Jump to content

2022 Fall Camp: Drippin'

DFW Horn

By DFW Horn
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

bejezuz

bejezuz 329

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, immamac said:

Guys shut the fuck up, @bejezuz is gonna go back to IT if you keep up the room and gloom. We don't need a fucking kicker. We can just go for 2 every time cuz we are going to fucking DOMINATE. 

Of course we don't have a KICKer! That's what happens when you fire a COACh who's never had a losing season and replace him with 7even Win Steve, who proceeds to shit the bed in historical fashion!  How the hell are we supposed to get champion special teams recruits at KICKer and PUNTer and LoNGsnaPper when we lose 6 games in a row, including to KANSas at HOME!!! I think I'm gonna mortgage my house and take it all to VEGAs and betting it all on the uNDER!!!  

(Is that better?)

Edited by bejezuz
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

closetojumping
closetojumping

I had the chance to talk to a buddy who has been to multiple practices and every person on this thread except the clown that thinks NFL scouts make a bunch of money would trust this buddy's unvarnishe

THUJONE
THUJONE
CurlyDumps
CurlyDumps

Posted Images

  • Popular Post
Codaxx

Codaxx 5,729

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Cool. Here is some reading material for you when you take a potty break (until I can find your abode):

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-recruiting-rankings-teams-with-the-best-classes-over-a-five-year-average-entering-2021/amp/

https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/john.dellape/viz/CollegeFootballRecruitingClassRankingsbyYear/Dashboard1

that second link you can filter and play with but it pretty much shows we should have been a lot better on the field than we have been. 

Those are worthless. 

#1 they merely give you the accumulation, not the distribution (i.e. the OL is fvcked outside of 17 year olds)

#2 they do not adjust for loses.  Where is a look at that awesome 2019 class that finished #3 that is bolstering that ranking

 

Edited by Codaxx
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
squeegeedegg

squeegeedegg 723

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

On a lunch break…what a beating this thread takes during the day…doesn’t matter because I just got a $9,000 raise so I’m pretty damn content.

However, this idea that somehow over the last decade we’ve had shit recruits is just ludicrous. We’ve had better recruits year over year than everyone in the Big12 save OU. People keep saying the cupboard is bare…blah blah blah…I feel like showing up at some of y’all’s houses or offices and taking your computer and smashing it and giving the parts to Goodwill so they can build one for some poor kid to use to take online classes at the university of samoa law school. The recruiting rankings aren’t wrong. We have chosen poorly since we fired Mack and it’s coaching + a few bad apples that were allowed to infect the program. Sure some are entitled dumbasses but most any good coach could have won more with what we had in our locker room. 

I tend to like your posts, but... The recruiting rankings aren't wrong?  In what way?  Are they "right" then?  The rankings are the least scientific part of recruiting, which already has less certainty than Hellen Keller dead-reckoning the Santa María in an Atlantic squall to find India.

What I have observed with Texas recruiting over the last decade is we've been incredibly lucky just to get our #1 targets to commit, and those that did, the best ended up never making it on campus and then tearing it up elsewhere.  The amount of secondary, tertiary, quaternary backup plans that have been pursued has been too damn high and I don't give a damn if the services grant them mid 4 star status, the recruiting effort has been mediocre at best.  When we see consistent wins at our clear #1 targets at more than a few positions, i.e. recently with Banks, Campbell, Mitchell, Ewers, Manning, Johntay... then we're cooking with gas.  I don't have my mind made up about Sark yet, at all.. but if he had gone 7-5 last year it's still not up to my personal standard, and 5-7 makes no difference to me.  First guy to 10 wins gets my vote, but no one is doing that with some of the clowns starting last year 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Longhornlove

Longhornlove 4,810

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

Those are worthless. 

