quote: Stoops, Saban, Mack and Meyer are not great x's and o's type coaches. Sherm is superior to all 4 of these guys when it comes to x's and o's, but all four of them kick his tail when comparing success and results.

Actually Saban is the best defensive X & O's coach in America- and it's not even close. And Meyer is arguably in the top 5 offensive minds in college football. I would put Sherman in the top 25 offensive minds in CFB. So that's what it takes to win championships: a coach with the ability to get the X & O's, but at the same time recruit well and by dynamic.

quote:

---

Sherm is missing whatever those coaches have.

---

Gary Patterson should have been fired in 2007!!![/sarcasm]

A&M will never win the NC...get it through your heads.

quote:

---

Sherm is missing whatever those coaches have.

---

Perhaps it's as good of a roster. Since you just admitted that you don't know what he is missing, then you can't say with 100% certainty the reason for his struggles are due to his head coaching ability instead of the program he inherited.

As I've said many times before, people like you would have never even given Mack Brown or Nick Saban a chance to begin their careers. Look up their records. The same thing you are doing with sherman now could have been done the first few seasons with these guys when they were taking over bad teams.

quote:

---

There were 7 significant coaching changes in '07, best to worst records through this season.


Bo Pelini- 24-8
Paul Johnson 23-9
Houston Nutt 21-10
Bobby Petrino 16-13
Rick Neuheisel 14-16
Mike Sherman 13-16
Rich Rod 13-16

---

That's an interesting list. And the records show 5 coaches who have had more sucess than Sherman. But only 2 of those would have been received any more warmly at A&M than Sherman, and we had little chance at getting either of them.

Rick Neuheisel - Riots would have ensued had we hired a hippie, liberal, turtleneck wearing pansy. Forget about "getting" A&M, he's a polar opposite to what most A&M fans want as a football coach. Not to mention his NCAA troubles and two previous firings.

Bobby Petrino - might have been a better choice but he seems to like being in the SEC. Unlikely we could have gotten him. From a quick search, he's making $2.85 million/year, to Sherman's to $1.8 million/year. We probably would have had to go over over $3 million to get him.

Houston Nutt - To me, at the time, this would not have been a bad choice but I don't recall a single Aggie fan being interested in entering the Houston Nutt sweepstakes after it looked like he would have to leave Arkansas. Somehow I don't think picking up a Hog reject would have pleased the A&M fanbase. He also makes $700,000 more per year than Sherman. And how does losing to 1-AA Jacksonville St in your 3rd year compare to losing to Sunbelt Arkansas St, in your first game?

Paul Johnson - Good coach, but the option was Satan's offense to Aggie fans at the end of 2007. Also GT has been very incosistent against better teams in a pretty weak ACC and they seem to stink this year. Kansas?

Bo Pelini- would have been a great choice, but I think his return to Nebraska had been set in stone for about a year prior to our hiring Sherman. Makes about $300,000 more per year than Sherman.

quote:

---

Stoops, Saban, Mack and Meyer are not great x's and o's type coaches. Sherm is superior to all 4 of these guys when it comes to x's and o's, but all four of them kick his tail when comparing success and results.

---

Sherman is a very good x and o's coach. But Saban, Meyer, and Stoops ARE (or at least were in the recent past) great x and o's coaches. See Stoops D's at OU, KSU, UF, Meyer's O at UF, Utah, and Saban's defenses at MSU, LSU, and Bama with high turnover at DC. Mack Brown hasn't been an x and o's coach at all for about 25 years so you're probably correct there.



[This message has been edited by Spider Rico (edited 10/7/2010 10:59a).]

quote:

---

Stoops, Saban, Mack and Meyer are not great x's and o's type coaches. Sherm is superior to all 4 of these guys when it comes to x's and o's, but all four of them kick his tail when comparing success and results.

---

Maybe it has to do with having better talent. Just a hunch. I don't know. All I know is you are downplaying sherman's recruiting based upon having an off year this year, but forget how we had 3 straight top 25 classes, with 2 of them being top 15, to start off his career. The 2012 class looks promising with a decent year here to.

Oh, and to say Meyer, Stoops, and Saban aren't x's and o's type of guys is wrong. Saban is one of the best defensive minds in all of college football.

Look, I'm not going to pretend I know one way or another if sherman is the guy for the job, I just find it ridiculous how some of you really think you can know.

hasn't mack been kicking everyones tail the last 10-years in recruiting?

beer
I am not pretending to know anything, I am simply giving an opinion. Chill out.

It can be debated one way or the other in regards to the x's and o's argument, I will give you that.

