This is who Steve Sarkisian is.

[BurntOrange&White 39931]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

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.

His coaching cost us 3 games. 

[quigley 1563]

3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

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.

You should make a website.

[ATXhorn17 1617]

17 minutes ago, LonghornSean said:

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.

Don't hold your breath. After what we saw from the officials this year, I doubt the Big 12 will allow us to make the Championship. If we're on the cusp, you can expect there to be an inexplicable game-changing call. After all, it hurts the Big 12's narrative and claim to legitimacy if Texas or OU contends in their last year of membership.

[Valmy77 13226]

38 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

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

 

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.

 

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.

Look I was cheering on Sark all year. He was so close to doing something really special this year, but he didn't. Texas fell just short. I am not whining about that, just pointing out that that is fact of the matter.

Hope we win the Alamo Bowl and things are better next year. There are reasons for hope and I live on hope, for the football team anyway. 

Edited December 5, 2022 by Valmy77

[closetohumping 17441]

15 minutes ago, quigley said:

You should make a website.

And you should divorce your sister for cheating on you with your brother.  
 

 

 

back to the topic I think both arguments are right.  Sark showed some promise and seems to be progressing but there are reasons for concern.  Back to back wins over 6 win teams shouldn’t alleviate the concerns

[Doogles 230]

3 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

And you should divorce your sister for cheating on you with your brother.  
 

 

 

back to the topic I think both arguments are right.  Sark showed some promise and seems to be progressing but there are reasons for concern.  Back to back wins over 6 win teams shouldn’t alleviate the concerns

If only there was a metric that tracked coaches performance over a period of time that could help predict future results.

[Valmy77 13226]

6 minutes ago, Doogles said:

If only there was a metric that tracked coaches performance over a period of time that could help predict future results.

Most recruits' moms seduced?

[jimmyjazz 45920]

9 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

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.

Earlier on this thread I posted our average margin of victory and average margin of loss -- I don't have time to go back and find those numbers, or recalculate them, but I think it was something like 24 point average win, 4.5 point average loss, which seems pretty consequential.  Is that at least partly why your power rankings put our current team fairly high in a historical sense?

[Huckleberry 32859]

19 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Earlier on this thread I posted our average margin of victory and average margin of loss -- I don't have time to go back and find those numbers, or recalculate them, but I think it was something like 24 point average win, 4.5 point average loss, which seems pretty consequential.  Is that at least partly why your power rankings put our current team fairly high in a historical sense?

To be clear, these shouldn't be considered my power rankings, it is based on the very basic standard power ratings method (looked for an old link to put here but couldn't find it). Essentially just using the score/margin of each game and iterating until ratings stabilize, including no other information. 

But to answer the question, yes that's why. 

Edited December 5, 2022 by Huckleberry

[0xdeadbeef 1651]

8 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

To be clear, these shouldn't be considered my power rankings, it is based on the very basic standard power ratings method (looked for an old link to put here but couldn't find it). Essentially just using the score/margin of each game and iterating until ratings stabilize, including no other information. 

But to answer the question, yes that's why. 

I'm not sure what use this list is. If it's not a Power Ranking, what does it tell us?  The list has the 2022 team twelve spots higher than the 2004 team that went 11-1 and won the Rose Bowl. There is no meaningful metric I can think of where the 2022 team was better than that 2004 team. 

 

[Huckleberry 32859]

4 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

I'm not sure what use this list is. If it's not a Power Ranking, what does it tell us?  The list has the 2022 team twelve spots higher than the 2004 team that went 11-1 and won the Rose Bowl. There is no meaningful metric I can think of where the 2022 team was better than that 2004 team. 

 

I just explained what it is twice. Do you have a specific question? 

[Loop 1604 227]

Stats are for losers. -Muschamp

[Orange&White 5526]

1 minute ago, Loop 1604 said:

Stats are for losers. -Muschamp

To help make your argument, you are quoting a guy with a career .523 record as a head coach.

