Big 12 should extend invitations to Boise State & TCU

[Dan B.]

That's because Texas makes $20M a year being on TV and in a BCS conference. Boise State doesn't. Money doesn't make you elite, but it sure helps.

I'd umm recommend that they quit trying to extort money from their opponents and act like any other school that goes to the BCS every other year. Cry me a river -- Boise has probably made 50 million off of its bowl games this decade, and it's not like they are ignored on TV either. Their games are always on ESPN cuz they play on any random night. Where'd all that money go?

 

[IDEXAN]

That's because Texas makes $20M a year being on TV and in a BCS conference. Boise State doesn't. Money doesn't make you elite, but it sure helps.

The Boise State guys are, well gotta say it, they're just small potatoes.
But they are trying to claw their way up the latter, but the fat cats like
UT keep stomping on their fingers.
Now when it comes to big-time programs, certainly in the Big 12, clearly the most admirable is Nebraska. They told UT to take the money and stuff it.
They've got too much pride, too much class to be treated like the plantation "boys" as UT is treating the Aggies, Baylor, Tech, Mizzou, etc.
I'm gonna enjoy that ass-stompin the Huskers deal to Texas in Lincoln later this fall almost as much as the NU fans in Lincoln will.

 

[Stemp]

I'd umm recommend that they quit trying to extort money from their opponents and act like any other school that goes to the BCS every other year. Cry me a river -- Boise has probably made 50 million off of its bowl games this decade, and it's not like they are ignored on TV either. Their games are always on ESPN cuz they play on any random night. Where'd all that money go?

Are you just completely ignorant about BCS bowl money and conference revenue sharing? There is no more guarenteed amount anymore and all the BCS Bowl money earned by a team gets split up by the conference (except ND).

Changes in Bowl Championship Series revenue distribution and the elimination by the NCAA in the last three years of a minimum payout have helped make it possible for teams playing in the same game to receive different amounts.

Champions from the six major conferences will generate $17 million apiece for their leagues in BCS games. Boise State and Notre Dame, also in the BCS, will make vastly different amounts: $9 million by Boise for five other I-A leagues to share and $4.5 million for independent Notre Dame to keep.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2006-12-06-bowl-payouts_x.htm

Per an agreement struck four years ago, the five nonautomatic qualifying conferences -- Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt and WAC -- split a 9 percent share of the overall BCS revenue, which in the past couple years has come out to about $9.6 million.

That BCS revenue share is split in half and each of the five conferences is given an equal portion, which comes out to $964,800 per conference. The other half is split into 15 shares and handed out based on performance. The top non-AQ conference earns five shares, the second-best earns four, the third earns three, and so on.

The Mountain West earns the most from this pool because it had the top BCS qualifier and two other teams ranked in the Top 25. Its payout from that pool is about $1.6 million, while the WAC, which had the second-highest BCS ranked team, earns just under $1.3 million.

The conferences also split about $9.8 million for TCU’s guaranteed spot in the Fiesta Bowl. The Mountain West gets $6 million of this because it has the BCS bowl qualifier and the five conferences split the remaining $3.7 million based on the performance tier system noted above.

Now, here’s where the numbers differ from a year ago. Because Boise State entered the BCS as an at-large, the WAC earns an extra $4.5 million. This money is for the WAC and will not be shared with the rest of the five-conference coalition. Boise State earns $3 million of that total and the rest is split evenly amongst the WAC’s member schools.

Because of this, the WAC is the only conference that makes more money than it did a year ago. If the payouts remain approximately the same as they did last year, which is expected, the Mountain West will lead the non-AQ conferences with a total revenue of $9.8 million and the WAC will earn $7.8 million. Both of these figures are before bowl expenses.

Last season, the WAC earned $3.2 million.

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/15793/breaking-down-the-non-aqs-bcs-money

So to compare, Iowa State, possibly the weakest Big 12 team, earned 4.5M million from the conference last year, including it's share of BCS Bowl money for being a bottom feeder in the Big XII, while Boise State, a BCS contender from an non-AQ conference, got 3.9M.

 

[Dan B.]

Are you just completely ignorant about BCS bowl money and conference revenue sharing? There is no more guarenteed amount anymore and all the BCS Bowl money earned by a team gets split up by the conference (except ND).


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2006-12-06-bowl-payouts_x.htm


http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/15793/breaking-down-the-non-aqs-bcs-money

So to compare, Iowa State, possibly the weakest Big 12 team, earned 4.5M million from the conference last year, including it's share of BCS Bowl money for being a bottom feeder in the Big XII, while Boise State, a BCS contender from an non-AQ conference, got 3.9M.

OK, so they've earned 40 million in the past decade, not 50. Doesn't change the fact that they shouldn't need a million dollar check to go on a road trip. Iowa State doesn't.

Is Boise State a legitimate top 10 contender, or a patsy? Only patsies get paid to play in a game. No big name school is going to pay Boise money to play them. Why would they? They wouldn't do it for any other dangerous opponent either. You shell out checks to rent an opponent when you need someone to fill up the stands and an easy win. You don't pay money to big name programs that stand a better than even chance of beating you.