#1 they merely give you the accumulation, not the distribution (i.e. the OL is fvcked outside of 17 year olds)

#2 they do not adjust for loses.  Where is a look at that awesome 2019 class that finished #3, that is bolstering that ranking

 

Holy fuck that list.......Not much there is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eskimohorn

Eskimohorn 5,630

Posted
Posted
On a lunch break…what a beating this thread takes during the day…doesn’t matter because I just got a $9,000 raise so I’m pretty damn content.
However, this idea that somehow over the last decade we’ve had shit recruits is just ludicrous. We’ve had better recruits year over year than everyone in the Big12 save OU. People keep saying the cupboard is bare…blah blah blah…I feel like showing up at some of y’all’s houses or offices and taking your computer and smashing it and giving the parts to Goodwill so they can build one for some poor kid to use to take online classes at the university of samoa law school. The recruiting rankings aren’t wrong. We have chosen poorly since we fired Mack and it’s coaching + a few bad apples that were allowed to infect the program. Sure some are entitled dumbasses but most any good coach could have won more with what we had in our locker room. 

bloated recruiting rankings, lack of development, apathy, new coach, disconnect in scheme fit, attrition, bloated recruiting rankings, rinse, repeat
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19,068

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, UncleSonny said:

Coaches are generally way too conservative with the ‘take the points’ stuff, but you still need a kicker, for end of game situations if nothing else. 

You are going to be in situations where to are tied or down by 3 or less with one drive left. Huge difference in only having to go 35 yards in 1 minute with no timeouts to set up a reasonable chance for a good kicker vs. having to go 55 for a chip shot. Or worse, needing a td. 

Sure, there comes a point of no return where you definitely want the kicker b/c you just have to have the kicker.  But, if you don't trust him, and we've all seen this scenario play out a bunch of times with a team down 3 where they fuck around on the 25 or 30 yard line, go conservative and are happy to get into OT.  The idea that the coach has a certain amount of pressure on him to have to drive the ball further down the field isn't necessarily the worst thing in the world.  

But yeah- end of game situation is where it would likely hurt the most.  That's intuitive. The dorks that mess with the numbers essentially say you are better off just not fucking with it b/c you only have so many hours in the day and might as well get better at other shit.  My answer on this is way different if I fancy myself a top 10 team vs a run of the mill team.  IF I was a run of the mill team anything that introduces variance into the equation when I play a really good team is my friend. 

Maybe we wouldn't be in end of game situations if we were basically playing for TD's on every drive and forgoing the opportunity to both punt and kick.  The guy that does it at the high school level kills with it. I always felt like playing Leach or other riverboat gambler teams that made them more scary. It would be beyond awesome if someone played that out that way in college football and we got to see it in action. 

*I don't want Texas to be that someone.  I do want us to go for it all year long rather than try a 37 yard kick b/c I'm pretty sure the kicking game is going to be ass.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tex Long

Tex Long 4,383

Posted
Posted

The most troubling fact of Steve's HC career, to me, is that he had never won a game in which he trailed at halftime. Not a single time. Oh-for-eleven, I think it was.

Yep, there's the truly applicable word: was. We trailed K State - only by one but we trailed. And Steve found a way to adjust and come back. Maybe it was just that K State managed out-suck us, but a win is a win, and it broke both the season's six consecutive game losing streak and Steve's personal never-winning when behind at the half record.

So we enter the 2022 Season on a winning note, which wew are nearly certain to maintain for at least one more game. Huzzah.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3,654

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dignan said:

Well, this is interesting. Some aggy simulated the 2022 season 1,000 times. His results are posted on Reddit. He has done it before so you might have seen it. Here is one quote in the Reddit post about Texas:

Check it out on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/wxevkz/i_simulated_the_2022_season_1000_times_here_are/

His methodology makes no sense.  Basically, if Texas has a 20% chance to beat Bama and rolls a win their "power" shoots up for the remaining games.  This is only going to create unrealistic win or loss streaks based on the order of games played.  Teams with backloaded schedules are automatically given favor because they accumulated power beating pansies at the beginning of the season.

It makes since if plugging in actual results week-to-week (which is how FPI or basically any other model works), but it doesn't make sense to create new inputs from random chance that won't actually effect the next game.

Other than that, 7-wins seems right.

