Texas needs new blood...

[Tear Down This Wall]

...and, thankfully, they're not getting it:
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/sports/visit-140584-mcallen-network.html
“Mack’s been there 14 years,” Dodds said. “Twelve of them have been superb. When we hired him, if somebody had said he was going to have 12 great years, two chances at a national championship and two average years, would you take that? I would have said yes.

Why we hitch our wagon to these dopes' cart, I'll never know. They have the biggest ship in the water and don't know how to steer it. Two conference titles for Mack. Wow. Geez, Kansas State and Oklahoma State are only one more title away from catching up to them.

[Mississippi Sooner]

Sooo...5-7 is an average year? Heh.

[Tear Down This Wall]

5-7 followed by 8-5...and, an extremely crappy 8-5 at that: 4-5 against the Big 12's candy-*** defenses. A whopping 6 wins and 11 losses in the Big 12 over the past two seasons.

Say what you will about Bob Stoops, he's never followed an "average" year with another average year. And, his one or two "average" years never resulted in losing seasons.

Look, there's something amiss in Austin down there. How you can have a program with that money and exposure and not be able to recruit a decent quarterback is - or, should be to Texas fans - inexcusable. I mean, we're talking full blown, Michigan-style underachieving going on down there right now.

And, we're happy for it, too!

[badger]

Sooo...5-7 is an average year? Heh.

Tell me, SF.com: Has college football become such a money pit that it is has gotten to the point where success and failure is determined in dollar signs, not win-loss record?

Perhaps DeLoser Dodds is referring to "average" years as years when UT's athletic department raked in less money than the other years.

I personally don't care. I'm not wealthy and probably never will be and we're winning.

[Mac94]

Has college football become such a money pit that it is has gotten to the point where success and failure is determined in dollar signs, not win-loss record?

For the fan ... NEVER ... for the bean counting suits in an athletic department ... yup.

[BoulderSooner79]

...
Say what you will about Bob Stoops, he's never followed an "average" year with another average year. And, his one or two "average" years never resulted in losing seasons.
...


Now you've done. DOOMED!

[marfacowboy]

I'm not sure Texas can consistently compete with the OU's, Bama's and USC's of the world. They have more money, nice facilities, a prime recruiting ground, tradition. Everything you'd want. The difference is academic standards for athletes at Texas is probably more stringent than at the top SEC schools or at OU. It's why Georgia Tech initially left the SEC (A 2008 article stated that Georgia Tech had the nation's best average SAT score for football players, 1028 of a possible1600, and best average high school GPA, 3.39 of a possible 4.0.) If it remained in the SEC, it either had to adopt the lower standards or compete at at distinct disadvantage. Texas can't beat LSU (for example), because LSU has a lot of damn fine football players Texas won't touch, and there aren't enough 6'8" 300 pound linemen with even a 26 on their ACT.
At one point (2008 I think...same article), Florida's football players scored, on average, approximately 300 points lower on the SAT than their regular student body. I think that says pretty clearly what's going on and what you have to do to win.
But I have no issue with schools like OU taking kids that are considered "marginal" academically. Let's quit pretending this is something it's not. We need the money and to get the money, we have to take kids that might not gain admission as a regular student. That's just a fact. The whole concept of the "student athlete" is largely a farce, and a lot of these kids are getting their chance in life and taking it. Who can blame them? They can't help the fact they grew up poor or had to go to bad schools.
Texas is stubbornly hanging on to a standard they believe in, which is fine. They're just not going to win a lot of championships that way.

