Realignment talk not going away

[Welshy 907]

I'm here for the realignment gang bang?

[Satchel 6,932]

5 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

UT is a branch of the Texas government and thus if the state is racist (which it certainly was), you can bet that the university and football program will be racist as well, whether they want to be or not. 

Well, let’s not get carried away here. The state of Oklahoma was not then and is not now a racial panacea (neither is Texas) it appears the OU coaches brought the rest of the state kicking and screaming to a level of racial tolerance that they learned to embrace, once the wins started piling up.

[statsman 5,451]

7 hours ago, LTbear said:

You find that funny? Might want to seek help my friend. 

There is a thing called a “sarcasm meter”. You may want to invest in one. 

[LTbear 4,168]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

There is a thing called a “sarcasm meter”. You may want to invest in one. 

Sure, are those on Amazon? But hey, still, sorry your team hasn't won any more Big XII titles than Baylor, hope you'll be ok. 

[Zhorn96 1,773]

Despite all the headlines the past couple days saying there has been a shift, Cal peeps say nothing has changed and a vote is expected today or no later than tomorrow on formal acceptance of Cal, Furd and SMU into the ACC under the terms previously discussed.  Headlines the past couple days are allegedly click bait bullshit.  Now we’ll see if Cal insiders are full of shit or not

[LTbear 4,168]

8 minutes ago, Zhorn96 said:

Despite all the headlines the past couple days saying there has been a shift, Cal peeps say nothing has changed and a vote is expected today or no later than tomorrow on formal acceptance of Cal, Furd and SMU into the ACC under the terms previously discussed.  Headlines the past couple days are allegedly click bait bullshit.  Now we’ll see if Cal insiders are full of shit or not

You and I must frequent the same other board. 

[statsman 5,451]

8 hours ago, Satchel said:

Well, let’s not get carried away here. The state of Oklahoma was not then and is not now a racial panacea (neither is Texas) it appears the OU coaches brought the rest of the state kicking and screaming to a level of racial tolerance that they learned to embrace, once the wins started piling up.

It’s a little more complex. 
 
In 1956, Prentice Gautt integrated OU’s team. (That same year, Royal was coaching an integrated UW team). 
 
In the early ‘60s, OU re-segregated the team. Wilkinson told Time magazine that he felt he had to, in order to recruit Texas HS athletes. 
 
In 1963, Royal became AD, replacing the retired Bible. He integrated the Texas Relays and Texas T&F squad. He started to work the Texas higher ups on football as OU (seeing the success of Michigan State and UCLA with Texas athletes) re-integrated. 
 
In the ‘70s, Switzer (and others) created the legend of “racist UT”. The legend exaggerates the reality. 

[statsman 5,451]

14 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Sure, are those on Amazon? But hey, still, sorry your team hasn't won any more Big XII titles than Baylor, hope you'll be ok. 

I’ll be fine. 
 
Big XII titles: Baylor 3, Texas 3

NC: Texas 4, Baylor 0

Head to Head: Texas, 80-28-4

Heisman winners: Texas 2, Baylor 0

Coaches fired in shame: Baylor 1, Texas 0

University presidents booted in same scandal: Baylor 1, Texas 0

I’ll be just fine. 

[LTbear 4,168]

4 minutes ago, statsman said:

 

Heisman winners: Texas 2, Baylor 0

 

Say what now

[Al_4_ISU 12,451]

26 minutes ago, statsman said:

I’ll be fine. 
 
Big XII titles: Baylor 3, Texas 3

NC: Texas 4, Baylor 0

Head to Head: Texas, 80-28-4

Heisman winners: Texas 2, Baylor 0

Coaches fired in shame: Baylor 1, Texas 0

University presidents booted in same scandal: Baylor 1, Texas 0

I’ll be just fine. 

[statsman 5,451]

Oops. I meant to type “1” and just screwed it up

[TxEx84 398]

Username does not check out. 

[TKthunder2 4,985]

http://amp.awfulannouncing.com/college-football/big-ten-after-dark-fox.html

[cochamps 1,879]

11 hours ago, LTbear said:

I'm asking about the UT football program in direct comparison to OU's. Can you not read?

I would say that you are the onewith the reading comprehension issue.  You responded that we underperformed except for Royal when his breakout showed us #2 from 1998-2009.  The Royal stretch also included 90% of the Akers regime.  Not to mention that 1939-54 run.  

