bowl win jorts?

quote:

---

They have a better coach…

---

And you know this...how, exactly? One was very good in the NFL, and the other got his azz handed to him with a team that went 11-5 the very next season.

I think we'll finish right at .500

We'll beat New Mexico, Utah State, UAB, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor

We might beat Colorado and Arkansas, but we always play awful in Boulder and I can't remember the last time A&M won a big neutral site game

Okie Lite, Texas, OU and Tceh will destroy us

quote:

---

big neutral site game

---

thats sad

really really freakin sad

Arkansas showed flashes last year that they were starting to buy into Petrino's system. Knocking off LSU was huge. A&M showed nothing last year and at times during games looked as if they had given up entirely.

4-8 to 5-7 next year with little possibility that the defense will be much improved.

It's big for this reason: We'll likely be 3-0 going in and that game could define our season. Going 4-0 in OOC play would be a huge boost to what will be the youngest group of starters in the conference.

That's not true that A&M showed "nothing". Our last few games of the year were rough to be sure, but from Game 1 to about Game 9, there was steady improvement in many phases. And LSU wasn't that good. BNS, you don't know much about A&M, so don't throw out ignorant predictions. "Little to no chance the D will improve"? How do you know that? You don't. You're pizzing in the wind.

quote:

---

A&M showed nothing last year and at times during games looked as if they had given up entirely.

4-8 to 5-7 next year with little possibility that the defense will be much improved.

---

Wind the clocks back to January of 1998 and replace A&M with Texas and people were saying the EXACT same thing

[This message has been edited by BMEDAggie11 (edited 1/14/2009 2:45p).]

quote:

---

And you know this...how, exactly? One was very good in the NFL, and the other got his azz handed to him with a team that went 11-5 the very next season.

---

And one has been successful in college with fewer resources, while the other blew @ss this year as a first time college HC. Saban was 15-17 in NFL, then the Dolphins went 11-5 and won their division. He was still great at LSU, and turned Bama around pretty quick. There is pretty good list of good NFL coaches who disappointed at the college level and vice versa.

"We won the game," Texas defensive guru Will Muschamp said. "Stats are for losers. I like winning games."

quote:

---

Wind the clocks back to January of 1998 and replace A&M with Texas and people were saying the EXACT same thing

---

Except we hired a guy who had pretty successful as a college HC already and he came in and kept a soon to be Heisman winner in the fold, recruited like crazy, invigorated the fan base and boosters, healed old wounds (DKR)…oh and he took a 4-7 team to 9-3 in his first year instead of going from 7-6 to 4-8.

"We won the game," Texas defensive guru Will Muschamp said. "Stats are for losers. I like winning games."

quote:

---

One was very good in the NFL, and the other got his azz handed to him with a team that went 11-5 the very next season.

---

This is college. More coaches that come from the NFL ranks fail than succeed. You are more apt to have a Callahan or a Weiss than a Carroll. There have been too many articles to post them all but the basic premise was most NFL "guru's" don't relate well to spoiled, unmotivated, college kids that lack fundamentals.

quote:

---

Though Weis himself claims that, "My greatest attribute professionally is as a teacher" -- how much teaching had he really had to do prior to this season? Tom Brady and Weis' other Patriots protégés arrived as fully developed professionals. Quinn and the other veteran stars Weis inherited at Notre Dame had at least played college football. Teaching guys a playbook is one thing; teaching them how to play is another.

"In the NFL, those 53 guys, for the most part, have already figured it out," said USC offensive coordinator Steve Sarkisian, who spent the 2004 season as an assistant for the Oakland Raiders. "A lot of these kids coming in, they're so talented, they've gotten away with a lot of things they can't get away with in college -- a defensive end who only uses one pass-rush move, a receiver who runs the wrong routes. Those are the kind of things we have to teach our kids what to do.

---

And Petrino built a crappy Louisville program that was exclusively a basketball town into a BCS caliber team. That alone is reason enough!

quote:

---

Except we hired a guy who had pretty successful as a college HC already and he came in and kept a soon to be Heisman winner in the fold, recruited like crazy, invigorated the fan base and boosters, healed old wounds (DKR)…oh and he took a 4-7 team to 9-3 in his first year instead of going from 7-6 to 4-8.

---

If one goes looking for excuses, he'll find them

The point is, NOBODY thought tu was even going to be .500, let alone win 9 games.

quote:

---

Except we hired a guy who had pretty successful as a college HC already and he came in and kept a soon to be Heisman winner in the fold, recruited like crazy, invigorated the fan base and boosters, healed old wounds (DKR)…oh and he took a 4-7 team to 9-3 in his first year instead of going from 7-6 to 4-8.