 

 

[gmr548 16577]

I'm not sure what use this list is. If it's not a Power Ranking, what does it tell us?  The list has the 2022 team twelve spots higher than the 2004 team that went 11-1 and won the Rose Bowl. There is no meaningful metric I can think of where the 2022 team was better than that 2004 team. 
 

Scoring on OU?

[tbone_ 14119]

To help make your argument, you are quoting a guy with a career .523 record as a head coach.
 
 

Doesn’t make him wrong. Just means he’s not that great of a head coach.

[Valmy77 13226]

12 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

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.

Well this is only the third 8 win regular season since 2009. So even just by record, it isn't far off.

[Loop 1604 227]

4 hours ago, Orange&White said:

To help make your argument, you are quoting a guy with a career .523 record as a head coach.

Career 0.562 is so much better. How could I be so wrong.

[Valmy77 13226]

57 minutes ago, Loop 1604 said:

Career 0.562 is so much better. How could I be so wrong.

3.9% better!

[HtownHorn 14678]

On 12/4/2022 at 1:32 PM, 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…

Dykes 1st move as the head coach was to bench the QB that lead him to the CFP for a guy with limited P5 experience. So, really Dykes was lucky enough to overcome his own shitty decisions. Well, until the last game of the season.

[closetojumping 62693]

There's always a lot of angst in this thread, and I get it. I worry that we're saddled with a loser.  A guy that simply doesn't know how to win and when things are close, he has the proclivity to shit himself under pressure go into tunneled playcalling and exhibit weak leadership on the sidelines in doing so. There's history on my side with that concern. 

I've not advocated for giving Sarkisian the benefit of the doubt, since nothing in his history really commands that he deserves it. But the guy is here through 4 years irrespective of anyone's concerns, so you can choose to be miserable about your outlook or allow hope to be a factor. I think everyone feels some level of the trapped misery after games like @Tech and @OSU this year. Hell, the TCU game has been discussed ad nauseum here. I get it. 

That all said, if hope is part of your strategy for 2023 and 2024, I think this period's transfer portal handling and recruiting class are going to be decisively important in enabling that hope. The roster currently has been moved up several levels in talent. The current recruiting class adds to that. That's big, mean bodies on the OL and big, athletic bodies on the DL. Texas has playmakers on campus and coming in at every skill position. Ewers had his freshman flaws but he's got the talent and he's got a guy coming in behind him who has the same. Finally, Texas is building depth. We have not had a team to cheer for with actual depth since the Oughts. 

Point is, if Seven Win Steve is capable of being anything else other than a fuck-up under pressure, Texas is near the ability to straight up bully other teams without comparable talent and depth. That's how any program gets to 10 wins annually and stays there. Then he becomes Ten Win Steve and that's easier to get my head around. If Texas closes this 2023 class well, locks in key differentiated talent in the portal, and manages to hang on to Worthy, Barron, Ford, Sweat, Neyor, Sanders and a few others, 2023 might look better than 2022 and 2024 might be better than that. 

I'm sure this post will make me feel foolish after 9/9/23, but it's how I'm going to be thinking about things offseason if Texas has a strong 2022 finish. I'll be asleep on the other side of the world during the UW game, so if Texas loses that one, I'll ignore the outcome and if they win, I'll let that add to my hope and delusion for 2023. 

[Fondren & Main 6715]

9 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

There's always a lot of angst in this thread, and I get it. I worry that we're saddled with a loser.  A guy that simply doesn't know how to win and when things are close, he has the proclivity to shit himself under pressure go into tunneled playcalling and exhibit weak leadership on the sidelines in doing so. There's history on my side with that concern. 

I've not advocated for giving Sarkisian the benefit of the doubt, since nothing in his history really commands that he deserves it. But the guy is here through 4 years irrespective of anyone's concerns, so you can choose to be miserable about your outlook or allow hope to be a factor. I think everyone feels some level of the trapped misery after games like @Tech and @OSU this year. Hell, the TCU game has been discussed ad nauseum here. I get it. 