[htownsooner7]

I'm not sure Texas can consistently compete with the OU's, Bama's and USC's of the world. They have more money, nice facilities, a prime recruiting ground, tradition. Everything you'd want. The difference is academic standards for athletes at Texas is probably more stringent than at the top SEC schools or at OU. It's why Georgia Tech initially left the SEC (A 2008 article stated that Georgia Tech had the nation's best average SAT score for football players, 1028 of a possible1600, and best average high school GPA, 3.39 of a possible 4.0.) If it remained in the SEC, it either had to adopt the lower standards or compete at at distinct disadvantage. Texas can't beat LSU (for example), because LSU has a lot of damn fine football players Texas won't touch, and there aren't enough 6'8" 300 pound linemen with even a 26 on their ACT.
At one point (2008 I think...same article), Florida's football players scored, on average, approximately 300 points lower on the SAT than their regular student body. I think that says pretty clearly what's going on and what you have to do to win.
But I have no issue with schools like OU taking kids that are considered "marginal" academically. Let's quit pretending this is something it's not. We need the money and to get the money, we have to take kids that might not gain admission as a regular student. That's just a fact. The whole concept of the "student athlete" is largely a farce, and a lot of these kids are getting their chance in life and taking it. Who can blame them? They can't help the fact they grew up poor or had to go to bad schools.
Texas is stubbornly hanging on to a standard they believe in, which is fine. They're just not going to win a lot of championships that way.

This comment is ridiculous. The best players get into Texas under their current academic standards. Rarely if ever do you hear of their guys that commit that fail to qualify. Plus, their recruiting classes consistently rank better than damn near everyone so getting top notch high school kids is not the problem. Let me know how well Vince Young did on the SAT.

[Tear Down This Wall]

I'm not sure Texas can consistently compete with the OU's, Bama's and USC's of the world. They have more money, nice facilities, a prime recruiting ground, tradition. Everything you'd want. The difference is academic standards for athletes at Texas is probably more stringent than at the top SEC schools or at OU. It's why Georgia Tech initially left the SEC (A 2008 article stated that Georgia Tech had the nation's best average SAT score for football players, 1028 of a possible1600, and best average high school GPA, 3.39 of a possible 4.0.) If it remained in the SEC, it either had to adopt the lower standards or compete at at distinct disadvantage. Texas can't beat LSU (for example), because LSU has a lot of damn fine football players Texas won't touch, and there aren't enough 6'8" 300 pound linemen with even a 26 on their ACT.
At one point (2008 I think...same article), Florida's football players scored, on average, approximately 300 points lower on the SAT than their regular student body. I think that says pretty clearly what's going on and what you have to do to win.
But I have no issue with schools like OU taking kids that are considered "marginal" academically. Let's quit pretending this is something it's not. We need the money and to get the money, we have to take kids that might not gain admission as a regular student. That's just a fact. The whole concept of the "student athlete" is largely a farce, and a lot of these kids are getting their chance in life and taking it. Who can blame them? They can't help the fact they grew up poor or had to go to bad schools.
Texas is stubbornly hanging on to a standard they believe in, which is fine. They're just not going to win a lot of championships that way.

This is the funniest thing I've read in about a year. Anyone got a link on Vince Young's Wonderlic? Texas would, without question, take any OL and DL recruit that LSU would. If you don't think so, you are kidding yourself to a very high degree.

[SCOUT]

The Jammal Charles interview with Ric Renner during the High School All-Star game is a classic as well.

[marfacowboy]

This is the funniest thing I've read in about a year. Anyone got a link on Vince Young's Wonderlic? Texas would, without question, take any OL and DL recruit that LSU would. If you don't think so, you are kidding yourself to a very high degree.

I know for a fact they don't. Sometimes, you have to take your blinders off. I'm not saying every kid they take is a great student, but if anyone here thinks they would take the same kids LSU does, you're delusional.

[marfacowboy]

This comment is ridiculous. The best players get into Texas under their current academic standards. Rarely if ever do you hear of their guys that commit that fail to qualify. Plus, their recruiting classes consistently rank better than damn near everyone so getting top notch high school kids is not the problem. Let me know how well Vince Young did on the SAT.
Their kids are frequently overrated. Compare the rankings of their classes with actual results. There are a lot of kids at Arkansas, LSU and Florida that would never get an official visit at Texas. Don't let the rivalry blind you to reality.
It doesn't mean every kid they take is a fine student. I'm sure they take a few here and there that are below what they'd want. But overall, they don't take nearly as many "marginal" athletes as schools like LSU.

