Who is next?

[hookem48 4857]

15 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

Willie fuckin Fritz is cheap, a proven winner, and has turned around 5 straight football programs

 

 

buuuuut we have dumbasses on here fawning over Meyer and Kiffin

57-52 in his coaching career? I must be missing something.

[HornsOverIthaca 2339]

29 minutes ago, Longboard Horn said:

What the fuck!? Lane Kiffin has really redeemed himself then

He’s been know to talk people into goddamn anything

[hobbes2702 13479]

I love Traylor but I need to see way more before I want that to happen. Luckily we still get two more years of Sark to evaluate.

Honestly Patterson should take over immediately. 

[dogfarts 45]

What the fuck!? Lane Kiffin has really redeemed himself then

Bama sororities gave Freshwater enough votes to put him over the top

[6th Street 6692]

If Arch decommits, is there any reason to keep Sark? 

[ATXhorn17 1677]

35 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I love Traylor but I need to see way more before I want that to happen. Luckily we still get two more years of Sark to evaluate.

Honestly Patterson should take over immediately. 

At least Patterson would chew out the officials and the entitled divas on this squad like Worthy. 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

4 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

If Arch decommits, is there any reason to keep Sark? 

I don’t know but I’ve cringed a lot every time somebody put “Got Arch” in the plus column for Sark.

Plenty of time for Arch to decide he has a brighter future elsewhere.

[SHOOTER12 8886]

14 hours ago, FORTY NINE TO ZERO said:

Let Patterson finish out the year   
 

then get Rhule  

 

 

 

Hopefully they've been in touch with Rhule already. 

[hobbes2702 13479]

Just now, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

I don’t know but I’ve cringed a lot every time somebody put “Got Arch” in the plus column for Sark.

Plenty of time for Arch to decide he has a brighter future elsewhere.

There’s also no guarantee that he’s even good. 
It’s insane thing to think about keeping a coach for kid that hasn’t ever played 

[6th Street 6692]

He would be better off going to UGA than joining this dumpster fire.

[Lat22 4086]

Sark is the perfect fit for the University of Texas at Austin. 

[gmr548 16701]

Kick the tires on that guy at Washington. He’s won multiple national titles at the lower levels similar to Kelly and Tressel

Definitely one I’m watching over the next couple years.

[hookem48 4857]

7 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

I don’t know but I’ve cringed a lot every time somebody put “Got Arch” in the plus column for Sark.

Plenty of time for Arch to decide he has a brighter future elsewhere.

he's an early enrollee so not really

[hookem48 4857]

8 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

There’s also no guarantee that he’s even good. 
It’s insane thing to think about keeping a coach for kid that hasn’t ever played 

didn't just get rid of a coach because he lost a recruit that everyone hates now?

[hobbes2702 13479]

2 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

didn't just get rid of a coach because he lost a recruit that everyone hates now?

Wut? Do you think that is why we fired Herman?

Edited November 13, 2022 by hobbes2702

[Hank Chinaski 6361]

2 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

didn't just get rid of a coach because he lost a recruit that everyone hates now?

Well, everyone hated that coach too.

[Horn of Gabriel 1886]

5 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

he's an early enrollee so not really

Free transfer is still available so not really

[hookem48 4857]

Just now, Horn of Gabriel said:

Free transfer is still available so not really

I don't think a Manning is going to sign somewhere just to change their mind, they'll be sure it's the right place.

[turtlepond 179]

Jesus H Tapdancing Christ… do some of you actually think Urban would be on the table again to land in Austin?  If so, this board needs to moderate and ban any mouthbreathing fuckhead that thinks this is a legit option….dude is a walking cancer, he already pissed on Belmont’s leg, and our high and mighty big cigars think this program is too good to stoop to him. 

[victory88 5765]

Just give the damn reigns to GP and let Marion call the plays and install his 2 back go go offense.

For all the shit Jimbo gets, Sarks offense hasn’t scored a TD in 8 of the last 10 quarters.  Just pathetic.  We have half the starters on offense are 5 star players.  I don’t want I hear it’s a talent problem.  This is a fucking coaching problem.

Edited November 13, 2022 by victory88

[Satchel 6982]

16 hours ago, USNALonghorn said:

Traylor

I think he turned down the Tech job in the hope the Texas job would open up eventually. 

[tx 3 putt 78687]

16 hours ago, 936horn said:

It literally does not matter. We will hire some shitty coach because they fit our "image" and the BMDs will pat each other on the butt on a job well done. Maybe get a consulting firm or three involved, and we'll be right back here in three years. CDC is a loser, Sark is a loser, the big money guys are fucking losers. This University can not and will not do what it takes to win and everyone might as well just get comfortable with that. Our culture won't allow us to hire winners who happen to like fingerbanging co-eds like Urban, so we settle for losers like Sark. Well guess what - our fucking culture is just losing. That's it. That's our culture. Fucking losers who lose.

