When OU shellacked Mack's Horns 63-14 and 65-13, OU was about the only quality team in the conference. Win all but one or two of the other games and you're 9+ or 10+. During those 9 and 10 win runs, there were not, as I recall anyway, two Top-5 teams in the Big12... with OU not even one of those two. A few threatened now and then, but not much really. I've said all along, Mack got away with ****** non-conference games (tons of batted balls and wins that left you not very satisfied, even when winning by 3-4 TDs) then beat up on a relatively weak conference with huge talent margins, but hardly ever able to really handle OU over the long run. And got 60 rung up twice to OU in a 5-year dominant run. But because he could out-talent the rest of the league, the 9 and 10 wins made it all good times. Then came the mother load of talent for 04 and 05. And so on. Problem now is that Texas faces a huge recruiting war it never had when it was just OU to deal with. Now you've got Baylor, TCU, still OU some, and of course aggie.
That's pretty revisionist. Additionally, considering we're now the cupcake...it just seems like the Big 12 has better teams. It doesn't. The Nebraskas, A&Ms, OSUs, Colorados, Missouris, KSUs, Tech, and even some those Reesing KU teams back in the day would destroy this 2015 Longhorn team. As part of those 10+ win seasons, Mack also beat USC, Michigan in the Rose Bowl, LSU, Ohio State (twice) Additionally, other than the SEC occasionally, no conference consistently produces 2 top-5 teams. The Big 12 historically produces 2 or 3 - top 10 teams every season with many times one of those teams in the top 5 and occasionally 2 teams in the top 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_12_Conference_football
I knew my narrow view would be taken to task. It was small talk only. Very small. It was not meant to be a paper handed in to a graduate course for a serious grade.
Greg Fenves September 15, 2015 in an email to UT students and alumni: "I want you to know that I have full confidence in Coach Charlie Strong."
Tegard September 15th was an eternity ago. Most of us felt that way then. How many of us do now? Regardless of what Fenves said then, I seriously doubt that his support of this coaching staff hasn't taken a hit after today.
When you invoke "we played for a big 12 championship a few years ago..." you're delusional and should be banned. If Texas played baylor 100 times that season they would've beat them exactly 0 times. Texas participated in a game in which a big 12 champion was awarded. They didn't play for **** that day.
Zero chance of this happening. Political correctness would not allow it because of the potential public relations backlash.
They were 7-1 in Big 12 play and ranked in the top 25 going into that game with a win over #10 OU. The winner of that game was the Big 12 Champion. Unless you have some different rulebook than everyone else on the planet, they were playing for the conference championship that day. And the reason you play the game is because nothing is guaranteed. Just like you can't guarantee a win simply because your uniform is burnt orange and it says TEXAS on the front. Additionally, they got to that opportunity having to play Case because Ash got injured - which is a coaching accomplishment in itself. That team, for all their faults, was light years ahead of what's on the field in 2015.
The upperclassmen were actually playing? Significant roles? Really? Then why are they being outperformed by freshmen and sophomores now?
Why is Santos' name being mentioned? Can someone please tell me his stats for this year? Anyone? Hmmmmm.
Oh get out of here with that. Charlie is playing the best players. So Charlie has coached down the upperclassmen while upcoaching the new players? Really? Are the freshmen and sophomores now so much better than the upperclassmen simply because Strong has ruined the upperclassmen? You cant possibly mean that but that is exactly what you are saying. Wow.
All I'm pointing out is that Carry's bullish contention that players improve "exponentially" with age and experience is not guaranteed. And that bad coaching is a reason for a player who was productive in the past not attaining that "exponential" improvement that premise promises. Carryhorn's premise is his justification for giving Charlie Strong more time as head coach - because these players will be better simply with age and experience. CS' record with the upperclassmen directly contradicts this argument. You should go back and read the thread again.
Someone has to see the field. Who should be right now? Give me your starting 11 on offense and defense. You have to pick someone... Getting our *** kicked doesnt change that you still have to field a starting lineup. You think Strong has made the upperclassmen worse?
Playing for the Big 12, no matter what, is better than being embarrassed enroute to a 1-4 start. Surely you can see the difference. We got jobbed last week, but you have to have your guys up for this week.
Of course nothing is guaranteed. But the players you guys mentioned that played two years ago against Baylor were not all first teamers. Not at all. Did they get some game time, sure... but Mack wasnt leaning on Jinkens to anchor the defense, and he wasnt leaning on Santos or Gray at their respective positions either. Thats the point. Right now, Strong is leaning on Malik and Heard and Hill and Boyd and Foreman and Vahe and Williams and a bunch of other freshmen to anchor their positions. The upperclassmen are largely playing second fiddle. Thats the difference here.
So what? Really? So what? Youre right. Just fire the man today. Why wait till monday even. Just get rid of the whole staff before they get on the bus back to Austin. The season is lost and nothing else matters. So what. So what indeed.
You're making it the difference. That was not what was being discussed. Carryhorn's argument is that players improve "exponentially" with age and experience. He was using this argument to justify keeping Strong. CS' record with the upperclassmen directly contradicts this argument. You can make of that what you want, but all those players are 3L and played in every 2013 game. Some, like Gray, were major parts of the team. Some like D Johnson were special team players or package players. Some like Jinkens or Santos were important backup players. They all had meaningful playing time and weren't just garbage time players. Whatever they were, however, they certainly have not "exponentially" improved.
"Complete votes of confidence" are not infrequenrly followed with dismissals. Not saying it's going to happen in this case though.