Jump to content

closetojumping

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    14559
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    131

Posts posted by closetojumping

  1. 14 minutes ago, ClubWhatever said:

    I detect some sarcasm here but I suspect few of us Texas fans have seen Mateer play.  He is good.  Going from pure suck to good at QB makes all the difference in the world in CFB.  If they don't win 8 he should and will be fired.

    I was being serious with 8-5. Mateer is a good dual threat guy. They return most of their OL. WR/TE will likely be mediocre and the backs are fine. The offense could go back to being somewhat above average. 

    Defensively, they lose 3 of their best players but they have talent. The DL will be good. The back 7 is sketchier but I’m sure Venables will figure it out. 

    The schedule is tough. Ceiling looks like 9-4 and the floor looks like 6-7. I’m going with 8-5. If there’s big movement in the second window either way, my view is subject to change. 

    • Hook 'Em 4
  2. 20 minutes ago, Fud said:

    He blew out the combine as an edge rusher, he's going to go much higher than his production merits 

    He’s Black Mamula. He’s got bust written all over him and I am here for it. 

    Membou and Campbell over Banks continues to astound me. Banks has better film than either of them. Banks has better measurables than Campbell. Campbell’s measurables are frankly comical. Watching these mockers overthink this is still amazing. 

    • Hook 'Em 8
  3. 5 hours ago, Pdawg88 said:

    He will be gone after this year so it doesn’t matter 

    I doubt it. OU is going to be a good team next year. People haven’t looked at things critically yet, but when they do, they’ll see that OU has a lot going for it. The schedule is unforgiving, but getting to 8-5 is a solid outcome and Castiglione isn’t an idiot. 2026 could be hideous. 

    53 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

    Apparently $34.9m after the end of 2025. That's not Jimbo money, but it's not cheap. The key thing is it's not a lump sum, so I don't think there's any question they could afford it. 

    I didn't do a lot of research. Just a quick google search. But the articles I came across whining about UT's schedule compared to the Sooners were awesome. 

    OU is having all kinds of panic regarding the House settlement and competing in NIL. They’re worried more about ensuring softball and gymnastics remain competitive than figuring out a new way squeeze blood from the stone in football. That’s a seachange driven by a clear-eyed view of the landscape as NIL has rapidly changed the game. 

    No one needs 2500 words on how football is OU’s identity and they’ll do whatever it takes. It is known.  What is now known as well is that they don’t have the weaponry in storage left to maintain that war. As they retreat and rally the ranks, the hills they’re going to die on are the two in which they honestly think they can continue to win titles. 

    • Hook 'Em 5
  4. 2 minutes ago, BillyGoatHill said:

    Streaming through D1 baseball only. Or listen to Craig and Keith via Texassports

    I’ll only have 30 minutes before taking my wife on a date. I’ll just follow this thread for updates, I guess. 

  5. 8 hours ago, kilroydos said:

    I do think the Littrell situation fucked up Jackson Arnold something fierce.  He's going to be better outside of Norman in the future.

    On this board, we were selling Arnold before he ever stepped onto your campus.

    He’s a camp hero with a helicopter parent from a system offense with no elite skills. He had no business being ranked the way he was. Contrarian rubes like that fatfuck pedophile Mike Farrell ranked him over Arch Manning … just because. They wanted everyone to know how smart they are.

    Arnold may play better at Auburn, but there’s nothing there to get excited about other than his overrated recruit ranking pedigree. 

    • Hook 'Em 4
  6. Without going into a bunch of details, the 501(c)3 side of TOF will be ending shortly. The House settlement is specifically ending that aspect for all programs. Independent NIL work and TOF LLC related work will continue, including uninterrupted for the subs and stuff. NIL support above the university/AD payouts is still going to be essential and corporate NIL will be critical, due to many of the concerns voiced here about the return of bags and other such if there isn’t more active support to ensure players feel like they’re getting their value. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
  7. 38 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

    Bill Connelly came out with his initial SP+ rankings for 2025. Texas is 7th. Full list below along with how he calculates the rankings.

