Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'On The Field' started by bck031, Jan 2, 2018.
I always say Vince was not on the field for 4th and 2.
Yep. He also didn't recover the bone-headed fumbled RB pitch. He didn't make the interception on the goal lone for a touchback as USC was driving. Etc....He did play a phenomenal game, no doubt.
I get sick of the "VY won it all" mentality also. That said, I am still mad he didn't come back for 2006. THAT, more so than the Colt injury in the 2009 NC game, is what set the program back, IMHO.
Vince was winner until he met Jeff Fisher.
Without Vince, the defense is on the field more often, gets tired, big plays are more likely to occur. Anyone on this board can say Vince didn't do it by himself (true, it's a team game) but you take away Vince, they're not in either Rose Bowl, period. Take away any one player on defense, and perhaps someone behind them takes up the slack. Any one Texas player besides Vince, yes, Texas still might go/win. Take away Vince, no way it happens. The Straw that Stirs the Drink........
The only team that I think may have been better was 2002. 2001 and 07 are debatable. Otherwise, I do not think any of the years OU won are really debatable. OU did have a better team in 04, Bob Stoops just was not the best in bowls. Also, Mack Brown winning in 08 was an upset according to everyone else and the BCS, but most Texas fans agree we had a better team.
2004 OU 12 Texas 0
2004 USC 55 OU 19
2005 Texas 41 USC 38
A classic example of the "oh yeah Mack was better in a bowl game". Guess Mack was lucky it wasn't the current playoff system or he might've had to coach against Stoops in a bowl game, too......
If Mack Brown had gone to more BCS games (by winning the Big 12 more than twice or getting an at large bid more often, but the OU blowouts or second conference losses prevented that) we may know in that parallel universe what would've happened, but it didn't.
^ is a classic example of Mack Brown being a better bowl coach. Before someone says “Vince Young”, let me just state that Vince Young did not play defense and maybe Bob Stoops should have considered recruiting Vince Young if he wanted to beat USC.
Also, Mark Richt never won a national title and did not have Bob Stoops in his division. He did have Urban Meyer, but that was only for a 5 year span. Overall, the SEC East was easier than the Big 12 South in the 2000s. Brown won a national title in a harder division.
Zucker I totally agree. We do not beat usc without Vince. He is my 2nd favorite longhorn after Earl Campbell.
I don't recall anyone saying we win that game without VY. Just pointing out it takes an entire team, not JUST an elite QB.
What has been pointed out is that he was recruited and developed, yes, it's true, by Mack Brown and GD. That seems to be an endless debate around here, but we can't have it both ways. Other coaches who win NCs are given credit for recruiting and developing the talent. Somehow, magically, all of VY's greatness just happened because they "let Vince be Vince". Give me a break...
Yeah, it was Mack that recruited him, but remember the famous quote from Mack "We showed Vince film of him in high school and we asked 'Where's that guy' and Vince said, 'Take the reins off of me'"....... There was even a picture of the play Greg Davis wrote up to win the National Championship......folks, every lifetime there appears a special athlete with such athleticism and God given talent that is going to do great things unless stalled by the likes of Jeff Fisher..... If Mack was so great, why couldn't he and GDGD coach up Garrett Gilbert? Colt McCoy's dad was already a coach so they got help there......don't overestimate the coaching of Mack Brown.....he was a great recruiter/diplomat. When his prize "pupil" went down against 'Bama, Mack checked out....so much for coaching greatness.....give ME a break....
I didn't single you out, so I'm not sure what's with the "...give ME a break..." comment. You can disagree with people in a more agreeable fashion. Or not. You seem to choose not. So, have a nice day.
No national title: Sam Bradford, Colt McCoy, Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin....
National title: Jake Coker, Chris Leak, Tee Martin, Greg McElroy
I get a little steamed sometimes. Don’t want to harm feelings while making my point. Sorry, Chicago....
My point is without Vince, no rose bowl games....
All game managers, like Colt....
My feelings weren't hurt, just wasn't sure if I said something wrong to you. Thanks!
While for the most part you are correct, against the 2nd best team they played all year, that was a really outstanding team & defense, OU lit it up in the 2nd half after not being able to not trip over their own feet in the first half (against tOSU, OU had 3 points at halftime and 28 in the 2nd half). That itself made the rest of the season pretty baffling to me.
To be fair though:
Bo Schembechler 5-12
Woody Hayes 6-6
Tom Osborne 12-13
Bill Snyder 9-10
Frank Beamer 10-12
Vince Dooley 8-10-2
Dennis Erickson 5-7
Shug Jordan 5-7
Frank Broyles 4-6
Don Nehlen 4-9
My only point is that it's harsh & perhaps not particularly accurate to judge a coach's ability/acumen by their bowl record.
