Online Now 222

Inside the Bubble

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

Online now 215
Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)

Boards ▾

Inside the Bubble

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

6th Street

The place for off topic discussion on Hookem

Reply

The Latest (Thursday 10:34am)

  • ah, the problem: if you get a super-proven standout coordinator (even still entails some risk, just maybe a lot less), then a greater chance he'll bolt a lot sooner. If you're looking for longevity, then--at least generally--you run the risk of going into the more unproven. I would hope, of course, we're looking for the most stellar performers available, whoever they are.

    If those are likely to be short-term guys, I guess that's the negative you live with, unless you have a great eye for up-and-coming guys who aren't a well known commodity.

  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)

    I still wonder if Tim Brewster might be hirered to organize recruiting, do a lot of the administrative stuff, and be given the title co OC but with Applewhite calling the plays. Mack is loyal to a fault and Brewster did bring us the Vince!

    Brewster has never been a coordinator at any level (part the reason he failed as a HC), therefore makes no sense naming him Co-OC with Applewhite. Evaluation is the problem not recruiting, adminstrative stuff must be is handle by non coaching staff because the time demand

  • True, but as I've stated in a previous post, I think your taking more of a gamble with his hire than you would be with Chryst. Your statement is predicated on the unknown. Sure, we can say the same thing about Chryst, however based on his total body of work and experience calling offenses under both schemes (passing and running), he has done quite well in adapting to what he has had to work with. That's what I would be looking at when making a decision if I were Mack. I just think based on what we've seen from Texas the last few years in the running game and our need to move quickly to improve that area in our offense in order to be competitive, I would think that a Chryst hire is the more "safe" choice at this point for Mack. In the end, I think it's that overall "experience" that will win out.

    For what's it worth, I could see Major being a lot more involved in a Harsin style of offense. Both guys are young and both would contribute toward establishing the overall offensive scheme. Not saying that he won't have a more established role if Chryst is the guy, but I think he would be a bit more involved in the offense if Harsin is the choice. Overall....I would sleep just fine if Harsin is the guy. This is just my opinion on what I think we need to look at the short term of things

    This post has been edited 4 times, most recently by txhookem78 4 years ago

  • Silky Johnson said... (original post)

    There are some things you guys don't understand about Harsin.

    Yes, there will be questions on whether it's his offense or Petersen's at Boise State.

    But if he comes to Texas and tears it up, all those questions will take a back seat to the fact that he turned around an offense at a top tier program. His stock, if not already high from his offenses at Boise, will skyrocket.


    See my reply above in response to your post. Don't get me wrong on Harsin...he's definitely on the rise and would be a great hire. I just don't know if we have the time to get his system in place for the type of results that it's going to take to get the program back and running again.

  • The Bigdawg said... (original post)

    Brewster has never been a coordinator at any level (part the reason he failed as a HC), therefore makes no sense naming him Co-OC with Applewhite. Evaluation is the problem not recruiting, adminstrative stuff must be is handle by non coaching staff because the time demand

    Urban Meyer also has never been a coordinator at any stop in his career.

  • Sessamoid said... (original post)

    Urban Meyer also has never been a coordinator at any stop in his career.

    Add Jim Harbaugh to the list of never been a coordinator either.

    9 and 4 at Texas sucks! - Jeff Howe

  • txhookem78 said... (original post)


    For what's it worth, I could see Major being a lot more involved in a Harsin style of offense. Both guys are young and both would contribute toward establishing the overall offensive scheme.

    Very much agreed. I also think the fact that Harsin has spent his whole career at Boise State and under Chris Petersen would make Brown hesitant to give total control of the offense to a guy who's not completely proven on the BCS level.

  • After watching Boise State play last night, I am completely sold on Bryan Harsin. ANYBODY else would be a complete disappointment to me. I absolutely love the way he calls a game,

    signature image signature image signature image
  • I don't mean to be a wet blanket but whoever gets the OC job has to figure out a way to get production out of the quarterback position. You can install any system you want but if the QB turns the ball over 2+ times a game Texas will have another poor season.

    Mack has to realistically look at his options at that position and bring in somebody to maximize the talent on hand if he wants to win big next year. I still think Texas is lacking playmakers on the outside and that the best system for our current crop of QBs is a power running game with play action or completely write off Gilbertand McCoy and go with a run spread attack ala Nebraska.

    76-37-5

  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial
  • I don't get it. All this talk about scheme vs scheme and Texas having to adapt to a scheme.