That all said, if hope is part of your strategy for 2023 and 2024, I think this period's transfer portal handling and recruiting class are going to be decisively important in enabling that hope. The roster currently has been moved up several levels in talent. The current recruiting class adds to that. That's big, mean bodies on the OL and big, athletic bodies on the DL. Texas has playmakers on campus and coming in at every skill position. Ewers had his freshman flaws but he's got the talent and he's got a guy coming in behind him who has the same. Finally, Texas is building depth. We have not had a team to cheer for with actual depth since the Oughts. 

Point is, if Seven Win Steve is capable of being anything else other than a fuck-up under pressure, Texas is near the ability to straight up bully other teams without comparable talent and depth. That's how any program gets to 10 wins annually and stays there. Then he becomes Ten Win Steve and that's easier to get my head around. If Texas closes this 2023 class well, locks in key differentiated talent in the portal, and manages to hang on to Worthy, Barron, Ford, Sweat, Neyor, Sanders and a few others, 2023 might look better than 2022 and 2024 might be better than that. 

I'm sure this post will make me feel foolish after 9/9/23, but it's how I'm going to be thinking about things offseason if Texas has a strong 2022 finish. I'll be asleep on the other side of the world during the UW game, so if Texas loses that one, I'll ignore the outcome and if they win, I'll let that add to my hope and delusion for 2023. 

***8 win Steve, sir.

[jimmyjazz 45920]

8 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I'm sure this post will make me feel foolish after 9/9/23, 

I don't expect to beat 'bama in Tuscaloosa next year.  They may not be '05 tOSU, but we obviously won't be '05 Texas, either.  That said, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility, depending on how much weight I put on this year's game against the Tide and how much I ignore Texas Tech, etc.  Fortunately, it really doesn't matter much -- any Texas fan who thinks the playoff is a real possibility should probably be evaluated by capable mental health professionals.

[Wulaw Horn 19069]

16 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

There's always a lot of angst in this thread, and I get it. I worry that we're saddled with a loser.  A guy that simply doesn't know how to win and when things are close, he has the proclivity to shit himself under pressure go into tunneled playcalling and exhibit weak leadership on the sidelines in doing so. There's history on my side with that concern. 

I've not advocated for giving Sarkisian the benefit of the doubt, since nothing in his history really commands that he deserves it. But the guy is here through 4 years irrespective of anyone's concerns, so you can choose to be miserable about your outlook or allow hope to be a factor. I think everyone feels some level of the trapped misery after games like @Tech and @OSU this year. Hell, the TCU game has been discussed ad nauseum here. I get it. 

That all said, if hope is part of your strategy for 2023 and 2024, I think this period's transfer portal handling and recruiting class are going to be decisively important in enabling that hope. The roster currently has been moved up several levels in talent. The current recruiting class adds to that. That's big, mean bodies on the OL and big, athletic bodies on the DL. Texas has playmakers on campus and coming in at every skill position. Ewers had his freshman flaws but he's got the talent and he's got a guy coming in behind him who has the same. Finally, Texas is building depth. We have not had a team to cheer for with actual depth since the Oughts. 

Point is, if Seven Win Steve is capable of being anything else other than a fuck-up under pressure, Texas is near the ability to straight up bully other teams without comparable talent and depth. That's how any program gets to 10 wins annually and stays there. Then he becomes Ten Win Steve and that's easier to get my head around. If Texas closes this 2023 class well, locks in key differentiated talent in the portal, and manages to hang on to Worthy, Barron, Ford, Sweat, Neyor, Sanders and a few others, 2023 might look better than 2022 and 2024 might be better than that. 

I'm sure this post will make me feel foolish after 9/9/23, but it's how I'm going to be thinking about things offseason if Texas has a strong 2022 finish. I'll be asleep on the other side of the world during the UW game, so if Texas loses that one, I'll ignore the outcome and if they win, I'll let that add to my hope and delusion for 2023. 