 

[Dan B.]

The Boise State guys are, well gotta say it, they're just small potatoes.
But they are trying to claw their way up the latter, but the fat cats like
UT keep stomping on their fingers.
Now when it comes to big-time programs, certainly in the Big 12, clearly the most admirable is Nebraska. They told UT to take the money and stuff it.
They've got too much pride, too much class to be treated like the plantation "boys" as UT is treating the Aggies, Baylor, Tech, Mizzou, etc.
I'm gonna enjoy that ass-stompin the Huskers deal to Texas in Lincoln later this fall almost as much as the NU fans in Lincoln will.

Careful what you wish for. What if they finish #2 in the country and play Bama over an undefeated BSU? If I were a hardcore Boise fan I'd be praying for Nebraska to lose. They are primed to leap over you guys when the computer rankings using strength of schedule are factored in.

 

[Hervoyel]

UCLA? Seriously? This is football, not basketball. This is the same UCLA that went 7-6, 6-7, 4-8, and 7-6 the last 4 years. Are you seriously bragging about "quality" opponents and using UCLA as an exmple?

NU, and CU left because of the disparity in the Big XII and the arrogance of Texas. Same reason Mizzou and it's St. Louis TV market will bolt if/when the Big 10 invites ND and Mizzou and why A&M wants to go to the SEC. OU would also bail on the Big XII if it could rid itself of Ok. St. It can't, so it let tu get the OSU a place in the PAC 10.

Well, as it turns out maybe UCLA was more of a quality opponent than you thought at the time. Interesting though that UH did about as well against them on the road and got laughed at by many for losing that game.

I wonder how many teams see UT as a "quality opponent" by the end of this season.

 

[Hookem Horns]

I wonder how many teams see UT as a "quality opponent" by the end of this season.

Probably not many. They are going to be a train wreck this year. The offense is clueless as to what they are doing.

Honestly this is season is going to be a well deserved karma for all those UT morons rooting for the Titans. At least I can draw some comfort in that when the Horns lose.

 

[JB]

Probably not many. They are going to be a train wreck this year. The offense is clueless as to what they are doing.

Honestly this is season is going to be a well deserved karma for all those UT morons rooting for the Titans. At least I can draw some comfort in that when the Horns lose.

This may be the season that finally sees Davis fired...

 

[Mr. White]

This may be the season that finally sees Davis fired...

One could only hope.

Any half-ass DC knows how to exploit a Greg Davis offense. He was lucky he had Vince Young and Colt McCoy to cover his ineptitude all those years.

 

[JB]

One could only hope.

Any half-ass DC knows how to exploit a Greg Davis offense. He was lucky he had Vince Young and Colt McCoy to cover his ineptitude all those years.

Yep! And I think that Gilbert will be a very good qb, but they have to have a better system. They can't run a power running scheme with a light weight OL

 

[Blake]

Probably not many. They are going to be a train wreck this year. The offense is clueless as to what they are doing.

Honestly this is season is going to be a well deserved karma for all those UT morons rooting for the Titans. At least I can draw some comfort in that when the Horns lose.

You said it brother. I thought we would end up 9-3 this year. And after our offense sucked it up against UCLA, it is looking very likely. The running game is horrendous. The receiving core is good as usual. The running backs are all going to be out of a job when true freshman Malcolm Brown comes in next season. The only RB I like is Cody Johnson. And he hasnt gotten the ball since the first game when he got banged up. Also where the hell is Malcom Williams? Dude is crazy good yet plays second fiddle to Davis, Childs, Goodwin and Kirkendoll. I dont understand that one.

But lets be honest. Despite starting in the top 10, who saw Texas as a title contender? Not me. I really like Alabama with their vet QB, strong running game and defense. Oregon is crazy good on offense. And Arizona is my sleeper. Ill throw a bone to Boise that they have looked good. Just wish they mixed in a few more solid programs like a Big 10, Big 12 or SEC team in addition to OSU and VT.

This may be the season that finally sees Davis fired...

He has made it this far. What makes you think one down season with a new QB will make it his last? Until there is a new head coach, I doubt we see a new OC. JMHO.

 

[Dan B.]

You said it brother. I thought we would end up 9-3 this year. And after our offense sucked it up against UCLA, it is looking very likely. The running game is horrendous. The receiving core is good as usual. The running backs are all going to be out of a job when true freshman Malcolm Brown comes in next season. The only RB I like is Cody Johnson. And he hasnt gotten the ball since the first game when he got banged up. Also where the hell is Malcom Williams? Dude is crazy good yet plays second fiddle to Davis, Childs, Goodwin and Kirkendoll. I dont understand that one.

But lets be honest. Despite starting in the top 10, who saw Texas as a title contender? Not me. I really like Alabama with their vet QB, strong running game and defense. Oregon is crazy good on offense. And Arizona is my sleeper. Ill throw a bone to Boise that they have looked good. Just wish they mixed in a few more solid programs like a Big 10, Big 12 or SEC team in addition to OSU and VT.