     

      Reveal hidden contents

    I base SP+ projections on three primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:

    1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. Combine last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on current returning production numbers, and you're pretty far down the projections road. In fact, this factor accounts for more than 60% of the overall projection at this point.

    2. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by both the past few years of recruiting rankings and the quality of incoming transfers, and it accounts for about 14% of the current projection.

    3. Recent history. Using a chunk of information from previous seasons gives us a good measure of overall program health. It stands to reason that a team that has played well for one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good for years on end (and vice versa), right? This factor accounts for a little more than 20% of the projection, and it only focuses on what happened within the last three seasons. I used to use a weighted history stretching back five years, but that's a less effective approach now with the changes in the sport.

    I will update these numbers in May and August after there have been further transfers and roster changes, and my annual preview series will begin after the May numbers are posted. But for now, let's establish the 2025 hierarchy.

    A reminder on SP+: It's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking. Along those same lines, these projections aren't intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the season. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather to date.

    In addition to the rankings of every FBS team (overall, offense, defense and special teams), we'll look at conference breakdowns and how SP+ matches up with the eyeball test in terms of which teams seem to be overrated and which could be underrated at this early stage.

    Initial 2025 SP+ rankings

    Here are the full rankings, now featuring 136 teams with the addition of Delaware and Missouri State.

     

