Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    mcdawg22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Gulf Breeze, Fl
    Posts
    6,798

    How Texas Football and Tom Herman have fallen behind Gary Patterson...

    ...and TCU.
    2020 has been the brunt of a lot of apocalyptic explanations, but that doesn’t explain the meteoric downfall of the Texas Longhorn football team. Meteoric rise is often used as a colorful description of teams that are ascending to the cream of the crop. But let’s be honest, meteors are falling to the ground, much like the Texas football program. In two consecutive years, they have lost to TCU. A team that has not outrecruited them, or has more brand awareness. How is that possible? It’s simple. Texas isn’t back! They may never be. They are the Blockbuster and Kodak of the football world. Yeah, we all know the name, but we have moved on to Netflix and Adobe Lightroom. I’m sure you still are proud of all of your past excellence, but so is Army, and quite frankly they scare me more than you. Would I rather line up against hard nosed veer offense or a rag armed QB with a bunch of 7 on 7 players? I think TCU proved who the real team in Texas is this year. Good luck Texas, you have been passed. That was Gary Patterson and the rest of the Big 12 doing it in the Right Lane, as you thought the Left Lane was just for you.

    SPS: Respond if you want, this was a dick move to Horka.
    Last edited by mcdawg22; 12-01-2020 at 11:23 PM.


    7 out of 7 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  2. #2
    The problem with Texas is like the problem with Michigan and Nebraska and few other former blue bloods. They think old school program prestige is enough to keep them at the top. The media plays them up every season but then they shit the bed every year.


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  3. #3
    I’m not really sure if there’s a subtext to this post but I don’t think I agree with the regular text.

    Has TCU passed Texas? Are they really the team of the state in 2020? Since joining the conference TCU is 67-44, in that same time Texas is 63-48. So the heart of the Patterson Dynasty is four games better than the end of Brown years and the failure of Charlie Strong. In the time since Herman has taken over Texas is 30-18 while TCU is 27-20. I wouldn’t quit call that zooming. But On the head-to-head thing you have a point, a d missed a way better stat. Since TCU joined the Big 12 they are 7-2 vs. Texas so there is that. It doesn’t feel like either team is really falling back though.

    Also, You talk about Texas like they are a fossil, resting on some kind of pre-forward pass era Laurels. They are one of five non-SEC teams to win a NC this millennium. 15 years ago wasn’t yesterday but it isn’t ancient history.

    Last thing, I don’t really like your analogies. Blockbuster came and went in 25 years. That feels more like a Boise State comp. For Kodak I like Norte Dame, old as dirt with success going all the way back. Used to rule the show and got about as big as a program can. Since the peak not relevant in any demonstrable way (hello 2013).


    1 out of 2 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  4. #4
    The thing about Texas is they could turn it around over night with the right coach.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  5. #5
    The Godfather dawgstudent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    31,756
    Twitter
    @SixPackSpeak
    Quote Originally Posted by WutheringDawg View Post
    I’m not really sure if there’s a subtext to this post but I don’t think I agree with the regular text.

    Has TCU passed Texas? Are they really the team of the state in 2020? Since joining the conference TCU is 67-44, in that same time Texas is 63-48. So the heart of the Patterson Dynasty is four games better than the end of Brown years and the failure of Charlie Strong. In the time since Herman has taken over Texas is 30-18 while TCU is 27-20. I wouldn’t quit call that zooming. But On the head-to-head thing you have a point, a d missed a way better stat. Since TCU joined the Big 12 they are 7-2 vs. Texas so there is that. It doesn’t feel like either team is really falling back though.

    Also, You talk about Texas like they are a fossil, resting on some kind of pre-forward pass era Laurels. They are one of five non-SEC teams to win a NC this millennium. 15 years ago wasn’t yesterday but it isn’t ancient history.

    Last thing, I don’t really like your analogies. Blockbuster came and went in 25 years. That feels more like a Boise State comp. For Kodak I like Norte Dame, old as dirt with success going all the way back. Used to rule the show and got about as big as a program can. Since the peak not relevant in any demonstrable way (hello 2013).
    He's mocking Horka's Ole Miss spirit article...
    I support the two most frustrating teams in America: The New Orleans Saints and The Mississippi State Bulldogs


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  6. #6
    aTotal360's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Starkville, MS
    Posts
    12,893
    I assumed he copy/pasted swapped out TCU for OM and Texas for MSU. Amirite?
    90 percent of college football teams do not cheat...the other 10 percent are ranked.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  7. #7
    Texas and Michigan will eventually be back. Just too much resources not to be. People said the same thing about Alabama for most of the 80s-00s (even though they did have a good run under Stallings in the early 90s). Nebraska may have a problem though. Plenty of fan support, but their state just doesn't produce a lot of players and it's not that easy to recruit players to come there these days.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  8. #8
    the peeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lurking in the shadows...
    Posts
    6,456
    You left out THE University of North MS
    The poster formerly known as: dawgebag


