Cobra39 said:
You are working on a 6-day anti-Sherman bender. Don't you ever get tired?
Cobra39
I don't mean to be, I just think Sumlin isn't getting a fair shake...it was time for him to go but he wasn't as bad as people are making him out to be
Cobra39 said:
You are working on a 6-day anti-Sherman bender. Don't you ever get tired?
Cobra39
ABATTBQ11 said:ebag02 said:Sherman didn't recruit the best players on the 2010 team, Fran did. Sumlin had only winning seasons. Sherman is the guy with all the .500 and below seasons. You keep on with those made up coaching records though.ABATTBQ11 said:ebag02 said:ABATTBQ11 said:
2 of those bowl wins were 100% Johnny. You think Sumlin wins against duke without JFF? Once Sherman's players were gone he was 1-4 and lost to k-state. His last 4 years were a total embarrassment. Sherman's failures were mostly at the beginning of his tenure.
Sherman won 0 bowls and his 4 years made aggie football into a joke. Once Fran's players were gone he went 6 - 6 and was canned. One winning season with Fran's players. You think Sherman wins 9 games without Von Miller and Tannehill?
Sherman's best year was in 2010, 3 years in. Sumlin's was 2012, year 1 with a team recruited and coached by Sherman, and he never came close again. Sherman's best team was undoubtedly his Abbey 2 years of exciting and coaching. Sumlin's was undoubtedly not after a single off-season.
After year 3 (hell, starting in year 3), Sumlin was a proven 7-5, 6-6 coach, depending on who we drew from the east. Sherman had a 6-6 year 4 that should have been better, but he left a team with incredible potential. Do you think the 2016 or 17 teams could get to 11 wins?
You keep on with those false equivalencies though.
Sherman developed all of those players into the 2010 team. Who did Sumlin develop? He went from 11-2 with a team that Sherman developed and turned it into a mediocre, perennial 7 win team by year 3. Everything from 2014 on was wins over paper tigers and second half of the season collapses. Sumlin turned us into a joke for the last 4 years.
ebag02 said:ABATTBQ11 said:ebag02 said:Sherman didn't recruit the best players on the 2010 team, Fran did. Sumlin had only winning seasons. Sherman is the guy with all the .500 and below seasons. You keep on with those made up coaching records though.ABATTBQ11 said:ebag02 said:ABATTBQ11 said:
2 of those bowl wins were 100% Johnny. You think Sumlin wins against duke without JFF? Once Sherman's players were gone he was 1-4 and lost to k-state. His last 4 years were a total embarrassment. Sherman's failures were mostly at the beginning of his tenure.
Sherman won 0 bowls and his 4 years made aggie football into a joke. Once Fran's players were gone he went 6 - 6 and was canned. One winning season with Fran's players. You think Sherman wins 9 games without Von Miller and Tannehill?
Sherman's best year was in 2010, 3 years in. Sumlin's was 2012, year 1 with a team recruited and coached by Sherman, and he never came close again. Sherman's best team was undoubtedly his Abbey 2 years of exciting and coaching. Sumlin's was undoubtedly not after a single off-season.
After year 3 (hell, starting in year 3), Sumlin was a proven 7-5, 6-6 coach, depending on who we drew from the east. Sherman had a 6-6 year 4 that should have been better, but he left a team with incredible potential. Do you think the 2016 or 17 teams could get to 11 wins?
You keep on with those false equivalencies though.
Sherman developed all of those players into the 2010 team. Who did Sumlin develop? He went from 11-2 with a team that Sherman developed and turned it into a mediocre, perennial 7 win team by year 3. Everything from 2014 on was wins over paper tigers and second half of the season collapses. Sumlin turned us into a joke for the last 4 years.
Johnny Manziel and Mike Evans played 0 downs for Sherman, yet Sherman gets full credit for them. Johnny is on the record on his podcast saying he hated playing for Sherman. Sumlin never won less than 8 games when he coached a full season, yet you say he is perennial 6 to 7 win coach.
You give credit to Sherman for 2012 because Sumlin didn't recruit Johnny and Mike Evans. I use your logic to give credit to Fran for 2010. If jimbo wins the National championship this year then Sumlin gets credit. I'm just trying to be consistent.