However, in recruiting, there is no reason to debate. I do not care about recruiting ratings by some jar head from rivals. The best recruiting rating is wins/losses and how many kids are going to the NFL. Great recruiting usually results in a high degree of success in wins and NFL talent.

[This message has been edited by sealyaggie (edited 10/7/2010 10:56a).]

Are sure that date is right? If it is I had no idea Byrne hired Sherman 3 days after we beat Texas in 2007 and Fran resigned.

under mac brown, t.u. won in his 8th season. He did combine his with an mnc though.

it was 3-4 days after Fran left. He left on a Friday and I believe the Sherman hire was announced the following Monday. I remember the day well. A&M beats Texas and the BB team beat Ohio State to win that tourney they were in. It was a tri-fecta.

He's got all of this year, and all of next. Then we go out and hire Mike Leach if we know what's good for us!

quote:

---

As I've said many times before, people like you would have never even given Mack Brown or Nick Saban a chance to begin their careers. Look up their records.

---

Nick Saban
1995 Toledo 9-2

1995 Mich. St. 6-5-1
1996 Mich. St. 6-6
1997 Mich. St. 7-5

2000 LSU 8-4
2001 LSU 10-3
2002 LSU 8-5

2007 Alabama 7-6
2008 Alabama 12-2
2009 Alabama 14-0


Better records at all three stops, and though I hvaven't looked at each game, I'm willing to bet half the games weren't blowout losses.

Now you have a little better argument numbers-wise for Mack. He went 1-10, 4-7, and 6-6 in his first three seasons at Tulane, and 1-10, 1-10, and 6-4-1 his first three seasons at UNC. But he also won 9 games in his first three seasons at Texas. However, I don'think we're comparing apples to apples. I'd like to think A&M is more on par with Texas circa 1999 than Tulane circa 1985 and UNC 1988. Maybe you disagree.

As for rosters, I think Sherm had enough talent to beat Arky St. I think he had enough talent to stay within three touchdowns of Baylor, or within 50 points of K-State. Or do you think our roster was so depleted that accomplishing even those meager goals was too much to ask for?

quote:

---

I did feel that:

we shouldn't lose to Sun Belt teams at Kyle Field
we shouldn't give up 40+ points in 12 of 25 games
we should have better than 5-15 record against teams from BCS conferneces
that we should be able to beat an OSU team (not Texas, not OU, but OSU) that replaced 15 starters
considering we buy three wins every year, it's not unreasonable to expect a overall winning record after 3 years (which unless we get our **** together real quick, ain't gonna happen)

---

So much of what has happened in the past has been determined by our defense. It has been terrible. On that I think we can all agree.

So my question is this - if you were Sherman, or any non-defensive coach, who would you have hired to be the D-coordinator at first? Then, what would you have done when Herring bolted for the Cowboys? Third, would you have fired Kines after one year?

This year and next are the telling years for the program.

To counter the other comment, how many of you that are down on Sherman were down on him at the time of hiring as well? I suspect is is a high percentage.

Did yall like Fran better? Look at the players we have now compared to what we had with Fran? TFred, Hunter, Fuller...all players Sherman got that Fran didn't. I think we upgraded in recruiting. Sherman was able to leverage his resume to get some of them, but I agree that he will have to win this year nad next to keep improving, as winning is the greatest factor in recruiting.

And for the person that says we will never win a NC - I hope you are a troll or non-Ag. I'm not going to guaranty one, but we certainly have the ability to do so just as much as any program, if we can keep building on our progress.

quote:

---

However, I don'think we're comparing apples to apples. I'd like to think A&M is more on par with Texas circa 1999 than Tulane circa 1985 and UNC 1988. Maybe you disagree.

---

Mack took over in 1998. He inherited a Heisman Trophy winner, two NFL Pro Bowl DT's, and a 1st rounder/5th overall pick at CB, all still playing in the NFL in 2010. A&M in 2008 was not close to being on the talent level 1998 Texas was.

They had won two conference titles in the previous three years and had a terrible year and total meltdown even with great talent in 1997. I'd say UNC 1988 is a better comparison.

"I think Sherman is the guy. For those of you that don't, please tell me what he lacks, or why you don't think he is the guy."

Your kidding right?

Lost to Arkansas State.
One decent win.
Multiple blowout losses
subpar recruiting (yes, subpar)
Almost lost to FIU
Personality of a broom
etc
etc

one obvious question...

why are the Ags starting a true freshman in year 3 of the Sherman era?

----
where is the junior or redshirt sophomore from Sherman's first class (to play left tackle)? Or the sophomore or redshirt fish from Sherman's second class?

