Horns247 Board

uttotop said...
"but Mack dupes them all in terms of the class to which he has done it, save possibly Tressel.."

I can't understand what is so "classy" about Mack? Why does everyone continue to parrot that? He has always come across to me as a politician. He's smarmy, slimy, slick. He is a washington press secretary. On the surface it appears "classy" I suppose, but I look a little deeper.

His Monday morning press conferences, can be very telling. This week he was putting even more blame on the defense and more excuses for the offense.

Bobby, I don't grade like that. Its not that we are top 10% of the team in the country, we are. Its that my grades are given independent of that. Think to school. My professors in college had plenty of tests where 10% of the class didn't get an A just because they were the top 10% of the scores. The grading scale is independent of that. Right is right and wrong is wrong. In my eyes, when you fail your 1st and primary goal 11 out of 13 years you cannot get an A. Maybe I am too hard, you are probably right on that point.

I don't recall much being said about Michael specifically. People inferred there must be an issue, but it was stated repeatedly that there were no outside issues (grades or handlers) and that the staff made a poor decision on him. They flat missed. On that particular thread his name was never mentioned, however. Trent Richardson and Cam Newton both were though.

The two are totally analogous. You either discount rumors and the insiders who post them or not. You went from one end to the other in the matter of 5 minutes.

There are a lot of folks outside of Longhorn circles that think the world of Mack. A bad season and some bad decisions don't make him a bad person. Just like being a shitty OC doesn't make GD bad person.

I've been a member of various longhorn site for years and I don't recall anyone throwing CM under the bus. Like I said, a lot rationalizing to try and make sense of the lack of interest form our coaches, but that was all shot down pretty clearly.

I don't really see a difference in the two situations as you do. Both are verifiable, one is just more likely to be talked about that the other.

Regarding Mack versus other coaches. There are some that people contrast him to and rightfully so. Meyer and Miles are contrasted due to their lying to recruits where Mack has been more upfront to his own detriment at times. Or guys like Stoops with the way he handles injured players.

Bobby disagree with because if you win the conference championship in the Big 12 you have an outstanding chance of playing in the BCS Championship Game. Do you think for a second if Mack and Stoops records for Big 12 Championships were reversed Mack would be singing those number to the high heaven.......?

bobby - very much disagree. for any team in an AQ conference, winning the conference is THE goal, every year. adds millions of dollars to the bottom line of the program, regardless of the outcome of the game. the difference in payday between a BCS game and the next tier of bowls is huge.

Stoops = 6 Conf Titles, 1 NC, 1 Heisman Winner, Probation
Carroll = 6 Consec Conf Titles, 2 NC's, 1 or 2 Heisman Winners, Probation
Mack = 2 Conf Titles, 1 NC, 1 Heisman Winner, No Probation
Saban = 2 Conf Titles, 2 NC's (LSU, ALA), 1 Heisman Winner, No Probation
Meyer = 3 Conf Titles, 2 NC's, 1 Heisman Winner, No Probation

The days of Texas being a football only school ended 25 years ago.........get over it! If we are going to measure what is king at a school then we should be a swimming or baseball school because they've had a lot more success than football................there are about 50 baseball and basketball players (approximately 1/2 the number of football players) now list since Augie and Barnes have been at Texas vs Mack the number of off the field/court issues.................in 13 years you can count on one had the number of baseball/basketball players and it would take both hands and both feet a couple of times over to count the the number of football players involved in off the field issues...........

since mack arrived, he is 132-31 (81%) with 2 big 12 titles one other south division championship, one national championship and another appearance.

same time frame, beamer is 125-38 (77%) with 4 conf championships (3 ACC, 1 BE) and another ACC coastal division championship. he has one NC appearance.

yes, i'll take the texas program and mack any day of the week but it's not like a case can't be made. let's also consider that texas has ~5X as many d-1 football players as virginia to recruit from, and vtech was putrid for the 80 years preceeding beamer's hire (he is responsible for 6 of the 7 conference titles in the school's history). the programs don't play cards at the same table.

in that vein, there needs to be a little macro level perspective in this conversation. mack inherited an average texas program in 1998, but it is still the university of texas football with all the history that comes along with that. there are less than 10 (maybe 5) programs that have a comparable pedigrees (let's say bama, notre dame, usc, nebraska, OU, ohio st, michigan for starters).

the administration needs to (and does) have a different standard than other programs. just because mack is better that mackovic and mcwilliams (about a 55% winning percentage for those years) doesn't mean he is up to "our" standards. not saying mack isn't doing a good enough job, just my thoughts.

for me, texas football needs to be in the hunt for a conference championship every year winning once in every three years and winning 75% of our games. national championship runs will follow.

I think mack gets a solid B+ so far (winning % exceeds goals, but conf championships fall a little short). he should be given every opportunity to fix the problems this team currently has. If we are having this same conversation next year, then the administration should start having hard discussions.

The point is, I don't even know how many conference championships Va Tech has won, and I'd take the Texas program the last 10 years over them any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

The emphasis of conference championships, at least to me, is not as big as some of you guys are making it.

I'd also like to note that Va Tech has lost at least 3 games in every year 9 of the last 10 years.

Prior to this year, Texas had lost more than 2 games in a season just 4 of the last 10 years.

And if you include bowl games, I'd dispute the suggestion that Va Tech has had a significantly tougher non-conference schedule.

Va Tech lost to James Madison this year. What would you do if Texas lost to Southwest Texas?

Virginia Tech doesn't have nearly the natural recruiting base that we do and Blacksburg isn't Austin. Mack has done a better job than Beamer, namely winning a national championship. However, if you take into account how much harder it is to win at VaTech, Beamer has been a better coach. Namely, I do not think Mack and Greg Davis would've accomplished nearly as much as Beamer if they were at VaTech.

What about what they did at North Carolina? Is NC that much different from VT?

I can't believe people are actually comparing VT favorably with our program.

Man, I agree. I think Beamer deserves an A for his tenure as well.