Any improvement Sherman's teams showed was due to how he completely failed his first 2 seasons. Aggie football was in a bad place and Sherman said to Fran hold my beer. His final team went 6-6 and that is worse than Fran's last team. That's not improvement. Sherman had one outlier in 2010 with Fran's players.ABATTBQ11 said:ebag02 said:ABATTBQ11 said:ebag02 said:Sherman didn't recruit the best players on the 2010 team, Fran did. Sumlin had only winning seasons. Sherman is the guy with all the .500 and below seasons. You keep on with those made up coaching records though.ABATTBQ11 said:ebag02 said:ABATTBQ11 said:
2 of those bowl wins were 100% Johnny. You think Sumlin wins against duke without JFF? Once Sherman's players were gone he was 1-4 and lost to k-state. His last 4 years were a total embarrassment. Sherman's failures were mostly at the beginning of his tenure.
Sherman won 0 bowls and his 4 years made aggie football into a joke. Once Fran's players were gone he went 6 - 6 and was canned. One winning season with Fran's players. You think Sherman wins 9 games without Von Miller and Tannehill?
Sherman's best year was in 2010, 3 years in. Sumlin's was 2012, year 1 with a team recruited and coached by Sherman, and he never came close again. Sherman's best team was undoubtedly his Abbey 2 years of exciting and coaching. Sumlin's was undoubtedly not after a single off-season.
After year 3 (hell, starting in year 3), Sumlin was a proven 7-5, 6-6 coach, depending on who we drew from the east. Sherman had a 6-6 year 4 that should have been better, but he left a team with incredible potential. Do you think the 2016 or 17 teams could get to 11 wins?
You keep on with those false equivalencies though.
Sherman developed all of those players into the 2010 team. Who did Sumlin develop? He went from 11-2 with a team that Sherman developed and turned it into a mediocre, perennial 7 win team by year 3. Everything from 2014 on was wins over paper tigers and second half of the season collapses. Sumlin turned us into a joke for the last 4 years.
Johnny Manziel and Mike Evans played 0 downs for Sherman, yet Sherman gets full credit for them. Johnny is on the record on his podcast saying he hated playing for Sherman. Sumlin never won less than 8 games when he coached a full season, yet you say he is perennial 6 to 7 win coach.
You give credit to Sherman for 2012 because Sumlin didn't recruit Johnny and Mike Evans. I use your logic to give credit to Fran for 2010. If jimbo wins the National championship this year then Sumlin gets credit. I'm just trying to be consistent.
No. You're reading what you want to read and putting words in my mouth. I give credit to Sherman for 2010 because he developed that team for two years. Recruiting has very little to do with it outside of Sherman recruiting for 2 years. I don't give Sumlin much credit for 2012 for the same reason. That team was built and developed mostly by Sherman, and after two years Sumlin was walking through one debacle of a season after another. He's a 6-7 win coach in the regular season. I'm not cobbling bowl wins and losses. You think he'd have won more than 6 games this year if we let him finish out?
Sherman's teams showed improvement the longer he was here. Sumlin's showed regression the longer he was here. Not that hard to understand.
ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
You'll never convince him or the other Sherman honks on here. I don't remember anyone shedding a tear for him 6 years ago when he got fired, maybe in time people won't judge Sumlin so harshly either...I guess it's too fresh still.ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
Bayside Tiger Ag said:ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
It's amazing that Sumlin is ahead of Sherman by every quantifiable metric yet people still have the audacity to think he was the better coach.
So because Sherman tanked year 1 and won less games than his predecessor he should get some kind of credit for winning 6 games in his final season? I guess Sumlin should have just tanked year 1 and lost every game like he was expected to so his delta would look better.ABATTBQ11 said:Bayside Tiger Ag said:ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
It's amazing that Sumlin is ahead of Sherman by every quantifiable metric yet people still have the audacity to think he was the better coach.
Really? Sherman's positive win delta over time is much better than summon's negative one... It's almost like Sumlin inherited a solid team and ran it into the ground and Sherman didn't.