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  9. #9
    The Godfather dawgstudent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    31,756
    Twitter
    @SixPackSpeak
    I have no idea. I didn't read the article b/c it was "premium" material.
    I support the two most frustrating teams in America: The New Orleans Saints and The Mississippi State Bulldogs


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  10. #10
    Parody aside, Texas is pretty 17ing underwhelming for the size of its budget and history. This goes for basketball and football over the last 10ish years.

    The university is THE university in one of the most talent rich states, yet results have been anything but impressive for a general decade.
    They cant claim its due to a lack of funding. Cant claim its a lack of resources. Cant claim its a lack of recruiting inroads. Cant claim its a lack of academic prestige.

    Texas is just plain underwhelming.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  11. #11
    I have no idea. I didn't read the article b/c it was "premium" material written by Tyler Horka.

    Fixed it for you.


    5 out of 5 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  12. #12

    A strong UTexas helps MSU. I don't like the tea sippers, but

    a strong U of Texas football program hurts Texas A&M and makes it a little easier for State to beat A&M. A&M has always been one of those 'middlin' SEC teams that State has been able to beat when we are good, so we need them to be a little weaker.


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  13. #13

    If you listen to media personalities

    Quote Originally Posted by mstateglfr View Post
    Parody aside, Texas is pretty 17ing underwhelming for the size of its budget and history. This goes for basketball and football over the last 10ish years.

    The university is THE university in one of the most talent rich states, yet results have been anything but impressive for a general decade.
    They cant claim its due to a lack of funding. Cant claim its a lack of resources. Cant claim its a lack of recruiting inroads. Cant claim its a lack of academic prestige.

    Texas is just plain underwhelming.
    And people from Texas, you would assume they have an amazing history with many national championships. They have 2. Not that 2 championships isn’t nice, but people act like they are some elite former dynasty in the cusp of returning to their rightful place atop college football. One championship in the 70’s and one in ‘05 does not justify their self proclaimed prestige.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by patdog View Post
    Texas and Michigan will eventually be back. Just too much resources not to be. People said the same thing about Alabama for most of the 80s-00s (even though they did have a good run under Stallings in the early 90s). Nebraska may have a problem though. Plenty of fan support, but their state just doesn't produce a lot of players and it's not that easy to recruit players to come there these days.
    If there is an Urban Meyer sweepstakes, the school that wins is back sooner rather than later. You are spot on about Alabama. They wandered in the wilderness for the better part of 25 years (with the exception - as you noted - of a few good. Stallings years) until they landed Saban. It took him one recruiting cycle to get it going.


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  15. #15
    Goat Version 372.0
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    1,326
    Your sarcasm aside, on Texas and Michigan, they continue to make ignorant hires and on top of that, they hamstring them. Boosters/alumni are way too involved. If they want to do that, they need to hire a politician who will relinquish control of the program to them. Or - hire a guy and let him have it. They are in the same vein as Notre Dame. Auburn has the same problem with boosters, but their problem is trying to control the players they recruit, and the way they play, rather than being a holier a thou academic program.

    Nebraska, who knows what's going on there. They have an identity crisis going on.....are they a midwestern weightlifting corn fed bully program or not? Also, now that they are in the B1G it's probably hurt them with Texas recruiting. Seems like Florida is the only real talent market they can make hay and that's only due to Frost's connections.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by patdog View Post
    Texas and Michigan will eventually be back. Just too much resources not to be. People said the same thing about Alabama for most of the 80s-00s (even though they did have a good run under Stallings in the early 90s). Nebraska may have a problem though. Plenty of fan support, but their state just doesn't produce a lot of players and it's not that easy to recruit players to come there these days.
    Michigan doesn’t really have the history of winning that people act like they do. They’ve been a good program, sure. But far from great. I think they’ve got one shared national title in the history of the program? Ohio State OWNS them. It’s a rivalry in the way Florida and Kentucky is. They call it a rivalry and then one team kicks the shit out of the other consistently.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  17. #17
    And yet, they're the winningest program in NCAA history, both in terms of number of wins and winning percentage and they lead Ohio St. 58-51-6. Yeah, they haven't done much in the last 15 years, but they're about a big a program as there is in college football. All they need is a good coaching hire and they'll be right back.


