Hondo

I'd love to see that interview. Alabama has a 67% winning percentage against the Big 12. "We need to get smaller to be more like the teams we've been dominating in order to compete with them" is pretty illogical and Saban doesn't seem like an illogical guy. Not saying it didn't happen, but I'd need to see that one for myself.

Have you read this thread and the SEC schedule thread? Quite a few 7-1, 6-2 predictions, "we should do XYZ with that schedule", etc. Swing and a miss. You're sitting 0-1. "We're Texas" isn't a literal reason I'm giving for people assuming we're going to be successful in the SEC. It's a placeholder summarization of the expectation of winning without anything of much substance backing up the expectation. We ARE Texas. We ARE a college football blue blood. We ARE one of the most recognizable brands on the planet. It's cool as hell to be a part of it. But that's not enough and hasn't been enough for quite awhile now. Call it a foul ball, still 0-1. Texas not being competitive without some wholesale changes is backed up by the numbers. Unemotional...numbers. The only way it equates to "you're not SEC ready" is if the changes have not been made. I haven't made an argument that the changes have not been made and that we're not ready - actually, I've specifically stated that it seems Sark has been recruiting in preparation for the move. If so, then we could certainly be SEC ready. Strike 2 looking. 0-2. Calling me an Aggie gets a 100mph fastball right in your ear hole, but you swung at it so it's strike 3.

There's 27 years of data in the post right above yours. You'll have to read/comprehend/process vs. feeling/reacting, but it's there for your consumption if you're willing to put the effort into it. No, we haven't been kicking ass in the Big 12 (I think we're actually 70% or so in Big 12, but not a ton of recent success)...which hasn't been kicking ass against the SEC...yet it's apparently insane to suggest that we might not waltz in there and dominate without changing some things about ourselves.

The bolded part is the only part of your post that I disagree with, and why that's such a contentious point of view (not just with you, in general) is beyond me. Hell, I've even stipulated that on a game-by-game basis anything can happen. But as the sample size gets larger and larger, the average of the outcomes/results tends to revert to the expected (law of large numbers and all that jazz). In 27 years, the Big 12 has had 6 winning seasons against the SEC. The Big 12 is 42% against the SEC, 38% in bowl games. Texas is 48% against the SEC, slightly better than the conference as a whole. In the and 2000s and 2010s, when most of the games were played, the Big 12 was 41%. In the 90s, 40%. In the 2020s, 55% (small sample size - 11 games, 6-5 record). The entire Big 12 as a whole has a losing (or even) record against: -Alabama (33%) -Arkansas (32%) -Auburn (25%) -Florida (50%) -Georgia (27.3%) -LSU (25%) -Ole Miss (47%) -Texas A&M (25%) -Vanderbilt (50%) The entire Big 12 as a whole has a winning record against: -Mississippi State (63%) -Missouri (67%) -South Carolina (100%) -Tennessee (75%) My argument has always been that "Big 12 Texas" will have a difficult time in the SEC. Not "Texas will get crushed", but rather "if it's the same old Texas from the last 15 years, 7-1 or 6-2 in the SEC is overly optimistic and 4-4 wouldn't be surprising." Any other argument attributed to me is a straw man - debate/refute it if one wants, but it won't be against any argument I've made. A new and improved Texas, built for the SEC, might have great success. But it will take some wholesale changes to recruiting, style, mentality, etc. It appears a lot of that is taking place, which is a good thing. We'll see.

You're pointing to exceptions (1 successful season by Texas A&M when they had a historic player - first freshman to win the Heisman - and 2 seasons by Missouri) to disprove the rule? All good. You have your opinion and I have mine. We'll find out soon enough, beginning next year. After 5 years, we'll have enough of a trend to see what's what. Nothing will tell the story like an aggregate Win/Loss record. I'm pumped to see games like Texas - Florida/Georgia/A&M/Arkansas/LSU regularly. If I'm wrong and we kick everybody's ass, then that'll be icing on the cake. I hope we do.

