Countdown until Hop brings up how we are competing with 300 other schools in basketball so being ranked in the 60's or 70's really isn't that bad...
A&M ranked headed into next season?
11,322 Views |
152 Replies |
Last: 6 yr ago by wacarnolds
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
JJxvi said:
The football program is obviously healthier in basically every way that matters. Maybe Kennedy would have had an argument if he had followed up 2015-16 with something other than the football equivalent of having a crappy year because you have no one who can play quarterback.
Please explain why healthier. A&M hoops will be preseason ranked in most polls and will be one of the deepest most talented SEC teams going into the season that includes a lottery pick/SEC Defensive Player of the Year and Tyler Davis who was an All-SEC player his freshman year. Football will not be ranked in many if any polls. There are big questions at QB, OL, DE, LB, and CB. Christian Kirk is the only marquee returning player with Wilson and McCoy drawing a few preseason honors...possibly Keke. But that's about it.
So let's hear your position...
Well, I'll just start with the fact that I find "what are we ranked in the polls in one single preseason" to be a fairly useless indicator and probably umpteen items down the list on things I would use to decide on "the health of the program"
22
In the last 5-6 year period which is the time period for these coaches, A&M recruits better, is more competitive, has more fan interest, has more star power both on the team and from players who reached the next level, etc etc in football than we do in basketball. The end.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Not last season. The SEC football conference was well below standards and A&M had an experienced team that should have taken more advantage than they did. You can't tell me that losing to a mediocre Ole Miss team at Kyle with a virgin freshman QB at the helm wasn't a bad loss. Getting smoked by a 6-7 Mississippi State squad? Combined, those teams won only three other conference games all year. A&M couldn't even beat a very down LSU team that fired its coach.mengland said:
Hop the league Is so much better in football. It would be the equivalent of our basketball team playing in the ACC or our football team playing in the big 12.
If you think Texas A&M football is performing at a respectable clip under Sumlin with the players he recruited, you aren't objectively looking at the records or the performances...and the overall talent level has dropped since his arrival. He inherited FIVE 1st round draft choices and a Heisman winner, and he hasn't parlayed that into more talent.
Kennedy had a dip, but he's been significantly increasing the talent pipeline in the program over the last three years. I'm not saying he's great or head-and-shoulders ahead of Sumlin, but Sumlin certainly isn't head-and-shoulders ahead of Kennedy either.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
I said the influx of talent is the number one most significant component for any major D-1 sports program. It's no coincidence that most of the schools competing for a spot in the football playoff are at the top of most recruiting lists. Kentucky doesn't win because Calipari is great with a whit board. He has a steady of flow of the best talent in the country.JJxvi said:
Well, I'll just start with the fact that I find "what are we ranked in the polls in one single preseason" to be a fairly useless indicator and probably umpteen items down the list on things I would use to decide on "the health of the program"
Fan interest? That is your barometer to measure coaches? Really?
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
JJxvi said:
In the last 5-6 year period which is the time period for these coaches, A&M recruits better, is more competitive, has more fan interest, has more star power both on the team and from players who reached the next level, etc etc in football than we do in basketball. The end.
What are Sumlin's accomplishments with his players? Sumlin inherited something like 8-9 NFL players in that 11-2 first season. What are the notable accomplishments from 2013-2016?
Hop said:I said the influx of talent is the number one most significant component for any major D-1 sports program. It's no coincidence that most of the schools competing for a spot in the football playoff are at the top of most recruiting lists. Kentucky doesn't win because Calipari is great with a whit board. He has a steady of flow of the best talent in the country.JJxvi said:
Well, I'll just start with the fact that I find "what are we ranked in the polls in one single preseason" to be a fairly useless indicator and probably umpteen items down the list on things I would use to decide on "the health of the program"
Fan interest? That is your barometer to measure coaches? Really?
You asked about my sttement about the health of the program, yes?
Hop said:JJxvi said:
In the last 5-6 year period which is the time period for these coaches, A&M recruits better, is more competitive, has more fan interest, has more star power both on the team and from players who reached the next level, etc etc in football than we do in basketball. The end.
What are Sumlin's accomplishments with his players? Sumlin inherited something like 8-9 NFL players in that 11-2 first season. What are the notable accomplishments from 2013-2016?