    Team SP+ Off. SP+ Def. SP+ ST SP+
    1. Ohio St. 28.0 38.6 (6) 10.6 (2) 0.3 (11)
    2. Alabama 26.1 39.1 (5) 13.0 (5) 0.2 (20)
    3. Penn St. 25.3 39.1 (4) 13.8 (7) 0.1 (58)
    4. Georgia 24.5 37.9 (7) 13.3 (6) 0.6 (1)
    5. Notre Dame 23.4 37.3 (10) 13.9 (8) -0.2 (106)
    6. Oregon 22.6 39.5 (3) 16.9 (15) 0.5 (3)
    7. Texas 21.9 32.0 (28) 10.1 (1) -0.5 (135)
    8. Tennessee 21.3 33.6 (22) 12.3 (4) 0.2 (21)
    9. Ole Miss 20.2 34.5 (19) 14.3 (9) 0.3 (7)
    10. LSU 19.5 39.7 (2) 20.2 (26) 0.1 (48)
    11. Clemson 18.8 37.8 (8) 19.0 (21) -0.3 (133)
    12. Texas A&M 18.5 35.7 (12) 17.1 (16) 0.2 (24)
    13. Michigan 17.7 28.7 (51) 11.0 (3) 0.2 (22)
    14. Miami 16.9 42.5 (1) 25.6 (49) 0.2 (19)
    15. Missouri 15.7 32.0 (27) 16.3 (13) -0.1 (96)
    16. S. Carolina 15.4 33.1 (24) 17.7 (18) 0.1 (50)
    17. Florida 14.4 33.6 (23) 19.2 (22) 0.3 (8)
    18. SMU 14.1 37.4 (9) 23.3 (38) 0.1 (40)
    19. Kansas St. 13.7 34.4 (20) 20.8 (28) 0.2 (26)
    20. Oklahoma 13.1 29.7 (43) 16.6 (14) 0.2 (31)
    21. Iowa 12.5 27.5 (64) 15.0 (10) 0.3 (12)
    22. Louisville 12.4 36.7 (11) 24.4 (45) -0.1 (97)
    23. Auburn 12.1 29.9 (42) 17.8 (19) -0.1 (83)
    24. Indiana 12.0 32.0 (29) 20.0 (24) 0.2 (29)
    25. Illinois 11.2 30.5 (38) 19.3 (23) 0.2 (30)
    26. TCU 10.5 34.6 (18) 24.1 (41) -0.1 (92)
    27. BYU 10.1 31.6 (32) 21.5 (31) 0.3 (10)
    28. Iowa St. 9.9 30.5 (39) 20.6 (27) -0.1 (87)
    29. Arizona St. 9.8 31.3 (34) 21.5 (32) -0.6 (136)
    30. USC 9.7 35.4 (14) 25.8 (52) 0.1 (63)
    31. Boise St. 9.5 35.3 (15) 25.8 (53) -0.3 (132)
    32. Utah 9.5 26.7 (70) 17.3 (17) 0.2 (36)
    33. Texas Tech 8.7 35.5 (13) 26.8 (61) 0.2 (23)
    34. Nebraska 8.2 24.5 (89) 16.3 (12) -0.2 (119)
    35. Arkansas 8.2 31.9 (30) 23.7 (39) 0.2 (35)
    36. Baylor 8.0 34.6 (17) 26.6 (58) 0.2 (38)
    37. Minnesota 7.9 23.4 (98) 15.5 (11) 0.0 (64)
    38. Washington 7.3 28.5 (54) 21.2 (29) -0.2 (121)
    39. Duke 6.5 27.8 (62) 21.3 (30) 0.0 (66)
    40. Kentucky 6.4 26.5 (73) 20.1 (25) 0.3 (14)
    41. Wisconsin 6.1 25.1 (83) 19.0 (20) 0.0 (70)
    42. Va. Tech 5.2 29.4 (49) 24.2 (43) 0.2 (37)
    43. Rutgers 4.6 28.7 (50) 24.1 (42) 0.1 (52)
    44. N. Carolina 4.6 31.4 (33) 26.8 (60) 0.0 (72)
    45. NC State 4.5 31.6 (31) 27.1 (63) 0.1 (55)
    46. Ga. Tech 4.5 32.0 (26) 27.5 (65) -0.1 (100)
    47. JMU 4.0 29.7 (46) 25.7 (51) 0.1 (53)
    48. Colorado 3.9 30.0 (41) 26.1 (54) -0.2 (114)
    49. Kansas 3.9 32.5 (25) 28.6 (78) -0.1 (94)
    50. Tulane 3.4 31.0 (35) 27.6 (66) 0.0 (77)
    51. Florida St. 3.2 25.0 (85) 21.7 (33) 0.3 (13)
    52. Memphis 2.8 35.2 (16) 32.3 (101) 0.1 (42)
    53. Pittsburgh 2.7 29.7 (45) 27.0 (62) 0.2 (17)
    54. Vanderbilt 1.8 27.4 (67) 25.7 (50) 0.3 (9)
    55. Cincinnati 1.7 26.1 (76) 24.4 (44) -0.1 (88)
    56. UCF 1.3 27.7 (63) 26.3 (56) 0.0 (81)
    57. Syracuse 1.2 30.9 (36) 29.7 (84) -0.2 (101)
    58. California 1.2 26.7 (71) 25.5 (48) 0.0 (82)
    59. Liberty 1.1 27.8 (61) 26.7 (59) -0.2 (105)
    60. Army 1.1 24.3 (93) 23.2 (35) 0.0 (75)
    61. UTSA 0.7 34.0 (21) 33.2 (106) 0.2 (33)
    62. S. Alabama 0.6 29.6 (47) 29.0 (79) 0.0 (69)
    63. Navy 0.0 28.2 (58) 28.2 (69) -0.2 (113)
    64. W. Virginia 0.0 28.5 (55) 28.5 (75) 0.2 (18)
    65. Miss. St. 0.0 28.0 (59) 28.0 (67) 0.2 (27)
    66. Arizona -0.1 27.4 (68) 27.5 (64) 0.2 (16)
    67. Maryland -0.2 24.7 (87) 24.9 (47) 0.0 (68)
    68. Boston College -0.3 26.3 (74) 26.6 (57) -0.2 (127)
    69. UCLA -0.8 24.0 (94) 24.8 (46) 0.1 (54)
    70. UNLV -1.1 28.3 (56) 29.4 (81) 0.4 (5)
    71. Oregon St. -1.3 28.6 (52) 29.9 (85) 0.0 (67)