    Hire Harsin. He has no scheme. He calls plays. His plays are entirely based on how the defense lines up. If they line up open to a power run play like Wisconsin runs, they run a power counter Trey, power sweep, or straight up ISO. If the defense lines up open to say a slant, the offense then moves formation and an instant snap slant is run. If the defense is say a cover 2 zone, then you may see them attack deep on the posts.

    If we were smart we'd only have one name on the list: Harsin. His offense is the future of football. It adjusts play by play to take advantage of the defensive line ups.

    Chryst is stuck in his system. Sure, Harsin will take a while to get Texas to run it like a machine, but we would improve immediately and damn we would be scary by seasons end.

    He doesn't have to adjust to players, he adjusts to defenses. The talent we have on the team and coming to the team would work fine.

    Perhaps Major learning it for a year to do himself couldn't hurt.

  • LotusHorn said... (original post)

    I don't get it. All this talk about scheme vs scheme and Texas having to adapt to a scheme.

    Hire Harsin. He has no scheme. He calls plays. His plays are entirely based on how the defense lines up. If they line up open to a power run play like Wisconsin runs, they run a power counter Trey, power sweep, or straight up ISO. If the defense lines up open to say a slant, the offense then moves formation and an instant snap slant is run. If the defense is say a cover 2 zone, then you may see them attack deep on the posts.

    If we were smart we'd only have one name on the list: Harsin. His offense is the future of football. It adjusts play by play to take advantage of the defensive line ups.

    Chryst is stuck in his system. Sure, Harsin will take a while to get Texas to run it like a machine, but we would improve immediately and damn we would be scary by seasons end.

    He doesn't have to adjust to players, he adjusts to defenses. The talent we have on the team and coming to the team would work fine.

    Perhaps Major learning it for a year to do himself couldn't hurt.


    I would disagree with your point on Harsin not having a scheme. I don't think the guy is on the sideline reading the opponents defense on every down and simply calling his plays based on what is shown to him. Sure there are audibles/checks at the line, but that happens with many teams. I do think he has a system of plays or prepared set going in to a game (just like every OC does) for each opponent. We certainly saw him having to adjust in last night’s game when things weren't working in the 1st quarter. Like any good OC, he measures the ebb and flow of his offense and makes adjustments accordingly. My concern is the amount of time that it would take our current personnel to adapt to his style of offense. I'm not saying that we wouldn't have to adjust to Chryst either; however I think the transition to his style of play calling would be a bit easier to adapt too. I mean it's not like Chryst wasn't churning out points (2 games of 70 points and one over 80) this season over at Wisconsisn, so were not talking about a guy that gets stuck in neutral with one style of play calling. I think the perception of a Chryst hire is that were in for these long drawn out games, where we run it 70 to 80 percent of the time. I don't see that happening. The guy has a proven track record of being diverse in his approach to what he has to work with (talent and personnel wise). I would much rather have someone a bit more seasoned on the sideline who can adjust when the situation calls for it and can develop the exisiting personnel in place to meet those challenges head on.

    The fact is we don't have to speculate very much on Chryst, because the proof is on the stat sheets at both schools (Wisconsin and Oregon State). With Harsin, the jury is still out on what he will look like when he is totally on his own. As I've stated in previous posts, there are so many moving parts to a Harsin type of an offense, that it would really take a whole lot more than just lining up and calling out plays. If it looks easy for Boise State right now, it's only because it has been a Chris Peterson installed system that came about some time ago, in which they have tweaked here and there over time. Again, I think scheme is very important and it will be a huge factor in Mack's overall decision I do believe.

  • The thing about BSU is they do it all:

    Power running, option, spread, pistol, etc. They block accordingly, run routes accordingly, etc. Yes, they have to send the right packages out. So you need three blocking tight ends, two blocking and receiving tight ends, as well as four extremely capable receivers and RBs who can run, block, and catch. Running routes is important for the backs. However not more important than power running. Reversing the field and cutting to the weak side is generally CALLED at the line.

    I've studied BSU and their offense before. It's different. TheY specifically tell you they don't run a scheme, they call plays. The plays take from every scheme.

    It's about overloading a defense and taking what they give you. If they give you big play opportunity you attack that.

    If you're a recruit you want to play that offense. The one where you have to learn a lot because they do it all. If successful at it and you have the talent your NFL stock will sky rocket.

