burdine

I'm less focused on where we are now than I am on our trajectory. Last year felt terrible on defense and was a big step back. This feels like an even bigger step forward and it does not feel gimmicky (orlando blitz pkg) or insane talent driven (joseph ossai, etc). We need more data though to draw any real conclusions but I think it's encouraging. If Sark can roll out a consistent top 10 offense and this level of defense or better, I think that might even make Surly smile a bit.

Basically, the data shows that so far the defense has taken a solid step forward against reasonably good competition (no lower div schools, Bama, etc) from last year despite the super frustrating maddening loss to Tech. I would also say we are seeing signs of actual development of players. Seniors like Coburn and Sweat are playing at a different level instead of looking like maxed out busts. We aren't a dominant defense for sure. We do seem to be a much improved one. For a long time, we have said development of players on the roster has been our biggest issue. Maybe this staff can get that fixed. Too little data to know for sure but it's encouraging so far. We did struggle with Tech's mobile QB and we have a couple of those still to come on the schedule (Duggan, Martinez) so I'd like to see how we handle those guys. Also, I think it's even more encouraging to see real improvement on the defensive side of the team given Sark is an offensively minded head coach.

Agree, I could see it being more a parent issue. I root for all these kids to succeed.

A very good friend of mine was in the West Side suites for the game. Some of the athletic staff were there. This was what I heard from my good friend.

Hopefully, this game is big enough for his Dad to let him play. Love the talent but not sure this helps our culture problems. Arch seems like a solid culture fit. I want nothing more than them all to succeed. It's just that special treatment seems corrosive to what we want to accomplish.

Seems like the stats say we have improved YOY but not enough to be a consistent winner with our dinged up offense with a backup QB (who is playing fine for a backup QB but not putting the team on his back play either). Not what anybody wants to hear or see but it is what it is.

Not that it means everything is great, but just consider our likely record with a healthy Anguilau? Geez, that one really hurt and no easy fixes in the short term.

It was a gutsy performance. He had us in position to win the game against #1 Bama. He made some plays and no turnovers. He earned a ton of respect from me.

I was there in 90. I felt this was loudest I have heard. our fans gave it their all.

I guess 98 KSU is a good example of how a very talented team with a new culture and inexperience at QB can lose big to similar or lesser talent with a completely developed and in place winning culture. I expect better. I would rather play Bama with this team than last year's team. And I like being a big home dog. That is the exact opposite of situations where Texas has usually underperformed. Hook'em.

My bad on getting the Apple Turnover reference incorrect. I do think 1998 KSU is decent model of how things could go wrong in this game. That 1998 Texas team was loaded with NFL talent including RB, but had a young QB and had not gelled as a program. I am not saying it is destined be a repeat just that if Ewers has a bad game then that is a good historical reference game.

This is an excellent post. To be devil's advocate, that 1998 KSU game is reasonably analogous to this matchup. They were an established program with their guys. We had new coaches and a young QB and a stud RB they keyed on. The Apple Turnover game ensued. But the rest of the games fit the profile.

+1 for accurate weather smack. Heat has been centered in the middle of the country this summer. Advantage: Texas!

It's too soon to say much about Sark's time here. If he was 10-2 last year, it would still be too soon. I like the offensive trajectory. I like the two new coaches this year. I like the recruiting. He did hire the defensive staff backwards which is definitely on him. Maybe he can course correct and maybe he can't. We'll see.

Yeah me too. This is mostly the way I feel. Last season's record was bad and it means something BUT IT IS NOT DESTINY either.

Last year sucked. Kansas sucked. Still I think a case can be made our offense and offensive recruiting is on a much better trajectory than under Herman. Herman did not prioritize OL like this staff. So the big question is can he get the defense to improve? if that happens cigars all around, if not bring on the next guy I guess.

I like the recruiting classes. I really like where we are headed on offense. If it's good enough for the Mannings that's going to be good enough for me to be excited. We are also going to be a very young team so there will be some WTFs. I'm concerned about the defensive side. Overall, I expect us to look better especially on offense with many more receiving weapons than last year. Losing Whittington was literally the beginning of the 6 game losing streak. We add Billingsley, Sanders, Thompson, Whittington back. Bummed about Neyor. On defense, I am hoping they have like any sign of competence and that last year with a new staff, Covid restrictions, etc could be a mulligan. We'll see. Overall, the offense should be better and more consistent. The defense is the big issue to watch. And yeah, I'm excited. This is my team. Bad coach, good coach, whatever. Hook'em.

Playing anybody but who you think gives you the best chance to win that game is just counterproductive. Reasonable folks can disagree on who that might be. Sark may have quite a few faults as a head coach yet if there is one area he is about as proven as they come it would be as a QB coach and evaluator. I guess I trust Sark to maximize that as best as humanly possible. Now the defense and young OL, those worry me.

Ewers missed a good chunk of OSU summer program. Not much install going on during the season. Closest useful comp is to a freshman early enrollee IMO.

I don't really see anyway the league could have worked once NU and Aggy left. Mizzou and CU were replaceable. There just wasn't anybody to add with the support NU and Aggy have. It really hollowed out the conference.

I don’t think it’s right to call OSU and ISU leeches and I don’t think it’s right to say Texas and OU have a similar decision to make as Ohio St and Mich in remaining in their conference.

OSU and ISU are the class of the remaining. However, attendance is still 30-40% less than comparable programs in SEC and B1G. Not leeches I think but not the same either.

I went ahead and did the SEC with the remaining Big 12 the same way. Basically, there are 3 tiers in the B1G and the SEC, and the Big 12 is missing a upper middle tier of programs like Auburn, ATM, Penn State, NU, Wisky, etc. There is nothing comparable in the remaining Big 12.

Here is 2021 football attendance per Wikipedia. I removed Ohio State, Michigan, Texas and OU. 5 B1G are above the best remaining Big 12 school. I don't think Texas and OU would be leaving a league with that type of attendance and support. Most blame has to fall on NU, CU, Mizzou, and ATM for leaving the league. These were those types schools in the Big 12 that still remain in the B1G. ATM is basically directly comparable to Penn St in support and prob more valuable in TV. My two cents.

Big 12's best attributes are a large supply of Central time zone games and fan bases that care about football. Oregon and Wash care about ball but not sure about the others in the Pac.