    72. Ohio -1.8 24.3 (92) 26.1 (55) -0.3 (131)
    73. Oklahoma St. -2.0 27.5 (65) 29.5 (82) 0.0 (78)
    74. Louisiana -2.2 28.5 (53) 30.7 (87) 0.4 (6)
    75. Toledo -2.2 26.2 (75) 28.4 (71) -0.1 (86)
    76. Michigan St. -2.2 21.0 (107) 23.2 (37) 0.2 (32)
    77. Troy -2.6 25.9 (78) 28.4 (73) -0.1 (84)
    78. Houston -2.9 20.3 (111) 23.2 (36) -0.2 (120)
    79. Texas St. -3.5 29.5 (48) 33.0 (104) 0.0 (79)
    80. Ga. Southern -4.3 26.9 (69) 31.1 (91) 0.2 (15)
    81. USF -4.3 29.7 (44) 34.0 (111) 0.2 (25)
    82. Virginia -4.8 24.3 (91) 29.1 (80) 0.1 (56)
    83. Wake Forest -5.2 25.2 (81) 30.5 (86) 0.1 (60)
    84. Wash. St. -5.4 30.3 (40) 35.7 (117) -0.2 (110)
    85. San Jose St. -5.7 25.7 (79) 31.4 (94) -0.2 (108)
    86. Fresno St. -5.9 22.6 (101) 28.4 (74) -0.2 (102)
    87. Northwestern -6.1 17.6 (122) 23.7 (40) -0.2 (103)
    88. Stanford -6.2 25.4 (80) 31.6 (96) 0.2 (28)
    89. E. Carolina -6.2 28.2 (57) 34.4 (114) 0.0 (65)
    90. UConn -6.4 24.9 (86) 31.3 (92) 0.1 (61)
    91. Marshall -6.5 24.6 (88) 31.1 (90) 0.1 (59)
    92. N. Texas -6.7 30.5 (37) 37.3 (123) -0.1 (91)
    93. App. St. -7.3 25.0 (84) 32.3 (100) -0.2 (112)
    94. West. Kent. -7.6 20.7 (108) 28.3 (70) 0.6 (2)
    95. Air Force -7.8 20.3 (110) 28.1 (68) -0.2 (125)
    96. Buffalo -7.9 21.7 (102) 29.6 (83) 0.1 (49)
    97. Old Dominion -8.3 23.2 (99) 31.5 (95) 0.0 (80)
    98. Coastal Caro. -8.7 27.8 (60) 36.6 (121) 0.1 (43)
    99. Miami-OH -9.0 14.2 (134) 23.2 (34) 0.4 (4)
    100. Colorado St. -9.5 23.8 (96) 33.2 (107) -0.1 (89)
    101. Bowling Green -9.9 23.2 (100) 33.0 (105) 0.0 (71)
    102. J'ville St. -10.4 26.0 (77) 36.4 (120) -0.4 (134)
    103. Wyoming -11.0 19.7 (115) 30.8 (88) 0.1 (46)
    104. Delaware -11.1 21.4 (105) 32.5 (102) -0.2 (115)
    105. Hawaii -11.9 20.0 (113) 31.9 (97) -0.2 (118)
    106. Arkansas St. -12.1 27.4 (66) 39.5 (131) 0.1 (51)
    107. La. Tech -12.7 15.7 (130) 28.4 (72) -0.1 (98)
    108. FAU -12.7 21.6 (103) 34.3 (113) -0.2 (107)
    109. San Diego St. -12.9 15.6 (131) 28.5 (76) -0.1 (93)
    110. East. Mich. -13.4 19.9 (114) 33.4 (108) 0.1 (57)
    111. Sam Houston -13.5 19.4 (117) 32.9 (103) -0.2 (129)
    112. UAB -13.6 25.2 (82) 38.7 (129) 0.1 (47)
    113. Georgia St. -13.7 23.4 (97) 37.2 (122) -0.2 (109)
    114. N. Illinois -14.1 14.4 (133) 28.5 (77) -0.2 (124)
    115. UL-Monroe -14.4 17.0 (127) 31.4 (93) -0.1 (95)
    116. Purdue -14.6 17.7 (121) 32.3 (99) -0.2 (117)
    117. Rice -14.8 16.1 (129) 30.9 (89) -0.2 (104)
    118. New Mex. St. -14.9 21.3 (106) 36.2 (119) 0.2 (34)
    119. FIU -15.2 18.3 (120) 33.4 (110) -0.1 (99)
    120. Utah St. -15.2 24.4 (90) 39.6 (132) 0.0 (76)
    121. Cent. Mich. -15.9 17.5 (124) 33.4 (109) 0.1 (44)
    122. West. Mich. -16.4 19.1 (118) 35.5 (116) 0.1 (39)
    123. Missouri St. -16.6 26.6 (72) 43.2 (134) -0.2 (115)
    124. UTEP -16.6 17.5 (123) 34.1 (112) -0.2 (130)
    125. Tulsa -17.2 21.5 (104) 38.6 (126) -0.2 (111)
    126. Middle Tenn. -17.5 17.2 (125) 34.7 (115) -0.1 (90)
    127. Temple -18.4 19.6 (116) 38.0 (125) 0.1 (62)
    128. So. Miss -18.6 20.1 (112) 38.7 (127) -0.1 (85)
    129. Akron -18.9 17.2 (126) 36.1 (118) 0.1 (41)
    130. Kennesaw St. -19.7 12.3 (136) 32.0 (98) 0.0 (73)
    131. Nevada -20.4 18.3 (119) 38.7 (128) -0.2 (126)
    132. New Mexico -21.5 23.9 (95) 45.4 (136) -0.2 (123)
    133. Ball St. -22.3 16.9 (128) 39.1 (130) 0.0 (74)
    134. Charlotte -22.8 14.8 (132) 37.6 (124) 0.1 (45)
    135. UMass -24.0 20.3 (109) 44.4 (135) -0.2 (128)
    136. Kent St. -27.2 13.2 (135) 40.4 (133) -0.2 (122)
     

