Jump to content

RaysBoomBoomRoom

Full Members
  • Posts

    2002
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by RaysBoomBoomRoom

  1. 6 minutes ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

    There are virtually zero data points indicating Sarkisian will succeed here. There are a massive shit ton of data points indicating he will not. Of course we all hope that isn’t the case - and perhaps Ewers can be his Vince Young/Cam Newton - but simply saying “we don’t know anything” doesn’t come close to telling the full story.

    Yeah maybe that was poorly worded. We don’t know “enough” might have been more appropriate. I’m not here to get in a big pissing match with anyone. I thought we finally gave our best players the ball and put them in positions to succeed on offense. As other posters have pointed out, the OL seems to have improved over the year and ST is actually an asset for this team again. There was evidence of a team that could be really good(1st half OU) and piss poor(Kansas and Arky). That’s all I was trying to say. I can see the vision of what this thing could be. But obviously it’s up to the players and coaches to get us there.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  2. 7 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

    Sarkisian's own history "laughs at that notion" that the collective should be giving the guy any benefit of the doubt. He's here, fine, show us. But selling the concept that he's about to turn the corner and start putting trophies in the case is something you should be reserving for posts on 247 or Texags. 

    I never said that he was gonna turn any corner haha I’m just saying that we don’t know either way. Your position of impending doom is just as untenable as the position that you’ve accused me of having. Im sure that you’d agree that there were at least some positive takeaways from this year. As i would agree with you that there were some negatives. We don’t know anything so there’s no reason to bury the guy yet.

  3. 3 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

    I can't figure out if you're just a very literal guy, or just naive, or what. I don't know, maybe you're a performance artist or something and don't have any experience with corporate dynamics and politics. Whatever it is, the premise that Sarkisian would publicly object to the hiring is absurd.

    Agreed. I don't track how the concept of an actual GM is immediately getting conflated by some people here. Gary Patterson isn't angling for a subordinated recruiting role, guys. Fuck. Think of what a GM does in the pros and there you have it. Also, it seems like a really low chance that they'd frame the role that way to the public.

    I wouldn’t call myself naive. I understand how things work and I know many in the industry who I talk to on a regular basis. I don’t understand how hiring A well respected guy like GP is being spun as a negative. I don’t believe that the UT admin is dumb enough to create division and toxicity within the program by doing something like this without Sarks approval. Especially with the National narrative of big money guys being the problem at UT. Sark would tell folks and nobody would ever want to coach here under this admin. I know that GP has a rep in the recruiting world but I have met him a few times and my dad and used to help run his football camps way back. From my encounters with him, he is a super genuine, family oriented kind of person and it’s known that he respects Sark so it’s kind of a reach to suggest sabotage. Logic says that this reaction is unwarranted. Everyone wants Sark to win big here, why in the hell would the people that hired him less than a year ago purposely undermine his ability to be successful? It makes no sense.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 2 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

    The main argument by folks here is that we do not need to be a learn on the job program or a risk taking program. We should be getting proven established head coaches that have shown they can win 10+ games on a consistent basis at a P5. When we got Mack I felt we could not get him but I was told I was stupid and we should be able to get coaches like Mack since We're Texas and the other folks were right. So arguments that a coach needs a couple of more seasons to learn how to be a head coach or the Sarkisian argument that we need to see what he can do as a sober mature head coach because we know only what he has been as a young drunk head coach fail. It all goes back to we should not have been in this position in the first place.

     

    Seems like a poor argument to me. One year is not enough time to mold a FB team and establish a culture. Years two and three are far more indicative. I am surprised that people with knowledge of CFB think we know anything about a guy after one year. History laughs at that notion. There is no such thing as a coach who is a finished product, if we hire a guy who thinks he’s done learning then he wouldn’t work out either. You have to constantly adapt and improvise to be worth a crap in such a rapidly changing arena like CFB 

  5. 33 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

    What are peoples thoughts on Hankton? Idk much about him but UGAs receivers haven’t ever done shit and any recruiting results are skewed by bags. Not my favorite choice. 

    UGA fans find him responsible for the fact that they don’t have a game breaker like Waddle or Jameson Williams on the roster. They respect him as a coach and developer. His title is pass game coordinator at UGA(yikes), but by most accounts he’s a good football coach and a pretty good but not elite recruiter although he did land George Pickens who was a 5 star WR. He has solid ties in Florida but more importantly he is a force to be reckoned with in Louisiana. Him and Choice on staff seems like a great deal for recruiting in Georgia, Florida, and Louisiana moving forward. He would be a major influence in Louisiana with Austin being close I think his impact on Louisiana recruiting would be somewhere in between Mickey Joseph and Corey Raymond.

  6. 7 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

    SBJ is predicting that the Big Ten is going to sign with CBS/Fox and so CBS is going to let the SEC out of their deal a year early, which would mean ESPN would start carrying the premium SEC games in 2023.

    https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2021/12/13/Insiders/Sports-media.aspx

    image.png.9e1101782ade8c27288f966dc8142fc8.png

    Yeah Steven Godfrey said the same. Seems like the consensus in the industry is that this is the final year in the big 12.

    • Hook 'Em 1
×
×
  • Create New...