Texas is in a rebuilding year and is definitely a 3 or 4 loss team. Top 10 was way too high for them. At best they are a top 20 team, and even then just barely. OU, Nebraska, A&M, and KSU are all going to be extremely difficult for UT. I think in addition to the teams you listed Nebraska and Ohio State have looked superb so far. It's obviously unlikely that all go undefeated but I could see any of them running their schedule.

He has made it this far. What makes you think one down season with a new QB will make it his last? Until there is a new head coach, I doubt we see a new OC. JMHO.

Yup. Greg Davis isn't going anywhere while Mack Brown is the head coach. They are a package and have been since both got to UT.

 

[awtysst]

Texas is in a rebuilding year and is definitely a 3 or 4 loss team. Top 10 was way too high for them. At best they are a top 20 team, and even then just barely. OU, Nebraska, A&M, and KSU are all going to be extremely difficult for UT. I think in addition to the teams you listed Nebraska and Ohio State have looked superb so far. It's obviously unlikely that all go undefeated but I could see any of them running their schedule.



Yup. Greg Davis isn't going anywhere while Mack Brown is the head coach. They are a package and have been since both got to UT.

I am hoping we only lose 1 more game(to OU or Nebraska) but if we lose 3-4 I will not be surprised.

 

[Hookem Horns]

I am hoping we only lose 1 more game(to OU or Nebraska) but if we lose 3-4 I will not be surprised.

I have them losing 4. OU, Nebraska, and either Baylor or A&M. Yes, I am serious about Baylor.

BTW, I wouldn't mind seeing Mack go. He has been a great recruiter and has done a ton for the program however I think it's time for a change. I have also never have been a big fan of his come game day. Oh, Greg Davis, if Mack goes he goes which would be a very welcomed.

Living in Austin I am just tired of hearing the same coach speak over and over again. It's pretty annoying now.

 

[Blake]

I have them losing 4. OU, Nebraska, and either Baylor or A&M. Yes, I am serious about Baylor.

BTW, I wouldn't mind seeing Mack go. He has been a great recruiter and has done a ton for the program however I think it's time for a change. I have also never have been a big fan of his come game day. Oh, Greg Davis, if Mack goes he goes which would be a very welcomed.

Living in Austin I am just tired of hearing the same coach speak over and over again. It's pretty annoying now.

I wouldnt mind if Mack wanted to leave. But I am not going to ask him to leave. Like you said he has done a lot for the program, including a NCT. I think he will want to leave on his own in the next 2-3 years max.

I think how Florida State kicked Bowden out on his ass was sad. And dont want to see that at UT.

Agree 100% with Macks coach speak, and Greg Davis needing to go with Mack.

 

[Stemp]

Mack Brown isn't going anywhere for 4-5 years at least.

Texas fans need to be worried about losing Muschamp at the end of the season. He is primed to be a HC and he's not going to wait for Mack Brown to retire, especially with the HC openings that will likely come about this year.

 

[Blake]

Mack Brown isn't going anywhere for 4-5 years at least.

Texas fans need to be worried about losing Muschamp at the end of the season. He is primed to be a HC and he's not going to wait for Mack Brown to retire, especially with the HC openings that will likely come about this year.

Do you have anything to back up this claim? Or just your personal opinion?

Muschamp has said publicly that he is content with waiting for the UT head coach job as he sees it as the premier job in the country. He is the 2nd highest paid assistant coach in the country. And he passed on other head coach jobs like Tennessee.

It would be a shocker to see him leave. So no, I am not worried.

 

[Stemp]

Do you have anything to back up this claim? Or just your personal opinion?

Muschamp has said publicly that he is content with waiting for the UT head coach job as he sees it as the premier job in the country. He is the 2nd highest paid assistant coach in the country. And he passed on other head coach jobs like Tennessee.

It would be a shocker to see him leave. So no, I am not worried.

Muschamp is primed to be a HC. He's making $1M a year, but there will be big name jobs that will open up paying 2-3X times that. I don't think Muschamp will wait around for years for Brown to retire, not without some assurance of a timeframe. He doesn't have the 5 year clause that Jimbo Fischer did in his contract at FSU.

 

[Dutchrudder]

Muschamp is primed to be a HC. He's making $1M a year, but there will be big name jobs that will open up paying 2-3X times that. I don't think Muschamp will wait around for years for Brown to retire, not without some assurance of a timeframe. He doesn't have the 5 year clause that Jimbo Fischer did in his contract at FSU.

Rumor had it that Muschamp was the top candidate for the Tennessee job after Lane Kiffin left. Reports said he rejected the offer though and the speculation was that he was waiting to take Mack Brown's place after he retires.

 

[Goldensilence]

Rumor had it that Muschamp was the top candidate for the Tennessee job after Lane Kiffin left. Reports said he rejected the offer though and the speculation was that he was waiting to take Mack Brown's place after he retires.