You either don't comprehend or you have other issues.

 

[cochamps 1,879]

11 hours ago, LTbear said:

Fair enough. I'd just never heard "Oklahoma was less racist" as an answer to anything. 

If you are old enough, you would know that they were ahead of the curve as it pertains to football.  

[LTbear 4,168]

4 minutes ago, cochamps said:

I would say that you are the onewith the reading comprehension issue.  You responded that we underperformed except for Royal when his breakout showed us #2 from 1998-2009.  The Royal stretch also included 90% of the Akers regime.  Not to mention that 1939-54 run.  

You either don't comprehend or you have other issues.

 

Ironic you mention reading comprehension - I said in another post UT had had one good run in my lifetime (Brown). How was the 80's and early to mid 90's? Anyways, UT underperforms relative to their resources, in a weird way - very good in number of wins, subpar in Heismans and national titles relative to your peer programs. 

5 minutes ago, cochamps said:

If you are old enough

I'm not. Hope the home is treating you well my friend. 

[cochamps 1,879]

1 minute ago, LTbear said:

Ironic you mention reading comprehension - I said in another post UT had had one good run in my lifetime (Brown). How was the 80's and early to mid 90's? Anyways, UT underperforms relative to their resources, in a weird way - very good in number of wins, subpar in Heismans and national titles relative to your peer programs. 

I'm not. Hope the home is treating you well my friend. 

Not there yet whippersnapper.  😂

[statsman 5,451]

Yes, Texas has underperformed. 
 
Why? Coaching and recruiting. Texas has to dominate regional recruiting in order to be successful. Texas isn’t Baylor, TCU or Okie State; it doesn’t get to have a multi year cycle to develop competitive teams. It needs to be ready for all comers every year. 
 
Texas’ recruiting took a hit when the Ags joined the SEC. The top recruits want to play in the SEC. Also, that opened the gates for other SEC schools to recruit the state. 
 
Now, Texas is joining the SEC. Now, Texas gets to pay players. We’ll see if that works as well as I think it will. 

[BachelorTrek 2,967]

2 hours ago, TxEx84 said:

Username does not check out. 

1234

[closetohumping 17,435]

From @Longboard Horn in another thread

 

[Al_4_ISU 12,451]

That would be absolutely hilarious, and also a bigger indictment of that league's mismanagement than anything we've yet seen.

[bullet 1,596]

15 hours ago, LTbear said:

Ya but that's kinda the issue, isn't it? Outside of the Royal years Texas is generally massively underperforming relative to its resources. No way Oklahoma should be so dramatically more successful than UT over the course of history. (Texas of course doesn't underperform as badly as Aggy, which absolutely takes the cake in that regard).

Don't be stupid.  You sound like aggy now.

You ignored early Fred Akers, Mack Brown, Dana Bible and several others.

And even DKR had three 6-4 seasons in a row.  Everybody is up and down.  Look at Alabama prior to Saban, worse than the late Mack/Strong/Hermann years at UT.

Look at Notre Dame in the 24 years between Holtz and Brian Kelly.  Look at the era Michigan just recovered from.  Look at USC.

 

[bullet 1,596]

1 hour ago, closetohumping said:

From @Longboard Horn in another thread

 

Well it might also be SEC champ Texas vs. AAC champ Rice and Big 12 champ TCU vs. ACC champ SMU!

[bullet 1,596]

15 hours ago, LTbear said:

One such era in my lifetime. And I'm not meaning to diminish the Brown years, but only two conference titles? However I'll happily admit that 2005 UT was one of the better teams I've seen in my entire lifetime, and that title game was probably the best of my lifetime (hard to beat not only because of the game itself, but because of the season-long buildup when it was so clear who the top two teams were).

Just like Big Game Bob usually flopped in the big games on a national stage, Mack Brown always found a Robert in his conference, ACC or Big 12, who was a better coach than him.

[bullet 1,596]

7 hours ago, LTbear said:

Sure, are those on Amazon? But hey, still, sorry your team hasn't won any more Big XII titles than Baylor, hope you'll be ok. 

Murder, rape.  14 wins in your first 14 years in the Big 12.  Yes, we are delighted we are not Baylor.

[Satchel 6,932]

7 hours ago, statsman said:

It’s a little more complex. 
 
In 1956, Prentice Gautt integrated OU’s team. (That same year, Royal was coaching an integrated UW team). 
 