    0 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  18. #18
    Goat Version 372.0
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    1,326
    Quote Originally Posted by patdog View Post
    And yet, they're the winningest program in NCAA history, both in terms of number of wins and winning percentage and they lead Ohio St. 58-51-6. Yeah, they haven't done much in the last 15 years, but they're about a big a program as there is in college football. All they need is a good coaching hire and they'll be right back.
    So Rich Rod isn't a good coach? Jim Harbaugh? Give me a break. I will say Rich Rod was not a great fit for Michigan, but he had them going in the right direction and Hoke went 10-2 with his players.

    No, it's something inside Michigan's program that is holding them back.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by patdog View Post
    And yet, they're the winningest program in NCAA history, both in terms of number of wins and winning percentage and they lead Ohio St. 58-51-6. Yeah, they haven't done much in the last 15 years, but they're about a big a program as there is in college football. All they need is a good coaching hire and they'll be right back.
    They had a shared national title with Nebraska in 1997 and their previous national titles would have been pre-integration. They certainly can win with a great coach, but they've had some really good ones and haven't. They're basically Georgia. They're going to be consistently good, sometimes really good. You'd think they would have one more than one national championship since 1950, but for whatever reason, they consistently fail to get over the hump.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  20. #20
    Goat Version 372.0
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    1,326
    Quote Originally Posted by oxfordrebel22 View Post
    Michigan doesn’t really have the history of winning that people act like they do. They’ve been a good program, sure. But far from great. I think they’ve got one shared national title in the history of the program? Ohio State OWNS them. It’s a rivalry in the way Florida and Kentucky is. They call it a rivalry and then one team kicks the shit out of the other consistently.
    They are still a 'Have' program, bottom line. To me, the 'Haves' can win a national title, the 'Have-Nots' can't. It's that simple. Yes, there will be a few outliers over a long period of time, but in general that rule applies.

    The question is how long do you remain a 'Have' if you do not compete for a title? I usually say 20-25 years. That makes sense because Michigan, Tennessee and Nebraska are all lumped together and they were in that late 90s run together too. They are all in danger of sliding into permanent mediocrity, and they'll all have to build back up the hard way. Miami is right behind them.

    Can you come back? Sure, but you have to do it the hard way. Take Clemson for example. They last won it all in 1981, but they weren't considered a true 'have' that could win it all until they built back up and actually did it. However, I think they still had a recruiting cache built up over the years because once you win a title, it does seem to be the understanding that you'll eventually get back. Notre Dame is 'kinda' in this territory, they've come back, but haven't won it yet.

    Oregon is a good example of what it takes to build to a point of winning a title, from nothing. They had to have Nike behind to get there, and they still haven't pulled it off yet, though they've been very close twice. Are they a Have? Fringe probably.

    Look at Michigan State, Arkansas, Ole Miss. They'll all won titles. But nobody considers any of them a real contender. Have-Nots, even though Sparty did make a playoff (that is not enough). Texas A&M, with all their money, is still here in my opinion, though they may be considered by some to be fringe with Oregon just because of that money. Again, there are always outliers.

    Washington and Georgia Tech are weird ones, they won the title in 1990 or whatever, and have done some good things. But I don't anyone can consider them a Have right now, but they could get into that territory quickly.

    Then you have a few like Georgia that are Haves, well, just because. Be crazy to say otherwise, sometimes it's just common sense. Penn State is another. Maybe they fall from grace eventually. Honestly Michigan is probably here too.
    Last edited by Russ Wheeler; 12-02-2020 at 03:33 PM.


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ Wheeler View Post
    They are still a 'Have' program, bottom line. To me, the 'Haves' can win a national title, the 'Have-Nots' can't. It's that simple. Yes, there will be a few outliers over a long period of time, but in general that rule applies.

    The question is how long do you remain a 'Have' if you do not compete for a title? I usually say 20-25 years. That makes sense because Michigan, Tennessee and Nebraska are all lumped together and they were in that late 90s run together too. They are all in danger of sliding into permanent mediocrity, and they'll all have to build back up the hard way. Miami is right behind them.

    Can you come back? Sure, but you have to do it the hard way. Take Clemson for example. They last won it all in 1981, but they weren't considered a true 'have' that could win it all until they built back up and actually did it. However, I think they still had a recruiting cache built up over the years because once you win a title, it does seem to be the understanding that you'll eventually get back. Notre Dame is 'kinda' in this territory, they've come back, but haven't won it yet.

    Oregon is a good example of what it takes to build to a point of winning a title, from nothing. They had to have Nike behind to get there, and they still haven't pulled it off yet, though they've been very close twice. Are they a Have? Fringe probably.