    I've skimmed his stuff this time around. It looks like a lot of pseudo-math lumped in with his opinions in an effort to look credible. I get it, but anyone putting weight on his numbers early in the season is messing with fool's gold.

  8. 20 minutes ago, kilroydos said:

    I'd argue it's a good hire AND doesn't fix the problems.

    It’s only a good hire if the guy is calling the shots on personnel, like a NFL GM. And that’s assuming that he’s actually good at that these days. 

    It’s bizarre looking from my view. It pleases me. OU looks lost at that this point. 

    • Hook 'Em 5
  9. You guys are doing a ridiculous amount of handwringing about this. As corporate NIL grows veins into the Texas athletics department, and that's happening for sure, fearing the unhinged offer will become more and more pointless. The Canady scenario is not the norm, even for Tech. 

    Barring lunatic-level shit out of nowhere, Texas is sitting pretty. And if there were going to be lunatic-level shit, we'd be hearing about it already.

    • Hook 'Em 6
  10. Just now, SydneyCarton said:

    I'm not rewarding that fucking guy with Ana De Armas pictures, and I don't even like the rest of you cunts. So no, I chose to remind everyone here what he thinks is on the same level as Ana de Armas. 

    It’s the local elementary school PE coach, everybody! Replete in your Bike shorts, tucked in Polo, long tube socks and a whistle, you’re going to punish all of us because one asshole stepped out of line. 

    • Haha 5
  11. 1 hour ago, Scholz said:

    I don't understand the consternation.  I think he brings a wealth of knowledge to the defense ala Sweaty Gary.  A very experienced voice in the meeting rooms.

    I see two issues:

    1) It’s just kind of retread feel to the hire for many of us. It’s also a position coaching role, as opposed to simply being an advisor.

    2) Some people think that anyone over a certain age, I guess maybe 65?, is a worthless fucking drag on society. They either need to sit in their rocking chair, watching Matlock reruns while they eat their tv dinners, or they need to be taken out back and shot, leaving their carcasses to the coyotes and critters. 

    I’m in group 1, but I agree with your sentiments. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Haha 2
×
×
  • Create New...