Edited by JBJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
40acredropout

40acredropout 2,902

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

On a lunch break…what a beating this thread takes during the day…doesn’t matter because I just got a $9,000 raise so I’m pretty damn content.

However, this idea that somehow over the last decade we’ve had shit recruits is just ludicrous. We’ve had better recruits year over year than everyone in the Big12 save OU. People keep saying the cupboard is bare…blah blah blah…I feel like showing up at some of y’all’s houses or offices and taking your computer and smashing it and giving the parts to Goodwill so they can build one for some poor kid to use to take online classes at the university of samoa law school. The recruiting rankings aren’t wrong. We have chosen poorly since we fired Mack and it’s coaching + a few bad apples that were allowed to infect the program. Sure some are entitled dumbasses but most any good coach could have won more with what we had in our locker room. 

Yeah... pretty bad take.  I don't think anybody complaining about talent level is oblivious to where our recruiting classes have ranked.

Recruiting services miss, players don't develop and players leave.    247 composite talent rankings at least accounts for transfers/departures but it still is far from perfect.

Yes, we have some exciting young talent.  But look at what is left of our highly rated 2018 and 2019 classes.  Those are the 4th and 5th year guys who should be the heart and foundation of our team.  There's 14 of them left.  I don't have the answer but I'm willing to bet that is a way smaller number than other healthy programs.   Then there's the part where half of them fucking suck.

image.thumb.png.76e8d2b178785ccc1755672348069006.png

image.thumb.png.f2b1620057faf66ad75ad89f63332d9a.png

There's also a reason that the majority of the former 4/5*'s transferring out this offseason ended up at places like SMU, Houston, Sam Houston State, or Sacramento State.  Previous staff did not know how to assess talent and/or develop it.  

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Codaxx

Codaxx 5,729

Posted
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, satyanash said:

giphy.gif

People want to make fun of Luke on that play, but Cook was god awful there. Him sticking his facemask into a blade of grass is pretty much the reason that is a TD. CB (Thompson?) is terrible. Safety needs his head up (Thompson).  Secondary was pretty much uniformly ass on that play. 

Edited by Codaxx
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetojumping

closetojumping 62,568

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, PTINS said:

"No actual Texas fan wants to see Sarkisian fail so they can claim foresight."

That's a Bingo. Your definition of Actual Texas Fan is different than mine.  Much different. Tell me how all of the negative posting does anything to help this University.  Does your posting make it better or worse?

I sense to some posters here that "being right" is more important than Texas winning. Agree to disagree, but that attitude is not far below the surface.

"Sarkisian was a terrible hire on paper. Indefensible." Terrible; extremely or distressingly bad or serious, causing or likely to cause terror; sinister.

Who or what do you want? 

Sark has a few coaching attributes that are at the top of the food chain; a brilliant offensive mind and he relates well to players, recruits & parents, and other coaches.  He's not the best at everything, but that's a great starting point.

Sark's choice for DC was vetoed. I agreed w/ the veto.  We ended up w/ a DC who did not know and had not coached with all the assistants. Can't put that all on Sark.

Sark is not the same person he was 10 or 20 years ago.  He faced adversity and overcame the challenges.   Can you not see that fact resonates well with recruits and their parents, the lifeblood of a college program? Is that terrible or indefensible? 

Top HS players want to play for Sark. He has signed and got commitments from top players that were heavily recruited by the last 3 National Champions, including 2 of the 3 highest rated QB's of all time. Is that terrible or indefensible?

Poor decision making and execution by the players on the field is 100% controlled by the players on the field. It's the coaches role to coach and the players role to play. Some of the players last year had the talent, but not the attitude.

Sark made a mistake in equating one with the other.  Regardless, those were the players he had and the only ones he had to choose from. 

The culture and character of the Texas team has been suspect for some time.  Last year showed what it really was.  There wasn't a lot on that team that was symptomatic of a championship level organization.  

Was it coaching or the players? Based on my 50+ years of watching Texas Football, I think it was the players.  The players quit.

The program needed to be rebuilt from the ground up.