There's no speculation, he's the HC in waiting.

I really like Mack and appreciate all he's done in bringing UT back to national relevance, including a title, but Greg Davis is his albatross.

 

[Blake]

Muschamp is primed to be a HC. He's making $1M a year, but there will be big name jobs that will open up paying 2-3X times that. I don't think Muschamp will wait around for years for Brown to retire, not without some assurance of a timeframe. He doesn't have the 5 year clause that Jimbo Fischer did in his contract at FSU.

What makes you think that Mack Brown hasnt assured him that he will leave after year X? You have no idea. None of us do.

You are basing your claims off opinion not facts.

So again, please explain your claim that Muschamp's "not going to wait for Mack Brown to retire."

Fact. Muschamp has said that UT is the premier job in the country.

Fact. He passed on the Tennessee job and "2-3x the pay" to stay in his current position.

Would he leave for Georgia? Maybe. But I wouldnt claim that he is gone if Mack doesnt leave soon.

 

[Goldensilence]

What makes you think that Mack Brown hasnt assured him that he will leave after year X? You have no idea. None of us do.

You are basing your claims off opinion not facts.

So again, please explain your claim that Muschamp's "not going to wait for Mack Brown to retire."

Fact. Muschamp has said that UT is the premier job in the country.

Fact. He passed on the Tennessee job and "2-3x the pay" to stay in his current position.

Would he leave for Georgia? Maybe. But I wouldnt claim that he is gone if Mack doesnt leave soon.

A program like Georgia doesn't worry me. If he didn't bolt for Tennessee, granted Kiffin left it in a contractual cluster****, I doubt he'd go to Georgia.

I think if for some reason Florida's job came open I'd be worried. I don't think that'll happen soon now though.

The job possibly opening up this next year that worries me is Michigan.

 

[Blake]

A program like Georgia doesn't worry me. If he didn't bolt for Tennessee, granted Kiffin left it in a contractual cluster****, I doubt he'd go to Georgia.

I think if for some reason Florida's job came open I'd be worried. I don't think that'll happen soon now though.

The job possibly opening up this next year that worries me is Michigan.

the only reason I said Georgia, is that Georgia is his Alma Mater, and he is from Georgia.

 

[Stemp]

What makes you think that Mack Brown hasnt assured him that he will leave after year X? You have no idea. None of us do.

You are basing your claims off opinion not facts.

So again, please explain your claim that Muschamp's "not going to wait for Mack Brown to retire."

Fact. Muschamp has said that UT is the premier job in the country.

Fact. He passed on the Tennessee job and "2-3x the pay" to stay in his current position.

Would he leave for Georgia? Maybe. But I wouldnt claim that he is gone if Mack doesnt leave soon.

The timeframe isn't in his contract. Maybe Mack gave him private assurances, but he's also publicly stated he not even thinking about retiring soon and isn't interested in the AD job, which is where people thought he would slide into.

Texas may be a top coaching spot, but I think Muschamp wants to make his bones and be a HC and won't wait forever for Mack to retire. If a big name school has a vacancy, you can bet that Muschamp will listen and will move for the right price and situation.

 

[Goldensilence]

The timeframe isn't in his contract. Maybe Mack gave him private assurances, but he's also publicly stated he not even thinking about retiring soon and isn't interested in the AD job, which is where people thought he would slide into.

Texas may be a top coaching spot, but I think Muschamp wants to make his bones and be a HC and won't wait forever for Mack to retire. If a big name school has a vacancy, you can bet that Muschamp will listen and will move for the right price and situation.

I thought Mack was slated to move into the AD role?

I do agree that given the right price and situation Muschamp would make a move. Just looking around right now though I don't see a better possibility than moving into the HC role at UT.

There's a few spots that do worry me though as I've pointed out, with Michigan being the most prominent. I thought Rodriguez was a bad fit from the word go and anything short of a BCS game will likely cost him his job, especially with the injuries at QB last game right before the start of the Big 10 schedule.

 

[Dan B.]

If UGa or possibly LSU opens up I think Muschamp is out. I think Michigan goes a different direction.

 

[awtysst]

I have them losing 4. OU, Nebraska, and either Baylor or A&M. Yes, I am serious about Baylor.

BTW, I wouldn't mind seeing Mack go. He has been a great recruiter and has done a ton for the program however I think it's time for a change. I have also never have been a big fan of his come game day. Oh, Greg Davis, if Mack goes he goes which would be a very welcomed.

Living in Austin I am just tired of hearing the same coach speak over and over again. It's pretty annoying now.

Mack's strength is in recruiting. I would love to see him slide into AD/head football recruiter and let Muschamp be the head coach/coach the D with a solid top notch Offensive football (ie NOT Greg Davis coaching) on the other side of the ball.

 

[JB]

Mack's strength is in recruiting. I would love to see him slide into AD/head football recruiter and let Muschamp be the head coach/coach the D with a solid top notch Offensive football (ie NOT Greg Davis coaching) on the other side of the ball.