[tx 3 putt 78687]

15 hours ago, 6th Street said:

Mack is 9-1

 

UT is in this ongoing mess because Saban wanted a raise from Bama and needed a jabroni ready to be suckered 

[MotownHorn 1905]

16 hours ago, Radical Larry said:

Fuck it, I'll do it. 

I mean I fucking hate squatting but I'll do it for $5 million given that squatting seems to be Sark's big strength

[TX Wing Fan 146]

I went through this thought experiment a few months back when we lost to Tech.

To me, the minimum requirement for whoever we hire next should be that they have won a conference championship (or co-championship) at the P5 level in the last decade or so. This shows that they are capable of taking a program to some modicum of success, while playing against solid competition week-in and week-out. Additionally, both of the G5 coaching hires we've made in the last decade have either been mediocre or terrible, so we should avoid hiring directly from that level if possible.

 

I selected 2010 as the cutoff point for this list, as it was the start of the dark ages that UT Football currently finds itself in. This narrows down the list of potential hires to a little under 30 names:

 

From this list, we can remove anyone is currently experiencing success at a powerhouse program, has been part of a major scandal, or is seemingly retired from coaching. These coaches would likely not be interested in coaching at UT, or inversely UT would not be interested in hiring them. That gives us the following names:

 

From these 13 names, I think it's also safe to remove anyone who has not experienced some amount of success recently. Again this is subjective, but for my definition of success I'm going to say the coach needs to have won at least 10 games in a season in any of the past 5 complete seasons (2017-2021). Coaches that meet this requirement are as follows:

 

There's still quite a few stinkers on this list (namely Malzahn, Helton, and Franklin), but it should at least give us a starting point on who we theoretically should be going after if Sark gets canned. To me the best names are the coaches from the Big 12; Gundy, Patterson, and Aranda. If Sonny Dykes wins the Big 12 this year or Chip Kelly wins 10 games at UCLA this season they should also be under consideration.

 

TLDR:

The next football coach UT hires should have won a conference championship since 2010, and won at least 10 games in a season since 2017. Based on that criteria, the best options seem to be Mike Gundy, Gary Patterson, and Dave Aranda.

[Kyrie Eleison 9312]

[bullet 1630]

23 hours ago, Auto Driller said:

All I know is that whatever criteria we use to evaluate coaching candidates is wrong as fuck. I would honestly be happy to hire someone who won a bunch of championships in FCS or some shit. Anything different than what we have been doing.

Well McWilliams was totally unproven.  Mackovic was exactly what he was before.  So was Mack Brown-very good but almost always 2nd place.  Strong was unproven.  Herman was just like he was before.  Sark appears to be just like he was before.  Maybe we should hire somebody with some history, who at least has been very good before.  We keep betting on finding the next DKR, someone relatively young who will be something different than their history would suggest.

We're TEXAS.  We don't need to gamble on a coach.  We can hire someone proven.

[David Dennison 19542]

1 minute ago, bullet said:

Well McWilliams was totally unproven.  Mackovic was exactly what he was before.  So was Mack Brown-very good but almost always 2nd place.  Strong was unproven.  Herman was just like he was before.  Sark appears to be just like he was before.  Maybe we should hire somebody with some history, who at least has been very good before.  We keep betting on finding the next DKR, someone relatively young who will be something different than their history would suggest.

We're TEXAS.  We don't need to gamble on a coach.  We can hire someone proven.

Who do you have in mind?

[bullet 1630]

12 hours ago, ATXhorn17 said:

This is such a lazy take. I've watched multiple of UNC's games in person this year... If they played our schedule, Mack would be 6-4 or worse.

And Sark would be 3-7 coaching UNC.

[GreenspointTexas 9972]

To be fair, Herman was a pretty solid hire on paper. Strong was awful… total headscratcher because he was our 5th option or someshit.

 

sark was the universities way of hoping to emulate the Riley hire/era at OU. And its looking like a failure for us so far

[bullet 1630]

6 hours ago, TX Wing Fan said:

I went through this thought experiment a few months back when we lost to Tech.

To me, the minimum requirement for whoever we hire next should be that they have won a conference championship (or co-championship) at the P5 level in the last decade or so. This shows that they are capable of taking a program to some modicum of success, while playing against solid competition week-in and week-out. Additionally, both of the G5 coaching hires we've made in the last decade have either been mediocre or terrible, so we should avoid hiring directly from that level if possible.

 

I selected 2010 as the cutoff point for this list, as it was the start of the dark ages that UT Football currently finds itself in. This narrows down the list of potential hires to a little under 30 names:

 

From this list, we can remove anyone is currently experiencing success at a powerhouse program, has been part of a major scandal, or is seemingly retired from coaching. These coaches would likely not be interested in coaching at UT, or inversely UT would not be interested in hiring them. That gives us the following names:

 

From these 13 names, I think it's also safe to remove anyone who has not experienced some amount of success recently. Again this is subjective, but for my definition of success I'm going to say the coach needs to have won at least 10 games in a season in any of the past 5 complete seasons (2017-2021). Coaches that meet this requirement are as follows:

 

There's still quite a few stinkers on this list (namely Malzahn, Helton, and Franklin), but it should at least give us a starting point on who we theoretically should be going after if Sark gets canned. To me the best names are the coaches from the Big 12; Gundy, Patterson, and Aranda. If Sonny Dykes wins the Big 12 this year or Chip Kelly wins 10 games at UCLA this season they should also be under consideration.

