This is who Steve Sarkisian is.

[TriStone 1724]

12 minutes ago, Doogles said:

Good luck the rest of the way!

Go fuck yourself.

[WinningIsHard 4030]

6 hours ago, Nicole44 said:

Context matters (so I’ve been told.) Dykes isn’t that great. (Ok yeah whatever.)

He had a lot of upper classmen. (True—so I assume Sark could have done the same at TCU this year…nope.)

Duggan is a robot. He’s really 35 years old. We’d have smote either team down in the big 12 championship…blah blah blah…does everyone feel better? I’ve heard every excuse in the book. The last few weeks. Sonny outcoached Sark in the regular season and he was able to take the roster he had and using a legit OC scheme around their strengths. That to me is the mark of a good HC. Will he be great? Who knows? Could Sark have gone to TCU this year and done what Sonny and his staff accomplished? (Narrator: Nope.) Could Sonny have come to UT this year and made it to the Big 12  championship and go on to the CFP? I believe he would. Especially with Rojo and Bijan. 
 

Ultimately it doesn’t matter what I think. We aren’t playing for the CFP. You can make all the excuses you want for why that is. Will Satk ultimately in the long term be a better HC than Dykes? I guess we’ll see. But right now scoreboard and all that…Sonny did a better job in year one at TCU than Sark has done in the last two years at UT. If iT makes you feel better at night when you’re rocking yourself to sleep to say Sark is better at this point that’s fair. A better argument will be where will these two HCs be in 5 years. Because apparently we can’t compare Sark and Sonny now because of context etc…

Since Royal left we are 388-188 (basically 8-4 lol), 18-15 in bowl games and we have won 7 conference championships. 45 years of pretty average, with a couple magical seasons in there. Kinda like tcu is doing right now but you’re right, fuck that context. Let’s get the pitchforks out and burn this mother fucker to the ground because we deserve better. If tcu sucks next year like Baylor did this year will you learn that sustained rebuilding isn’t about quick satisfaction or should we get immediate and long lasting satisfaction because “we’re Texas”? 

[closetohumping 17441]

3 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:

Since Royal left we are 388-188 (basically 8-4 lol), 18-15 in bowl games and we have won 7 conference championships. 45 years of pretty average, with a couple magical seasons in there. Kinda like tcu is doing right now but you’re right, fuck that context. Let’s get the pitchforks out and burn this mother fucker to the ground because we deserve better. If tcu sucks next year like Baylor did this year will you learn that sustained rebuilding isn’t about quick satisfaction or should we get immediate and long lasting satisfaction because “we’re Texas”? 

Like Johnny Mac said “deal with it.”

[Doogles 230]

16 minutes ago, TriStone said:

Go fuck yourself.

Edited December 5, 2022 by Doogles

[lilMAC25 3794]

18 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:

Since Royal left we are 388-188 (basically 8-4 lol), 18-15 in bowl games and we have won 7 conference championships. 45 years of pretty average, with a couple magical seasons in there. Kinda like tcu is doing right now but you’re right, fuck that context. Let’s get the pitchforks out and burn this mother fucker to the ground because we deserve better. If tcu sucks next year like Baylor did this year will you learn that sustained rebuilding isn’t about quick satisfaction or should we get immediate and long lasting satisfaction because “we’re Texas”? 

We’ve mostly sucked, so we can never have a quick turnaround, but if we wait, it’ll get better.

 

[ClubWhatever 12139]

7 minutes ago, Doogles said:

I’m sorry Sarkisian hurt you

[jimmyjazz 45920]

The only coach to win a national title at Texas in the last 50+ years went 9-5 in his 2nd season.  We got our shit pushed in by Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl.

Sark's 2nd team will go either 8-5 or 9-4.

It took 6 more seasons for that other coach to climb the mountain, although there was clear improvement (largely fueled by excellent recruiting) along the way.

What is this brave new world we are living in?

[Doogles 230]

3 minutes ago, ClubWhatever said:

I’m sorry Sarkisian hurt you

He's actually an inspiration.  Nobody has failed up better than Sark. 

[jinx 2635]

5 minutes ago, Doogles said:

He's actually an inspiration.  Nobody has failed up better than Sark. 

At least @Thatguy now has some legitimate competition for ruining this thread. UW smack will be new and so far is lame as fuck. 