[goingoneight]

I know for a fact they don't. Sometimes, you have to take your blinders off. I'm not saying every kid they take is a great student, but if anyone here thinks they would take the same kids LSU does, you're delusional.

Alright, let me spell this out for you... V-I-N-C-E Y-O-U-N-G.

How many worldly scholars do you see on that Texas team right now? Last year? 2005? Any year in general?

[Seamus]

The Jammal Charles interview with Ric Renner during the High School All-Star game is a classic as well.

For the 94 percent of us that didn't see that, maybe some details would be in order.

[badger]

For the 94 percent of us that didn't see that, maybe some details would be in order.

I googled it. Is this it?
6cBEDFDhoq8

Universi... uhhh... the state of Texas.

wtf...

[marfacowboy]

Alright, let me spell this out for you... V-I-N-C-E Y-O-U-N-G.

How many worldly scholars do you see on that Texas team right now? Last year? 2005? Any year in general?

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Go back and read the quote of mine you included in your last post.

But since you asked, lets look at Thomas Ashcraft. (6'5", 315) "...enrolled in the college of liberal arts ... a prep honor roll student who ranked in the top five percent of his class ... a four-year member of the National Honor Society...."

Let's compare him to any member of LSU's starting offensive or defensive front.

[olevetonahill]

Alright, let me spell this out for you... V-I-N-C-E Y-O-U-N-G.

How many worldly scholars do you see on that Texas team right now? Last year? 2005? Any year in general?
Ya better look out go8 He gonna put you on the Dreaded Iggy list

[Sooner70]

Marfacowboy:

Are you smoking the same stuff all those Texas players were that landed them in the Austin jails a few years back, along the lines of the UT example of moral uprightness Cedric Benson? Either that, or you're staring too much into those mysterious lights up your way.

If you were from Stanford, I might understand your comment.

Take note that in a 2010 survey, Alabama's & LSU's football programs were in the top 10 graduation rates in the country at over 60 %.. In 2010, Texas' football program was next to the bottom in graduation rates in the Big 12 at 49%, slightly higher than OU's 45%.

Pleasssse. Don't play that academic & quality of player card. It's a joke. For gosh sakes, Landry Jones is going to be a preacher. Think of some other excuse.

[SCOUT]

I googled it. Is this it?
6cBEDFDhoq8

Universi... uhhh... the state of Texas.

wtf...
It is indeed. I couldn't find a copy that didn't have that dumb picture on it so I just referenced it.

[marfacowboy]

Marfacowboy:

Take note that in a 2010 survey, Alabama's & LSU's football programs were in the top 10 graduation rates in the country at over 60 %.. In 2010, Texas' football program was next to the bottom in graduation rates in the Big 12 at 49%, slightly higher than OU's 45%.

From 2004 to 2007 (during their national title period) the football team’s four-year grad rate was 71 percent. It was higher than the University's rate overall. They're not perfect. Far from it, but I think Mack Brown has a stronger commitment to academics than Les Miles.
I still believe the monster he's created can't be maintained unless he lowers standards to SEC levels.
Texas' greater sin is the fact they didn't have a black player that played until 1970. They had one in '69 that never played (a freshman), as I recall. OU was way ahead of them. Texas' 1969 team was last all-white team to win a national college football championship.

[texaspokieokie]

Yep, frosh couldn't play till 72.

[Sooner70]

Marfa:

You're living an illusion. It doesn't matter what happened 2004-2007. Texas' current graduation rate for it's FB players is among the LOWER TIER of the Big 12. You're chasing the wrong rabbit. This sounds more and more like Texas entitlement all over again ...."The only reason we're not as good as SEC is that we have higher standards....what?" Texas annually has among the best ranked recruiting classes in the nation--better than several SEC teams.

