Sandbagging Steve

These journalist are so bad. The list is not only terrible but leaves out many important factors. Of course, we know that already. Just look at most of the articles written on the subject lately. 1. Winning would be determined over the school's history + current results + potential results 2. Viewership would need to account for what channel did you play on? what day you played? what time you played? who you played? what conference you played in? what your record is? how much success/failure in the past few years? So many factors here and they would need to be compared the other programs in the same exact way. It's much more complicated but shouldn't be hard to get fairly close by just knowing college football in general. 3. He doesn't even mention footprint/markets, which still matters. A conference would prefer someone bordering another state, although exceptions can be made in certain circumstances. Footprint can help regional rivalries or it can help spread the conferences reach more nationally. And new TV markets still matter. Not only to increase cable rates, but to raise prices on streaming services at a later date. 4. Recruiting territory is not mentioned and it matters. B1G took Rutgers and Maryland because of media markets, footprint and recruiting territory. They badly needed rich recruiting territory and this expanded their reach. California is a huge add for them. 5. So many other factors. The guy, like all these hacks, is a clickbait machine. None of these paid journalists even work anymore. They don't even do anymore research than the average message board poster.

I never denied that we lacked development. I even mentioned OU winning with offensive schemes and OL development. Outside of QB and OL, I think development is the least important aspect of college football. Offensive schemes, five-stars, good evaluations and S&C are most important. A good player will bite the moment he arrives on campus. The majority of our classes, prior to NIL, were full of players ranked in the 250-400 range. We didn't land enough difference-makers and didn't evaluate the late-risers. We have looked SLOW for the better part of a decade. Go watch some games in the early 2000s and then compare to the Charlie/Herman era. The speed wasn't the same on either side of the ball, especially receiver and defense. Go watch the film and look at the measurements/track times of some of these kids Charlie and Herman recruited. And then go look at Alabama/LSU/Georgia/tOSU and get back with me. There are very few good coaches in this game. You really think Cookie Monster is a better coach than Herman? Miles a better coach than Herman? Kirby Smart a better coach than Herman? I actually think Herman is better than all 3 of them and Herman is average. Those other three won national titles because they bought top end talent. They didn't settle for the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth options. Herman didn't even win a conference title. The biggest problem in Austin since the mid-1980s is cheating by the competition. It's no coincidence that the only success we've had was when ATM/SMU got busted and in-state/out-of-state schools were spooked and stopped dropping bags to every recruit worth a damn within the state of Texas. It's also the fact that Leach's system spreading across the state thinned out certain positions. You need to recruit nationally. Texas started losing once the new pay structure was set in place in the mid-2000s. Again, not a coincidence. Mack, Greg and McWhorter were also lazy. Doesn't change what I said. Many of the players we recruited just didn't have the skillset. Look what happened to the scrubs that were ranked as 4-stars right before Mack got fired and how far they dropped after he left. They decommitted and didn't even end up playing P5 football!!! Look at the recruiting services admitting they gave us huge bumps. They give all large fan bases bumps. Texas has to out-recruit the Oklahoma States of the world by a wide margin. We play a harder non-conference schedule and our players have much more pressure on them to win. In the next few years, we are going to be much more competitive. We may not win championships, or we may, but we are going to be a much better football team. Why? Because NIL will allow us to land more top ranked players.