Do you think Applewhite is ready to take over as OC?

 

[awtysst]

Do you think Applewhite is ready to take over as OC?

I don't know, but I have to believe he is better than Greg Davis. I mean, he tries to force fit a game plan on players rather than scheme for their strengths. Trying to make Texas into a running team is ridiculous when they don't actually have a running back. GG is clearly a QB that needs to roll out and throw down the field. Instead Davis decides to try to pound the ball with 3 subpar backs on first and second down. Then GG is forced to throw on third down with the opposing D pinning their ears back.

 

[JB]

I don't know, but I have to believe he is better than Greg Davis. I mean, he tries to force fit a game plan on players rather than scheme for their strengths. Trying to make Texas into a running team is ridiculous when they don't actually have a running back. GG is clearly a QB that needs to roll out and throw down the field. Instead Davis decides to try to pound the ball with 3 subpar backs on first and second down. Then GG is forced to throw on third down with the opposing D pinning their ears back.

Totally agree with you about Davis. I know it is time for him to be gone, and I think Applewhite may be a good fit.

 

[Mr. White]

I don't know, but I have to believe he is better than Greg Davis. I mean, he tries to force fit a game plan on players rather than scheme for their strengths. Trying to make Texas into a running team is ridiculous when they don't actually have a running back. GG is clearly a QB that needs to roll out and throw down the field. Instead Davis decides to try to pound the ball with 3 subpar backs on first and second down. Then GG is forced to throw on third down with the opposing D pinning their ears back.

The reason that I keep hearing that they can't run is because the O-Line can't run block....and this isn't a "players or coaching" question like we've been debating for years with the Texans.

It damn sure ain't the players. Texas gets 99% of the recruits they want. The fact that they can't open up running lanes is on the coaches. Every DC in the nation has Greg Davis' number. He just doesn't have Vince Young, Colt McCoy or Jordan Shipley to cover up how weak the offensive coaching anymore.

To answer JB's question....I think Major is ready for the promotion. He damn sure can't be any worse than Greg Davis. He's been groomed for it ever for almost 10 years.

BTW....anyone who agrees with me and thinks it's time for Davis to go should join the The Fire Greg Davis group on Facebook. It had 90 members when I joined on Saturday. Now it's up to 282.

 

[Dutchrudder]

The reason that I keep hearing that they can't run is because the O-Line can't run block....and this isn't a "players or coaching" question like we've been debating for years with the Texans.

It damn sure ain't the players. Texas gets 99% of the recruits they want. The fact that they can't open up running lanes is on the coaches. Every DC in the nation has Greg Davis' number. He just doesn't have Vince Young, Colt McCoy or Jordan Shipley to cover up how weak the offensive coaching anymore.

To answer JB's question....I think Major is ready for the promotion. He damn sure can't be any worse than Greg Davis. He's been groomed for it ever for almost 10 years.

BTW....anyone who agrees with me and thinks it's time for Davis to go should join the The Fire Greg Davis group on Facebook. It had 90 members when I joined on Saturday. Now it's up to 282.

Yes they get the players they want, but for the last 5 or so years they have been running a pass-heavy spread offense. They don't recruit the monster Olineman that are needed for a power running game, they recruit the guys who are great at dropping back and pass protecting. That's why they can't run right now and why it makes no sense to switch to a run based team. They don't get the interior push required to open big holes at the LOS, nor do they have any exceptional RBs because the best ones know to go elsewhere if they want to showcase their skills for the NFL.

 

[Dan B.]

Yes they get the players they want, but for the last 5 or so years they have been running a pass-heavy spread offense. They don't recruit the monster Olineman that are needed for a power running game, they recruit the guys who are great at dropping back and pass protecting. That's why they can't run right now and why it makes no sense to switch to a run based team. They don't get the interior push required to open big holes at the LOS, nor do they have any exceptional RBs because the best ones know to go elsewhere if they want to showcase their skills for the NFL.

They are switching to a run based team because that's what their new hotshot RB insisted they do for him to come to UT (you know, the latest in a decades long line of exceptional RB's to come from Texas):

However, unlike the case with many Lone Star State products, Brown was hardly a given for Texas. According to Mike Jinks, Brown's coach at Cibolo Steele High, the move by UT coach Mack Brown this offseason to go to more of a running game and away from the spread scheme UT operated while Colt McCoy was the Longhorns' quarterback was a key factor in the back's decision-making process. In 2009, Texas ranked 61st in the country in rushing and the team's leading rusher, Tre Newton, ran for 552 yards.

I kind of suspect that Muschamp is a helluva lot more comfortable with a run first offense too. I've never known a DC turned HC that suddenly turned into Mike Leach. Will is going to want an offense that chews up the clock and doesn't turn it over -- basically one that doesn't hinder his defense.

