Texas Next Coach

[JimsTexas]

Will have to be part coach, politician, BMD and manage the LHN. A Texas coach has to be better that just a good coach and that means the search committee will have there work cut out for them. Like MB are not he was able to balance all that and still win football games. My friends y'all have a great day  

 

 

[Embrey]

I respectfully disagree.

Texas needs a great head coach that can manage the team and recruit.

The entire reason a portion of the fan base did not like the previous coach was because he was part politician, BMD whisperer and loved the LHN spotlight a bit too much. The LHN should not even be considered. If it is required contractually, the coach ought to make the reporters follow him around and cut together the best show they can. Zero time ought to be given to the LHN and marketing. Texas is marketed to the hilt. That is not the problem. The problem is there is no there there.

 

[streettopeschel]

I respectfully disagree.

Texas needs a great head coach that can manage the team and recruit.

The entire reason a portion of the fan base did not like the previous coach was because he was part politician, BMD whisperer and loved the LHN spotlight a bit too much. The LHN should not even be considered.

Remember when we were winning 10-13 games a year how much people didn't like Mack for the reasons you state? Yeah, I don't either. When he stopped winning big, all that stuff started bothering people.

 

[primal defense]

Oh darn! When I clicked on your title, I thought you had the inside scoop.

 

[Randolph Duke]

Will have to be part coach, politician, BMD and manage the LHN. A Texas coach has to be better that just a good coach and that means the search committee will have there work cut out for them. Like MB are not he was able to balance all that and still win football games. My friends y'all have a great day

"Manage LHN?" Lol. Um...no.

The next coach needs a strong AD to shield him from the bullshit distractions. Once he has that, he needs to worry about the football program.

 

[Embrey]

Remember when we were winning 10-13 games a year how much people didn't like Mack for the reasons you state? Yeah, I don't either. When he stopped winning big, all that stuff started bothering people.

Yes, I do. I was quite lonely back in those days. If Mack had never stopped winning 10-13 games he would still be the head coach, the winningest coach in Texas history and I would still be saying he is a huckster.

What you seem to forget is that THE LOSING HAPPENED. The losses didn't occur because I believed he was a huckster. The losses occurred because the teams Mack was responsible for were losing games. Longhorn nation gave him a vote of no confidence. Imagine that, a head coach with a recent national championship lost a significant enough portion of the fan base to merit his ouster. What does that tell you about him?

 

[streettopeschel]

Yes, I do. I was quite lonely back in those days. If Mack had never stopped winning 10-13 games he would still be the head coach, the winningest coach in Texas history and I would still be saying he is a huckster.

What you seem to forget is that THE LOSING HAPPENED. The losses didn't occur because I believed he was a huckster. The losses occurred because the teams Mack was responsible for were losing games. Longhorn nation gave him a vote of no confidence. Imagine that, a head coach with a recent national championship lost a significant enough portion of the fan base to merit his ouster. What does that tell you about him?

not sure what your point is. Of course I'm well aware of his record post-2009. His ouster had nothing to do with him being a 'huckster '. It had to do with UT not accepting 8 or 9 win seasons. Now an 8 win season will be celebrated and possibly keep an underachieving coach employed.

 

[Embrey]

not sure what your point is. Of course I'm well aware of his record post-2009. His ouster had nothing to do with him being a 'huckster '. It had to do with UT not accepting 8 or 9 win seasons. Now an 8 win season will be celebrated and possibly keep an underachieving coach employed.

I said he is a huckster. I didn't say that all Longhorn fans thought of him as a huckster.

Your implication is that you would rather have Mack than Charlie.

OK

That is not the point.

We got rid of the huckster because he quit producing.

One might say the Charlie hire was a mistake.

Why replace a mistake with a non-producing huckster?

It is not an option

 

[North Texas Golfer]

Embrey, I'm really not following the point of either of your last 2 posts. But, of course, that could just be me. 

 

[primal defense]

I'm spoiled, but I always look for the next Darrell Royal.  Darrell Royal was just a smart football coach who made good decisions.

 Bum Phillips said all the coaches would pay attention when DKR was talking at coaches meetings.. DKR made good decisions on his assistant coaches and listened to them such as the wishbone from Emory Bellard. He was gutsy when he had to be such as the Street to Paschal pass. DKR was also great in front of the camera. Most importantly he was cool hanging out James Garner and Gregory Peck.  
 

 

[Royal 60]

What was one of the Special traits of Coach Royal --- he made an effort to surround himself with Coaches that knew as much OR more than him about football. He was special !!

 

[streettopeschel]

I said he is a huckster. I didn't say that all Longhorn fans thought of him as a huckster.

Your implication is that you would rather have Mack than Charlie.

OK

That is not the point.

We got rid of the huckster because he quit producing.

One might say the Charlie hire was a mistake.

Why replace a mistake with a non-producing huckster?

It is not an option

I'm not implying anything. And I've pretty much lost interest in what this conversation was about.
Mack was really good, got stale and needed to go.

Charlie has never been good and needs to go.

 

[streettopeschel]

Embrey, I'm really not following the point of either of your last 2 posts. But, of course, that could just be me.

glad to hear this.

 

[Embrey]

Embrey, I'm really not following the point of either of your last 2 posts. But, of course, that could just be me.

Mack Brown was referenced in the original post. I respectfully disagreed with the premise. STP came over the top because he always defends mackbrowntexasfootball.com, just like I always kick mackbrowntexasfootball.com in the nuts.

It is not the first time we have had a little skirmish in a thread and it won't be the last.

Why?

Because I really don't like mackbrowntexasfootball.com.

 

[BevoBlake]

Mack Brown was referenced in the original post. I respectfully disagreed with the premise. STP came over the top because he always defends mackbrowntexasfootball.com, just like I always kick mackbrowntexasfootball.com in the nuts.

It is not the first time we have had a little skirmish in a thread and it won't be the last.

Why?

Because I really don't like mackbrowntexasfootball.com.

I think you're giving yourself a little too much credit here. I also don't think you've begun to grasp the point of STP's posts. That might just be me though.

 

[streettopeschel]

Mack Brown was referenced in the original post. I respectfully disagreed with the premise. STP came over the top because he always defends mackbrowntexasfootball.com, just like I always kick mackbrowntexasfootball.com in the nuts.

It is not the first time we have had a little skirmish in a thread and it won't be the last.

Why?

Because I really don't like mackbrowntexasfootball.com.

we've skirmished? Nothing comes to mind, but if this thread is any indication I'm guessing I won the others.
Furthermore I said Mack got stale and needed to go. I doubt he'd think I was defending him.

I'll give you the last word on this thread because I really don't know WTF the point of it is.