I like Sark. But then again, I'm an actual Texas fan. 

 

 

Yeah, man, let's get into a dick measuring contest about who is a better Texas fan on a fan forum. That will be both original and satisfying.

"I'm a better fan that you because I like the coach, any coach, running the program at Texas and you and your ilk have the audacity to be objective about that role. Meanies. That's hurtful. He's good at recruiting! At Texas even! People like him! You're not a fan!"

You have zero idea what my level of involvement of support and interest is in UT athletics. Being a "true fan" means more than being a blind loyalist for whoever the current coach of the program is. That's as far as I'll take this silliness and I've grown bored with the bleaters who can't have an objective conversation about the program outlook and coach expectations. You aren't worth the fucking bullet.

Also, no one vetoed a DC choice for Sarkisian, you uninformed threadshitter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19,068

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, JBJ said:

His methodology makes no sense.  Basically, if Texas has a 20% chance to beat Bama and rolls a win their "power" shoots up for the remaining games.  This is only going to create unrealistic win or loss streaks based on the order of games played.  Teams with backloaded schedules are automatically given favor because they accumulated power beating pansies at the beginning of the season.

It makes since if plugging in actual results week-to-week (which is how FPI or basically any other model works), but it doesn't make sense to create new inputs from random chance that won't actually effect the next game.

Other than that, 7-wins seems right.

2% chance at CFP seems a little low to me to make the playoffs. Draft Kings has us at +800 to make the playoffs with -1400 to not make the playoffs. Split the middle to account for the juice and that means Vegas actually has us at 9% odds of making the playoffs.  So, for you people who believe that we have zero chance of doing better than 6-6 or 7-5 as some sort of crazy stretch goal all you have to do is bang away at NO on playoff participation at a cool little 14/1. Seems like easy money, load up! I wouldn't want any part of that bet either way as that juice on the spread between YES/NO is awful.  Like loanshark type VIG.  

Texas has something like the 10th best odds to make the CFP on draft kings.  I know we are a public team but that seems... aggressive?

https://dknation.draftkings.com/2022/8/25/23318764/2022-college-football-playoff-odds-alabama-ohio-state-clemson-utah-usc-georgia-miami-michigan-nd

Link to comment
Share on other sites
squeegeedegg

squeegeedegg 723

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

People want to make fun of Luke on that play, but Cook was god awful there. Him sticking his facemask into a blade of grass is pretty much the reason that is a TD. CB (Thompson?) is terrible. Safety needs his head up (Thompson).  Secondary was pretty much uniformly ass on that play. 

CB is Darion Dunn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
immamac

immamac 42,838

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Yeah, man, let's get into a dick measuring contest about who is a better Texas fan on a fan forum. That will be both original and satisfying.

"I'm a better fan that you because I like the coach, any coach, running the program at Texas and you and your ilk have the audacity to be objective about that role. Meanies. That's hurtful. He's good at recruiting! At Texas even! People like him! You're not a fan!"

You have zero idea what my level of involvement of support and interest is in UT athletics. Being a "true fan" means more than being a blind loyalist for whoever the current coach of the program is. That's as far as I'll take this silliness and I've grown bored with the bleaters who can't have an objective conversation about the program outlook and coach expectations. You aren't worth the fucking bullet.

Also, no one vetoed a DC choice for Sarkisian, you uninformed threadshitter. 

Here here 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3,654

Posted
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Fud said:

It's been awhile, was Brockermeyer injured here? I recall him having a shoulder injury at some point, but this game was also pretty early in the season 

He tore his labrum the previous year and had surgery over the offseason.  The rumor is it was never 100%.

However, he didn't tear his ACL until KSU.

Edited by JBJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hermanator

Hermanator 7,032

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Yeah, I agree. It is much harder to kick 32 yard field goals after practice in DKR than it is to kick in a high school football game.