As long as we are keeping score, I’ll take 2-0 for Tom Herman
and 0-1 for Lincoln Riley
Did you know that Bear Bryant went 0-7-1 in Bowl games from 1967-1974? That after he won 3 MNCs & before he won 3 more.
Just bustin chops DDS, I really like having opposing fans contribute to our site. You don’t get busted here unless you are liked. Keep posting!
I made a similar argument about first year legendary coaches who went 7-6 or worse when our fans gave Coach Herman a hard first year grade
Ha. No worries. I don't mind the chop busting at all. I prefer to visit rival team boards. Better discussion. And let's face it, HornsFans is the best board anywhere.
I agree Stoop is a very good coach, but not great in Bowls. Also Riley lost with Stoop's team (Bob might have beaten Georgia).
Mack Brown was a better bowl coach than Bob Stoops. Whether or not DKR, Bo Schemblecher, Woody Hayes or Bob Stoops are better or worse than coaches overall than Mack Brown is irrelevant to Mack being a better bowl coach than Bob Stoops.
Bowl do matter. They affect your final ranking more than conference championships. The bad bowl record may be why, unlike Mack Brown, Bo Schembechler never won a national championship. Meanwhile, Nick Saban has proven you can win a national title without winning your conference. Hell, Bob Stoops played for one despite getting killed by Kansas State in the Big 12 championship game. The conference title was meaningless that year.
@zuckercanyon Tom Herman tried to use Buechele, a pro style QB, as a running QB. Meanwhile, Mack Brown is a bad coach because he recruited Vince Young, recruited the best players, got a great defense coordinator, implemented the spread, decided to run the offense in the most successful manner (letting vince be vince) and finally knocked off a loaded, Pete Carroll led team in the Rose Bowl.
If Tom Brady was so great, how come he lost two super bowls to the Giants?
If Lebron James was so great, how come he has lost the NBA finals so many times?
If Bob Stoops was so great, how come he won the exact same number of national titles as Mack Brown?
Arguing any national title winning football coach or someone who won 244 games is not great is just foolish. Who are they not great compared to? Other elite coaches? The fact is only two coaches have won a national title at UT. DKR and Mack Brown. They are the two winningest coaches in school history. If Mack Brown did not know Xs and Os, he would never made it as far as Tulane in his career much less Texas.
Meanwhile, everyone talks about how great Hal Mumme is at Xs and Os, but what did he ever win?
HTown, I'll say this...
Bob Stoops' 18 years at Oklahoma:
9-9 in bowl games (went to a bowl game EVERY year)
Finished the season ranked top 25 in 15 of those 18 years
Finished the season ranked in the top 10 in 11 of those 15 ranked years
Finished the season ranked in the top 5 in 7 of those 11 top 10 years
Played for national championship four times, winning 1.
Mack Brown's 16 years at Texas:
10-5 in bowl games (lesser bowls, went to a bowl in 15 of 16 years coached)
Finished the season ranked top 25 in 13 of those 16 years
Finished the season ranked top 10 in 6 of those 13 ranked years
Finished the season ranked top 5 in 5 of those 6 top 10 years
Played for the national championship two times, winning 1
I'm responding to your point that bowl records mean something because of final ranking. Sure, Stoops dropped when he lost a bowl game, but I'd say the numbers listed above imply that Stoops won more games in less years (190 in 18 years), while Mack won 244 in 30 years (I won't bother to divide years into wins to get the number of wins per year).
If Stoops had decided to stay on at OU he would've passed Mack's 244 (54 away) in 6 or 7 years.
190-48 is right below 80% winning record for Stoops
244-122-1 is right about 67% winning record for Brown
Both winners, one just better at it than the other, especially head to head.
Mack was a great recruiter and united the fan base, no doubt.
If I seem venomous/treacherous by backing Stoops so heartedly, it's just because I got tired of the excuses for not beating OU (and getting trounced at times), that I looked at the stats and said "Stoops beats Mack even with switching players from burnt to crimson and vice versa".
And yet you wrote another long post that has nothing to do with refuting the statement that Mack was a better bowl coach. Next you will tell me how Stoops is better at home and garden care or is better at visor wearing and that somehow has anything to do with Mack Brown being more successful in bowl games than Bob Stoops.
Your post further proves my statement that stoops was better at the regular season and mack was better at the postseason.
My only other objections have been to claims that Mack Brown was not a great coach or that the somehow the 05 team was not any good without vince young or something, still not sure what the point was there.
I think he might be trying to say that either bowl games aren't important or that the bowls Texas played in compared to OU is comparing apples to oranges. Since OU played in more difficult higher profile games, the Texas victories mean less than the OU losses therefore Stoopid is a better coach.
I'm not saying I agree, just trying to interpret interwebese.