Welcome to my world. I was 4 months (maybe 11) ahead of you. I saw what I needed to see last December- signing day in February to know the program was headed in the right direction. After some up and down data points this year from a coaching perspective we are nailing this off-season away (and I think we did juuuuuuust enough during the season to be able to mail the off-season), along with good QB play, from 9-3 being an absolute floor in this shot conference and 10-2 causing some consternation and disappointment. 
I know you know this but feels like it needs to be repeated for the board- Kirby Smart is a mouth breathing moron. Georgia turned the cheating machine to Brrrrrrrrr levels and accumulated so much talent that even that mental midget can’t fuck it up every single year. 
I have hopes for Sark the offensive play caller/mastermind when he gets enough talent and decent QB play in here (we were short talent in the WR room and QB obviously didn’t go as well as could have been hoped) but him improving that is the difference between 9-3 and 12-0 if talent acquisition continues to trend the right direction. 
A Texas that is properly motivated and can legally pay players is almost impossible to fuck up. 

13 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

***8 win Steve, sir.

Estefan. 8 win Estefan Senor.

[closetojumping 62693]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't expect to beat 'bama in Tuscaloosa next year.  They may not be '05 tOSU, but we obviously won't be '05 Texas, either.  That said, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility, depending on how much weight I put on this year's game against the Tide and how much I ignore Texas Tech, etc.  Fortunately, it really doesn't matter much -- any Texas fan who thinks the playoff is a real possibility should probably be evaluated by capable mental health professionals.

I'll be in Tuscaloosa, and with some people who work with Saban and Bama, so I'll be right in the middle of hearing a ton of shit all weekend. If Texas gets blown out, Christ, it will be miserable. So I am absolutely hoping for Texas to play well and potentially pull out the win. 

Saban's not enjoying himself, even as he's about to sign the #1 recruiting class. I think NIL and the portal are going to shorten his career. He's stopped talking about coaching past 80, even jokingly. The guy won because of the competitive advantages he created with talent acquisition and ruthless roster management. NIL as a great equalizer is really pissing him off. Now everyone is a ruthless roster manager, as the players are reciprocating.

Bama loses Young and Anderson, probably. They could also lose Gibbs. They lose 4 starting OL and the TE. On defense, they lose 3 on the DL (Anderson being one), 2 LBs including To'oTo'o, both star safeties, and potentially Ricks at CB. They also lose their PK. Saban is also rumored to be dumping both coordinators and multiple other assistants. I know Bama just "reloads", but even so, that is a lot for a 71 year old to be heading up.

Their schedule is also tough. Before they play Texas, the play Middle Tennessee State. I'm sure they'll blow them out, but I'd rather not be breaking in that much change against a bowl team, personally. 

Anyway, next year is the year to be playing Bama at home early in the non-con.

[closetojumping 62693]

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Welcome to my world. I was 4 months (maybe 11) ahead of you. I saw what I needed to see last December- signing day in February to know the program was headed in the right direction. After some up and down data points this year from a coaching perspective we are nailing this off-season away (and I think we did juuuuuuust enough during the season to be able to mail the off-season), along with good QB play, from 9-3 being an absolute floor in this shot conference and 10-2 causing some consternation and disappointment. 
I know you know this but feels like it needs to be repeated for the board- Kirby Smart is a mouth breathing moron. Georgia turned the cheating machine to Brrrrrrrrr levels and accumulated so much talent that even that mental midget can’t fuck it up every single year. 
I have hopes for Sark the offensive play caller/mastermind when he gets enough talent and decent QB play in here (we were short talent in the WR room and QB obviously didn’t go as well as could have been hoped) but him improving that is the difference between 9-3 and 12-0 if talent acquisition continues to trend the right direction. 
A Texas that is properly motivated and can legally pay players is almost impossible to fuck up. 

Estefan. 8 win Estefan Senor.

I think there is quite a chasm between where my head is on Sarkisian and yours, but I guess we'll see how our outlooks adjust in the next calendar year.

[jimmyjazz 45920]

1 minute ago, closetojumping said:

Bama loses Young and Anderson, probably. They could also lose Gibbs. They lose 4 starting OL and the TE. On defense, they lose 3 on the DL (Anderson being one), 2 LBs including To'oTo'o, both star safeties, and potentially Ricks at CB. They also lose their PK.

. . . and these losses are off one of the lesser 'bama teams since '09.  I thought their secondary was particularly weak, at least by their standards.

