Big Recruiting Weekend!

H2RA - “Again... NOTHING in sark's head coaching background suggests he's the guy to turn us around, let alone any program. He's failed twice at high profile programs. MackOTOH turned around UNC“

And may I ask just what it was exactly in Stoops pre-OU career that suggested to you that he was the guy to turn OU around? Serious question. Presumably, you knew.

You constant cynics will invariably hang your own damn self when provided enough rope.

The reality is that you have zero clue yet how this hire will turn out in the end, nor do I, as we’ve currently only a small sample of contextual evidence with which to work. Personally I see a variety of meaningful program improvements and am quite willing to wait a few years at minimum to see more, but by all means “you do you”.

 

As a football coach and the annual results, I would prefer Stoops record, which he pulled off with some genius hires (Leach & Mangino) and some pure **** hires (Chuck Long & keeping Cale).

The Mack Brown era should NEVER be gauged on W-L but rather on his ability to reunite all the factions of the Longhorn nation which I would have told you was impossible. DKR/Mike Campbell divided us in 1977, and those factions were further divided by some (should I say all) of David's hires (see Lynn Amadee), and then Mackovic/Cunningham. Bob Stoops could never have pulled it off, but neither was Bob Stoops "the most hard headed son of a ***** you ever met"*

*Direct quote face to face with a member of the Bellmont Hierarchy.

Mack may have been the only person that could have achieved what he did, and for that I am grateful to him. His departure tarnished that legacy.

 

Stoops developed talent at both Kansas state and Florida. Stoops was a big reason k state went from a joke to a top notch defensive unit. His defenses at Florida were damn impressive, but I thought his work at k state was enough to give him a good look for a top gig

The rest of your comments are off base and ignorant. I'll watch you swing from the noose you pointed at me. (Grin)

 

Yeah, the non backing Fred got in 77 was uncomfortable, from a former student/fan perspective. I recall there were some bad vibes, shouldn't be that way.

1977 was maybe the most important season of my lifetime because our best coach in our history had a ton of talent but couldn't beat ou, left on a 5-5-1 season. He left Fred a great foundation, the right guy at the right time. Plus, he played Switzer heads up . After being dominated by ou , that 77 game felt like getting out of jail.

 

Simpler translation, "You're an idiot and I know better but you be you!"

There was absolutely nothing else of substance or fact in the rest of the message.

 

I don't know, I thought this part was very well said.

 

It is interesting to see someone who has been a member since 2004 choose that type of post as his or her first.

Although, now that I say that, I wonder if that poster is a holdover from the old HF. The username sounds familiar. Maybe the previous post count didn't come through.

Or, maybe the person lurked for more than 16 years before posting.

 

Well if it's about developing talent then shouldn't we count - Heismans (Lienart USC, Smith Bama) Championship QBs (Lienart, Jones, Tua, Hurts) Championship RB (Najee Harris), etc.?
Seems as good or better than Stoops pre OU.

 

You can count them all you like. I already have a track record on sark as a head coach. I'd have passed

 

Nick Saban's record at Michigan St.
Year W-L-T
'95 6-5-1
'96 6-6-0
'97 7-5-0
'98 6-6-0
'99 9-2-0

 

Too bad for you we have Sark. Ha Ha

Meanwhile, the rest of us appreciate him. We look forward to his success on the field and in recruiting

 

Somewhat lost in all of this is that we were competitive with the 3rd and 8th ranked teams in the nation. With a first year head coach, first year offensive and defensive coordinators. Change takes time. The head coach, by all indications, is repairing relationships with HS coaches, is impressing recruits (#2 class). I agree with the "glass half full" folks above and am willing to wait a few years before I panic. We appear to be headed in the right direction.

 

If we had a have decent OL , we would be undefeated right now.

 

I guess we'll hear a reply from TheHornSupremacy....Supremacist, eh?....in another 16 years.

<sarc, sort of, for those who are not aware of sarcasm>

 

I wholeheartedly agree that Leach and Mangino are geniuses.

 

If we had a decent OL, we could be undefeated right now.
FIFY

 

I hear he won a NC at lsu. Can you confirm?

Compare to sark....

 

FWIW, the guy for whom our stadium is named brought a career record of 17-13, at Mississippi State & Washington, before taking the Texas job in 1957. He was 6-4-1 in 57 and 7-3 in 58.

We will see if Sark is the right guy. Obviously neither Strong nor Herman were.

 

OK, he said "Personally I see a variety of meaningful program improvements".

