If I was A&M, I'd shut the **** up. Texas will be good again, you can bet on it.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Trouble in Texas
- Thread starter cmgoods
- Start date
My first thought as well.
Matter of fact, it wouldn't surprise me if they beat TCU. I think TCU is overrated anyway. Texas has too many resources to suck for good.
A&M needs to get it while the getting's good.
True but Texas is like a USC or Alabama type, they won't stay down long. I think they just held on to Mack a little too long. That and their "legacy" recruiting didn't help.
Texas may think they are in the class of USC and Alabama, but they are not.
Perhaps but they aren't far from it. Plus I seem to remember them beating USC. They also drove right down the field on Bama until McCoy got hurt by one of the best dtackles in the NFL. The talent level is not much different.
Or maybe they are entering another 20-year period they had pre-Mack Brown. They are going to struggle for the foreseeable future. No denying they can eventually become a power again, but I do not think this is just a momentary stumble.
That's fair I guess, I don't see Strong being there. They will probably try for a splash hire this time. Lord knows they pay well. Pete Carroll would be interesting but Idk how old he is and what not. Word is Seattle has some locker room stuff going on.
Deleted member 807
Guest
But, but, but...
Still #1 in money, money, money...
Still #1 in money, money, money...
Money, talent, branding and with no lack of support. I recognize that sometimes those forces can work against a program (Texas size checks come with Texas size egos), but I don't understand why this program isn't in the top five annually.
Duff, what do you see as the barriers to Texas being an Alabama or USC (USC struggled through the 90s as well, and their fans are even bigger assholes than Texas')?
What was the reason Texas struggled pre-Mack Brown? I would tend to think another period like that could be prevented but who knows. I have always thought Texas was on the level of a USC, Bama, Ohio St. Notre Dame but this is the first I have seen that maybe they are not.
Texas has way to many big money donors with their fingers in the pie that need to be kept happy.
They also have high school coaches to keep happy, politicians, administrators, etc.
Considering their access to talent and resources it is amazing that they have only managed one title under each of Darrel Royal and Mack Brown and a lot of failures under the rest.
They also have high school coaches to keep happy, politicians, administrators, etc.
Considering their access to talent and resources it is amazing that they have only managed one title under each of Darrel Royal and Mack Brown and a lot of failures under the rest.
This. UT should be the most successful program in college football, but because they have so many people with their own agendas, it is impossible for that department to run as a cohesive unit and you get the constant under performance. If they actually had unified leadership, watch out.
Aren't they the second winningest program in history?
Good question. But Alabama and USC have won much bigger on the biggest stages. I just view them as a tier above.
I am not trying to say Texas is small time by any means, but it sure seems like they should win more conference titles and national titles than they do. When you are talking the elite programs, those matter.
I agree that in the modern era, they have largely underperformed, based on their situational advantages. They should have won more.
Any theories on why they haven't? Hubris and cronyism springs first to mind, but I'll bet that happens in 'Bama too.
My thoughts as well. I think Texas football has become the good ole boys club and everyone feels they have a say. Honestly, an Oregon kind of donor path is probably best. One guy with tons of money and only one ego to deal with.
Oh Christ, yes. USC. I've met a many USC grads, and some of them are well off and donate sizable sums. None dooshier. None dooshier. None.Dooshier.
As in there is one?
Oklahoma is a good comparison to Texas.
They recruit the same kids, are culturally similar in a lot of ways and major rivals.
Oklahoma doesn't have the same money as Texas, is often the recruits second choice after the horns, and is seen as less prestigious. On the field however OU has 4 National Championships since 1970 compared with 1 for UT.
They recruit the same kids, are culturally similar in a lot of ways and major rivals.
Oklahoma doesn't have the same money as Texas, is often the recruits second choice after the horns, and is seen as less prestigious. On the field however OU has 4 National Championships since 1970 compared with 1 for UT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NCAA_football_teams_by_wins
Texas is #3 all time in wins for FBS, behind ND and Michigan (they are 37 wins behind Michigan for all time wins). All teams ebb and flow. It happens. To say they aren't elite or are doomed to an extended period in the cellar is not taking into account history and $$.
Texas is #3 all time in wins for FBS, behind ND and Michigan (they are 37 wins behind Michigan for all time wins). All teams ebb and flow. It happens. To say they aren't elite or are doomed to an extended period in the cellar is not taking into account history and $$.
Most likely this. And I think A&M is kinda overrated right now.
In '94 when CU went into Texas, it wasn't "are we going to beat Texas", it was "how much are we going to smash Texas by?" I don't remember the exact stats, but Salaam went for like, 250, and there was no doubt.
I recall it being very hot, Salaam went for over 300 yard. It was still a close game.
Recruiting. Their weak conference and weak coaching didn't excite the best local recruits. The only meaningful game was against A&M. The rest of the schedule looked like a season of cupcakes compared to going up the road to OU, NU, or anywhere else. They didn't dominate the airwaves either.