 

TLDR:

The next football coach UT hires should have won a conference championship since 2010, and won at least 10 games in a season since 2017. Based on that criteria, the best options seem to be Mike Gundy, Gary Patterson, and Dave Aranda.

Sure makes it look like a really short list.  Patterson is too old and Gundy with his mullet is all Okie St.  So Aranda or Chip Kelly.

[bullet 1630]

I guess the other Kelly is too old to want to move again.

[David Dennison 19542]

I'm surprised no one has suggested hiring Kirby Smart away from Georgia.

 

 

[HtownHorn 15235]

12 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

i still don't understand why we don't pull 2 guys to pave the way for bijan go right, left, right, left.

what about all the window dressing to set up flips and slants

when you are losing the box man to man you have to disguise the creation of a numerical advantage at the point of attack

i've seen sark call it once or twice in the first half every game and then never goes back to it

/loud noises

We tried it. Either Bijan would get impatient and blow past his lead blocker or the lead blocker, Conner, was too slow to get out to the LB.

[Satchel 6982]

15 hours ago, David Dennison said:

I'm surprised no one has suggested hiring Kirby Smart away from Georgia.

 

 

Why would this Georgia alum come to Texas?

[Pam Cummings 9868]

Why would anyone logically think that hiring Patterson to be HC makes any sense? TCU fired him, and is undefeated with their new guy. Think about that.

[Pancho 46315]

8 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Why would this Georgia alum come to Texas?

Pretty sure he was being facetious. 

[David Dennison 19542]

22 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Why would this Georgia alum come to Texas?

Because we're Texas. Duh.

[hobbes2702 13479]

53 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Why would anyone logically think that hiring Patterson to be HC makes any sense? TCU fired him, and is undefeated with their new guy. Think about that.

Because he has a track record of success over many years? Sometimes it gets stale. Ask Mack

Btw, I’m not saying he should be the guy. I do however think we would be better off letting him coach until we find someone else but I doubt he wants to do that

Edited November 14, 2022 by hobbes2702

[Pam Cummings 9868]

26 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Because he has a track record of success over many years? Sometimes it gets stale. Ask Mack

Btw, I’m not saying he should be the guy. I do however think we would be better off letting him coach until we find someone else but I doubt he wants to do that

So you're saying he baked the cake? I just think the dude is kinda old and the game has passed him by, and that he doesn't have what it takes to be a successful HC anymore. He'd rather be semi-retired, and good for him.

Edited November 14, 2022 by Pam Cummings

[BurntOrange&White 41870]

23 hours ago, TX Wing Fan said:

I went through this thought experiment a few months back when we lost to Tech.

To me, the minimum requirement for whoever we hire next should be that they have won a conference championship (or co-championship) at the P5 level in the last decade or so. This shows that they are capable of taking a program to some modicum of success, while playing against solid competition week-in and week-out. Additionally, both of the G5 coaching hires we've made in the last decade have either been mediocre or terrible, so we should avoid hiring directly from that level if possible.

 

I selected 2010 as the cutoff point for this list, as it was the start of the dark ages that UT Football currently finds itself in. This narrows down the list of potential hires to a little under 30 names:

 

From this list, we can remove anyone is currently experiencing success at a powerhouse program, has been part of a major scandal, or is seemingly retired from coaching. These coaches would likely not be interested in coaching at UT, or inversely UT would not be interested in hiring them. That gives us the following names:

 

From these 13 names, I think it's also safe to remove anyone who has not experienced some amount of success recently. Again this is subjective, but for my definition of success I'm going to say the coach needs to have won at least 10 games in a season in any of the past 5 complete seasons (2017-2021). Coaches that meet this requirement are as follows:

 

There's still quite a few stinkers on this list (namely Malzahn, Helton, and Franklin), but it should at least give us a starting point on who we theoretically should be going after if Sark gets canned. To me the best names are the coaches from the Big 12; Gundy, Patterson, and Aranda. If Sonny Dykes wins the Big 12 this year or Chip Kelly wins 10 games at UCLA this season they should also be under consideration.

 

TLDR:

The next football coach UT hires should have won a conference championship since 2010, and won at least 10 games in a season since 2017. Based on that criteria, the best options seem to be Mike Gundy, Gary Patterson, and Dave Aranda.

I think you should factor in sub fbs national championships into this formula somehow. Tressel and kelly are both guys who were national championship coaches sub-fbs level before making the jump.