Do you think Texas has higher academic standards than Stanford? Do you think Texas could've competed with Stanford last year?

Ask yourself this question instead: How is it year in and year out Texas recruits these top ranked classes, and manages to turn them into mediocrity on the field?

Here's a hint: There's a theory out there that with Texas, it has nothing to do with the caliber or type of players. There's no doubt Texas has talent par with any top 20 team in the country--year in & year out. It has everything to the system, how they're coached & the overall plan (or lack thereof) of how that talent is used.

[3rdgensooner]

Texas is funny, what with their supersized egos and yellow-teethed quackery...

[marfacowboy]

Marfa:

You're living an illusion. It doesn't matter what happened 2004-2007. Texas' current graduation rate for it's FB players is among the LOWER TIER of the Big 12. You're chasing the wrong rabbit. This sounds more and more like Texas entitlement all over again ...."The only reason we're not as good as SEC is that we have higher standards....what?" Texas annually has among the best ranked recruiting classes in the nation--better than several SEC teams.

Do you think Texas has higher academic standards than Stanford? Do you think Texas could've competed with Stanford last year?

Ask yourself this question instead: How is it year in and year out Texas recruits these top ranked classes, and manages to turn them into mediocrity on the field?

Here's a hint: There's a theory out there that with Texas, it has nothing to do with the caliber or type of players. There's no doubt Texas has talent par with any top 20 team in the country--year in & year out. It has everything to the system, how they're coached & the overall plan (or lack thereof) of how that talent is used.

They're not anywhere close to Stanford. In any sport. Then again, no one is close to Stanford, overall. Stanford competes at a high level in almost every sport and has great students in its athletic department. It's the best athletic program in the country and one of the top three institutions for academics and research.

Texas doesn't have the kids. I talk to a lot of Texas people, and they'll all tell you they don't have the kids to compete with LSU and Alabama,across the board.That was readily apparent when Texas played LSU in the CWS a few years back. LSU had men on the field. Texas had college kids. It was apparent against Alabama in the National Title game. Colt and Shipley gave them a chance, but over the course of the game, those Bama guys just wore them down. Without Colt, they had zero chance.

Kinda reminds me of when UNLV played a Nolan Richardson Arkansas basketball team in Fayetteville. It was that great UNLV team with Augmon and Johnson. Arkansas didn't have Corliss yet. They were still building the team what would win it all. Anyway, UNLV thumped them, and at one point during the game, Johnson ran past Nolan Richardson and said, "You better get you some men, coach." Or something like that.

I think their recruiting is overrated, but I also believe, as you say, there is a coaching problem. Surely, they're better than what they've shown. But they're not as physical and tough as OU, Bama or LSU. I think they're soft.

They used to have players like this guy:

http://imagecache6.allposters.com/LRG//27/2763/COCTD00Z.jpg

But when they played Alabama, they brought this guy:

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQqZUyDskpL_A5t1jrScIEo2tNYsu1Gp P-RwEQsMc0m3YjIdRMu

[marfacowboy]

You know, maybe their biggest problem is their haughty attitude. This air of superiority they have is nauseating.

[OU_Sooners75]

5-7 followed by 8-5...and, an extremely crappy 8-5 at that: 4-5 against the Big 12's candy-*** defenses. A whopping 6 wins and 11 losses in the Big 12 over the past two seasons.

Say what you will about Bob Stoops, he's never followed an "average" year with another average year. And, his one or two "average" years never resulted in losing seasons.

Look, there's something amiss in Austin down there. How you can have a program with that money and exposure and not be able to recruit a decent quarterback is - or, should be to Texas fans - inexcusable. I mean, we're talking full blown, Michigan-style underachieving going on down there right now.

And, we're happy for it, too!