But, we lose some guys too.  I'll be watching, but I'll be drinking, too.

[Wulaw Horn 19069]

9 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I think there is quite a chasm between where my head is on Sarkisian and yours, but I guess we'll see how our outlooks adjust in the next calendar year.

Not really. I was devils advocating for him as much as anything else because the 5-7 brigade was so fucking stupid that they needed to be smacked upside the head, hard, to try to seep into their stupidity. 
My main point, which is the same spirit I see in this post, was the book isn’t written on him and he’s not destined to be a failure if all the things lining up in his direction favoring us come to fruition. 
Maybe I’m a bit more optimistic than you but it’s not because I think he’s a great coach- I think he merely might be “good enough” to succeed with the tailwinds you and I both think might be heading his way in this portal class and the next recruiting/portal class.  

[C-Man 27222]

18 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

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.

Here's all 121 all-time Texas teams ranked in order by SRS. The 2022 Longhorns are 25th.

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't expect to beat 'bama in Tuscaloosa next year.  They may not be '05 tOSU, but we obviously won't be '05 Texas, either.  That said, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility, depending on how much weight I put on this year's game against the Tide and how much I ignore Texas Tech, etc.  Fortunately, it really doesn't matter much -- any Texas fan who thinks the playoff is a real possibility should probably be evaluated by capable mental health professionals.

Who’s going to be their QB?

I don’t know how many people remember way back when Texas rolled into Auburn and absolutely beat the #5 team’s ass. 20-0 at the half. Ended 20-7. Something along that model is brewing for Alabama, imo. 

Edited December 5, 2022 by Doc Daneeka

[gmr548 16577]

There's always a lot of angst in this thread, and I get it. I worry that we're saddled with a loser.  A guy that simply doesn't know how to win and when things are close, he has the proclivity to shit himself under pressure go into tunneled playcalling and exhibit weak leadership on the sidelines in doing so. There's history on my side with that concern. 
I've not advocated for giving Sarkisian the benefit of the doubt, since nothing in his history really commands that he deserves it. But the guy is here through 4 years irrespective of anyone's concerns, so you can choose to be miserable about your outlook or allow hope to be a factor. I think everyone feels some level of the trapped misery after games like @Tech and @OSU this year. Hell, the TCU game has been discussed ad nauseum here. I get it. 
That all said, if hope is part of your strategy for 2023 and 2024, I think this period's transfer portal handling and recruiting class are going to be decisively important in enabling that hope. The roster currently has been moved up several levels in talent. The current recruiting class adds to that. That's big, mean bodies on the OL and big, athletic bodies on the DL. Texas has playmakers on campus and coming in at every skill position. Ewers had his freshman flaws but he's got the talent and he's got a guy coming in behind him who has the same. Finally, Texas is building depth. We have not had a team to cheer for with actual depth since the Oughts. 
Point is, if Seven Win Steve is capable of being anything else other than a fuck-up under pressure, Texas is near the ability to straight up bully other teams without comparable talent and depth. That's how any program gets to 10 wins annually and stays there. Then he becomes Ten Win Steve and that's easier to get my head around. If Texas closes this 2023 class well, locks in key differentiated talent in the portal, and manages to hang on to Worthy, Barron, Ford, Sweat, Neyor, Sanders and a few others, 2023 might look better than 2022 and 2024 might be better than that. 
I'm sure this post will make me feel foolish after 9/9/23, but it's how I'm going to be thinking about things offseason if Texas has a strong 2022 finish. I'll be asleep on the other side of the world during the UW game, so if Texas loses that one, I'll ignore the outcome and if they win, I'll let that add to my hope and delusion for 2023. 

Well said. I wouldn’t say I’m totally confident in the idea, but I see the path for Texas to simply out talent the mutant anarchy version of the Big 12 over the next couple years and win 9+ regular season games in 2023 and 24.

Post SEC move, I think that’s a different story. I think Sark’s downside really starts to catch up to you when you’re dealing with - what, five, six, seven? - other programs that are also going to be competing for and fielding their share of top tier of roster and coaching talent. I find it hard to believe Sark’s going to clear the established 7-8 win bar in that environment. But hey, that’s a two years from now problem.