[Doogles 230]

12 minutes ago, jinx said:

At least @Thatguy now has some legitimate competition for ruining this thread. UW smack will be new and so far is lame as fuck. 

You must be one of the infamous Texas boosters who looked at his resume and thought, "this is the guy.  He's the one to save us." 

Brilliant stuff in Austin.

[Valmy77 13226]

5 minutes ago, Doogles said:

You must be one of the infamous Texas boosters who looked at his resume and thought, "this is the guy.  He's the one to save us." 

Brilliant stuff in Austin.

We aim to shock and amaze.

Anyway I hadn't really thought about the Sark-UW connection. It's nice to see him reconnect with his old devoted fans.

[lilMAC25 3794]

38 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The only coach to win a national title at Texas in the last 50+ years went 9-5 in his 2nd season.  We got our shit pushed in by Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl.

Sark's 2nd team will go either 8-5 or 9-4.

It took 6 more seasons for that other coach to climb the mountain, although there was clear improvement (largely fueled by excellent recruiting) along the way.

What is this brave new world we are living in?

Mack Brown already had THREE ten win seasons and FIVE 9 win seasons by that point (not counting 1999). Furthermore, Mack took over a 5 win team when he got to TEXAS. This back when teams played 10 game regular seasons instead of 12. Also, Mack took Texas to the Big Xii CG in 1999. 

 

Trying to compare the two at this point for anything other than recruiting success is LAUGHABLE.

Edited December 5, 2022 by lilMAC25

[jw4381 3072]

2 hours ago, lilMAC25 said:

For fuck’s sake, that is an utterly stupid take without a jot or tittle of relevance.

 

 

 

So I start googling “tittie of relevance.”

don’t

[Loop 1604 227]

3 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

Mack Brown already had THREE ten win seasons and FIVE 9 win seasons by that point. Furthermore. He took over a 5 win team when he got to TEXAS. This back when teams played 11 game regular seasons instead of 12.

 

Trying to compare the two is LAUGHABLE.

You can’t reason with these dudes. Most of them are attorneys so facts and data are irrelevant in any argument. 
 

Comparing early Mack to current Sark is laughable.

[Valmy77 13226]

7 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

He took over a 5 win team when he got to TEXAS. This back when teams played 11 game regular seasons instead of 12.

Um...no. That team went 4-7 not 5-6. But it was mostly the same guys who had won the 1996 Big 12 title. Mackovic really fucked up that year but his recruiting was sound and he left Mack a pretty good team and Mack being Mack was great at keeping those guys around. I don't think the situations are all that comparable. 

Though they both got left an all-time running back and Mack did a better job with Ricky (though Mackovic's offensive lines were also great).

Anyway it is an interesting comparison but also we are talking about a really different era in College Football. Sark has to manage his roster more like a NFL team now with NIL and the Portal. That ultimately is what is going to make or break his time here.

If Mack had all that in his arsenal I don't think there is anyway he becomes OU's bitch the way he did...or who knows? He still cannot seem to win a conference.

Edited December 5, 2022 by Valmy77

[Valmy77 13226]

5 minutes ago, Loop 1604 said:

You can’t reason with these dudes. Most of them are attorneys so facts and data are irrelevant in any argument. 
 

Comparing early Mack to current Sark is laughable.

We are powered by hope. Like Mack had a similar record in 1999 so maybe we are destined for another 2005 in six years? At least 1999 Texas played (well...they were there anyway) in the Big 12 title game. If Sark had gotten there this year then maybe we can talk about a bright future. This season was a Tom Herman type season (A non-2018 one). Sark has some signs of life with recruiting and the players seem to like him...but none of that shit means anything until he has an appearance in a championship game.

Edited December 5, 2022 by Valmy77

[Doogles 230]

1 minute ago, Loop 1604 said:

You can’t reason with these dudes. Most of them are attorneys so facts and data are irrelevant in any argument. 
 

Comparing early Mack to current Sark is laughable.

This guy gets it.  Nice to see a few Texans still know football.

Too many Seattleite transplants have made Austin soft.

[TriStone 1724]

Every post another neg opportunity.  Keep 'em coming!

[ClubWhatever 12139]

9 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

We aim to shock and amaze.

Anyway I hadn't really thought about the Sark-UW connection. It's nice to see him reconnect with his old devoted fans.

