HoustonAg2106 said:

---

In his first year he had us playing for a trip to the SEC championship game in the last game of the year against our most hated rival.

Would you seriously have said that is a bad first year if I told you that in July? I understand the context of losing every power 4 game in November, but it's not enough to just completely give up on him after one freaking year

---

Not a good year. Not a bad year. No reason for Elko hate, but no reason for Elko love either. 8-4 is about what should have been expected given our schedule. Losing a meaningless bowl game is pretty much meaningless.

That said, acting like Elko did a great job because we were playing for a chance for the SEC Championship appearance is as bad as those wanting him fired after one year. It was a combination of an easy conference schedule (at least until the last game), other SEC teams doing much worse than expected, and a lucky tie breaker situation. We were an OK team, not a really good team. And that is OK for a first year coach. Just don't make it out to be more than it was.

Coach blO said:

---

Playing for an SEC championship game berth on last regular season game had more to do with scheduling and the state of the sec than it did with the quality of the team. The sec is not as strong as we all pretend. We just lost to a bad big 10 team that was nowhere close to the big 10 championship game while we were almost in the sec championship game. The sec is not dominate. Let's stop pretending this is a strong conference top to bottom. There are two championship level teams in this conference and that's it.

---

SEC is still very strong, top to bottom, compared to others. Big 10 is respectable now too with its new additions.
Both have a dominant top 2 or 3.
But the separation starts once you start sizing up 4 thru the rest.
Having solid teams thru the middle like that opens the door to conference cannibalism, occasionally taking a bite outta the top 3 also.

TexAggie1999 said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

In his first year he had us playing for a trip to the SEC championship game in the last game of the year against our most hated rival.

Would you seriously have said that is a bad first year if I told you that in July? I understand the context of losing every power 4 game in November, but it's not enough to just completely give up on him after one freaking year

---

Not a good year. Not a bad year. No reason for Elko hate, but no reason for Elko love either. 8-4 is about what should have been expected given our schedule. Losing a meaningless bowl game is pretty much meaningless.

That said, acting like Elko did a great job because we were playing for a chance for the SEC Championship appearance is as bad as those wanting him fired after one year. It was a combination of an easy conference schedule (at least until the last game), other SEC teams doing much worse than expected, and a lucky tie breaker situation. We were an OK team, not a really good team. And that is OK for a first year coach. Just don't make it out to be more than it was.

---

Agreed

Elko had an opportunity with this team to do much better.

In my eyes he finished well below average.

The faults were with playcalling and secondary. He deserves the blame because he is in control. Edit to add: evaluation of talent and depth charts seems to be an issue to. Unsure of who decides and how on that but there's blame there for sure

If he brings back assistants with no changes, alarm bells are ringing very very loudly

I'm not hating Elko or any of the coaches or players. Just like I didn't hate Jimbo or Sumlin (although I will state I did have an active hatred of Addazzio, Spavital, and Mazzone. And don't get me started on Fran for what he did to RC's Wrecking Crew.).

But yet another November collapse is unacceptable. We've all seen this movie before, multiple times even. Auburn and USC were absolutely winnable games. South Carolina was far better than I anticipated they would be but I can see a path to beating the cockgobblers as well. tu. Ugh. They really did dominate us, but even so, it was only 10 points and we did drop a potential pick-six. I won't say we should have beaten those ****ers given the ineptitude of our offense.

Then throw in what Elko said the other night about knowing HIS defense is unable to run zone coverage. Such a statement leads to lots of questions, all of which have been posted elsewhere on TA.

RaggedConverge said:

---

I think you hit on a good portion of the problem. A program has to develop the athletes. In the end these kids want to get to the nfl.

Deserves more then the 1 blue star I can give.

---

There's no such thing as development with the portal.

Big question is if your defense can't run a zone and you're a defense based head coach. What the eff is happening?

45-70Ag said:

---

RaggedConverge said:

---

I think you hit on a good portion of the problem. A program has to develop the athletes. In the end these kids want to get to the nfl.

Deserves more then the 1 blue star I can give.

---

There's no such thing as development with the portal.

---

Oh there still is and we don't have it

Kids aren't waiting two and three years to develop in the eyes of a coach, they go where they get on the field and get paid and will leave any school to do so.

TAMUallen said:

---

Elko had an opportunity with this team to do much better.

In my eyes he finished well below average.

The faults were with playcalling and secondary. He deserves the blame because he is in control. Edit to add: evaluation of talent and depth charts seems to be an issue to. Unsure of who decides and how on that but there's blame there for sure

If he brings back assistants with no changes, alarm bells are ringing very very loudly

---

The primary reason we struggled in the secondary is simply because the players themselves just aren't very good, and/or very smart if they've got challenges latching onto zone concepts.
Full display of how bad it was in the bowl game, with Will Lee out and with Chappell missing most of season.
The leftovers looked like leftovers.