 

[mr. peebs]

I highly doubt Malcolm Brown called Mack Brown and said "hey coach, if you don't switch to a power running scheme I'm not gonna go there, so man up and drop that spread bs". I would believe instead that Mack, Greg Davis, and Muschamp got together and realized that Gilbert Grape and the current personnel on offense are more suited to a pro-style run oriented offense instead of the spread and I'm sure Muschamp was 100% in agreement as it helps his defense stay off the field.

Also, the way you added...

you know, the latest in a decades long line of exceptional RB's to come from Texas

...is annoyingly self-aggrandizing and serves no purpose in the context of the discussion/post.




Edit: By the way, future Big 12 schedules released today...

Link here: http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=1522978

 

[Dan B.]

I highly doubt Malcolm Brown called Mack Brown and said "hey coach, if you don't switch to a power running scheme I'm not gonna go there, so man up and drop that spread bs". I would believe instead that Mack, Greg Davis, and Muschamp got together and realized that Gilbert Grape and the current personnel on offense are more suited to a pro-style run oriented offense instead of the spread and I'm sure Muschamp was 100% in agreement as it helps his defense stay off the field.

Also, the way you added...

...is annoyingly self-aggrandizing and serves no purpose in the context of the discussion/post.

Huh? The history of UT's running backs has zero context when discussing the history of UT's run game?

It's more than a little annoying for someone to say that UT misses out on the best RB's due to Davis' offense. Ever heard of Jamaal Charles? Ced Benson? I could keep going through the decades I referred to, but trust me, it won't improve the argument that elite RB's choose to skip UT.

I'm not saying that Brown necessarily held a sword over their head. But do you think that he would have gone to Texas if UT hadn't transitioned? I am saying that the UT coaching staff recruited Brown with the idea of transitioning to a power run game. This year is a rebuilding year. They are not playing to win a MNC this season. They are instituting a system for future years.

Also, I think that a team's RB core can make an OL look a lot different than they really are. UT's line isn't up to the standards they've had in previous years, but a huge part of the problem, as mentioned, is Newton and CJ. Look at the difference with the Texans once they got Foster (a RB that fit their system) in the lineup. The entire OL looks twice as good on running plays, just from changing RB's.

Edit: By the way, future Big 12 schedules released today...

Link here: http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=1522978

Well that is much more relevant wrt Muschamp's future...

 

[mr. peebs]

Huh? The history of UT's running backs has zero context when discussing the history of UT's run game?

Correct, it doesn't have any context, especially when nobody else is discussing the history of UT-Austin running backs or running game beyond 1998.

It's more than a little annoying for someone to say that UT misses out on the best RB's due to Davis' offense. Ever heard of Jamaal Charles? Ced Benson? I could keep going through the decades I referred to, but trust me, it won't improve the argument that elite RB's choose to skip UT.

Yes, I have heard of them. I actually played against Jamaal Charles in high school as he was in my district and ran all over us (though I was only PK.. thank God).. but I don't understand why going through the decades would be relevant to talented RB recruits skipping UT-Austin because of Davis' offense? He came with Mack in '98, so any RB before then is a moot point, yes?

I'm not saying that Brown necessarily held a sword over their head. But do you think that he would have gone to Texas if UT hadn't transitioned? I am saying that the UT coaching staff recruited Brown with the idea of transitioning to a power run game. This year is a rebuilding year. They are not playing to win a MNC this season. They are instituting a system for future years.

I'm not claiming he would or wouldn't have committed. I just said that I highly doubt they made the switch just because he wanted them to, which is what you said in the post before:

They are switching to a run based team because that's what their new hotshot RB insisted they do for him to come to UT

Well that is much more relevant wrt Muschamp's future...

Finally, I added that edit just to post the Big 12 schedules in this thread that has morphed from an idea of adding Boise State and TCU to the Big 12 into a Big 12 hodgepodge of all sorts-thread. It didn't have anything to do with Muschamp or Mack or Malcolm or anyone else, just didn't feel like making another post when I could just add a post-script on that last one. It's just there for people who wander into this thread and are curious so they can see what the Big 12 conference schedule will look like.

 

[Dan B.]

Umm Jamaal Charles went to UT from 2005-2008. That's within the last five years. He didn't predate Davis. I'd say he's relevant when someone says UT hasn't produced a good RB in the last five years "because the best go elsewhere to showcase their abilities for the NFL." Not sure how you can claim he isn't. He is one of the best in the NFL right now, is he not?

I don't think you have to be a UT homer to admit that they produce some pretty fine RB's. I think the only people that can't admit that have a serious bias that precludes their judgement. Is there any other school that produced as many of the NFL's current RB's (since history is irrelevant in this discussion)? Maybe Cal (Best/Arrington/Lynch) or Miami (Gore/McGahee/Portis) have produced as many quality RB's recently. Anyone else?

 

[mr. peebs]

Umm Jamaal Charles went to UT from 2005-2008. That's within the last five years. He didn't predate Davis. I'd say he's relevant when someone says UT hasn't produced a good RB in the last five years. Not sure how you can claim he isn't.

/sigh

I PLAYED against Charles in high school while he was at Port A!! I think I know that he went to UT-Austin when he did and while Davis was there.