In the early ‘60s, OU re-segregated the team. Wilkinson told Time magazine that he felt he had to, in order to recruit Texas HS athletes. 
 
In 1963, Royal became AD, replacing the retired Bible. He integrated the Texas Relays and Texas T&F squad. He started to work the Texas higher ups on football as OU (seeing the success of Michigan State and UCLA with Texas athletes) re-integrated. 
 
In the ‘70s, Switzer (and others) created the legend of “racist UT”. The legend exaggerates the reality. 

I have relatives who were at UT when Julius Whittier played for Royal. They have often told the story of how Julius was instructed to keep his helmet on when on the sidelines so that his Afro would not reveal the fact that he was black. The legacy of racism in college football is real and in very real ways, enduring. It need not be sanitized.

[bullet 1,596]

7 hours ago, Zhorn96 said:

Despite all the headlines the past couple days saying there has been a shift, Cal peeps say nothing has changed and a vote is expected today or no later than tomorrow on formal acceptance of Cal, Furd and SMU into the ACC under the terms previously discussed.  Headlines the past couple days are allegedly click bait bullshit.  Now we’ll see if Cal insiders are full of shit or not

The UNC shooting seems to have put everything on ice for the time being.  Now its hard to get the presidents together.

[Liquor and Poker 3,659]

16 hours ago, Satchel said:

OU rode the wave of being more open to the black athlete and it has paid big dividends for them. Plus they were/are massive cheaters.

The bolded part was the bigger advantage.  The first one just gained them a couple of years.

[LTbear 4,168]

7 minutes ago, bullet said:

Don't be stupid.  You sound like aggy now.

You ignored early Fred Akers, Mack Brown, Dana Bible and several others.

And even DKR had three 6-4 seasons in a row.  Everybody is up and down.  Look at Alabama prior to Saban, worse than the late Mack/Strong/Hermann years at UT.

Look at Notre Dame in the 24 years between Holtz and Brian Kelly.  Look at the era Michigan just recovered from.  Look at USC.

 

Don't get so easily offended and defensive - that really sounds like Aggy. As I said in my later post you replied to, UT underperforms historically in NCs and Heismans relative to the other mega-brands. Conference titles they've done really well historically, though obviously the last 20 years has been slow. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,451]

3 minutes ago, bullet said:

Murder, rape.  14 wins in your first 14 years in the Big 12.  Yes, we are delighted we are not Baylor.

 

[LTbear 4,168]

4 minutes ago, bullet said:

Murder, rape.  14 wins in your first 14 years in the Big 12.  Yes, we are delighted we are not Baylor.

Can you explain how your post here relates to UT's number of Big XII titles? I'm failing to make that connection. Thanks in advance. 

Again, try not to get so easily offended and defensive. It's very aggy-esque. 

Edited August 31, 2023 by LTbear

[Al_4_ISU 12,451]

3 minutes ago, Satchel said:

I have relatives who were at UT when Julius Whittier played for Royal. They have often told the story of how Julius was instructed to keep his helmet on when on the sidelines so that his Afro would not reveal the fact that he was black. The legacy of racism in college football is real and in very real ways, enduring. It need not be sanitized.

You don't have to explain that to anyone where I'm from.

[bullet 1,596]

2 hours ago, statsman said:

Yes, Texas has underperformed. 
 
Why? Coaching and recruiting. Texas has to dominate regional recruiting in order to be successful. Texas isn’t Baylor, TCU or Okie State; it doesn’t get to have a multi year cycle to develop competitive teams. It needs to be ready for all comers every year. 
 
Texas’ recruiting took a hit when the Ags joined the SEC. The top recruits want to play in the SEC. Also, that opened the gates for other SEC schools to recruit the state. 
 
Now, Texas is joining the SEC. Now, Texas gets to pay players. We’ll see if that works as well as I think it will. 

Texas recruiting took a hit when Mack got complacent after winning the title and then drove off a cliff when Charley Strong took over coupled with the CFP elevating Ohio St., Alabama, UGA and Clemson so they could pick off players anywhere in the country.  It wasn't so much the whole SEC.

[Liquor and Poker 3,659]

1 minute ago, LTbear said:

Can you explain how your post here relates to UT's number of Big XII titles? I'm failing to make that connection. Thanks in advance. 

Again, try not to get so easily offended and defensive. It's very aggy-esque. 