In a hurry so this is a bunch of rambling. This is exactly what I was getting at... DEPTH - OOC SCHEDULING - UNFAIR ADVANTAGE - REALIGNMENT Depth is supposed to be one of the biggest factors in the game of football. Alabama just lost the national title game because of depth issues. This isn't a valid excuse for weak schedules. It only strengthens the argument we need consolidation in college football. Everyone needs to play the same kind of schedule. Weak scheduling is one of the driving forces behind realignment IMO. The networks are fed up with it. They are losing money on these kind of games. And that includes eventually strengthening the SEC and B1G schedules. All the factors I mentioned in my previous post negatively impacted Texas in a lot of close games. Texas walks into these conference games with way more depth issues than the other teams in the conference. Our team is banged up by the start of conference play. Injuries. Playing hurt. Lack of confidence. More game plan on tape. Etc. Our conference opponents? They've been busy playing cupcakes. And then we lose a hard fought, very close game. How many of those close games would Texas have won under fair conditions? If both teams had to play the same kind of schedule? RECRUITING MYTH There are very few actual blue-chip prospects in America. Very few teams land them. Texas hasn't been one of them the past decade. The 300th ranked player isn't any better than a well evaluated 900th ranked player in this current age. Five stars and top 100 type players with the measurements/speed/mental eval are the only true blue-chips. All these so-called rankings are nothing but marketing hype by journalists looking to profit. There's probably around 100 actual 4-stars in a single class. For most of the past decade, prior to NIL, Texas landed the scraps after the cheaters picked off most of the so-called slam dunk prospects. In many cases, these leftovers lacked the overall profile to be good players. Yet, we line up and play a tougher OOC schedule than the rest of the conference. How is this fair to Texas? How is this type of arrangement fair to college football fans? Oklahoma survived this period with offensive scheme, good offensive line evaluations and a whole lot of luck. They didn't win by out-recruiting everyone. And they lost almost every time they lined up against a team that did recruit well. Their offensive scheme advantage is fading as more staffs catch up. TV RATINGS - LACK OF INTEGRITY - FUTURE OF NIL I haven't been interested in watching all that many games over the past 15 to 20 years (even before Texas dropped off a cliff) because the entertainment value has steadily eroded for two reasons: (1) weak scheduling and (2) the internet amplifies the ability of cheaters to get an even larger advantage in recruiting than ever before. We now have national recruiting on a level that used to not be possible; and a way to evaluate these national prospects. NIL should eventually level the playing field among Blueblood programs and strengthen the on-field product. But an overhaul in scheduling is still needed in order to fully maximize the product. Once upon a time, teams lined up and played each other. No excuses. REALIGNMENT This is one of many reasons I favor realignment. Let's have one or two conferences of top tier teams and one conference of only the very best of the rest. Rewrite the rules to make recruiting fair and more competitive. Top tier teams play 11-12+ conference games. Any possible OOC games, if any, can only be played against the "best of the rest" second tier conference. The "best of the rest" conference plays 11-13+ conference games. If they play any OOC games, it's against the top 2 conferences. Keep the playoff at 4 or expand to 8. We don't need a bunch of undefeated or one loss teams. We need more competitive games and enforceable rules.

I think it's good for the Big 12 to negotiate the GOR with Texas/OU if they can land some of the PAC schools. This sets precedent for the ACC to negotiate out of their GOR, which allows the Big 12 to raid the best leftovers. I think we've both established this much. There will be only two conferences above the Big 12 in the pecking order. I can't see the SEC/B1G wanting to raid after all the bullets are fired, but if they do, it's not going to be anyone that will really hurt the Big 12 all that much in overall revenue. Most of the teams in the Big 12 are going to have similar value outside of an Oregon or Washington. Big 12 won't have to be concerned as much with realignment moving forward IF they can land most of the PAC. The dust will be close to settled for them. They may never be the lion but they become the hyena picking off the tasty leftovers.

Not the same thing. Gundy is whining about playing a hard schedule. Oklahoma State usually plays 2 high school OOC opponents and 1 weak team from the Power 5. That's actually better than the majority of the other teams in the Big 12, but still very weak. I'm hoping when all these conferences realign that we will get fair and competitive schedules. On the other hand, Texas replaced ATM with bigger, better Blueblood programs on the schedule. Texas has been one of the few teams in the country this past decade to play at least one really good team OOC and a second P5 opponent. And that's with a 9 game conference slate. It's way too tough compared to the competition around the country. The scheduling is a mess in college football. It's actually hurt us quite a bit. It's not just a possible loss, but Texas goes into conference with more injuries. We aren't just talking missed games, but players not at a 100%. The other teams in the Big 12 with their cupcake OOC schedules get more time to gain experience, build confidence, keep bodies fresh, etc. They can also show less tape to future opponents by keeping things simple. It makes a difference. Think about all those close conference losses the past decade? How many could we've won with fresher players by just playing the same cupcake OOC schedule that the competition played? There needs to be a rule that you can only play P5 teams OOC. Better yet, moving forward, play 11 conference games in a 16 team conference. The only difference in Texas during their worse run in school history and ATM during their second best run in school history is ATM's high school OOC schedule versus UT's tougher OOC schedule.

In this particular family, the Old Man = Archie Manning

If we had the Arch Manning profile at every position, I can guarantee you we'd win a national championship. Even if he doesn't meet expectations. And ninety-nine percent of these recruits don't meet the lofty expectations.

No doubt the new commissioner has helped change the tone in the room; but I think the USC/UCLA news has also helped change the thought process. The Big 12 now tastes blood. It knows it can be the "leftover conference" that survives conference realignment. They see stability for themselves, which wasn't there a few months ago, and that means branding power matters more now.

As stated up the page, it's best for the Big 12 to settle with Texas/OU and focus on building the new Big 12 brand. All the talk in their conference centered around two brands that will no longer be around is not good for business. With that said... Big 12 has an incentive to kill not only the PAC but the ACC in order to stabilize its membership as the clear #3 conference. If the Big 12 settles the GOR with Texas/OU, they now set a precedent for future litigation in the ACC. It now becomes easier for the ACC powers to leave the conference for the SEC/B1G in the future. ACC dying is good for the Big 12. They can add the PAC and the very best of the leftovers in the ACC. The Big 20 Conference I mentioned several pages back is then a possible reality.

