The B12 (XII) Forum, home of the 'Front Porch, y'all' at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Good post, CW.

In answer to your rhetorical question, I think it's a variety of factors.

Most important factor is the talent in the cupboard.

Mackovic left Mack dearth on defense and an abundance on offense.

Mack was able to capitalize on offense and move enough people from one position to another to mitigate the defensive gaps.

Not sure what Blake, Butch & Cooper left on the shelves at O! Miami & tOSU but I assume it was enough to get their successors started.

Mack left Charlie talent on defense but not a lot on offense.  Then, right or wrong, Charlie thinned it even more by getting rid of Chet Moss and his parttiers who were almost all on offense.  When injuries subsequently hit, the offense scarcely had enough bodies, let alone talent.

And those obvious problems overshadowed a more insidious one: a bad OC/playcaller arrangement and an offensive philosophy unfit to capitalize on Texas talent.

By the time Charlie was able to plug that sieve in the dam, Mack's defensive talent was gone and Charlie's was green.

Now we're reliving Charlie's ineptitude almost step by step with Tom.

He's better spoken and more sttentive to little details (like uhm.... special teams) but he's also more headstrong and probably not as willing to admit mistakes, learn from them and correct his course.

I feel like there's a lot of overthinking going on here regarding the UT job and Tom Herman specifically.

3rd and 2.... you're up by 3....  you're on your opponents side of the 50.  You have TEXAS written on the front of your burnt orange jerseys.

My 10 year old son knows to run the ball down their throat...... twice if needed.  To get the 1st down.. and run the clock out.  Herman throws the ball.... the rest is history.




If the horns want to get back to being successful..... stop worrying about meddling in the program.... overreaching admins..... job descriptions.... and all the rest.

Just RUN THE DAMN BALL.  Stop making incredibly stupid decisions like the above.  I don't follow the horns, but I have to believe if he did that against tech, he probably did stupid shit like that all season.  Sumlin did... that's why he's looking for a job.  

Do that.... The rest will take care of itself.  

Just RUN THE DAMN BALL.  

What if you're pretty bad at running the ball?

What if you're pretty bad at running the ball?

You mean if you can't gain 2 yards in 2 plays?
Then run it twice, burn up clock, give them the ball on their side of the field, and play defense.

I'm all for running the ball.  But if you're not good at it, it's often not going to be the best bet.  In some situations, sure.  

Knowing Herman and Beck, I'll wager Texas scantly gives any practice time to the run game, specifically run blocking.
I doubt we put in the time to be good at it.

. . . Tom comes from a generation of impatient coaches.  If they run the ball and gain 1, then they're ready to go to the air.  They can't wait.  They give up on the run because it doesn't send a dopamine rush to the brain.  They want instant gratification, reflecting the culture in which we live.

There's a lot of truth there.

Lincoln Riley--who is even younger than Herman--is subject to the same tendency.  Several times this year he has talked in his post-game comments about how he gave up too soon on one thing or another.

Good points.

A quick look through the recruiting ranking analysis tells me Texas currently has roughly the 13th most talented roster, which should be good for more than 6-6.  So UT fans are probably right to have some angst about year 1 under Herman.  Taking over a 5-7 team and going 6-6 is technically improvement, but clearly the roster dearth left to Strong by Mack was no longer a prime factor.  Strong rebuilt the roster but evidently couldn't get them to play like a good team, or wasn't given enough time.  A coach who was legit ready for the position (probably) should've been able to hammer out at least 8 wins, maybe more like 9, in a transition year, in this league.  

On the other hand.....devil's advocate....

Texas went 1-4 in one-score games.  They gave away two games because their QB was a Grade A nincompoop.  Ehlinger was the classic million dollar man and ten cent head guy.  He thinks he can make the throw, so he takes these spectacular risks when all the team needed to do is play safe, and they win.  Winning a close game is largely luck (though losing is not as much luck-based when you're stupid).  But they could have just as easily gone 4-1 in those games, with no change in team quality, but now they're a 9-win team.  

Myself, I'm more of a bottom line guy.  Parcells had a point when he said you are what your record says you are.  Mitigating factors be damned, the W/L is where I rest most of my cases.  Herman didn't fail per se, but he didn't deliver on the hype and the salary UT handed him, and appears to need to realize some things....perhaps most especially about himself.  

I was a big proponent of Herman, though it wasn't because he was a sure thing.  That was never the argument.  It's that he was the home run swing.  The thing about swinging for the fences is that you're more likely to strike out.  But I was all about the risk.  Take the damn plunge.  You're getting rid of a guy for a reason, don't play it safe.  Step up to the bar and order a man's drink.  And I'm not a huge fan of retreads that a lot of people consider "sure things."  If he doesn't work out, he doesn't work out, but that's the risk you take when you choose to get on the carousel, and imo UT still demonstrated how to approach that situation regardless of the final result.  I'd much rather gamble on an up-and-comer with some bullet points than the aforementioned retread.