There's a ton more pressure competing for a job at the college level than having no competition in HS because you're the only guy around who can kick more than 30 yds.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Codaxx

Codaxx 5,729

Posted
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, Fud said:

It's been awhile, was Brockermeyer injured here? I recall him having a shoulder injury at some point, but this game was also pretty early in the season 

I thought there was talk that he had a banged up shoulder in this game

Edited by Codaxx
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9,552

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

2% chance at CFP seems a little low to me to make the playoffs. Draft Kings has us at +800 to make the playoffs with -1400 to not make the playoffs. Split the middle to account for the juice and that means Vegas actually has us at 9% odds of making the playoffs.  So, for you people who believe that we have zero chance of doing better than 6-6 or 7-5 as some sort of crazy stretch goal all you have to do is bang away at NO on playoff participation at a cool little 14/1. Seems like easy money, load up! I wouldn't want any part of that bet either way as that juice on the spread between YES/NO is awful.  Like loanshark type VIG.  

Texas has something like the 10th best odds to make the CFP on draft kings.  I know we are a public team but that seems... aggressive?

https://dknation.draftkings.com/2022/8/25/23318764/2022-college-football-playoff-odds-alabama-ohio-state-clemson-utah-usc-georgia-miami-michigan-nd

Texas is a heavily public bet team, so the implied odds will be skewed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19,068

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Fud said:

Texas is a heavily public bet team, so the implied odds will be skewed 

Sure.  Which I said in literally the last sentence of the post, but is the public factor that great?  I'd have thought that would take us down from say 10-1 down to 8-1. I wouldn't think it would take us down from 20-1 to 8-1 for example.  I have no idea what the penalty is for a College public team in a futures oriented bet. My sense is in the NFL it's worth a point or two, max, on a game by game basis so I can't imagine it distorting the odds by more than 10 or so percent but that's just back of the envelope conjecture and WAG. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hookem2147

Hookem2147 21,200

Posted
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

The most troubling fact of Steve's HC career, to me, is that he had never won a game in which he trailed at halftime. Not a single time. Oh-for-eleven, I think it was.

Out of all the stats you can look at to say a coach is bad, this one is near the bottom. 

A quick google search tells me that from 2017-2019, John Harbaugh was 0-14 when trailing at halftime and Bill Belichick was 2-9. In the NFL, if you are losing at halftime the win rate is like 23%. 

Now, maybe the numbers are a tad different in the college game but the overall point remains that the team wins the first half has a pretty damn good chance of also winning the second half (except if you are 2021 Texas!). In a 20 minute halftime, you maybe get 10 minutes of actual sit down conversation with your position coach or coordinator once everyone has made it into the locker room and coaches have made it down from the box. My favorite ManningCast from this past year is when Eli and Peyton mocked “half time adjustments”. They said almost the entire time is spent waiting in line to use the urinal and maybe having a quick chat with your position coach. If you need to throw your gameplan in the trash at halftime and try to come up with a new one, it’s too late.

Edited by Hookem2147
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fud

Fud 9,552

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Sure.  Which I said in literally the last sentence of the post, but is the public factor that great?  I'd have thought that would take us down from say 10-1 down to 8-1. I wouldn't think it would take us down from 20-1 to 8-1 for example.  I have no idea what the penalty is for a College public team in a futures oriented bet. My sense is in the NFL it's worth a point or two, max, on a game by game basis so I can't imagine it distorting the odds by more than 10 or so percent but that's just back of the envelope conjecture and WAG. 

The "real" number is somewhere in the middle, but probably a lot closer to the aggie's number. Probably something in between whatever FPI and SP+ have. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetojumping

closetojumping 62,568

Posted
Posted
Just now, hook me said:

Surly getting Mike Stoops fired before he was ever hired will always be real in my heart.

 

He was going to be the LB coach, a la Choate. He was never in line for DC.

There is a lot of legitimate bad blood between money and the Stoops family at Texas. Those fucking guys went out of their way to fuck Texas repeatedly in voting schemes and with the media. People like to think "herrrrrr, derrrrp, people were just reacting to a name, herp derp!" but Mike Stoops was actively involved with hurting Texas for over a decade. Surly didn't have much to do with it, but there was big time pushback to hiring him that neither CDC or Sarkisian understood, and the pushback was justified. Anyone saying otherwise is wrong, plain and simple. 