What are you talking about? 3 of Sherman's 4 years were worse than every year Sumlin coached at A&M...I think slicer97 nailed it, people are mad at Sumlin because we couldn't fire him when we wanted to (after year 4 in 2015 it was starting to seem obvious that he wasn't the guy) because of his contract extension. Sherman was easy to fired after year 4 so he didn't hang around and wear out his welcome.ABATTBQ11 said:Bayside Tiger Ag said:ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
It's amazing that Sumlin is ahead of Sherman by every quantifiable metric yet people still have the audacity to think he was the better coach.
Really? Sherman's positive win delta over time is much better than summon's negative one... It's almost like Sumlin inherited a solid team and ran it into the ground and Sherman didn't.
HoustonAg2106 said:What are you talking about? 3 of Sherman's 4 years were worse than every year Sumlin coached at A&M...I think slicer97 nailed it, people are mad at Sumlin because we couldn't fire him when we wanted to (after year 4 in 2015 it was starting to seem obvious that he wasn't the guy) because of his contract extension. Sherman was easy to fired after year 4 so he didn't hang around and wear out his welcome.ABATTBQ11 said:Bayside Tiger Ag said:ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
It's amazing that Sumlin is ahead of Sherman by every quantifiable metric yet people still have the audacity to think he was the better coach.
Really? Sherman's positive win delta over time is much better than summon's negative one... It's almost like Sumlin inherited a solid team and ran it into the ground and Sherman didn't.
I'm glad that Sumlin hung around as long as he did though because I don't think we would have Jimbo otherwise...we would probably have Tom Herman
Sherman choked on cupcakes for 4 years and got beat by good teams. Sherman lost 62 - 14 to a 6-6 K state team. He also lost 65 - 10 to an unranked OU team. I could go on and on if you keep posting.ABATTBQ11 said:HoustonAg2106 said:What are you talking about? 3 of Sherman's 4 years were worse than every year Sumlin coached at A&M...I think slicer97 nailed it, people are mad at Sumlin because we couldn't fire him when we wanted to (after year 4 in 2015 it was starting to seem obvious that he wasn't the guy) because of his contract extension. Sherman was easy to fired after year 4 so he didn't hang around and wear out his welcome.ABATTBQ11 said:Bayside Tiger Ag said:ebag02 said:
Here's another fun fact. Sherman faced current SEC members 7 times while at A&M and went 0-7. Truly a legend and would have been better in the SEC.
Missouri 0-2
Arkansas 0-3
LSU 0-1
Georgia 0-1
It's amazing that Sumlin is ahead of Sherman by every quantifiable metric yet people still have the audacity to think he was the better coach.
Really? Sherman's positive win delta over time is much better than summon's negative one... It's almost like Sumlin inherited a solid team and ran it into the ground and Sherman didn't.
I'm glad that Sumlin hung around as long as he did though because I don't think we would have Jimbo otherwise...we would probably have Tom Herman
Sumlin also walked into a much better situation than Sherman in many ways. Fran's recruiting classes were good on paper, but he wasn't much of a coach or developer. We had some good athletes, but not a good team. Sherman was also recruiting against Mack Brown and Bob Stoops while still in the bdf. Sumlin got to recruit against chollie and big game Bob while touting the SEC.
Sure, Sherman's first two years were bad. He walked into a crappy program and worked to turn it around. 2010 was that turnaround. 2011 saw a talent dropoff and was a disappointment, but I don't think it's indicative of the direction or state of the program. I think Sherman would have easily done as well as Sumlin in 2012. You can disagree because we all thought the SEC was going to kill us and 2012 was a surprise at the time, but in hindsight the West was way down (see auburn and arkie's records) and Missouri had a terrible year with injuries. We had a very, very easy schedule besides Florida, LSU, and Bama, and we went 1-2 against them. You might throw 8-4 msu in there, but the only teams they beat with winning records were Jackson State and Middle Tennessee. We thought we were walking into a meat grinder and it turned out to be a bouncy house. Again, you can choose to disagree, but 2012's schedule was easy.