    This offense is not Chris Petersons offense. It is Harsins. The idea that Harsin has to come in and adjust to what we have and hasn't proven it means someone doesn't understand his offense. His offense adapts to every situation both in offensive talent and what the defense shows but more importantly in what you want the defense to do.

    Harsin is the most brilliant mind in college football offensively if the BSU offense is his. We should take him and therefor run a power running, spread, pistol, etc offense all in one "system"

  • Lotus,

    I think you're a little over the top on your assessment on Harsin. He would likely be a very good hire.

    To call him the "most brilliant mind in college football" only quickly to be followed by "if the BSU offense is his" shows exactly what we're talking about.

    Anyone who thinks Peterson sits by and watches Harsin run the offense would be incorrect. Peterson has a ton of input, from game plans to personnel to scheme, etc. He is an offensive coach. It would be like Will Muschamp being a head coach but not having anything to do with the defense. It doesn't work that way. Peterson, it is said, is in every QB meeting.

    Likewise, people who think Harsin couldn't bring the Boise offense with him are also incorrect. I'm sure he's capable of teaching it.

    The reality is that the Boise offense is a mix of a lot of "minds", not just a single one. So don't give Harsin too much credit and don't give him zero either. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

    But the one thing I am certain of, before Chris Peterson, the Boise offense was not what it is today. If anybody is called the brilliant mind or the architect it needs to be Chris Peterson. Perhaps he has disciples who are outstanding, but Peterson deserves credit himself.

    This post was edited by BobbyBurton 4 years ago

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • ut755 said... (original post)

    I don't mean to be a wet blanket but whoever gets the OC job has to figure out a way to get production out of the quarterback position. You can install any system you want but if the QB turns the ball over 2+ times a game Texas will have another poor season.

    Mack has to realistically look at his options at that position and bring in somebody to maximize the talent on hand if he wants to win big next year. I still think Texas is lacking playmakers on the outside and that the best system for our current crop of QBs is a power running game with play action or completely write off Gilbertand McCoy and go with a run spread attack ala Nebraska.

    Agree. Without solid QB play, good luck being a good football team.

    And I'd have to say that's another thing about Chryst that you like. Here's a guy with a pedestrian quarterback completing 73% of his passes.

    Like I said, either hire would be good. I prefer Chryst because I think he could win a couple of different ways and you could sustain his "style" more easily if he left eventually.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by BobbyBurton 4 years ago

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial
  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial

    76-37-5

  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial
  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial
  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)


    Anyone who thinks Peterson sits by and watches Harsin run the offense would be incorrect. Peterson has a ton of input, from game plans to personnel to scheme, etc. He is an offensive coach. It would be like Will Muschamp being a head coach but not having anything to do with the defense. It doesn't work that way. Peterson, it is said, is in every QB meeting.

    Likewise, people who think Harsin couldn't bring the Boise offense with him are also incorrect. I'm sure he's capable of teaching it.

    The reality is that the Boise offense is a mix of a lot of "minds", not just a single one. So don't give Harsin too much credit and don't give him zero either. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

    I believe this is true for several coaching masterminds and their apprentices. Saban/Muschamp, Leach/Holgorsen, etc.

    But after coaching with a mentor for 10 years, an apprentice in that period gains more experience and understanding of the philosophy, and eventually autonomy, since one can effortlessly replicate its practice without much need for supervising.

    I think Harsin has had enough time in Bosie to efficiently channel Petersen while also adding some of his own mixes.

    He's been in the meeting rooms and gone over game plans, personnel, and schematics for 10 years. If Petersen thinks he's ready, he's ready.

  • Texas Flood said... (original post)

    I believe this is true for several coaching masterminds and their apprentices. Saban/Muschamp, Leach/Holgorsen, etc.

    But after coaching with a mentor for 10 years, an apprentice in that period gains more experience and understanding of the philosophy, and eventually autonomy, since one can effortlessly replicate its practice without much need for supervising.

    I think Harsin has had enough time in Bosie to efficiently channel Petersen while also adding some of his own mixes.

    He's been in the meeting rooms and gone over game plans, personnel, and schematics for 10 years. If Petersen thinks he's ready, he's ready.

    Tend to agree with this, Flood. Peterson can be still in the middle of things with Harsin yet able to--by this point--run a good bit of it on his own I'd imagine.

  • The Wisconsin ties to the search committee and the athletic department will be interesting.

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)

    The Wisconsin ties to the search committee and the athletic department will be interesting.

    Agreed. If the booster(s) makes the call, it's Leach. If the AD and search committee make the call, it could be Chryst.