[Wulaw Horn 19069]

2 hours ago, gmr548 said:

Well said. I wouldn’t say I’m totally confident in the idea, but I see the path for Texas to simply out talent the mutant anarchy version of the Big 12 over the next couple years and win 9+ regular season games in 2023 and 24.

Post SEC move, I think that’s a different story. I think Sark’s downside really starts to catch up to you when you’re dealing with - what, five, six, seven? - other programs that are also going to be competing for and fielding their share of top tier of roster and coaching talent. I find it hard to believe Sark’s going to clear the established 7-8 win bar in that environment. But hey, that’s a two years from now problem.

Counterpoint: SEC coaching sucks and scheme sucks and is typically 10 years behind cutting edge because they are reactionary rubes who can’t learn a lesson until it buttfucks them with a barbed wire dildo. 
 Also- they never seem to have solid teams throughout 1-14, the refs protect the brand and are corrupt in keeping the favored team ahead on the scoreboard, and we won’t be every team in the conferences Jihad game.

Finally, they were basically the main ones seriously paying players and that’s now going to stop as a competitive advantage.  Would you rather make 10M at Texas or Bama?  That wasn’t a tough decision for Arch. And I bet it’s not a hard decision if it’s 500k or 1M. And we will be paying at the top of the scale. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by Wulaw Horn

[Duane Moore 5237]

12 hours ago, C-Man said:

Here's all 121 all-time Texas teams ranked in order by SRS. The 2022 Longhorns are 25th.

Am I missing the 1983 team on these two lists? A team that was a muffed punt away from winning the MNC isn’t in the top 25 of historical Texas teams by these metrics?

[Huckleberry 32859]

1 hour ago, Duane Moore said:

Am I missing the 1983 team on these two lists? A team that was a muffed punt away from winning the MNC isn’t in the top 25 of historical Texas teams by these metrics?

They played several close games against some shitty teams and the conference other than SMU was terrible. They won't fare well in this kind of metric but do better in overall ranking systems that account for wins and are intended to rank season performance. Power ratings are intended to predict future results. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by Huckleberry

[JMFP 1120]

On 12/4/2022 at 11:07 PM, Valmy77 said:

Most recruits' moms seduced?

[troph 24789]

16 hours ago, closetojumping said:

There's always a lot of angst in this thread, and I get it. I worry that we're saddled with a loser.  A guy that simply doesn't know how to win and when things are close, he has the proclivity to shit himself under pressure go into tunneled playcalling and exhibit weak leadership on the sidelines in doing so. There's history on my side with that concern. 

I've not advocated for giving Sarkisian the benefit of the doubt, since nothing in his history really commands that he deserves it. But the guy is here through 4 years irrespective of anyone's concerns, so you can choose to be miserable about your outlook or allow hope to be a factor. I think everyone feels some level of the trapped misery after games like @Tech and @OSU this year. Hell, the TCU game has been discussed ad nauseum here. I get it. 

That all said, if hope is part of your strategy for 2023 and 2024, I think this period's transfer portal handling and recruiting class are going to be decisively important in enabling that hope. The roster currently has been moved up several levels in talent. The current recruiting class adds to that. That's big, mean bodies on the OL and big, athletic bodies on the DL. Texas has playmakers on campus and coming in at every skill position. Ewers had his freshman flaws but he's got the talent and he's got a guy coming in behind him who has the same. Finally, Texas is building depth. We have not had a team to cheer for with actual depth since the Oughts. 

Point is, if Seven Win Steve is capable of being anything else other than a fuck-up under pressure, Texas is near the ability to straight up bully other teams without comparable talent and depth. That's how any program gets to 10 wins annually and stays there. Then he becomes Ten Win Steve and that's easier to get my head around. If Texas closes this 2023 class well, locks in key differentiated talent in the portal, and manages to hang on to Worthy, Barron, Ford, Sweat, Neyor, Sanders and a few others, 2023 might look better than 2022 and 2024 might be better than that. 