Sumlin had a very favorable SEC schedule, drawing Vandy a couple of times and getting permanently paired with USCe. Arkie lost Petrino and got Smith and Bulimia as replacements. Maybe Sherman would have done better playing Kansas twice a year. Even our vaunted OOC schedule turned out to be full of busts. ASU and UCLA were highly touted when we played them, but as their seasons progressed it became obvious that we'd beaten very average or bad teams. Looking at how the teams we beat actually finished, Sumlin chowed down on cupcakes for almost 7 years. There's really only 2-3 standout wins in there, and Johnny is mostly responsible for those. In complete hindsight, outside of 2012, we've been average at best.
While that is certainly true to some extent, I don't see a single offensive lineman among those names you listed. Doesn't much matter how good your skill players are if they don't get sufficient blocking. Fran left some talent behind, but he also left quite a few holes.ebag02 said:
I know Fran left him with no talent. He left him scrubs like Von Miller, Stephen McGee, Jerrod Johnson, Mike Goodson, Ryan Tannehill, Michael Bennett, Jorvorskie Lane, Mike Goodson, Danny Gorrer.
How are you quantifying this mystical development? I would think wins would be the result, but they didn't come until Sherman was fired. Logic says Sherman's coaching was holding the team back.
Quote:
But we had the 3rd hardest schedule in the country in 2012 so stop making things up please
Bama didn't have a terrible year, they won the national championship. We weren't dinged up against La Tech, we had some guys suspended though.Agsuffering@bulaw said:Quote:
But we had the 3rd hardest schedule in the country in 2012 so stop making things up please
I have been posting about 2012 for years, but here we go again:
In 2012, our lack of defensive depth never got exposed because of the way things fell. That was the break. We never faced consecutive fierce hitting contests. Arkie and Bama both had terrible years and those games were over quickly. MSU was decent, but played terribly and that game was over at halftime. We had to deal with attrition once, and we almost lost to La Tech because of it. Thankfully JFF had his best game of the season.
FLORIDA
-smu
-sc state
-arkie (was terrible that year, game over by halftime)
OM
-la tech (almost lost b/c defense was dinged up)
LSU
-auburn (also horrible and over at halftime)
-msu (had a decent team, but played a bad game, over at halftime)
BAMA
-sam
-mizzou
Every other year, the lack of depth got exposed.
Quote:
I know Fran left him with no talent. He left him scrubs like Von Miller, Stephen McGee, Jerrod Johnson, Mike Goodson, Ryan Tannehill, Michael Bennett, Jorvorskie Lane, Mike Goodson, Danny Gorrer.
Fair enough, the 2012 team wasn't good. I guess that's on Sherman.ABATTBQ11 said:
SoS based on total wins and losses is an incomplete picture when we lost to 2/3 of the top teams we played. We beat 3 FBS teams that finished the regular season with winning records, and one of those was an overrated MSU who didn't beat a single one. Another was Louisiana tech. Overall, we played a high number of bad teams and a few really good ones.
Using your metric, you could have a difficult SoS playing 4 undefeated teams with no wins over winning teams and 8 other winless ones. Not all wins are created equal.
2/4 we beat a very good Oklahoma team, also Ole Miss finished with a winning record...and you don't get to decide for yourself if a schedule is worthy or not when there is already an accepted method of measuring a teams SOS for all teamsABATTBQ11 said:
SoS based on total wins and losses is an incomplete picture when we lost to 2/3 of the top teams we played. We beat 3 FBS teams that finished the regular season with winning records, and one of those was an overrated MSU who didn't beat a single one. Another was Louisiana tech. Overall, we played a high number of bad teams and a few really good ones.
Using your metric, you could have a difficult SoS playing 4 undefeated teams with no wins over winning teams and 8 other winless ones. Not all wins are created equal.
Agsuffering@bulaw said:Quote:
I know Fran left him with no talent. He left him scrubs like Von Miller, Stephen McGee, Jerrod Johnson, Mike Goodson, Ryan Tannehill, Michael Bennett, Jorvorskie Lane, Mike Goodson, Danny Gorrer.
Most of those guys were gone after 2008.