Especially ones who felt he underachieved by going 5 games over .500 at a school that:  previously employed Tyrone Willingham; is historically a 0.610 winner; and whose coach after Sark went 4-5 in conference in 3 of his 6 years at the school including his last.  

[Doogles 230]

2 minutes ago, TriStone said:

Every post another neg opportunity.  Keep 'em coming!

Soft as that banana in your mouth.

[WinningIsHard 4030]

6 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

Mack Brown already had THREE ten win seasons and FIVE 9 win seasons by that point (not counting 1999). Furthermore, Mack took over a 5 win team when he got to TEXAS. This back when teams played 10 game regular seasons instead of 12. Also, Mack took Texas to the Big Xii CG in 1999. 

 

Trying to compare the two at this point for anything other than recruiting success is LAUGHABLE.

That 98 team had arguably the best rb to ever play college football and lost to Texas tech who ended up 7-5 that year. Next year we lost to NC state, and ended with 3 straight losses to aggy, Nebraska and arky. All 3 of those were embarrassing losses. 2000 we started off with a head scratcher of a loss to Stanford. I mean this board would have fuckin shit on Mack for all those losses. It took Mack 7 years to win a big 12 title. 

[lilMAC25 3794]

2 minutes ago, Doogles said:

Soft as that banana in your mouth.

Feel free to fuck off and troll elsewhere.

[lilMAC25 3794]

7 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:

That 98 team had arguably the best rb to ever play college football and lost to Texas tech who ended up 7-5 that year. Next year we lost to NC state, and ended with 3 straight losses to aggy, Nebraska and arky. All 3 of those were embarrassing losses. 2000 we started off with a head scratcher of a loss to Stanford. I mean this board would have fuckin shit on Mack for all those losses. It took Mack 7 years to win a big 12 title. 

Absolutely, but Mack beat OU in 1998 and 1999, and actually MADE it to a Big Xii CG in year 2. That and the fact that Mack was a PROVEN winner buys a LOT of goodwill. 

 

(I was wrong about the shorter seasons in my earlier post, but I can’t edit it now)

Edited December 5, 2022 by lilMAC25

[Valmy77 13226]

8 minutes ago, Doogles said:

Too many Seattleite transplants have made Austin soft.

I have never been to Washington or the northwest in general so I don't know exactly what this means but Austin has always been soft. Probably why those Seattleite people like to move here.

[SarkAfterDark 1688]

7 hours ago, Nicole44 said:

Context matters (so I’ve been told.) Dykes isn’t that great. (Ok yeah whatever.)

He had a lot of upper classmen. (True—so I assume Sark could have done the same at TCU this year…nope.)

Duggan is a robot. He’s really 35 years old. We’d have smote either team down in the big 12 championship…blah blah blah…does everyone feel better? I’ve heard every excuse in the book. The last few weeks. Sonny outcoached Sark in the regular season and he was able to take the roster he had and using a legit OC scheme around their strengths. That to me is the mark of a good HC. Will he be great? Who knows? Could Sark have gone to TCU this year and done what Sonny and his staff accomplished? (Narrator: Nope.) Could Sonny have come to UT this year and made it to the Big 12  championship and go on to the CFP? I believe he would. Especially with Rojo and Bijan. 
 

Ultimately it doesn’t matter what I think. We aren’t playing for the CFP. You can make all the excuses you want for why that is. Will Satk ultimately in the long term be a better HC than Dykes? I guess we’ll see. But right now scoreboard and all that…Sonny did a better job in year one at TCU than Sark has done in the last two years at UT. If iT makes you feel better at night when you’re rocking yourself to sleep to say Sark is better at this point that’s fair. A better argument will be where will these two HCs be in 5 years. Because apparently we can’t compare Sark and Sonny now because of context etc…

Remind me, once it was clear it wasn't going to be Urban, were you rooting for Dykes to get the job?

[jimmyjazz 45920]

31 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

Mack Brown already had THREE ten win seasons and FIVE 9 win seasons by that point (not counting 1999). Furthermore, Mack took over a 5 win team when he got to TEXAS. This back when teams played 10 game regular seasons instead of 12. Also, Mack took Texas to the Big Xii CG in 1999. 

 

Trying to compare the two at this point for anything other than recruiting success is LAUGHABLE.

Good lord, how did you miss the entire point?  