And good coaches on the other sideline are gonna expose your weak spots and attack them.
A la Dezz Ricks

Saban should've been fired after his first season (7 wins) at Bama!

Hello? Is anyone home? Lost 4 of the last 5.

Game has changed. Good or bad makes no difference. Coaches job at a major program making major money is to win. To busy finding ways to win have a thought about the knitting club conversation. Job is not to wax nostalgic about the virtue of the veer offense and the dangers of the forward pass. There were 12 teams that made the playoffs. 6 of them are pretty good teams. They figured it out. Either do so as well or get a coach that can. I give SC a pass. If I was at SC I would be very optimistic about the coach even though not in playoffs.

Because it was a paper tiger and not elite

It funny that you think we are a major program. Bless your heart!

Our $. Our facilities. The commercial value of our brand and our team. Our recruiting rankings. Our coaching cost. Our conference. Our population. Our tv draw. All incontrovertibly are a major program. Definitely top 12. Bless your heart.

Our performance on the other hand is maybe top 40...sometimes top 25. Unacceptable year one or any year. Go 8-5 and with losses that look like south carolinas losses (and wins like their wins)...ok, I'll by the rebuilding, year one crap. But there was nothing like that here. And there is no excuse for the mediocrity. None. No additional coaching $ needed. Better hiring decisions needed.

JST92 said:

---

Game has changed. Good or bad makes no difference. Coaches job at a major program making major money is to win. To busy finding ways to win have a thought about the knitting club conversation. Job is not to wax nostalgic about the virtue of the veer offense and the dangers of the forward pass. There were 12 teams that made the playoffs. 6 of them are pretty good teams. They figured it out. Either do so as well or get a coach that can. I give SC a pass. If I was at SC I would be very optimistic about the coach even though not in playoffs.

---

Beamer at SC - 21' (6-6), 22' (8-4), 23' (5-7), 24' (9-3)...

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

In his first year he had us playing for a trip to the SEC championship game in the last game of the year against our most hated rival.

Would you seriously have said that is a bad first year if I told you that in July? I understand the context of losing every power 4 game in November, but it's not enough to just completely give up on him after one freaking year

---

Don't come here

Because here is a list of the the 12 most valuable athletic programs in order: Ohio State, Texas, Texas A&M, Michigan, Alabama, Notre Dame, Georgia, Nebraska, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Penn St, USC. Every one of the top 12 is either in the playoff now OR has a history of national championship success(Michigan, USC, Nebraska, OU). There is only ONE outlier and it's Texas A&M. People have a right to know why in the hell A&M remains so lowly respected despite being a BILLION dollar program(one of only 4 in the country). As far as Elko's first year, it's no longer like it used to be..Even compared to Sark's first year. The unlimited transfer portal is rolling now and it wasn't in 2021. THAT'S the difference. First year expectations have and SHOULD dramatically change when you are a billion dollar program who can attract players that are already developed and NFL caliber(Scourton, Lee). The days of giving a coach a pass in his first year are over for me.

8-5 with our schedule is certainly not a good year.

Finishing the season once again with a ton of losses is not good.

Having a defense with the talent to be much better and a defensive coach and still playing like we did defensively is not good.

Losing to your rival is not good. Being dominated by rival even worse.

Hundreds of coaches could have gone 8-5 with this team.
Ive never actually coached football but pretty sure give me a year devoted to study of it and i could have gotten to 8-5.

And for all the "next year" folks, consider that our D stands to be much worse next season. Our offense could be better, but probably needs to be excellent to overcome D and because we will once again have an OL that wont be top tier, im not holding out hope. Go ahead and pencil me in for 8-5 prediction for next year...it is what we do.

I was talking about SCs season this year. Sc is not the major program A&M is. The idea that performance has to wait 5 years suggests our top in the country paid coaches and existing elite stable of recruits have to relearn the complex sport of football...what with the blocking, tackling, running, catching and clock management calculus.

Point is...only 8-5 year i wouldn't be totally angry (though still frankly disappointed) would be SCs year this year. Showing beamers previous years is a non sequitur borne of an excuse making mind that sustains mediocrity.

merch said:

---

8-5 with our schedule is certainly not a good year.

Finishing the season once again with a ton of losses is not good.

Having a defense with the talent to be much better and a defensive coach and still playing like we did defensively is not good.

Losing to your rival is not good. Being dominated by rival even worse.