---

And none of this means that Sherman won't eventually be successful at A&M. And BNS, no, that isn't reason enough. You're making predictions when you don't wtf you're even talking about.

quote:

---

You are more apt to have a Callahan or a Weiss than a Carroll.

---

That means the college game is due for another Pete. maybe it's Sherman?

quote:

---

Game 1 to about Game 9, there was steady improvement in many phases.

---

Specifically - what were these improvements? Passing yards in garbage time?

quote:

---

And LSU wasn't that good

---

Really? You sure you want to stick with this? The defending BCS champion? The same team that wiped the floor with their bowl opponent and was light years better than any team A&M beat last year.

quote:

---

Little to no chance the D will improve"? How do you know that? You don't.

---

Who do you return of significance? Which playmakers are going to step up? Where does your optimism come from?

Did you all of a sudden get talent across your D line? Did you get a half-dozen fast LB's that transferred in?

6-6. 7-5 is what I'm hoping for. How sad. Hopefully Sherman won't get a raise for that record.

1. This is exactly what I'm talking about-you don't know what you're talking about. If you WATCHED THE GAMES, you'd see that there was steady improvement as the the season went on in several key areas; the problem at the end was that our lack of depth at OL was so bad that it killed us with guys playing hurt, and our offense started sucking hind tit.
2. LSU was 7-5. Do you consider 7-5 to be really good? Because I don't.

3. We'll have a reworked OL, Johnson, Tannehill, Fuller, Gray/Michael/Stephens, and we're adding SEVERAL true freshman that can come in and be playmakers right away on offense. On defense, I'm not as optimistic-mainly because I'm not certain that we aren't going to have some big changes in philopshy on that side of the ball. We do have some talented guys, but they're young with little experience.

You being some twit on an A&M message board doesn't make your predictions any less retarded than they already were.

[This message has been edited by Bud Lite Kaminski (edited 1/14/2009 3:14p).]

quote:

---

That means the college game is due for another Pete. maybe it's Sherman?

---

Yeah, you run with that.....

He (carroll) recruited lights out from the start (first class - Top 10 class). He had a terrible start, opening victory and then 5 losses in 6 games. 3 of the losses were to teams that were ranked #12 or better at the time (all 5 were to teams that had been ranked in the top 25). The 5 losses were by a combined 25 points (that is an average of 5 pts per loss, Sunshine).

After going 0-3 in conference, he won the next 5 conference games (including a 27-0 shellacking of #20 UCLA). That was a program on the rise, and the next year proved it beyond any doubt.

quote:

---

steady improvement

---

Where?

Sherman started out with a Top 15 class, and is adding another. His first year didn't go well, and we'll see on his second. Little snide, puzzy comments like "yeah, you run with that" don't make a lot of sense when you, nor anyone, knows what will ultimately happen. The point is, Sherman not having the first year Carroll had means nothing. Carroll didn't have the first year Brown had and he's better than Brown is. Stoops didn't have the first year Brown did and he's better than Brown. Point is, you can't make those statements based on what we know now. You don't have some insight that lets you tap into the future. In fact, I think you've shown that you're a football dipschit.

[This message has been edited by Bud Lite Kaminski (edited 1/14/2009 3:17p).]

[This message has been edited by Bud Lite Kaminski (edited 1/14/2009 3:19p).]

If you cannot see how much we improved from Arkie State to Tceh, you're blind.

He can't see it because: 1) He has the football IQ of a f***ing chimp; and 2) he didn't watch the games. He just likes to troll around here being a dewsh.

There was improvement......until OU rolled into town. It was all downhill from there.

quote:

---

If one goes looking for excuses, he'll find them

The point is, NOBODY thought tu was even going to be .500, let alone win 9 games.

---

Before the 1998 season sure. Pretty much the same prediction for A&M 2008. After one season one of those coaches changed the expectation, the other didn’t. The initial question was why do I think Arkansas is going to win. While I do think Arkansas was a little better last year than A&M, it was marginal. But I do think Petrino has shown himself to be a better college coach to date. And that is why I think they win.

quote:

---

And none of this means that Sherman won't eventually be successful at A&M. And BNS, no, that isn't reason enough. You're making predictions when you don't wtf you're even talking about.