I was hinting at "patience".  Mack took more than half a decade past year 2 to win a national title.  The point is that you just don't know exactly what's going to happen and this whole "7 win Steve" angle is the dumbest fucking thing I've heard outside of texags.

[Stunns38 3460]

A great offensive line will make any play caller look like a genius.

Except for Iowa.

[lilMAC25 3794]

13 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Good lord, how did you miss the entire point?  

I was hinting at "patience".  Mack took more than half a decade past year 2 to win a national title.  The point is that you just don't know exactly what's going to happen and this whole "7 win Steve" angle is the dumbest fucking thing I've heard outside of texags.

National title? Talk about entitlement. Let’s try baby steps.
 

How about just playing in a CCG? How about winning 9 games in a season at TEXAS? 

 

[Stunns38 3460]

What is this brave new world we are living in?

NIL and instant gratification

[jw4381 3072]

7 hours ago, C-Man said:

Emily Grace Rainey. A true cunt.

Fuck that puta.

1 hour ago, Walser said:

What in the ever living fuck.

this gif

[jimmyjazz 45920]

3 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

How about winning 9 games in a season at TEXAS? 

LMAO.  So if we beat UDub, will you come eat your words?

Texas fans.  Yikes.

[Orange&White 5526]

I feel like the folks on both sides of this argument are coming REALLY close to convincing each other and coming to an agreement. Just a few more pages of this and I think y’all will have it

[Valmy77 13226]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

LMAO.  So if we beat UDub, will you come eat your words?

Texas fans.  Yikes.

I think he means during the regular season.

But hey 9-4 would be tied with 2012 as our second greatest season since 2009. So, you know, he managed to tie bad Mack. So good for him. But we are looking for a good Mack type season.

Just now, Orange&White said:

I feel like the folks on both sides of this argument are coming REALLY close to convincing each other and coming to an agreement. Just a few more pages of this and I think y’all will have it

I think watching the Men's Basketball team is a better use of my time but somehow I can't turn away.

[lilMAC25 3794]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

LMAO.  So if we beat UDub, will you come eat your words?

Texas fans.  Yikes.

Of course. 

 

I’ve never run from being wrong in this thread. Then again, I’m not the one talking about National Championships or even winning conference championships.

[40acredropout 2902]

1 minute ago, Orange&White said:

I feel like the folks on both sides of this argument are coming REALLY close to convincing each other and coming to an agreement. Just a few more pages of this and I think y’all will have it

[WinningIsHard 4030]

3 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

National title? Talk about entitlement. Let’s try baby steps.
 

How about just playing in a CCG? How about winning 9 games in a season at TEXAS? 

 

You keep capitalizing those letters like it means something to someone, 7 conference championships in 45 years man. I understand you want one really bad, but gauging sark by something that Mack could only do three times in 16 seasons is regarded. Mack had the greatest football player to ever play the game in Vince and only won one with him (fuck you I think he’s the GOAT, I’ll fight you). If sark wins 9-10 games for the next 10 years I’ll build him a statue. We ain’t Nick saban and bama or Ohio state, we just aren’t. 

[lilMAC25 3794]

1 minute ago, Valmy77 said:

I think he means during the regular season.

But hey 9-4 would be tied with 2012 as our second greatest season since 2009. So, you know, he managed to tie bad Mack. So good for him. But we are looking for a good Mack type season.

I think watching the Men's Basketball team is a better use of my time but somehow I can't turn away.

Winning 9 games (even including the bowl game) might actually be a sign that Sark has started to figure shit out.

[jimmyjazz 45920]

1 minute ago, Valmy77 said:

I think he means during the regular season.

Do you know how ridiculous it sounds to parse data like that?

 

Quote

But hey 9-4 would be tied with 2012 as our second greatest season since 2009. So, you know, he managed to tie bad Mack. So good for him. But we are looking for a good Mack type season.

Sure, it would be great.  5-7 to 8-4 (bowl game pending) seems like a good trajectory, but some of you pussies just can't handle incremental change.  I honestly don't give a fuck, other than I'm embarassed for you.

 

Quote

I think watching the Men's Basketball team is a better use of my time but somehow I can't turn away.

Why not both?  I mean, be a fan of UT or don't, but this whininess is totally unbecoming.  @lilMAC25 accused ME of being entitled?  You assholes are the Merriam-Webster definition with photos.