The numbers and the facts don't lie. Mack could sell ice cubes to Canadians, Stoops could coach up the players he had better than Mack could. Stoops beat Mack more than Mack beat Stoops, and when he did, occasionally it was 65-13. Bigger/better bowl games against bigger/better competition. I'll give in to the Mack love this way....An Aggie co-worker once confronted me on my disapproval of Mack's coaching prowess..he said, in effect, "In college football, you have coaches who can coach and coaches who can recruit, and rarely do you have both (Nick Saban was mentioned by both of us at that instant). I'd take Mack Brown at A&M in a heartbeat just for the recruiting job he can do". I admitted he was correct at that time and still believe it. HTown and anyone else can go on ad nausea about what a pitiful bowl coach Stoops was and how great of a bowl coach Mack was. But if you look at both careers, Mack didn't win like Stoops did year in and year out, and you can love Mack and Frank Beamer and say "look at all those games they won", but those guys and Bill Snyder still take second place to Stoops, Saban, Meyer, etc. Yes, all winners, but some win better than others, and it's about keeping score. Mack Brown brought Texas to the national forefront, won a title, then played for another. But it took special qbs to get him there. How many different qbs did Stoops win with, and consistently? And after all that, when Texas lost to Alabama, Mack shut down, recruiting shut down (yeah, tell me about the solid 9 win seasons he had, but Texas was faltering while BAYLOR was doing well). Texas was out of the national picture, and heck, wasn't really a factor in the conference, either. I don't know how to say it any differently. If it makes you feel better to tout Mack's supposed prowess over Stoops in December/January, keep going....but it was October that really showed who was in charge, and when they were handing out Big 12 trophies, Mack has 2.....I forget how many Stoops has....
I already said Bob Stoops was a more successful coach though. I have agreed with you the entire time on that issue. No one in this thread has argued with you. I only said Mack was better in bowl games. For some reason, this bothers you. I do not get it. Mack was better than DKR in bowl games. No one thinks Mack was better than DKR.
The national championship and final rankings are decided by bowl games, so at this point in time they are important.
^ this is a wrong statement. The facts do not lie.
The problem here is the games were not necessarily more difficult, just because they were BCS.
Apples to apples: Mack was 3-1 in BCS bowls. He beat:
#13 9-2 Big Ten co-champ Michigan led by national championship winning coach Lloyd Carr
#1 12-0 Pac12 champ USC led by national championship winning coach Pete Carroll
#10 10-2 Big Ten co-champ Ohio State led by national championship winning coach Jim Tressel
He lost to:
#1 12-0 SEC champ Alabama led by national championship winning coach Nick Saban
Every Mack Brown BCS bowl was a against a top 15 conference champ led by a national championship winning head coach. Mack went 3-1 and had a good enough gameplay to stay in his only loss despite losing his starting QB.
Meanwhile Stoops went 5-6 in BCS games with a
19-55 loss to USC in the national championship,
43-42 loss to a lesser Boise State where he was completely out-coached
48-28 loss to West Virginia
48-20 over 8-4 unranked Uconn
37-17 loss to Clemson
35-19 win over 8-4 #17 Auburn.
Here are teams Mack Brown played in "lesser" games that were better than 8-4 unranked Uconn and 8-4#17 Auburn:
2000 #10 9-2 Oregon
2003 #16 9-3 Washington State
2007 #11 10-2 Arizona State
2012 #13 9-3 Oregon State
2013 #10 10-2 Oregon
It was factually incorrect in the BCS era (and still is) to just assume the BCS/NY6 bowl has a better opponent than every lower bowl. That assumption is false.
Now looking at all the bowl games as a whole, only lost two bowl games in his entire career, including at Tulane and North Carolina by 20 or more. He lost the infamous 2000 Cotton Bowl to Arkansas by 21 where we had a bunch of players suspended and he lost to #10 10-2 Oregon with an unranked 8-4 team 30-7 after he was fired.
Meanwhile, Stoops had:
36 point loss to USC
20 point loss to West Virginia
28 pont loss to A&M in a "lesser" bowl
34 point loss to Clemson in a "lesser" bowl
20 point loss to Clemson
That is five 20 or more point losses and two 30 point losses.
If I had to pick a coach for a bowl game, I would take Mack Brown. He was better at getting his teams ready to play and coming up with a game plan than Bob Stoops when given a month to prepare. Why does it bother you that Mack Brown was a better coach than Bob Stoops as something. No one has argued that Bob Stoops was more successful. All I said is Bob Stoops overall did better due to being a better regular season coach which will always lead to more overall success as many coaches have shown. I then said, I would take Mack Brown in a bowl over Stoops (and DKR even) because he was one of the better bowl coaches in CFB history. Then for some reason you went on unrelated rants.
I have two questions for you: Who is a better coach Mack Brown or Mike Leach? Who is a better offensive coach, Mack Brown or Mike Leach?