    Look at Michigan State, Arkansas, Ole Miss. They'll all won titles. But nobody considers any of them a real contender. Have-Nots, even though Sparty did make a playoff (that is not enough). Texas A&M, with all their money, is still here in my opinion, though they may be considered by some to be fringe with Oregon just because of that money. Again, there are always outliers.

    Washington and Georgia Tech are weird ones, they won the title in 1990 or whatever, and have done some good things. But I don't anyone can consider them a Have right now, but they could get into that territory quickly.

    Then you have a few like Georgia that are Haves, well, just because. Be crazy to say otherwise, sometimes it's just common sense. Penn State is another. Maybe they fall from grace eventually. Honestly Michigan is probably here too.
    I think this is a really good post. I can’t dispute any of it. The 3 programs you mentioned (Tennessee, Michigan and Nebraska) all were dominant late 80’s to mid 90’s. They’ve done more or less nothing since. That “since” is basically modern day college football. Today’s recruits were born in 2002... which means they didn’t care about football until 2007 at absolute earliest. So, they don’t care about Tommy Frazier, Brian Griese, or Tee Martin. They have Ferrari aspirations with a Camaro engine.

    As far as Ole Miss and State, which are the two programs we care about.. we are the “have nots”, no doubt. Which is why I love the Leach and Kiffin hires. We are basically saying - “hell we are going to go down swinging!” We can win a national championship, as we’ve both proven in last decade (State might’ve won one if Cam signs; State might have made the playoff with Dak if not for that 2014 Egg Bowl in Oxford; Ole Miss might have made the playoff if not for 4th and 25), but it’s highly unlikely. So much has to go right, including a ton of things out of our control.

    The biggest thing, is we’ve got to quit spending so much time and energy trying to drag the other down, and I don’t see that happening any time soon.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  22. #22
    Bryan Broaddus just said on DFW radio that Urban is starting to round up a staff for Texas.

    Herman like “OK cool. 17 ‘em”


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  23. #23
    IBleedMaroonDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Leander, TX
    Posts
    12,314
    Twitter
    @stephenedavis
    Quote Originally Posted by mstateglfr View Post
    Parody aside, Texas is pretty 17ing underwhelming for the size of its budget and history. This goes for basketball and football over the last 10ish years.

    The university is THE university in one of the most talent rich states, yet results have been anything but impressive for a general decade.
    They cant claim its due to a lack of funding. Cant claim its a lack of resources. Cant claim its a lack of recruiting inroads. Cant claim its a lack of academic prestige.

    Texas is just plain underwhelming.

    Know a guy solid in the network. Have not seen him in couple years but then he was pretty pissed at two or three big money alumni groups that were trying to run things and could not get along. He was really pissed at the Houston group. He said until they get someone with Saban's stare who would be able to put the donors in their place then were going to struggle.
    It's easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled.- Mark Twain



    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  24. #24

    This post feels 5 years too late.

    Plenty of reasons to criticize Herman, but....

    -How has Texas been a "meteoric downfall" under Herman? It's been the exact opposite of that. Their decline started 11 seasons and two coaches ago. If there was a meteoric downfall, it was from 2009-2010 in Mack Brown's final seasons. The decline continued under Charlie Strong. If anything, Herman has them--at worst--back up to where things were in Brown's final years, probably a tad better.

    -TCU? I used to think Gary Patterson was a Top 5 coach, but he probably should get more heat than he has in recent years. TCU has quietly been garbage over the last few seasons. If you want to talk about a "meteoric downfall" in the state of Texas over the last few seasons, it's TCU. Hell, under Herman, Texas has finished multiple games ahead of TCU in the Big 12 each year (+5 combined over the last 2 years, and is currently 1/2 game up)
    Last edited by Gus Fring; 12-02-2020 at 07:54 PM.


    1 out of 1 sixpackers like this post
    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

  25. #25
    King Edward catvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by dawgstudent View Post
    I have no idea. I didn't read the article b/c it was "premium" material.
    But I thought you lived for Jackson? All the institutions, I use that lightly, and the glory that is the New South.


    Towel Whips | Busted Lips Yes | No

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
SixPack Sponsors






Disclaimer: Neither this message board nor its rules and regulations are associated with Mississippi State University or any other Mississippi State sports website. Neither this message board nor its rules and regulations are associated with Scottish & Newcastle PLC d/b/a Bulldog Strong Ale. The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author. The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by SixPackSpeak.com. The interactive nature of the SixPackSpeak.com Discussion Forums makes it impossible for SixPackSpeak.com to assume responsibility for any of the content, including photographs and/or images, posted by participants. The ideas, suggestions, thoughts, recommendations, opinions, comments, advice, and observations made by participants of the interactive Discussion Forums are not endorsed by SixPackSpeak.com.