The Ags are having recruiting problems.

quote:

---

Did yall like Fran better?

---

I assume everyone did. Fran was way ahead of Sherman's pace two-and-a-half years in. At least Fran had a solid handfull of quality wins; Sherman has ONE.

quote:

---

Look at the players we have now compared to what we had with Fran?

---

Why do people measure success by the quality of players? Success should be measured "number of quality wins" divided by "quality of players" - which put's Fran even further ahead of Sherman (and RC)!

Having more good players and worse performing teams is a BAD thing, not a skin on the wall to brag about!

[This message has been edited by DRK 87 (edited 10/7/2010 12:57p).]

quote:

---

Years 1 and 2- the cupboard was bare.
Year 3- young OL
Year 4- First year starting QB
Year 5 and beyond- lather, rinse, repeat.

---

Aaaaand boom goes the dynamite.

I hope Sherman turns it around - I like him alot. But if he doesn't, and Mike Leach is still around, we should go out and hire him on the spot.

We will never win with a classical "recruit as best you can" and "play a meat-n-potatoes game" business model - not in a million years.

Took Mack Brown 7 years to win his first conference championship. He's only won it twice in 12 years.

I think we can give Sherman more than 4 games into his third year.

quote:

---

Took Mack Brown 7 years to win his first conference championship. He's only won it twice in 12 years.

---

I agree, but Sherman is off to a hidious start!

I think yall are looking at it wrong. Sherm is not a coach of the Brown/Stoops/Meyer/Saban mold. He is a program builder. A GM.

No one wants to admit it here, but our program was in such a bad shape when Sherm took over that we were lucky to get him. No "hot shot" coach in the country would work for us when there were easier jobs available. Post-Fran our job looked like a career killer.

Sherm might never win 9 or 10 games and he might never win a division title, but after a few 7 and 8 win seasons he will build up the brand of the program so that we are a more appealing place to recuits and coaches.

You can't compare the task Sherm has with what Meyer or Stoops walked into. Both had programs that had won national titles prior to America using the bomb, and both had a better brand supporting them. Even Brown had uber-hip Austin to sell recuits on.

We literally have nothing compared to those programs. We had a poor brand, a terrible recent track record, no recent national title, and all in a city that is about as white-bread and boring as can be.

The only way for us to ever have a good program is to realize we are at a disadvantage compared to every other major program in America, and that if we want success we have to build up slowly.

Step one is a few years of a technically winning seasons, and Sherm is gonna deliver that.


[This message has been edited by Cardboardboxer (edited 10/7/2010 1:14p).]

As other posters have stated, you have to give him 4 years barring catostrophic underproduction (i.e. losing season this year). While I don't have high hopes Sherm is the man who will win a Big XII title, I do think has to be given a legitimate chance. I know its painful to watch a lot of the time, but you just have to deal with it. In addition, there's really only one coach available that excites me at all (Sumlin) and I'm not convinced he's going to immediately cure all our ills either. After next season, Sumlin will likely still be available and we might also be able to find a few more of the up and comers.

quote:

---

As for rosters, I think Sherm had enough talent to beat Arky St. I think he had enough talent to stay within three touchdowns of Baylor, or within 50 points of K-State.

---

That Arkansas State game seems to have Sherman's death sentence for a lot of aggie fans, which is ridiculous. We were an unranked 18 point favorite with completely redesigned schemes on both sides of the ball in the staff's FIRST game..and we missed 3 fg's and lost by 4.

Compare that to Mack Brown and living legend of Texags Will Muschamp's effort as a 16 point favorite, number 5 ranked, home team against a 1-2 UCLA team with a QB who never showed he could throw the ball more than 10 yds downfield. They lost by 22. Which is worse?

Or against Frank Beamer's effort in his 20th+ season against I-AA James Madison. Or his 1998 loss to a Temple team that 2008 Arkansas St would have easily beaten.

Nick Saban lost his 10th game at Bama to a 24 point underdog in ULM. And in his 5th game was very lucky to beat another mediocre Briles coached team in Houston - at home. That 2007 Bama team had much better players than our 2008 team.

Urban Meyer lost at home to Ole Miss as 22 point favorites with a #4 ranking.

Bob Stoops lost a home game to 25 point underdog TCU - as the the #7 ranked team in the country.

Pete Caroll lost a game as the #2 ranked team in the country to a 1-3 Stanford team when they were favored by 41. How was that not far worse than the Ark St. game?

I think Sherman is doing a pretty good job but he started from a worse postion than people think. He may deserve some criticism for last year and a little for this year, but it's time to forget about that Arkansas St. game.