Get the discourteous language out of your system from the safety of your keyboard, amigo. Just don't let it develop into a habitual thing to the point where your tongue creates trouble for the rest of your body in real life. Such behavior may be the norm in your little bubble, but eventually you're going to run across someone who'll smile and call you "sir" while turning your ass inside out and making you wear it like a hat. As for the Texas Longhorns football team, I'll be rooting for them regardless of who we're playing or what conference we're playing in. It's not going to be a cakewalk in the SEC simply because "we're Texas." We may have great success, and I hope we do, but it's not guaranteed. If you actually read what I've posted, you'll see that I've never said we're going fail, only that success isn't quite the guarantee some people seem to think it will be. That's all. Baylor and Kansas State have exactly as many Big 12 titles as we do, 3. To suggest that we're somehow going to roll into the SEC and be instantly competitive absent some wholesale changes (which I certainly hope we've made and/or are making) is a little overly optimistic. Enjoy the rest of your day, sir.

Another reading fail. Tiresome. I acknowledged that it appears we're headed in the right direction. I don't know Coach Sarkisian personally, so I can't make declarative statements about what he's doing/not doing, but it certainly looks like they're on the right track to get us competitive. (And, if you think about it, the fact that it's taking "building", "changing', etc. to prepare for the SEC only proves my point that there's a big difference. Otherwise, we could just be the same ol Big 12 Texas that couldn't even win the Big 12 regularly, roll into the SEC and compete without changing a thing, no?) I also never said we're going to get our shit kicked in. I said 7-1 or 6-2 is overly optimistic given what we know today. AND I've said over and over, it's conditional on whether or not we adapt or stay as we have been for the last decade+. Big 12 Texas will be lucky to go 5-3 with that schedule. A Texas-built-for-SEC football could go 7-1, 6-2, or hell 8-0. My entire point is that the current Texas won't cut it. That's all. Not that we can't adapt and compete. Not that we won't adapt and compete. Simply that we have to adapt to compete.

No, I have eyeballs and a little thing called objectivity. I'm a UT homer as much as anyone; I just don't let it blind me. I've said several times that I myself scoffed at the idea until I saw it with my own eyes over a 10-year period of getting a closeup look. You'll see soon enough. We couldn't dominate the Big 12 and we're going to be middle of the road in the SEC unless there's a fundamental shift in how we recruit and play football. 12 team playoff will help us sneak in once in awhile, but under the current system, we wouldn't sniff a CFP playing in the SEC.

I made a point about how hard playing an SEC schedule is - week in and week out over an entire season - and you "refute" it with a comment about ONE team's performance over ONE season? Calling someone's opinion/position "laughable" and then talking straight out of your ass isn't a great look for you. Condescension - while yourself lacking basic reading proficiency, comprehension, and logic - makes you look silly. Pro tip for life: It's easier to accept a differing opinion when it's presented respectfully.

Bowl games aren't indicative of running the gauntlet of an SEC schedule every week for an entire season. I'll quote myself below to answer your question. Look, I'm not dogging UT or rooting against us for whatever reason. I'm just telling you the SEC and the Big 12 ain't the same - and anyone thinking it won't be much tougher is in for a surprise. And hell, we haven't done all that great in the Big 12 for starters. IF Sarkisian has been recruiting with the SEC in mind and we're willing to adopt a blue collar attitude vs. "we're Texas; we're a blue blood", we'll be okay. If we think we're just going to roll into the conference and have success because "we're Texas", well, they It's like a guy who "has done martial arts his whole life and is 78-0 in tournaments" going to prison. The baddest MFer on the block never took Karate/TKD/BJJ...he's just been fighting all his life and wants to kill you. IF martial arts guy gets lucky and wins, it'll be one of those fights where you win but it still feels like you lost. And then you gotta do it again with the next guy...and the next guy...and the next guy. That's an SEC football schedule. The Texas we're all used to is Mr. Karate. The Texas that succeeds in the SEC is Mr. Karate after he's been in prison for 10 years and is now the meanest MFer around.

