I do.

I do.

I do, it is what it is

I think it was a great idea, especially since I pay for $0 of it.

so far its more of the same - hope jimbo ends up being the guy but if not he'll just join the long list of disappointments. no biggie - its aggie football.

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

If you cant see the difference in thos team you are absolutely blind. Jimbo is doing a phenomenal job with what he has to work with. It will take time to get his system in place. I would be willing to wager that Sumlin would be 4-5 at best or maybe 3-6.with several blow outs!!!

fwag04 said:

---

If we had a QB that could complete a forward pass, we'd win the last 2. Jimbo can't make the plays too.

Defense is much improved, recruiting has improved, physicality has improved. Once Jimbo gets a good QB and not Sumlin scrubs, his teams will do way better.

DBs are awful, he's recruited the best DB class in the nation. He needs time to fix all the holes Sumlin and chief left him.

---

We do. He's on the bench for some reason.

Mond folds like a cheap lawn chair when the pressure is on, it is who he is. We won't win another close game with Mond running the QB position. The only reason we beat Kentucky is because Williams pounded the ball on them in the back side of the game and in OT.

Aggiedave1998 said:

---

You guys need to give the whole, "wait until Fisher get his own players" and "Fisher is stuck with Sumlin's scrubs" narritave a break. Over the last 5 years, A&M is ranked #9 in recruiting. Stop making excuses for poor decisions. Stop giving Fisher a pass and blaming poor decisions on "Sumlin's scrubs". Sumlin gave Fisher a top 10 recruited team, top to bottom. Does that mean Sumlin was a good/better coach...no. Does that mean that Fisher deserves all the "sky is falling" criticism he is getting...no. It most certainly means that Fisher did not inherit an empty cupboard. There is plenty of talent on this team on both sides of the ball. Stop making excuses for Fisher by blaming Sumlin.

https://n.rivals.com/news/rivals-top-50-recruiting-teams-of-the-past-five-years

---

Too many people like to assume that if there is talent, a new coach is going to win with it just because it exists. I'm seeing that it generally devolves into the "the cupboard was bare!" argument after it doesn't work out as well as they'd hoped.

Ignoring Taggart's shortcomings, I certainly never expected him to do well with a new-to-him team moving into a new-to-them scheme. I never expected Sumlin to do well either, or any other first year coach for that matter. I bet Florida didn't think Mizzou was going to curb stomp them on Saturday either. Sometimes you get lucky and it all works out immediately, but I think that's the exception more than the rule. We've had it work out once in modern history, in 2012. We are still on path to finish 2018 as a "winning" season. How well the players can adapt, and how well the coaches can move them into their system and style is all that matters in regards to the W/L column, assuming you have enough talent to get it done.

This all pretty much comes down to tempering expectations for a first year coach in general. Someone on here gave a stat that new coaches generally lose 2 more games per year than the team was expected to have under the old coach. I believe it so I'm not going to look it up. My hopes and dreams have no bearing on how the season shakes out.

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

I look forward to November 2019 when you open up your sock drawer to drop your annual post in the Zoo

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

How is the honeymoon over?

Please go see every great coaches first season at a new school -- Saban @ Bama, Dabo at Clemson (first few years).

have some perspective. Knee jerk reactions are for fools.

me

All that money and we still can't hire an Amazing offensive Playcaller.

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

$75 million for 10 years and he can't do any better than mond! It's going to be a long ten years.

oustiderlookingin said:

---

Did he need glasses when he won his last Natty?

---

No, he just needed a thug, thief, rapist quarterback

We have some pretty ridiculous fans.

You guys do realize we have won every game we were predicted to win and lost every game we were predicted to lose. We are right where we should be, with a top 2-3 recruiting class coming in next year.

This is year 1. Let's let the program develop beyond year 1 before throwing in the towel

beerad12man said:

---

We have some pretty ridiculous fans.

You guys do realize we have won every game we were predicted to win and lost every game we were predicted to lose. We are right where we should be, with a top 2-3 recruiting class coming in next year.

This is year 1. Let's let the program develop beyond year 1 before throwing in the towel

---

Not sure we're "throwing in the towel". This board seems to be like modern politics...no middle ground.

Half this board thinks Jimbo/Mond are terrible and the sole cause for all our problems.

The other half, thinks Jimbo/Mond are sacred cows and everything that is wrong is everyone's fault but theirs.

As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

aggie813 said:

---

I do. I don't pay his salary.
The question is really this, who is a better coach, Sumlin or Jimbo?
Jimbo all day long.

---

Zona is on a 2 game win streak.

Gene Chizik also won a National Championship at Auburn. Want to hire him for $75 million too? He's currently out of coaching.

Ric Clark said:

---

Yes, and I say that because we currently do not have an SEC caliber OL WRs or DBs. The players we currently have in those positions are from the KS era.

In the 4th quarter, we could have had Tom Brady at QB and we still would have been in trouble. No separation from the WRs, an OL which cannot protect anyone (evidence is the last play of the game 5 on 3 and they still get to the QB), and the DBs have been problematic all season ... heck they have been that way since Fran was here.

Fix those positions and we have a successful program, and Coach Fisher is a successful coach.

---

I believe what you are saying is we need a different set of Jimmies and Joes and I agree so we need to show some patience. That will probably take a couple more years before we are able to really be competitive in the SEC. Recruiting is the single most important factor at this point. We seem to have a pretty talented well rounded class at the moment. My biggest concern with our current commitments is the lack of a stud QB prospect.

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Alabama_Crimson_Tide_football_team

https://www.sbnation.com/a/2007-college-football-season/alabama-ulm-nick-saban

Bunch of rich dudes I don't know's money.
And you're asking me if I think gambling someone else's money is worth hiring a top ten (at the very least), but more than likely top five, head coach?