This board sounds like the group that told me Peyton Manning was going to be average back in the late '90s. I don't believe there's more than one or two college (QB) prospects in history that deserve a 1.000. With that said, Arch is one of the best prospects in the country. Arm strength means very little, as long as you can make all the throws. Don't discount the fact that the Manning's make a concerted effort to throw a catchable ball. It can deceive one's evaluation on arm strength. It's why the uninformed thought Peyton would lose out to Brandon Stewart at Tennessee. It's why these idoit journalists can't evaluate worth a damn. Arch does a lot at an elite level for a high school prospect: 1. He's typically very accurate with the ball while standing in the pocket 2. He progresses through his reads quickly for his age 3. He knows his safety valve and has a timely feel for when to take it 4. He throws receivers open 5. He already has a ton of experience throwing under pressure. It's probably one of the reasons Archie and family let their kids play on that bad team. There's nothing that will get you prepared for the next level like throwing in tight windows under pressure. Most of these highly rated quarterbacks rarely face these conditions. Arch will have four years of repetition at a young age (the younger you learn, the better). 6. His name is Manning and, yes, it matters. A really good high school player with the genes raises the chances of success. Now add to it the importance of knowledge at the QB position. He's had way more schooling than any other player in the country. He's been mentored on things that no coach can give him, especially a high school coach. He already prepares in the film room like a pro quarterback. Some of these kids never even figure out how to study film in college. It's a skill. 7. He scrambles like the Old Man, but his weakness is throwing on the run. He's getting better at it and I expect him to show even more improvement in that category this coming year. 8. The Manning's aren't concerned with championships and gaudy high school numbers. This time in Arch's life is measured by trying to simulate, and gaining experience, under the same duress of a college and pro quarterback. Train the mind to be prepared for all the variables coming his way in the future. It's the only way to strengthen your weaknesses. No better way to do that than play with a bad offensive line. The gaudy numbers will follow when it matters: college and pro. At least that's the plan. Mike Farrell was jizzing in his pants on the thought of Arch Manning reconsidering the Sooners. But now he's with the Longhorns... The whole world is turning into a bunch satyanash. There are people out there who just can't handle good news.

I'm about to head out on a fossil trip and this reminded me of the future Texas offensive line...

This is actually true. I did one of those genealogy thingies and Arch's 7-time great grandaddy is Paul Bunyan.

I still have a lot of movies I need to check off the list, but I have 6 perfect 10s on my list: The Godfather The Godfather 2 Saving Private Ryan Chinatown Casablanca Dr. Strangelove

He was scared of the Helmet.

2021 Bama Rushing Defensive: 2.66 YPC

We are going to line up with 2 tight ends and run it right at him with our Heisman Trophy running back, and then throw right over the top in play action.

happens to someone we don't like. 1 Jimbo4win 10:52a, 7/5/22 AG Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Notre Dame, Clemson, North Carolina and Duke and Miami will join the BIG first to get to 24. And with these additions, the BIG becomes the best conference in the country. I truly believe we need to be in firm talks with the BIG as we would be a HUGE get for them. They would rather have Texas A&M than any other school on this list other than ND. We are in a position of strength and in a fantastic position to test our value. What does it hurt to talk? It's business, nothing personal..

Talk about tone deaf curtbr62 In reply to The Lost • 1:28p I think you are correct about them ganging up in a self preservation mode. I think there are at least 4 teams in the SEC which would probably not be desired by ESPN: 1-Vandy 2-Ms State 3-South Carolina 4-Ole Miss An article talked about the way things are heading and to avoid the Conference bloodletting is to have schools form a new league by invitation only and set forth some criteria for membership which some of the current schools cannot meet. Whether it be athletic success; financial stability, etc. For example, Ole Miss has never gone to Atlanta and the last Ole Miss SEC Football Championship was in 1963. You can set forth Stadium size or whatever but it would be invitation only to join.

ToxicAG 8:10p, 7/4/22 A&M needs to start investing in academics like we do in sports. We are on the verge of getting kicked out - bottom of the list based on the latest numbers. Iowa State voluntarily left the AAU this year before being asked to leave

Did he make that in a Magic Mill food dehydrator?

They are trying to recruit the $9.95ers to the football board, but no one wants to visit that Hellhole.

I'm writing this on behalf of the greatest sports franchise in the history of the world, and the proud flagship university of the Great State of Texas: The Texas Fighting Aggies. I request that you cease any continuing or future uses of your trademark 8T4. Absent a prompt resolution, I will recommend my lawyer of the greatest law school of all time, Texas A&M University - Online School of Law at Fort Worth, take appropriate legal action to protect our proprietary rights. Any further infringing activity occuring after the receipt of this letter shall be considered a willful infringement. Please understand that this trademark, 8T4, was earned through generations of hard work and unwavering consistency to the greatest record in the history of American sports: 8-4 Sincerely, Billy Goat Liucci and the 12 Ewes