Hey look, I'm all-in for UT football. I hope we beat the snot out of everyone, run the table, and walk away with an SEC Championship and a Natty - all in year 1. I'm just being realistic, based on personal observation and objectivity. Those who haven't seen it for whatever reason will see it soon enough.

I've been to a lot of Big 12 games and a lot of SEC games. It's different football. It is physical, week in and week out. Even the lower tier teams (we can probably exclude Vandy and maybe Mizzou here) have big, strong athletes that can beat you. Watched a sub-.500 Florida team play LSU in Tiger Stadium and it was like gladiator shit - dudes just absolutely smashing each other. The Texas we're used to isn't built for that. Hopefully they're aware and are changing it. If not, they and the fans are going to learn the hard way. Exactly. Kinda proving my point here. I've said before, I went to a SWC/Big 12 school for undergrad and UT for graduate school. When the Big 12 was hot, I scoffed at the people saying the SEC was tougher. And then I saw it first hand. It was kind of shocking actually. Sure, a Big 12 team can hang for a game here and there - even win some. But an 8-10 game schedule where every week is like getting hit by a train, win or loss? Anyone expecting 7-1 or even 6-2 in SEC play in 2024 is probably going to be disappointed.

There are very few easy wins in the SEC. 5-3 or even 4-4 would not be shocking.

Ewers has to improve his footwork and mechanics. He is an incredibly talented "thrower" - one of the best you'll ever see at the college level/his age - but that will only get you so far. He needs to be developed and I trust that he is getting it. As for Arch Manning...I'm not sold on him just yet. I know some folks with direct ties to the Manning family and football down there, and even they'll admit that his last name gets him an additional star. That's the general consensus from people in Louisiana who really know football. I'm not saying he won't be great (nor are they), just that it's not a guarantee...yet. But shit...it feels good to even be typing about Ewers and Manning vs. being pissed we don't have anyone to be excited about. It's good to be a Longhorn.

Don't necessarily disagree with your premise, but I don't think it has as much of an effect as you do. Texas has been getting beaten because we haven't been very good, plain and simple. We haven't had the coaching and we've been trying to play 2000's football. I am a Texas alumnus and obviously love Longhorns football, but I'm also a realist. Back when the Big 12 was stout and Texas/OU were in the mix for Nattys, I used to scoff when people would tell me the SEC was a different animal. Then I moved to an SEC powerhouse city for a few years for work. The first week I was there, I saw some of the football players in a local gym. Not "collegiate student athletes" like I was used to seeing in the Big 12...these guys were grown ass men. I was mid-30s and not a small guy myself - former collegiate athlete and have stayed in good shape - and these guys made me look like a little kid. Looked up their jersey numbers from their t-shirts - "19 years old, RS freshman", "20 years old, second string OLB"...MFers looked more like a 30-year old NFL players. It's one thing to hang with Alabama at home for 4 quarters and lose by 1 point. It's another to play SEC teams week in and week out. I hope we're ready, but like I said before - it's going to take a big mentality shift. Finesse, skill players, and "we're Texas" won't cut it. We're going to have to get nasty...which is a little more difficult for us than most of the SEC schools because...well, we're Texas (a public ivy with standards). Whatever happens, it's going to be a helluva ride and fun to watch.

Texas certainly played down to the Big 12. Will we play up to the SEC?

It did hit him in the arm. It just hit something else first. Not saying it was the knob of the bat - it could have been that or his lead forearm, but it hit *something* prior to hitting the right forearm. One of the replay angles shows the ball changing trajectory prior to hitting the right wrist/forearm. I'm speculating that it was the knob of the bat because Flores only indicated the right forearm/wrist impact. Doesn't matter now anyway, only that I don't consider that particular call/no call to be all that egregious in the grand scheme of things.