6-11 in the last two years against the Big 12?

No...6-12 is the correct record.

Wins vs:
Texas Tech (2010, 2011)
Nebraska (2010)
Iowa State (2011)
Kansas (2011)
Texas A&M (2011)


Losses to everyone no listed above.

[OU_Sooners75]

No Sooner70 and Marfa have it completely wrong...


Texas SUCKS that is why they cannot compete for championships every year!

[KantoSooner]

Sooners 75, you posit that Texas Sucks. While I would not, ipso facto, argue with your analysis, I would raise the countra positive case that it is not so much a 'sucking' as it is a 'blowing'.

So, please consider, debate and explain:

"Texas Sucks/Texas Blows: Contrasting Similarities"

Your discourse, if it's of sufficient intellectual weight, will be published in the Journal of Texan Studies. Fall edition.

[Sooner70]

Marfa:

Re: Texas needs new blood...
"You know, maybe their biggest problem is their haughty attitude. This air of superiority they have is nauseating.'





Finally.....something we can agree on.

[pweitkem]

Hey Marfacowboy, check out how well your team is doing academically.
http://cfn.scout.com/2/1196887.html
91st out of 119 schools. For the love of Pete.... LSU is 55 spots ahead of you. What the heck are you and all of the UT graduates (many of whom I work with and hang out with daily) so high on yourselves about again?

[Tear Down This Wall]

I know for a fact they don't. Sometimes, you have to take your blinders off. I'm not saying every kid they take is a great student, but if anyone here thinks they would take the same kids LSU does, you're delusional.

Dude, look...you've got to face reality. These athletes are not, no matter what you wish to believe, accepted with the same academic entrance requirements of the regular student body.

Further, at UT (and Texas A&M, for that matter), because of Texas' stupid 10% law, Texas automatically loses many of the best academic students to other schools.

Additionally, the athletes at Texas are not taking up too much extra space down at the chemistry and engineering departments. They are majoring in the same crapassed degree programs meant to keep the football and basketball players eligible that other schools do - many varieties of sociology, what used to be called physical education, and garbage communications.

So, don't come in here with your academic baloney. UT is sucking because they can't find a quarterback. Instead of going out and getting real offensive and defensive coordinators, they've saddled themselves with guys who spent the majority of their career in non-BCS AQs preparing for the likes of Lousiana-Monroe and San Jose State. That's on Mack Brown. It's all on Mack Brown. It's got nothing to do with academics.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Hey Marfacowboy, check out how well your team is doing academically.
http://cfn.scout.com/2/1196887.html
91st out of 119 schools. For the love of Pete.... LSU is 55 spots ahead of you. What the heck are you and all of the UT graduates (many of whom I work with and hang out with daily) so high on yourselves about again?

This is great...Texas football players trail North Texas academically. Only three SEC schools fall below Texas. Hmmm.

[fadada1]

do a little digging, folks. EVERY school has "conditional" or "special" enrollment "policies". In other words, schools are given a certain number of "go ahead and enroll the special student" - usually reserved for marginal scores by prospective athletes. anyone here that thinks every athlete at stanford, notre dame, vanderbilt, cal, etc... made the minimum "requirements" set forth by the university, is smoking the same thing they do at... well... cal berkley.

i have a little knowledge on this, fellow SF peeps. it happens at EVERY university, at almost every level, save most of the ivy league and (definitely) military academies. as dumb as vince young is, what did he do academically for the university of texas???? as he might say... "nuthin"... and would probably spell it that way. the important question to ask is, "how much money did vince young bring the university of texas?" now you know why vince young was enrolled at ut.

[HAMTTX]

I have been watching Texas play football over fifty years, and like a lot of people I have never understood why they have not won more titles. I don't buy the educational argument as much as I buy the character argument. Sure they run into trouble in Austin, but not to the degree I have witnessed here in the deep south. There has to be more to that story. The rumor is that Ryan Perrileux (sp.)? Should have been at Texas. Some claim that dirty recruiting moved him to lsu. I have no idea how true that is, but it shows that Texas would have took him, if Ryan would have agreed to come.