You brought up "the history of UT running backs" when you said "you know, the latest in a decades long line of exceptional RB's to come from Texas", alluding to the days of yore with Earl and Ricky and whoever else you want to throw in. I don't consider 3 years ago this type of history that you're talking about. Therefore, I then said why bring up the history (in this instance, anyone before Davis' tenure) of the UT-Austin running backs when you're specifically talking about the Greg Davis era?

Also, where did I claim Greg Davis hasn't produced a good running back in the past five years?

 

[Dan B.]

/sigh

I PLAYED against Charles in high school while he was at Port A!! I think I know that he went to UT-Austin when he did and while Davis was there.

You brought up "the history of UT running backs" when you said "you know, the latest in a decades long line of exceptional RB's to come from Texas", alluding to the days of yore with Earl and Ricky and whoever else you want to throw in. I don't consider 3 years ago this type of history that you're talking about. Therefore, I then said why bring up the history (in this instance, anyone before Davis' tenure) of the UT-Austin running backs when you're specifically talking about the Greg Davis era?

Also, where did I claim Greg Davis hasn't produced a good running back in the past five years?

I never said you claimed that about Davis. That's why I responded to Dutch. I even left his name in the quote box. Dunno why that would be so confusing for ya.

Like I said, even if we are arbitrarily limiting UT's running backs to the last five years (less than half of Davis/Brown's tenure) they've still produced one of the best RB's in the NFL (two if you count Ced, who left five years ago).

I agree that they didn't make the switch because Malcolm told them to. You are entirely correct. I shouldn't have phrased it so.

UT wanted a power running game, and Malcolm Brown was the best power RB in the country. So they switched to a power game -- both to entice him from Alabama, who you may be aware are also quite well regarded for their running game, and (my opinion) to create an offense better suited for Muschamp. Basically I'm saying that they are in the midst of doing what a ton of fans (both of the Horns and other teams) say they don't do: recruiting monster offensive linemen and huge physical RB's to institute an effective power running scheme.

Yeah, they did it a year before the recruits were in Austin. And I'm not crazy about that decision. I can see the argument for winning now rather than taking your lumps for a year while you remake yourself. But I can also see Brown/Davis' side of things. Those physical players aren't going to come to UT unless the Horns at least show them they are trying to institute the type of offense that will allow them to shine.

Regardless, Davis is here to stay. This argument was going on when I went to UT 10 years ago. People wanted Davis fired then because he was predictable. Mack isn't going to fire him. The Horns aren't going to fire Mack. Davis is staying.

And I'm still not sure why any of this means UT is currently incapable of recruiting exceptional RB's under Greg Davis (which is EXACTLY what Dutch said):

nor do they have any exceptional RBs because the best ones know to go elsewhere if they want to showcase their skills for the NFL.

Oh and final thought: Universities whose fan bases are living off of championships from before WWII don't have a lot of room to stand on when they are criticizing other schools for going through the decades and living in the past (cuz Jamal Charles was ancient history man. He's in like his third NFL year. He's irrelevant when discussing UT football under Davis). I can't think of many schools that wouldn't trade places with UT's current athletic program. Can you?

 

[mr. peebs]

I never said you claimed that about Davis. That's why I responded to Dutch. I even left his name in the quote box. Dunno why that would be so confusing for ya.

Like I said, even if we are arbitrarily limiting UT's running backs to the last five years they've still produced one of the best RB's in the NFL (two if you count Ced, who left five years ago).

It's confusing because you were obviously responding directly to one of my posts so I assumed everything you said in that post was directed at me since you were prompted to write because of that post. Whoa, mind******.

Also, I never said anything about the NFL, so I'm assuming this is again directed at someone other than me?

I agree that they didn't make the switch because Malcolm told them to. You are entirely correct. I shouldn't have phrased it so.

UT wanted a power running game, and Malcolm Brown was the best power RB in the country. So they switched to a power game -- both to entice him from Alabama, who you may be aware are also quite well regarded for their running game, and (my opinion) to create an offense better suited for Muschamp. Not sure why this means UT are incapable of recruiting exceptional RB's under Greg Davis (which is EXACTLY what Dutch said):

The underlined is a good answer to what initially set me off to respond in this thread.

Oh and final thought: Universities whose fan bases are living off of championships from before WWII don't have a lot of room to stand on when they are criticizing other schools for going through the decades and living in the past (cuz Jamal Charles was ancient history man. He's in like his third NFL year. He's irrelevant when discussing UT football under Davis). I can't think of many schools that wouldn't trade places with UT's current athletic program. Can you?

I again assume this is directed at me since I have an A&M avatar and our last National Championship was won in 1939, so I will respond as such..