Hundreds of coaches could have gone 8-5 with this team.
Ive never actually coached football but pretty sure give me a year devoted to study of it and i could have gotten to 8-5.

And for all the "next year" folks, consider that our D stands to be much worse next season. Our offense could be better, but probably needs to be excellent to overcome D and because we will once again have an OL that wont be top tier, im not holding out hope. Go ahead and pencil me in for 8-5 prediction for next year...it is what we do.

---

You lost me at "defense with the talent to be much better". Where is it?
How many of the defense 2-deep have a legit NFL future?
Particularly at LBs or DBs?

TxAg76 said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Elko had an opportunity with this team to do much better.

In my eyes he finished well below average.

The faults were with playcalling and secondary. He deserves the blame because he is in control. Edit to add: evaluation of talent and depth charts seems to be an issue to. Unsure of who decides and how on that but there's blame there for sure

If he brings back assistants with no changes, alarm bells are ringing very very loudly

---

The primary reason we struggled in the secondary is simply because the players themselves just aren't very good, and/or very smart if they've got challenges latching onto zone concepts.
Full display of how bad it was in the bowl game, with Will Lee out and with Chappell missing most of season.
The leftovers looked like leftovers.

And good coaches on the other sideline are gonna expose your weak spots and attack them.
A la Dezz Ricks

---

We are now calling Lincoln riley a good coach?

45-70Ag said:

---

Kids aren't waiting two and three years to develop in the eyes of a coach, they go where they get on the field and get paid and will leave any school to do so.

---

You're missing the point. We aren't developing players whether they are here 1,2,3 or a shocking 4 or 5

RUGuys4Real said:

---

Saban should've been fired after his first season (7 wins) at Bama!

---

Do tell me how that team ranked, recruiting wise, and what they were set up to do

TAMUallen said:

---

TxAg76 said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Elko had an opportunity with this team to do much better.

In my eyes he finished well below average.

The faults were with playcalling and secondary. He deserves the blame because he is in control. Edit to add: evaluation of talent and depth charts seems to be an issue to. Unsure of who decides and how on that but there's blame there for sure

If he brings back assistants with no changes, alarm bells are ringing very very loudly

---

The primary reason we struggled in the secondary is simply because the players themselves just aren't very good, and/or very smart if they've got challenges latching onto zone concepts.
Full display of how bad it was in the bowl game, with Will Lee out and with Chappell missing most of season.
The leftovers looked like leftovers.

And good coaches on the other sideline are gonna expose your weak spots and attack them.
A la Dezz Ricks

---

We are now calling Lincoln riley a good coach?

---

On offense, yeah.
As a program CEO, not so much

Developing players statement is so overused.

So I'm seeing Texas develops players. If that's the case why was their best WR a transfer that played at Houston for two years. Why were the WRs that were there the whole time not as good as the brand new transfer? Why was the highly rated star WR not playing that just transferred out not properly developed by them?

DrAg14 said:

---

It funny that you think we are a major program. Bless your heart!

---

We certainly are a major program. We just don't perform like a major program and that's the issue that we have

Quote:

---

playing for a trip to the SEC championship game in the last game of the year against our most hated rival.

---

Are you really 'playing for' when you fail to score a single offensive point?

LB12Diamond said:

---

Developing players statement is so overused.

So I'm seeing Texas develops players. If that's the case why was their best WR a transfer that played at Houston for two years. Why were the WRs that were there the whole time not as good as the brand new transfer? Why was the highly rated star WR not playing that just transferred out not properly developed by them?

---

Yeah it's a fair argument. It's a better argument that we get players rated 5 star and continually don't get 5 star type play. We get 4 stars that don't play that well. We get mind blowing transfers that don't do that well. There's something going on here that is not giving us good results. I think it is talent evaluation but then if we were to develop and better players, it shouldn't be such an issue.

We know it isn't a S&C issue now

LB12Diamond said:

---

I have learned on here in the last two days that all these bright individuals crying like children on here paid Jimbo's buyout. Even though I have it on good authority other super rich Ags were the ones that paid his buyout. I guess I'm going to have to believe the ones throwing temper tantrums on here bc they bring a very sound argument. They use the word we over and over.

---

No super rich Aggies stepped up. Nor superpoor ones. The school raided standing cash accounts of the TMF for the first tranche of about $20 million and burdened media revenue and special projects for the rest. We need 5-10 special projects annually to cover the roughly $7 million in annual payments now burdening that media revenue.

The school did that to allow the idiots who cry here to give to NIL to power up recruiting. Instead they want to create more burdens on revenue.

I hate his coaching or lack thereof

So that debate can be had in a couple more years if that's important to you. But crying about what Jimbo did with that 2022 class is not relevant at this present time.