I'm sure this post will make me feel foolish after 9/9/23, but it's how I'm going to be thinking about things offseason if Texas has a strong 2022 finish. I'll be asleep on the other side of the world during the UW game, so if Texas loses that one, I'll ignore the outcome and if they win, I'll let that add to my hope and delusion for 2023. 

I think the two best strategies are yours - find places for realistic hope - a Mack type level of success with notable flaws and then hoping odds play out and milling around at 10 wins lucks us into a 14-0 season, or just say fuck it and passively observe as the seasons go by not letting this sport rule your Saturdays unless you want it to. Banging on pots and drums and yelling “seven win Steve” isn’t going to get anyone anything for the next few years. I’m not sure where I am, I do know wasting a Saturday on a loss is miserable not because they lost but because we only have so many nice weather saturdays left in this life. So count me between hope and not giving a shit. I think there’s a Shawshank quote in there somewhere.  

[Wulaw Horn 19069]

6 minutes ago, troph said:

I think the two best strategies are yours - find places for realistic hope - a Mack type level of success with notable flaws and then hoping odds play out and milling around at 10 wins lucks us into a 14-0 season, or just say fuck it and passively observe as the seasons go by not letting this sport rule your Saturdays unless you want it to. Banging on pots and drums and yelling “seven win Steve” isn’t going to get anyone anything for the next few years. I’m not sure where I am, I do know wasting a Saturday on a loss is miserable not because they lost but because we only have so many nice weather saturdays left in this life. So count me between hope and not giving a shit. I think there’s a Shawshank quote in there somewhere.  

Thinking that ought to go on a movie poster… “when you are somewhere between hope and don’t give a shit, this is the movie for you”. 

[jTower 227]

What are the characteristics of a success Power Five coaching hire? The recent past points the way

The four traits of the best hires

Looking at the broader takeaways from Power Five hires during this span yields four traits that bode well for a coach's tenure:

The hire comes with multiple years of Power Five experience. With the exception of Klieman and Leipold, every successful coach hired from 2018-21 brought Power Five experience to his new position. Even those successful coaches hired away from the Group of Five were deeply familiar with the Power Five landscape: Kiffin was the head coach at Southern California and Tennessee, Norvell was the offensive coordinator at Arizona State, and Heupel was the coordinator at Oklahoma and Missouri.

The coach leans older, or at least above that 45-year-old benchmark.While age is not the determining factor — just look at Day, Smith, Beamer and others — the numbers favor the older crowd, following the obvious conclusion that more experience is better than, well, less.

He has a background on offense. There is no more obvious predictor than whether the coach arrives with an expertise on offense or defense.

He has some sort of prior acquaintance with the program, or at least within the conference. As outlined, more than half of the 15 coaches who previously worked at the program have put together winning tenures. That percentage increases when you include new hires who have spent time in the same conference. Of the 19 successful hires between 2018-21, a total of 13 (68.4%) meet this criteria.

…there have been 28 hires of coaches with an offensive background, a reflection of college football's evolution into an offense-driven sport. Fourteen of these hires have worked out, including seven coaches with teams currently ranked in the USA TODAY Sports AFCA Coaches Poll: Day, Heupel, Norvell, Oregon State's Jonathan Smith, Kelly, Texas' Steve Sarkisian and Leach.

[troph 24789]

[C-Man 27222]

4 hours ago, Duane Moore said:

Am I missing the 1983 team on these two lists? A team that was a muffed punt away from winning the MNC isn’t in the top 25 of historical Texas teams by these metrics?

45th all-time among Texas teams. All-world defense but very offensively-challenged, especially once Edwin Simmons tore up his knee. Texas was 12th overall in SRS in 1983.

[nnm 36388]

At least one Boilermakers fan wants to go after Sark:

 

 

[BurntOrange&White 39931]

Circling back to the don’t want urban Meyer because he’d devalue your Texas degree crowd…..does Chris Beard devalue your degree? Just asking. 

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Circling back to the don’t want urban Meyer because he’d devalue your Texas degree crowd…..does Chris Beard devalue your degree? Just asking. 