What would those be? I see blown leads, defenses that crater, an unimaginative offense late in games that don't accomplish a damn thing other than 3& outs. Oh and an interview after a crushing loss where a player was completely unaffected by the embarrassing choke job

P.S., we have to get a **** ton better when we get to the SEC which is right around the corner. Nothing in sark's history suggests we'll be competitive. (Eight win season being his ceiling at premier programs vs the lowly PAC). If you guys see the unseen, great. Just don't piss down your own legs and sing 'it's raining'. It is what it is.

 

He came close to one in 2003, but the Tigers were runners-up to USC and Matt Leinert.

Year. W-L. Final Ranking
2000. 8-4. #22
2001 10-3. #7
2002 8-5
2003 13-1. #2
2004. 9-3. #16

He was mediocre with Michigan St., but showed promise. At LSU, he was pretty good and almost climbed the mountain once. His record at Alabama, 176-24, 88% winning percentage, & 6 MNCs speaks for itself. The point is that just because he was middlin’ before doesn’t mean he is forever precluded from being good, very good, or great. He could also flop. Consider this: John Wooden’ first 10 years coaching hoops at UCLA he went 199-76 for a 72% winning percentage. Over his last 12 years he was 335-22 for a 94% winning percentage. First 10, highest finish was #7. Only 1 other Top Ten finish. Five times he never finished in the Top 20. Last 12, never finished below 2nd in 11 out of the 12 and won the Natty 10 out of the 12. Might say he was a late bloomer. Maybe Sark will be too.

 

LSU won in 2003 under Saban beating BlowU in BCS title game 21-14 (Sugar Bowl)

 

In '99 they were 10-2. Before that MSU had one other 10 win season in 1965.

 

OL wasn't the issue in Fayettnam. The Team was not ready to play and coaches were confused with the defense the pigs rolled. OL issues were minor compared to these two issues.

 

Damn. It's one thing to have an opinion, it's another to be wrong, factually. The above is embarrassing.

My post about confirming the 2003 NC was sarcasm. He was more than a proven commodity then. To compare sark's 2 stints with Saban's first 2 is laughable . Sark has accomplished nothing. (Still)

Hope I'm wrong, but unlike some here, I can't deny facts and past performances.

Hook 'em

 

USC was voted #1 by the AP and the Football Writers Association of America (MacArthur Bowl) in 2003. They were going for a three-peat in 2005 when Vince & Co derailed their hopes. The BCS' authority to name the National Champion came from an agreement with the Coaches Poll to vote for whoever won the BCS championship game
That year, USC, LSU, & BlowYou all had 1 loss. USC was the odd man out with the BCS selectors. That said, I stand corrected and will concede that Saban did win a MNC at LSU. It's why we say MNC instead of NC. I also give more credit to Saban for gathering a MNC winning team that even the Mad Hatter couldn't screw up.

 

I have been wrong many times, both fact-wise and opinion-wise. I will be again. I was hopeful about both Charlie and Tom. Both seemed to be able to take teams to the next level. Charlie turned out to be a fluke because of Teddy Bridgewater. Tom's own arrogance and stubbornness helped do him in. Sark may be different. He may be another failed hire. For me though, I'm not giving a thumbs up or a thumbs down after just 7 games. I understand your opinion. For me though, I choose "wait and see" over doomism.

 

Most of us have acknowledged that we have seen flaws in Sark that give us cause to reflect.
In the fourth quarter when we have the lead the situation calls for power football to run out clock on long sustained drives. But we don't have the hosses up front to do that right now. But it is tempting to do that when you have a RB like Bijan. Sark gravitated toward power football (mostly) in those fourth quarter losses when he should have been more wide open though the o-line was having problems keeping the rush at bay. Sark was between a rock and a hard place. I think we needed to attack the edges quickly with quick passes and sweeps but throw ìn some misdirection plays.
Sark is trying to make do with what he has.

Obviously, some go the route of the glass half empty and some go the route of the glass half-full. I choose to go with the glass half-full and give Sark a chance especially since he has turned recruiting around. At the end of Herman's tenure recruiting was sinking fast.
Sark, like the rest of us, is salivating over quality o- line recruits.

 

OL could have set the tone.

 

^^^Yes, Sark is indeed between a rock and a hard place.
Even with the glaring problems at O-line and the weakness at LB and the obvious lack of depth throughout the lineup Sark’s Horns were within a play of winning both games.
I’m on board for giving him a few years to build a program.