Whatever the SEC does, several things can be certain: -Alabama will dodge the tough teams when they're really good or, at a minimum, get them at home. -Georgia will get a bunch of cupcakes every year. -Whatever years Texas has its best roster, it'll get Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Ohio State (OOC), Michigan, etc. - all on the road.

I wouldn't count on them moving LSU/Aggy off of Thanksgiving weekend.

The replay showed the ball clearly changing trajectory before hitting his right forearm/wrist. It definitely hit something, either the knob of the bat or his left forearm. Based on his reaction only being the right forearm, I'm guessing it did, in fact, hit the knob.

Who cares who/where we have play on the road? Let's just roll in and fuck 'em up, whoever it is. Would be sweet to open SEC play with wins against Arky and Aggy in their houses. I know Sark's been recruiting in preparation for the move (bigger in the trenches, etc.), but to be competitive in the SEC, we're going to have to find that last little "something" that's been missing for the last decade. Can't be the rich program riding tradition anymore...we're going to have to get a blue collar attitude and start getting nasty.

No sweat. Agreed on EK and DC. They both had great seasons and aren't to blame for the way it ended. Can't see what you can't see. Here's the AB just before the final one. Granted, the tying run was a gift to us (2 strike 3s the ump didn't call on DC), but still. Crazy how it went down.

Maybe ease off on calling people pussies and talking about kicking people in the ass. Everybody knows you wouldn't do a damn thing in person and it takes away from your baseball related points. (You quoted me, so I'm not sure if any of that was directed my way or what.) Regarding your baseball comments, I don't disagree with much - rebuilding year, outperformed expectations, etc. However, the game has changed a bit. Pitching/defense and manufacturing a few runs here and there doesn't cut it anymore. Sure, pitching and defense is still necessary, but in 2023 you have to put up runs. It's shifted a little more toward offensively outscoring the other team vs. defensively limiting their runs to fewer than yours (obviously you have to score more runs than your opponent; I'm talking strategy and how you get there). Pitchers, no matter how good, still have to throw the ball through the strike zone. As hitters get better, stronger, and smarter (through analytics), they're narrowing the gap between good pitching and good hitting. The adage of "good pitching beats good hitting" is still true, but not as much as it used to be. Teams, Texas included, have to recruit and develop hitters too. I speak from experience, not just observation and theory. I actually played college ball (maybe you did too; not saying I'm the only one or anything special) and today's game is a LOT different than when I played ~25 years ago. The athletes are more athletic, swings are different, tactics/strategies are different, etc., etc. Baseball is no different than any other sport - it changes over time and if you don't change with it, you get left behind. I hope Texas changes with it - minus the fur coat HR celebrations, mullets, and all that other flashy/dumb shit - or the SEC is going to be a meat grinder.

Very good point. That's one of the things Texas is going to have to adapt to. Can't be just a pitching/defense program anymore. They're going to have to start recruiting differently. Look at LSU's roster. A bunch of big dudes with a handful of "skill players" mixed in. Even Stanford's guys were notably bigger guys (for the most part). It's not about winning 4-1 via pitching and defense anymore. It's about giving up 8, but scoring 10.

We definitely got screwed on some calls, but there is no bottom of the 9th if the ump didn't gift us that last run by not calling strike 3 twice. Flores was hit twice, once before it hit the trailing forearm. The ball clearly changes trajectory, whether from hitting his leading wrist or the knob of the bat. They made the right call on Brown's HBP. We got screwed on some pitch calls, but so did they. Had we won that game, it would have been a travesty to Stanford and their fans. Losing it is one to us. But we're not a once-in-awhile program. We'll be back and it'll be fun to watch them compete in the SEC. Baseball is different down there. They trash the game up a bit more than I like, but they can absolutely play some ball. There is no doubt about that. Texas is going to have to step it up a notch to be competitive week in and week out. On to 2024.