I wasn’t in that crowd — hiring a known scumbag doesn’t change the value of my degree, anyway — but there are probably less than a handful of people who know what happened and I doubt any of them are posting here. 

If Beard did what he is accused of doing, or there’s a reasonably likelihood far short of being criminally liable, he needs to be gone as soon as those facts are established. 

Edited December 12, 2022 by Doc Daneeka

[jimmyjazz 45920]

How do Chris Beard's issues affect our willingness to let Sark go to Purdue?

I mean, if they have the money (which they surely don't), OK, but it's a pretty weak position.

[Blotto 23499]

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Circling back to the don’t want urban Meyer because he’d devalue your Texas degree crowd…..does Chris Beard devalue your degree? Just asking. 

Is it your understanding that Belmont possesses a Minority Report-like capability that allows Del Conte to see crimes in the future? If not, what the fuck are you babbling about?

[tbone_ 14119]

How do Chris Beard's issues affect our willingness to let Sark go to Purdue?
I mean, if they have the money (which they surely don't), OK, but it's a pretty weak position.

Didn’t we already send Fred Akers to Purdue?

[closetohumping 17441]

4 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Circling back to the don’t want urban Meyer because he’d devalue your Texas degree crowd…..does Chris Beard devalue your degree? Just asking. 

No. And neither did erxleben or weaver.  

[burdine 522]

While 6 - 3 in Big 12 play was our 2nd best result in 9 years, it did feel like the staff left one or two more wins on the table drawing legit criticism.

Now reflecting on this recruiting class, I think this is easily our best class in a decade.  I know folks say anybody can recruit at Texas and there is some truth in that.  Yet, for balance across the board between defense and offense and lines of scrimmage and skill players, this class just plain looks great.

We did well in Texas and cherry picked very high end talent nationally.

The defensive turnaround on the field led to tremendous success in recruiting.

Numerous defensive players DEVELOPED and played well beyond expectations.

We are also probably about to have our best NFL draft day in over a decade as well.

As the staff deserves criticism for some of those in game decisions, they deserve real praise for this recruiting effort.

My hope is that it reflects real changes in culture and development behind the scenes that I think have been at the root of our inconsistent results.

[Valmy77 13226]

Yes. There is more to a great recruiting class than high ranks and lots of stars. You need the highly ranked lots of stars guys who are right for the needs of your roster and your program. I feel like we got that this year.

But it doesn't mean anything until they get on campus and contribute. Time will tell. 

That experience with that Bama tight end kind of soured me a little bit on the portal. There is probably a reason these guys didn't make it at their previous school. But hopefully things go bettet with these two transfers we got yesterday.

[idigTexas 2288]

45 minutes ago, burdine said:

While 6 - 3 in Big 12 play was our 2nd best result in 9 years, it did feel like the staff left one or two more wins on the table drawing legit criticism.

Now reflecting on this recruiting class, I think this is easily our best class in a decade.  I know folks say anybody can recruit at Texas and there is some truth in that.  Yet, for balance across the board between defense and offense and lines of scrimmage and skill players, this class just plain looks great.

We did well in Texas and cherry picked very high end talent nationally.

The defensive turnaround on the field led to tremendous success in recruiting.

Numerous defensive players DEVELOPED and played well beyond expectations.

We are also probably about to have our best NFL draft day in over a decade as well.

As the staff deserves criticism for some of those in game decisions, they deserve real praise for this recruiting effort.

My hope is that it reflects real changes in culture and development behind the scenes that I think have been at the root of our inconsistent results.

I share your optimism, but prepare yourself for posts that will rightfully highlight the role that NIL is playing in recruiting success.  Comparing Sark's classes with those of previous coaches isn't a completely fair comparison, even if you assume that simply being Texas has always had inherent advantages.   

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

This is going to be a really fun thread for some people to quote in three or four years. I’m on the “this is the Simms/Redding foundation 2.0” bandwagon at this point. I’m hoping I will enjoy the quotes being thrown around. 

Theres definitely room for improvement but there’s also clearly a well-defined plan with concrete positive steps being taken.