And the Kansas St. game was bad, but it may have also helped us hammer Tech the following week. Would you rather have a had a close loss to K. St than our first win in Lubbock in 16 years?

quote:

---

Mack Brown

---

One national title and two title appearances.

quote:

---

Frank Beamer

---

Best coach in VT history and one title appearance.

quote:

---

Nick Saban

---

Two titles at two schools.

quote:

---

Urban Meyer

---

Two titles in his first four years.

quote:

---

Bob Stoops

---

One title, four title appearances.

quote:

---

Pete Caroll

---

Two titles (one vacated), three title appearances in a row.

/fixed context for you

It only took Bob Stoops 2 years.

quote:

---

And the Kansas St. game was bad, but it may have also helped us hammer Tech the following week.

---

Uhhh...mmmmkay.

quote:

---

Would you rather have a had a close loss to K. St than our first win in Lubbock in 16 years?

---

Why do the two need to be mutually exclusive?

You guys can spin this however you wish. The bottom line is wins and losses and Sherman is not getting the results.

Is Sherman a part of the solution or a part of the problem? I think he is a continuation of a 20 yr old problem.

OU, texas and USC did not accept mediocrity. They pulled the plug on many coaches who did not produce in 3 - 4 years until they found a winning formula.

With Sherman, I do not get the vibe that he is the one to take us to a national title as he and Byrne spoke on the day of his hiring.

Jeff George. I wasnt' trying to say that Sherman is a better coach than those guys. They are all Hall of Famers, but they all also had losses that were much worse than the Arkansas St. game. Sherman seems to have lost a lot of credibility with A&M fans for a game that was nowhere near the tragedy we make it out to be.

Also, Meyer, Stoops, Caroll, and Brown inherited teams that had only had to look back a few years to Conference and National titles. And they weren't in their FIRST game when they blew those either.

Spider,

The differences between the Arky St. game and your examples is that your examples are exceptions in otherwise successful careers while Arky State was the first of many embarrassing defeats that seem to be the trademark of our current coach. People keep pointing to Arky State simply because it is the most egregious example of the lack of perforomance under our current regime.

You can stick your head in the sand and ignore single games if you want to, but how do you address Sherm's 5-15 record against all BCS conference schools? How do you addres the fact that he has two wins over teams that finished above .500? How do you address the fact that in year 3 he can't beat an OSU program that had to replace 15 starters? How do you address the fact that he is getting his butt kicked in recruiting in year 3?

And as for the KSU debacle leading to a win against Tech, that is 100% pure speculation. And even if its true, is that all we can expect? To "upset" unranked Tech squads but only after embarrassing no-shows against inferior teams with first year coaches?

I know we're not going to fire the guy this year. And that to me is even more depressing than the current results. To know that we are stuck on this treadmill for at least one, probably two more years with nothing but more mediocrity to look foraward to.

quote:

---

OU, texas and USC did not accept mediocrity.

---

Each one of those programs has far more advantages than A&M has. They should expect more.

Our biggest problem the last 20 years is the delusion that our program is on the same level as the ones you mentioned. We need to have more realistic expectations based on what advantages our program actually has.

The only other alternative is to wait for OU/TU/LSU to have down years and pretend that during that time the world is how it should be, stocking away hope during those years to fuel the delusion when those powers return to their normal levels...

quote:

---

Would you rather have a had a close loss to K. St than our first win in Lubbock in 16 years?



Why do the two need to be mutually exclusive?

---

Good point. We should win them all. Why hasn't Sherman thought of that? We clearly have the talent to dominate every game.

I don't know that coming off a close loss to KSU would have led to the same level of effort we had against Tech. And Mike Leach was pretty vocal about the blowout KSU result having a negative effect on Tech's effort. I think our squad was pretty even, if not below Techs, last year and we came out with a huge win something Sherman should get at least a little credit for. KSU was not a bad team last year and they also had a Hall of Fame coach.

[This message has been edited by Spider Rico (edited 10/7/2010 2:02p).]

I hear you, Rico. It's just that first impressions mean a lot, and Sherm's first impression on a school that had languished in mediocrity for seven years was a pitiful performance against a team that didn't beat a single opponent outside the Sun Belt... except for A&M.

Yes, A&M was in much worse shape than their 2007 record seemed to indicate. But that's exactly why you hire someone like a Saban or a Stoops or a Meyer: to lift you out of a funk. A&M hired a Sherm instead. If he manages to pull out 10 wins this year and, for once, a bowl victory, that Arky State loss gets forgotten about. But so far, we've had more flashbacks to that loss (FIU) than any wins that would make us forget about it.