Muschamp wanted to join and agreed to join and his wife shit on it. He was out as DC of his own volition, Odom took a pass, and then a real search started. Stoops was long gone as a candidate for the lesser role by then.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Nicole44

Nicole44 22,059

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

My dad (RIP) was probably the biggest damn Longhorn fan and he still burnt a lot of his UT gear on the driveway after we lost to Arkansas when I was a kid. Lighter fluid. For a while there, we weren’t invited to game watches at peoples houses. But it’s all good. Bitch of it is and most of y’all know this he died 10/05/05 so he missed our greatest season since he was at UT with DKR 35 years prior. He’d be right up in this thread. Best thing was finding all the copies of faxes on letterhead (in a box in his gun safe after he passed away) that he had faxed to Mack Brown telling him was a sorry sack of shit he was for not winning the big 12. Lmao.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 2
  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19,068

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Fud said:

The "real" number is somewhere in the middle, but probably a lot closer to the aggie's number. Probably something in between whatever FPI and SP+ have. 

Yeah.  The Athletic has Texas with a 2.3% shot at making the playoffs. Even when I've been presenting optimistic case for Texas to be a lot better than most here are willing to conceive of I'm not talking playoff participant. I like to consider rosy case scenarios as 85 or 90th percentile outcomes which happen all the time, not once in a century type events like aggy winning a national title. So, that would mean I've emotionally got our playoff odds figured in at less than 5% or so. Which, intuitively, seems right not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Codaxx

Codaxx 5,729

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Sure.  Which I said in literally the last sentence of the post, but is the public factor that great?  I'd have thought that would take us down from say 10-1 down to 8-1. I wouldn't think it would take us down from 20-1 to 8-1 for example.  I have no idea what the penalty is for a College public team in a futures oriented bet. My sense is in the NFL it's worth a point or two, max, on a game by game basis so I can't imagine it distorting the odds by more than 10 or so percent but that's just back of the envelope conjecture and WAG. 

I think it is more that tails tend to trade expensive. Draftkings has it @ 11.1% to make the playoffs and 93.3% not to make it. Guys buying lottery tickets tend to pay through fair (since it is such a small number). On the flip side of that, people dont press low payout bets like -1,400.. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hook me

hook me 2,092

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

He was going to be the LB coach, a la Choate. He was never in line for DC.

There is a lot of legitimate bad blood between money and the Stoops family at Texas. Those fucking guys went out of their way to fuck Texas repeatedly in voting schemes and with the media. People like to think "herrrrrr, derrrrp, people were just reacting to a name, herp derp!" but Mike Stoops was actively involved with hurting Texas for over a decade. Surly didn't have much to do with it, but there was big time pushback to hiring him that neither CDC or Sarkisian understood, and the pushback was justified. Anyone saying otherwise is wrong, plain and simple. 

Muschamp wanted to join and agreed to join and his wife shit on it. He was out as DC of his own volition, Odom took a pass, and then a real search started. Stoops was long gone as a candidate for the lesser role by then.

ahhh LB coach, that's right. Man, what a ride this regime has already taken us on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetohumping

closetohumping 17,435

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

He was going to be the LB coach, a la Choate. He was never in line for DC.

There is a lot of legitimate bad blood between money and the Stoops family at Texas. Those fucking guys went out of their way to fuck Texas repeatedly in voting schemes and with the media. People like to think "herrrrrr, derrrrp, people were just reacting to a name, herp derp!" but Mike Stoops was actively involved with hurting Texas for over a decade. Surly didn't have much to do with it, but there was big time pushback to hiring him that neither CDC or Sarkisian understood, and the pushback was justified. Anyone saying otherwise is wrong, plain and simple. 

Muschamp wanted to join and agreed to join and his wife shit on it. He was out as DC of his own volition, Odom took a pass, and then a real search started. Stoops was long gone as a candidate for the lesser role by then.

Did mrs muschamp still have I’ll feelings towards Austin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...