It is true, we Aggies do live in the past. We religiously uphold traditions and stories that are over 100 years old. And why most people ask? The reason we do this is because those were the greatest Aggies. People like E. King Gill, James Earl Rudder, Fowler, Hughes, and Keathley; people who dedicated their lives to Texas A&M and to the United States. We uphold our traditions because it is who we are and where we came from. We remember who came before us because we strive to live up to their example. We also remember and stand on our victories on the field because they are just cherries on top. Our last and only Heisman winner was in 1957. We have disputed National Championships from 1917, 1919, and 1927. We stand as the 12th man to this day because of something that happened in the 1920s. Our yell leaders and subsequent yells go back even further. It's true my school hasn't had as much on field success as UT-Austin and that it is a point of constant irritation for nearly all of our alumni and students. But, we still stand by our team, and want them to be the best they can be. And that is why I love this school.

Surprisingly to you probably, I do have a lot of respect for the University of Texas - Austin, as well as a lot of friends that graduated or still attend there. I don't, however, hold people in high regard who use their school's success to prop themselves up or make themselves feel better by belittling others. It is boorish and very childish in my opinion and reflects negatively on the image of whatever institution that person is representing.

Finally, no, I don't think any school's athletic department would deny being jealous of UT-Austin's, at least in terms of revenue.

 

[Dan B.]

I specifically said some people in my response to you, because I wasn't directing the comment about UT lacking in RB recruits directly at you.

The NFL entered into the discussion because when you are discussing UT Rb's from the last five years you are going to be discussing RB's who recently entered the NFL. I'm not sure of a better metric for gauging exceptional Running backs than their success at football. I think that their success or failure there reflects upon whether or not UT was capable of recruiting and producing exceptional (which I read as NFL quality) RB's in the last five years. That's why I'm using Charles. He came from the time period specified.

Malcolm Brown is in the discussion because UT landing an elite RB prospect also refutes the claim that they are unable to recruit elite RB prospects under Davis. It's just not a true statement. Under Davis the Longhorns have produced several superior RB's. They continue to today.

Earl Campbell and Ricky Williams (and Ced Griffin, and Eric Metcalf, and Priest Holmes etc., etc., etc.) have a lot more to do with this discussion than James Earl Rudder. If you're going to get upset when people talk about their programs past success at a position when the program's success there was directly called into question, you can't really go on and on for paragraphs about a past that has no impact on the current state of UT's running game. You are talking about things that have zero context and even less relevance to this discussion. Why is it that when an Aggie talks about their past it's tradition but when a Longhorn does so it's arrogance?

The point is that Charles and Brown are the latest in a long string of RB's that UT has produced. I'm not sure how anyone can credibly argue that elite RB's (or any other position for that matter) skip out on UT because of Davis. UT pays their players as much as any program in the country after all.

And don't take things so personally. We're talking about college football teams. I really am an equal opportunity hater. You should see other Longhorn fan's opinion of me. I think they have the worst fans in college sports and possibly the worst in sports period. But I went there right when the Oilers left town. The combination of the NFL ripping my childhood away and me moving to a new town with their own "pro" team meant I was a UT fan for years, and still am today. I watched exactly one NFL game until we got the Texans -- the Titans loss to the Rams. No matter how douchey their fans are, no matter what their record or attendance may be -- the Longhorns are not going to move to Nashville.

I'm still hypercritical of them. I'm the same way with any team I support. I'm not a blind homer. I can't stand Davis' play calling. But I've grown resigned to it.

And as I said before I don't think it takes a blind homer to think UT is phenomenal at producing NFL caliber RB's. I think that's an objective statement based upon current RB's in the NFL.

 

[Blake]

 

[mr. peebs]

Take things personally? When you are responding to me and insinuate, although not directly, but taking in context, that I am able to condone your football program because what the school I support had done in years past? I just don't see how I'm the one taking it personally when I started by asking an objective question about what I thought was a misguided statement by you and then eventually turned into our mini piss-fest. It seems we're both offbase with what each other is trying to say because I tried keeping things focused on specific instances of things you said while you seemed to take statements from others and attribute to me then not respond to what I had brought up. Either way, I've had a bad day by blowing a test this morning than having a crappy day at work and it definitely came through in my posts.

Apologize to Dan B. and everyone for venting through these posts if it came out that way, been a looong bad day.

 

[Stemp]

A program like Georgia doesn't worry me. If he didn't bolt for Tennessee, granted Kiffin left it in a contractual cluster****, I doubt he'd go to Georgia.

I think if for some reason Florida's job came open I'd be worried. I don't think that'll happen soon now though.

Oops.

 

[Stemp]

Mack Brown isn't going anywhere for 4-5 years at least.

Texas fans need to be worried about losing Muschamp at the end of the season. He is primed to be a HC and he's not going to wait for Mack Brown to retire, especially with the HC openings that will likely come about this year.

Sorry, but I told you so.

 

[MojoMan]

Sorry, but I told you so.

You are a tee-tee head for saying so.

(Just kidding. I am a Texas Alum)

 

[Stemp]

You are a tee-tee head for saying so.

(Just kidding. I am a Texas Alum)

Its kinda shocking, at least at this point (before all the bowl games).
Also heard that Major Applewhite is following Muschamp to Florida.