Is your point that Texas should have won more Big 12 titles under Mack Brown?  Yes, you're right.  2001, when Simms shit the bed, and 2008 when some dude named Briles voted to help fuck us out of the playing the game come to mind.  

['stache 21,797]

16 hours ago, Satchel said:

OU rode the wave of being more open to the black athlete and it has paid big dividends for them. Plus they were/are massive cheaters.

 

1 minute ago, Liquor and Poker said:

The bolded part was the bigger advantage.  The first one just gained them a couple of years.

Yup. The story was that Oklahoma A&M had terrific athletics success in the 1940s and when some wealthy oil guys came together to put the state on the map for the growing game of college football, they offered the slush fund first to us, but Hank Iba thought football was a club sport and that basketball and baseball were the "real" sports and what he focused on (he coached both basketball and baseball from 1934-41). So they offered it to OU who took the deal. Iba was wrong, and he continued to hate football through his AD administration when lasted to 1970. We tried desperately to cheat in the 80's and were not successful. So football sucked shit for most of our existence until Miles then Gundy when the AD determined to pump money into a new stadium and everything else needed to compete. But we'll always be held back being the second program in a small state with a blueblood just down the road. The conference changes will mean we play them less (maybe never) but we'll have the money on conference prestige disparity to deal with, but I don't foresee the dynamic being any better or worse. 

TL;DR: Fuck ou.

[bullet 1,596]

6 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Don't get so easily offended and defensive - that really sounds like Aggy. As I said in my later post you replied to, UT underperforms historically in NCs and Heismans relative to the other mega-brands. Conference titles they've done really well historically, though obviously the last 20 years has been slow. 

No.  You just made an incredibly stupid comment.  So I threw back facts against your nonsense.

I have a low tolerance for total bs like you posted.  And then one about Baylor's conference titles was even more stupid.  Your comment quoted above wouldn't have gotten that reaction.

 

[LTbear 4,168]

Just now, Liquor and Poker said:

Is your point that Texas should have won more Big 12 titles under Mack Brown?  Yes, you're right.  2001, when Simms shit the bed, and 2008 when some dude named Briles voted to help fuck us out of the playing the game come to mind.  

I didn't have too much of a point - this convo started a page or so back, I commented that UT had underperformed relative to its resources and as compared to its peer programs, and a couple of people got hyper-offended by it. Yes, y'all should have won a couple more. Since Royal UT has seemed to often win games but not capture the big stuff. 2005 and obvious and awesome exception. Anyways, I was only talking facts of UT football, not trying to offend a few people. 

[bullet 1,596]

8 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Can you explain how your post here relates to UT's number of Big XII titles? I'm failing to make that connection. Thanks in advance. 

Again, try not to get so easily offended and defensive. It's very aggy-esque. 

You are comparing us to Baylor.  That is just asinine.  Now you are aggyesque changing the topic because you realize you were being stupid.

 

[ztejas 43,411]

14 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Can you explain how your post here relates to UT's number of Big XII titles? I'm failing to make that connection. Thanks in advance. 

Again, try not to get so easily offended and defensive. It's very aggy-esque. 

The 2008 team that didn't win the B12 is better than any team in your program's history. 

In fact - going by SRS on cfb reference - so are the 2001, 2002 and 2004 teams. 

Edited August 31, 2023 by ztejas

[LTbear 4,168]

2 minutes ago, bullet said:

No.  You just made an incredibly stupid comment.  So I threw back facts against your nonsense.

I have a low tolerance for total bs like you posted.  And then one about Baylor's conference titles was even more stupid.  Your comment quoted above wouldn't have gotten that reaction.

 

I'm stating clear facts. You're getting offended that you don't like them. I also have a low tolerance for BS.

UT is one of the most successful programs in the country. Relative to the others it shares air with, it's largely underperformed in NC's and Heismans. You could make any argument about conference titles but that's definitely more a my lifetime thing. 

[LTbear 4,168]

2 minutes ago, bullet said:

You are comparing us to Baylor.  That is just asinine.  Now you are aggyesque changing the topic because you realize you were being stupid.

 

What have I been saying? That UT has really underperformed in some metrics. What's one way of showing that? Comparing conference titles against a team that was a doormat for half of the lifetime of the conference. 

Again, quite getting so easily offended. Sip some whiskey. Saying "UT has really underperformed relative to its resources for quite a while, really ever since Royal in mot respects" is not a statement that any rational person on this site would have the slightest disagreement with. 