Damn right it was

Aggiedave1998 said:

---

rwhitlock3 said:

---

Aggiedave1998 said:

---

rwhitlock3 said:

---

Aggiedave1998 said:

---

KYou guys need to give the whole, "wait until Fisher get his own players" and "Fisher is stuck with Sumlin's scrubs" narritave a break. Over the last 5 years, A&M is ranked #9 in recruiting. Stop making excuses for poor decisions. Stop giving Fisher a pass and blaming poor decisions on "Sumlin's scrubs". Sumlin gave Fisher a top 10 recruited team, top to bottom. Does that mean Sumlin was a good/better coach...no. Does that mean that Fisher deserves all the "sky is falling" criticism he is getting...no. It most certainly means that Fisher did not inherit an empty cupboard. There is plenty of talent on this team on both sides of the ball. Stop making excuses for Fisher by blaming Sumlin.

https://n.rivals.com/news/rivals-top-50-recruiting-teams-of-the-past-five-years

---

Yes, Sumlin had highly rated classes. But then why do we not have any JR or SR receivers? And where are the 4/5 star CBs? What about the black hole that was RB recruiting when Jimbo showed up? He has highly rated classes because we always took large classes, but we were always young because of attrition at key positions and lack of development

---

Black hole at RB? You mean the same RB that Auburn couldn't stop? The one that went 17/107 with 2 TDs on the ground and 5/75 with 1TD receiving? As for attrition, with 5 years ranked in the top 10, we have plenty of talent. And let's not be naive...all programs hame attrition, but they all seem to deal with it well. We seem to be the only ones to use it as a perpetual excuse.

As for highly rated classes due to taking large classes...a simple red herring. Class size is dependent on available scholarships and it's the same limit for all programs. We have had both large and small classes over the years...just like every other program. However, over the last 5 years, our program ranks #9.

"Lack of talent...Sumlin's guys...not his players"...all just excuses to avoid legitimate criticism. That narrative, besides being false, is wearing thin.

---

I am talking about the fact that behind Traveyon, there was nothing but a walk on senior RB who has already been passed up by a true freshman. Sumlin and company definitely neglected some key positions. You are right, they recruited well in some (like DT) but the role of a Head Coach is to recruit an entire roster. The WR, CB, OL and RB behind traveyon are examples of his roster mismanagement. And you say all programs have attrition which is true, but look at some of the teams we have played this year that have so much more depth than us... how do you explain that with Sumlin's recruiting.

In regards to large classes, look at Clemson. They are pretty even in regards to class rankings, but always take smaller classes. They just take higher rated prospects and don't have high attrition levels like we do.

I am not saying Jimbo doesn't deserve criticism, but to be upset only 9 games into his first season seems a bit extreme...

---

Fair points.

I do disagree with the Clemson comparison however. Clemson signed 22 in 2016, 26 in 2015, 22 in 2014, 23 in 2013, 20 in 2012, 29 in 2011, 23 in 2010. Our class sizes over the same period were in the same ballpark, so I'm not sure Clemson has had super small classes on average...the last two years being the exception.

And just to be clear...my original post was in reference Fisher apologists blaming everything on "Sumlin's scrubs" claiming that Fisher will be the 2nd coming of Christ once he gets "his guys in here". Had we had horrible recruiting and Sumlin had left Fisher absolutely nothing to work with, I might entertain such protectionists arguments. However, that is simply not the case.

I wouldn't say I'm upset with Fisher as a whole after 9 games. But I do think it's fair to question some of his decisions. I also think it's fair to expect much more than I saw from Fisher in the last two games. "Lack of talent" and "Sumlin's guys" don't explain away those games.
.

---

Not sure why you refute the Clemson comparison by going back to 2010. Those guys are long gone. Then, you got the wrong numbers for 2014 and 2016 (too high by 2 and 1). And then you completely skip the part that proves they don't have a lot of attrition, their 2017 and 2018 classes that only had 14 and 17 commits.
Also, go compare the average recruit rating on 247. Clemson was usually in the 90 - 92 range over the last five years while we were normally in the 87-89 range. Our best class was 2014 with a 91.99 average and there ain't many of them still around.

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

We'll know the answer better in, say, 2020.

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

I think it was a good idea.

Goro Majima said:

---

Captain Augustus McCrae said:

---

Now that the honeymoon is over, who still thinks this was a good idea?

---

We'll know the answer better in, say, 2020.

---

How correct you were

OP:

That deal is getting better every year.

Never thought guaranteed contracts were a good idea. I prefer performance-based contracts.

It was a good idea the day it was signed and one game win or lose doesn't change that. Obviously now looks great. Just wondering why this wasn't revisited on 11/25/18 when we beat #8 LSU to finished 2nd in SEC West.

Wrangler said:

---

Never thought guaranteed contracts were a good idea. I prefer performance-based contracts.

---

Says the guy that has never negotiated a contract with a Div I coach or similar position

Wrangler said:

---

Never thought guaranteed contracts were a good idea. I prefer performance-based contracts.

---

Ask Texas what is more expensive... Buying out a coach every 4 years or paying for a really good one for 10 years.

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

Wrangler said:

---

Never thought guaranteed contracts were a good idea. I prefer performance-based contracts.

---

Says the guy that has never negotiated a contract with a Div I coach or similar position

---

Why are you annoyed with my opinion... because I don't agree with you? Let's all talk about ColoradoMooseTurd's issues.

Go!

This is already one of the best contracts in the league

Great hire and well deserved.

$10-15 Million/year contracts are coming, so we got a steal if Jimbo is here for next 20 plus years