario that can be neither proven nor disproven?

Yeah, but isn’t all that sort of baked into the prediction? Like - I think I voted 8-4 in the preseason based in the idea that the talent improved, year 2 in a system, and then account for youth and a freshman QB. Add it all up and it felt like 8-4 would be good. Actually watching the fuckups is always aggravating but they were accounted for in the prediction - not down to the detail, but from a broad perspective.

What the absolute fuck? How is that a penalty?

I don’t know what to think about Urban at this point. I think after last offseason it’s probably not a possibility anyway. But if we could lure a known quantity like USC and LSU did last year? Then yeah, we should. (I also have no expectation that that will happen, or that this will even be entertained, this winter.) And no, losing this weekend would not change my mind, because it wouldn’t be remotely surprising. Keep Sark until you know you have a better option. We didn’t do that last time.

I’ve tried to be optimistic with Sark, even though I definitely thought it was a WTF hire. I thought “well hell, we will at least have a badass offense and that’ll be entertaining, and if he gets recruiting right, he could be all right.” And I was ok kinda giving him a pass last year, because it was clear the roster wasn’t that talented, didn’t really have a QB who could execute his offense, and it was everyone’s first year in the systems. But I was kinda looking to the second half of year 2 to see progress. And it’s difficult to see. The QB is regressing somehow. The second half meltdowns haven’t stopped. He doesn’t seem to have answers. So yeah, first impression was probably correct - he’s almost certainly not the guy. Here’s the thing though - as long as recruiting doesn’t crater, I’d prefer to just keep him in place until you know for goddamn certain who the replacement will be. Seems like last time we thought maybe we could get Urban but miscalculated, and then we’re left holding our dicks and hired Sark. Don’t do that again. Just keep him here until you have a done deal (well, until you are extremely confident that you have your guy). No idea how realistic that is, acknowledging that there are probably way too many people involved in that replacement process to have coherent communication.

I mean, with Sark, a big part of it is that he’s an addict and has owned that and made changes in his life. That is admirable and isn’t easy, and many people can relate to what he’s gone through. He comes across as a humble, accountable, positive guy. That makes him likable (from afar). None of that makes him a good coach or means he should be evaluated differently than his predecessors, of course.