[LTbear 4,168]

5 minutes ago, ztejas said:

The 2008 team that didn't win the B12 is better than any team in your program's history. 

In fact - going by SRS on cfb reference - so are the 2001, 2002 and 2004 teams. 

May be - that was a great team. As a neutral observer, the Tech game that year was amazing. But as a neutral fan, watching Tech proceed to get skull-fucked by OU shortly thereafter was also hilarious. 

[statsman 5,451]

Sure, there is no doubt, Texas has only sporadically performed to potential. Luckily, its potential is so high. 
 
I am glad my school isn’t a “win at all cost” place. OU’s President Cross famously said that he wished he had a university that the football team could be proud of. He was only partially joking. OU has been fine being an outlaw program under Switzer (until the “dopings, ratings and shootings”), and recently, when a star RB KOed a coed, the president stood behind the aggressor. 
 
Baylor? When a horrific scandal unfolded, their administration paid through the nose to keep the details out of the public eye, for fear that it could hinder the football machine. 
 
SMU? They had the best team money could buy, and when the NCAA busted them, they continued to meet payroll until given the Death Penalty. 
 
TCU? They had football drug scandals- PED and recreational- but worked to keep them under wraps so as to not threaten the regime of their most successful coach ever. 
 
Yeah, I want Texas to be better, but not at all costs. 

[LTbear 4,168]

6 minutes ago, statsman said:

Yeah, I want Texas to be better, but not at all costs. 

Obviously a good avenue to choose. I'm curious to see how NIL goes. Before NIL, being honest, I think UT would be somewhat screwed in the SEC (not completely, but I'm sure we'd both agree there are plenty of SEC programs who will cheat through the nose). NIL - as long as it stays somewhat unregulated - I think could level a lot of that playing field, because certainly UT has boosters that can compete with anyone. 

[TriStone 1,724]

On 8/29/2023 at 1:46 PM, Mitch Hedberg said:

Any playoff spot decided by a committee and not won in a pre-determined way set out by rules, IE in every other level of football from peewee to pro, is fucking stupid.

I used to believe this.  I still do, but I used to, too.

[oSuJeff97 3,435]

12 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Obviously a good avenue to choose. I'm curious to see how NIL goes. Before NIL, being honest, I think UT would be somewhat screwed in the SEC (not completely, but I'm sure we'd both agree there are plenty of SEC programs who will cheat through the nose). NIL - as long as it stays somewhat unregulated - I think could level a lot of that playing field, because certainly UT has boosters that can compete with anyone. 

Yeah but has acquiring a large amount of talented players been the problem at Texas over the past 13 years?

Without taking the time to look, I'm guessing they have had the #1 or #2 recruiting class in the Big 12 that entire time, but has zero Big 12 titles to show for it.

NIL essentially allows you to recruit well, both from HS and the portal. You still need a coach who will pick the *right* high-end players and coach them up.

[mdmost 42,999]

 

[LTbear 4,168]

7 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Yeah but has acquiring a large amount of talented players been the problem at Texas over the past 13 years?

Without taking the time to look, I'm guessing they have had the #1 or #2 recruiting class in the Big 12 that entire time, but has zero Big 12 titles to show for it.

NIL essentially allows you to recruit well, both from HS and the portal. You still need a coach who will pick the *right* high-end players and coach them up.

Ya fair enough but at some point the right coaching hire will be made. From the outside it seems UT has suffered from 1) always recruiting the highest stars and not necessarily the best fits, and 2) gameday coaching errors from multiple coaches. 

 

Edited August 31, 2023 by LTbear

[LTbear 4,168]

4 minutes ago, mdmost said:

 

It's ridiculous that I'm hoping Cal gets into the ATLANTIC Coast Conference. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,451]

6 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Yeah but has acquiring a large amount of talented players been the problem at Texas over the past 13 years?

Without taking the time to look, I'm guessing they have had the #1 or #2 recruiting class in the Big 12 that entire time, but has zero Big 12 titles to show for it.

NIL essentially allows you to recruit well, both from HS and the portal. You still need a coach who will pick the *right* high-end players and coach them up.

They keep talking about the recruiting hit when Aggy joined the SEC, but Texas has been reeling in Top 10 classes the whole time, right?

Texas football the last 15 years seems like more of a case study in the importance of coaching than anything.  It doesn't matter who you are, if you don't have a good coach, it don't make a shit.