However, when this discussion comes up I always seem to fall back on the over-signing issue. I believe there is more to this than the main stream media is willing to talk about. Recently I saw a breakdown between how many scholarships Clemson and South Carolina offered in the last five years. It was surprising, and I am doing this from memory, but carolina had offered over 50 more in the same time frame. It easily explains carolinas new found dominance over a rival it has never in its history enjoyed before. Football has always been a numbers game. Over-signing will hide a coaches mistake. If they can't crack into the first or second team, get rid of them. It may be heartless but apparently it is very effective.

[marfacowboy]

I don't pay a lot of attention to those statistical reports, because I know how schools railroad their kids through programs. My own child was strongly encouraged to not major in History and English (by her coach) and move to something like Communications or Kinesiology. Why? Well, you'd have more time to workout and you'd lessen the chances of a subpar grade. She said "no," and wisely stayed the course.

She took 80% academic money (so if she stopped running her school would still be paid for) and the rest from the athletic department. This is pretty common in track and field, soccer and golf. The school almost always uses academic merit awards for these athletes since the athletic money is limited.

The football players were literally herded through. Many (most?) graduated with a modicum of preparedness for any career. Half of them couldn't write a coherent paragraph. They got notes from professional note takers (paid $50 per class), were constantly with tutors and basically had the tests (in BS majors) handed to them. The whole thing was a farce. So don't point out glittering GPA's and graduation rates to me in Communications, Kinesiology or Sports Management and tell me it's the same as a kid with a 3.2 in Economics or Engineering. These statistics are meaningless once you understand what goes on behind the scenes to produce them.
I agree most of them are in baloney degree programs. But it is what is it. They're making money for the school and the school needs the money. Does Texas have some of these kids? Sure. But I still think Texas is, overall, getting a better all-around student than A&M, LSU or Tennessee and doesn't take as many.

How many of you have either been a D-1 athlete or had a child that's a D-1 athlete? If you can't answer "yes" to either one of those questions, you're insufficiently informed on how the system works.

[pweitkem]

Marfa, just so I understand.... Texas is a really hard school that requires their students to take really hard classes. These really hard classes result in your 'student' athlete's inability to graduate. Which is why Texas near the bottom of all D1 schools in eligibility, retention and graduation... near the very bottom of all D1 schools! What's the reason for this? You have dumbasses playing football at your school that shouldn't be there and after you've used them up on the field you kick them out of school? I think I'm missing something here.

[marfacowboy]

Marfa, just so I understand.... Texas is a really hard school that requires their students to take really hard classes. These really hard classes result in your 'student' athlete's inability to graduate. Which is why Texas near the bottom of all D1 schools in eligibility, retention and graduation... near the very bottom of all D1 schools! What's the reason for this? You have dumbasses playing football at your school that shouldn't be there and after you've used them up on the field you kick them out of school? I think I'm missing something here.

I didn't say any of that. I'm saying Texas won't/can't (who knows) take as many marginal kids as some other schools. Maybe Mack would take more if he could. Maybe he wouldn't. But I think the parameters there are a little more stringent. That's just one reason why they are struggling, and they're struggling across the board.

[KantoSooner]

I won't argue what I don't know, and that includes much about current states of play as far as admissions and coddling of student athletes. I did tutor for a semester when I was at OU and a few of the guys on the FB team were excellent minds, most were middle of the pack and a few were borderline charity cases. (Sarah Palin level international affairs knowledge).

What IS clear is that Texas gets astounding athletes, in large numbers, each and every year.

And then proceeds to underwhelm.

I see no evidence to support the contention that they are all too tired from studying to play well. I see at least limited evidence that they are badly coached and poorly led.