Von- Fran was misusing, Sherman used him as a flex and the rest is history
McGee- was hurt
JJ- no argument there
RT- yes, but he would not have been nearly as good without Sherman
Bennett- did not have a single sack in 2008, he is a headcase who peaked under Fran
JTrain- unwilling to block, let his weight get out of control, could have been somebody, not Sherm's fault
Goodson- suffered from a bad attitude and bad OL, Cyrus ended up taking half his carries
Gorrer- yes, he was good for a year
Notice that only 1 of those players was a DL and none were OL or LBs?
HoustonAg2106 said:2/4 we beat a very good Oklahoma team, also Ole Miss finished with a winning record...and you don't get to decide for yourself if a schedule is worthy or not when there is already an accepted method of measuring a teams SOS for all teamsABATTBQ11 said:
SoS based on total wins and losses is an incomplete picture when we lost to 2/3 of the top teams we played. We beat 3 FBS teams that finished the regular season with winning records, and one of those was an overrated MSU who didn't beat a single one. Another was Louisiana tech. Overall, we played a high number of bad teams and a few really good ones.
Using your metric, you could have a difficult SoS playing 4 undefeated teams with no wins over winning teams and 8 other winless ones. Not all wins are created equal.
And yes you get credit for beating teams you are supposed to beat (like Sumlin did by going 50-15 against all teams not named LSU and Bama) which is something Sherman struggled to do (23-19 against teams not named texas and ou).
How can you look at those numbers and think that Sherman would have similarly gone 50-15 or better against those same teams?
Answer: Because you and others have a personal grudge with Sumlin because he hung around longer than he probably should have
ABATTBQ11 said:HoustonAg2106 said:2/4 we beat a very good Oklahoma team, also Ole Miss finished with a winning record...and you don't get to decide for yourself if a schedule is worthy or not when there is already an accepted method of measuring a teams SOS for all teamsABATTBQ11 said:
SoS based on total wins and losses is an incomplete picture when we lost to 2/3 of the top teams we played. We beat 3 FBS teams that finished the regular season with winning records, and one of those was an overrated MSU who didn't beat a single one. Another was Louisiana tech. Overall, we played a high number of bad teams and a few really good ones.
Using your metric, you could have a difficult SoS playing 4 undefeated teams with no wins over winning teams and 8 other winless ones. Not all wins are created equal.
And yes you get credit for beating teams you are supposed to beat (like Sumlin did by going 50-15 against all teams not named LSU and Bama) which is something Sherman struggled to do (23-19 against teams not named texas and ou).
How can you look at those numbers and think that Sherman would have similarly gone 50-15 or better against those same teams?
Answer: Because you and others have a personal grudge with Sumlin because he hung around longer than he probably should have
Regular season. Remember, I don't count bowls. They're not all created equal. Losing a playoff bowl shouldn't be counted less than winning a toilet bowl in your overall record dinky because one is a loss and another is a win. They're also subjectively set up based on ratings and revenues, not conference or parity. A team could easily have an extra game where they punch above or below their weight because someone decided the matchup would draw viewers. As I see it, the best way to look at a schedule is how you do in your conference and against who you choose to schedule. Bowls are nothing but exhibition.
There are many ways to determine SoS. Total win/loss is just the quickest and easiest, though probably the least accurate. A much more accurate metric would be to weight wins and losses of opponents need on your opponents' opponents. Lots of people say teams like Boise State have no business in the playoffs because of who they play, but if they go undefeated or 1 loss they're inflating SoS. Either all games are created equal and tabs with the best record deserve the first shot, or they're not and SoS based on Win/Loss alone isn't a good metric. It can't be both.
Sumlin does get credit for beating the teams he should have, but that's all he ever did once JFF left. He was nothing more than a flash in the pan who rode the coattails of a once in a generation QB. For all of his failings, at least Sherman can say he built a successful season on his own, and I think he'd have had more than 1 given another year. People like you hold a grudge against Sherman for getting your hopes up on 2011 and letting you down.
Champ Bailey said:
Sherman could recruit and develop better. But he couldn't win. Sumlin could as long as he had other people's players.
Sumlin is a better head coacch.
ApachePilot said:
I recall Missouri at Kyle in 2010, 3rd quarter and empty. Jerrod had a bad shoulder all season. Missouri kills us.