[lilMAC25 3794]

1 minute ago, WinningIsHard said:

You keep capitalizing those letters like it means something to someone, 7 conference championships in 45 years man. I understand you want one really bad, but gauging sark by something that Mack could only do three times in 16 seasons is regarded. Mack had the greatest football player to ever play the game in Vince and only won one with him (fuck you I think he’s the GOAT, I’ll fight you). If sark wins 9-10 games for the next 10 years I’ll build him a statue. We ain’t Nick saban and bama or Ohio state, we just aren’t. 

Again, I’m not the one that’s entitled here. I’m talking about JUST PLAYING IN THE CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME. I’m not even talking about WINNING one.

[jimmyjazz 45920]

3 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

Of course. 

 

I’ve never run from being wrong in this thread. Then again, I’m not the one talking about National Championships or even winning conference championships.

Are you drunk?  I'm not predicting a natty from Sark.  I'm pointing out that it took Mack the better part of a decade to get things to that point and you jackasses WANT RESULTS NOW.  Not to mention y'all were trying to fire his ass several years before that, and . . . hey, look!  A national title!

[Nicole44 22059]

26 minutes ago, SarkAfterDark said:

Remind me, once it was clear it wasn't going to be Urban, were you rooting for Dykes to get the job?

Nope. It remains to be seen if he’s just a good coach or can be a great one. I think he’s only as good as his coordinators. Which I’ve said a couple of times. I think what he’s done this year is outstanding. Having said that it may not be sustainable and he may not be a team builder and just a middle of the pack guy. But this year he’s not. Sark has only shown to be a middle of the pack type coach thus far. That doesn’t mean he can’t be great. This year he wasn’t. But I can’t compare the two because it makes sark not look as good. I don’t think Sark could do what Sonny did at TCU this year. Largely because he needs “his” guys and he refuses to give up main play calling duties. That’s been something that has spelled failure year over year with HCs that do the same thing. I don’t have pitchforks out for Sark. I’m frustrated. I think not hiring a true OC to sit up in the booth and handle the bulk of the playcalling will hurt him in the long run. We’ll see. But Sark didn’t and imo couldn’t do what Sonny did this year. Sark wouldn’t have been able to work with the talent on hand at TCU. Whereas I think for this year Sonny and Garrett Riley could have come to Texas and schemed around what was there and been in the Big 12 championship without having to count on an assist from Kansas. Jmo. You don’t have to like my opinion. It doesn’t change stuff at Texas. I just call it like I see it. Again it remains to be seen whether Dykes or Sark can build long term success… and by success I mean routinely playing in their conference championships year over year. 

[WinningIsHard 4030]

1 minute ago, lilMAC25 said:

Again, I’m not the one that’s entitled here. I’m talking about JUST PLAYING IN THE CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME. I’m not even talking about WINNING one.

I’m saying Vince and Colt McCoy played in 2 TOTAL, 7 years and they played in 2. Who do we have that you’d keep over Vince or Colt right now? We should relax and let sark build something solid, not shit on him constantly. Tcu abandoned duggan on the goal line to win the game after he rushed for like 75 yards and a TD to get them in OT. Coaches do dumb shit, often. Dykes will probably be 6-6 next year if he’s lucky. 

[Doogles 230]

6 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:

You keep capitalizing those letters like it means something to someone, 7 conference championships in 45 years man. I understand you want one really bad, but gauging sark by something that Mack could only do three times in 16 seasons is regarded. Mack had the greatest football player to ever play the game in Vince and only won one with him (fuck you I think he’s the GOAT, I’ll fight you). If sark wins 9-10 games for the next 10 years I’ll build him a statue. We ain’t Nick saban and bama or Ohio state, we just aren’t. 

Jesus christ expectations are lower here than I imagined.

[lilMAC25 3794]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Are you drunk?  I'm not predicting a natty from Sark.  I'm pointing out that it took Mack the better part of a decade to get things to that point and you jackasses WANT RESULTS NOW.  Not to mention y'all were trying to fire his ass several years before that, and . . . hey, look!  A national title!

Are you retarded?

 

I never called for Mack to be fired until after 2013. 