---

First that was me not BNS. Second, I didn’t say he wouldn’t eventually find success at A&M(though I have my doubts). I think, 4 games in next year, Petrino’s second year team will be better than Sherman’s. I think he did better last year and he has a track record of success. BMED compared the predictions about how Sherman would struggle to the ones made about Mack in 1998. That would have been relevant 5-6 months ago before Sherman took a 7-6 team to 4-8 (worse than I thought he would do actually) compared to Mack taking a 4-8 team to 9-3. If he doesn’t want people to compare him to Weiss and Callahan he better start looking more like Carroll.

Petrino has been successful before and has more going for him at Arkansas. Saying that he tanked in the NFL is so irrelevant given the records of guys going from the NFL to college v. college to the NFL.

quote:

---

That means the college game is due for another Pete. maybe it's Sherman?

---

Maybe. But Carroll took a 5-7 to 6-6 but more importantly 2-6 to 5-3 in conference with wins over both UCLA and Cal. They also got lucky with Carroll. He was the 3rd or 4th choice. Sherman beat out absolutely no one for the job. You might get lucky too, but I wouldn’t hold my breath. Not in this conference.

quote:

---

2. LSU was 7-5. Do you consider 7-5 to be really good? Because I don't.

---

I consider 8-5 with a bowl win over a ranked GT a hell of a lot better than 4-8 sitting at home.

quote:

---

We'll have a reworked OL, Johnson, Tannehill, Fuller, Gray/Michael/Stephens, and we're adding SEVERAL true freshman that can come in and be playmakers right away on offense.

---

Which means they will still be gelling/working out kinks 3 games in. All the more reason you will struggle with Arkansas.

quote:

---

Carroll didn't have the first year Brown had and he's better than Brown is. Stoops didn't have the first year Brown did and he's better than Brown.

---

Under Carroll USC is 88-15 for 85.43%. In the same time frame under Brown Texas has the exact same record is in arguably a tougher conference. For his whole tenure he is 115-26 for 81.56%. The both have one BCS title.

All that aside they both improved over the guy they replaced, Sherman did not.

I will concede that A&M improved for a while, but then they dropped off, Arkansas finished strong and Petrino is to date a better college coach. In any early game definitely give them an edge on a neutral field.

"We won the game," Texas defensive guru Will Muschamp said. "Stats are for losers. I like winning games."

A&M: 5-7
Tceh: 8-4

Book it.

Arkansas was very close to being 3-9 with two of it's losses to Arkansas state type schools.

quote:

---

Arkansas was very close to being 3-9 with two of it's losses to Arkansas state type schools.

---

We were very close to 1-11.

quote:

---

Arkansas was very close to being 3-9 with two of it's losses to Arkansas state type schools.

---

But they weren't. And they took out LSU to end the season. That my be a good indicator of Petrino v. Sherman in this debate.

"We won the game," Texas defensive guru Will Muschamp said. "Stats are for losers. I like winning games."

^
^
^
Does anyone EVER read those phuking novellas this dipschit posts? I've tried, and it's not the length; it's the utter stupidity. Example A: Petrino beat LSU at the end of the year, so Petrino is a better coach, no question. Nevermind that their NFL pedigrees are about as different as could possibly be. Absolutely no ability to entertain the concept of logic.

quote:

---

Does anyone EVER read those phuking novellas this dipschit posts? I've tried, and it's not the length; it's the utter stupidity. Example A: Petrino beat LSU at the end of the year, so Petrino is a better coach, no question. Nevermind that their NFL pedigrees are about as different as could possibly be. Absolutely no ability to entertain the concept of logic.

---

So you ask if anyone reads my post then confirm you read it? Brilliant.

I said a lot more than Petrino beat LSU at the end of the year. He has a good track record as a college HC, Sherman does not. I also pointed out(as have others) that their NFL pedigree means squat when you look at the track record for NFL guys taking college HC positions. And even less when you look at others who went college to NFL and then back to college.

Sherman may succeed, he may be better than Petrino, but the trends and their accomplishments to date point to Petrino having the upper hand next fall.

"We won the game," Texas defensive guru Will Muschamp said. "Stats are for losers. I like winning games."

quote:

---

6-6. 7-5 is what I'm hoping for. How sad. Hopefully Sherman won't get a raise for that record.

---

Amen to that, brother.

First thing we need is an attitude change up top.

How about this, you tell me what leads you to believe that Sherman is or will be a better college HC than Petrino.

"We won the game," Texas defensive guru Will Muschamp said. "Stats are for losers. I like winning games."