[lilMAC25 3794]

6 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:

I’m saying Vince and Colt McCoy played in 2 TOTAL, 7 years and they played in 2. Who do we have that you’d keep over Vince or Colt right now? We should relax and let sark build something solid, not shit on him constantly. Tcu abandoned duggan on the goal line to win the game after he rushed for like 75 yards and a TD to get them in OT. Coaches do dumb shit, often. Dykes will probably be 6-6 next year if he’s lucky. 

Texas played in 2 CCG in Mack’s first 4 seasons. He absolutely should have had TEXAS in more.
 

That said, there is no Bob Stoops/Lincoln Riley dominating the conference any longer. 

Edited December 5, 2022 by lilMAC25

[jimmyjazz 45920]

4 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

Are you retarded?

 

I never called for Mack to be fired until after 2013. 

My bad, you just sound exactly like all the whiny pussies who were calling for his head after 63-14.

[lilMAC25 3794]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

My bad, you just sound exactly like all the whiny pussies who were calling for his head after 63-14.

No worries, you just seem like you might a stupid fuck.

[LonghornSean 3994]

Failure to appear in the Big 12 title game next year will put Sark on very thin ice, if not fired outright based on how things transpire. That’s taking into consideration that the conference landscape will be significantly different next year.

Edited December 5, 2022 by LonghornSean

[jimmyjazz 45920]

My recollection is that the overwhelming preseason consensus around here was that Texas would go 8-4 with a loss to 'bama.

That implies a 3-loss conference season, which in turn implies pretty marginal odds for making the conference championship game.

But now, we're re-writing the story.

Typical.

Edited December 5, 2022 by jimmyjazz

[Huckleberry 32859]

Some food for thought for this thread.

A standard power rating formula is a pretty well known rating system and is something that can be used across all seasons because we have final scores of every game ever played in the top level of college football. Scoring environments have changed, though, so the raw power value can't be used to compare teams from different seasons because that would favor teams from higher scoring environments. What we can do, though, is normalize each team's power rating within their own season, essentially noting how many standard deviations from the mean they were. In the history of Texas football, here are the top teams in normalized power rating (in my system I set the mean as 65 and the standard deviation at 14, I like the numbers to look almost like grades and that puts 100 as 2.5 standard deviations above the mean which is a nice historical marker):

1. 2005, 13-0-0, 103.04
2. 1941, 8-1-1, 98.39
3. 2008, 12-1-0, 96.12
4. 1970, 10-1-0, 95.84
5. 1977, 11-1-0, 93.77
6. 1975, 10-2-0, 93.19
7. 2009, 13-1-0, 92.96
8. 1961, 10-1-0, 92.41
9. 1969, 11-0-0, 92.14
10. 1947, 10-1-0, 91.87
11. 2022, 8-4-0, 90.81
12. 1972, 10-1-0, 90.54
13. 1963, 11-0-0, 90.41
14. 1968, 9-1-1, 90.32
15. 1978, 9-3-0, 89.79
16. 2001, 11-2-0, 89.40
17. 1974, 8-4-0, 88.21
18. 1973, 8-3-0, 87.94
19. 2020, 7-3-0, 87.51
20. 1979, 9-3-0, 87.49
21. 2002, 11-2-0, 87.39
22. 2003, 10-3-0, 86.92
23. 2004, 11-1-0, 86.71
24. 1949, 6-4-0, 85.97
25. 1950, 9-2-0, 85.59

The only other team in the Top 14 with multiple losses had only 2, and they lost twice to the #2 team in the nation at the time of the game. The four losses here (obviously) are the issue. Sarkisian and his staff developed a very good football team this season. But his gameday tactics and coaching caused major issues in multiple games. None of this is surprising if you watched the game, and it also isn't surprising if you followed the weekly I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS POINT SPREAD WHY DO THE BOOKS LIKE TEXAS SO MUCH WHY DO THEY OVERRATE US at the same time the team was actually going 8-4 against the spread for the season, not just overall.

Based purely on the numbers, it can easily be argued that this was our best team since Colt McCoy left campus but they were let down by gameday issues. Now where you go from there is up to you because both contrasting conclusions are reasonable. Does that mean the team is being set up to succeed and the closing drives against Baylor show that Sarkisian can learn and grow? Or does it mean that even with a very good team he will always find ways to lose games he should win? If you consider the ways the team was held back this year it also means that the above power rating should have actually been higher.

Edited December 5, 2022 by Huckleberry