Personally I consider actually winning with the players you are handed rather than blowing it up for 4 years to be an accomplishment in its own right. Sherman didnt coach that team.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
JJxvi said:Hop said:I said the influx of talent is the number one most significant component for any major D-1 sports program. It's no coincidence that most of the schools competing for a spot in the football playoff are at the top of most recruiting lists. Kentucky doesn't win because Calipari is great with a whit board. He has a steady of flow of the best talent in the country.JJxvi said:
Well, I'll just start with the fact that I find "what are we ranked in the polls in one single preseason" to be a fairly useless indicator and probably umpteen items down the list on things I would use to decide on "the health of the program"
Fan interest? That is your barometer to measure coaches? Really?
You asked about my sttement about the health of the program, yes?
I assumed we were discussing health as in what a coach can reasonably affect. The "health" of the business of Aggie football has always been and always will be more lucrative and popular than basketball for many deep-seeded cultural reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with Kevin Sumlin or Billy Kennedy. I'm talking about the health of the program in terms of why you hire a coach...to recruit talent to the program and win.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Sumlin is 1-9 against Alabama and LSU...his top competition. Arkansas and South Carolina are the only two teams he has consistently beaten in the SEC. Hell, Kennedy has beaten Kentucky twice and came a hair from beating Calipari a third time.
I'm not saying Kennedy is great. I'm just saying Sumlin isn't either.
I'm not saying Kennedy is great. I'm just saying Sumlin isn't either.
This is where your "recruiting analyst" biases come into play. I wouldn't ever hire a coach to "recruit talent to the program". The coach's job is to WIN. Period. Multiple ways to get that done in both sports. Winning is something Kennedy doesnt do nearly enough of but IMO Sumlin does at least to a mediocre level. You can bring all the talent into the program, but if you are, say, Mike Sherman who apparently was gods gift to stocking a team with talent, without winning it gets your ass fired.
Hop said:JJxvi said:Hop said:I said the influx of talent is the number one most significant component for any major D-1 sports program. It's no coincidence that most of the schools competing for a spot in the football playoff are at the top of most recruiting lists. Kentucky doesn't win because Calipari is great with a whit board. He has a steady of flow of the best talent in the country.JJxvi said:
Well, I'll just start with the fact that I find "what are we ranked in the polls in one single preseason" to be a fairly useless indicator and probably umpteen items down the list on things I would use to decide on "the health of the program"
Fan interest? That is your barometer to measure coaches? Really?
You asked about my sttement about the health of the program, yes?
I assumed we were discussing health as in what a coach can reasonably affect. The "health" of the business of Aggie football has always been and always will be more lucrative and popular than basketball for many deep-seeded cultural reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with Kevin Sumlin or Billy Kennedy. I'm talking about the health of the program in terms of why you hire a coach...to recruit talent to the program and win.
Look around you on this board Hop. The 10 of us who are always here know what this board actually looks like when the basketball program is healthier than the football program. It has happened. This aint it.
Should Sumlin do more with what he has? Absolutely... I don't think you'll find anyone that argues against that.
But to disagree that what the two coaches have produced is somehow equal (or that Kennedy has done better) is downright idiotic.
Sure, if you want to take immeasurables and say that based on things we really can't know for sure Sumlin should have done better and Kennedy's failures can be excused.
But don't try and argue actual results are comparable. They aren't. They aren't even close. Despite Sumlin's flaws we've finished a Top 50ish program every year, with 1 year being Top 10ish and another being Top 20ish.
Under Kennedy we've been a Top 50 program once. Never a Top 10 program.
But to disagree that what the two coaches have produced is somehow equal (or that Kennedy has done better) is downright idiotic.
Sure, if you want to take immeasurables and say that based on things we really can't know for sure Sumlin should have done better and Kennedy's failures can be excused.
But don't try and argue actual results are comparable. They aren't. They aren't even close. Despite Sumlin's flaws we've finished a Top 50ish program every year, with 1 year being Top 10ish and another being Top 20ish.
Under Kennedy we've been a Top 50 program once. Never a Top 10 program.
Basketball program right now is healthier than the football progran, and it isn't really that close.
I wonder how everything and anything on Texags leads to a bash on Sumlin piss and **** fight.
Facts:
Sumlin: post season trips every season
Kennedy: 2 post season trips in 6 seasons (not counting the tournament we bribed our way into.
Sumlin: post season trips every season
Kennedy: 2 post season trips in 6 seasons (not counting the tournament we bribed our way into.
To 1,000,000 touchdowns ...and beyond
Did my post get deleted? Wtf?
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Not me...what was your general take?bobinator said:
Did my post get deleted? Wtf?
It was "I think we can all agree that the idea that a program that has made the NCAA's once in the last six years is in better shape than our football program doesn't speak well about either one"
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
GE said:
Basketball program right now is healthier than the football progran, and it isn't really that close.
The basketball team will be one of the 2-3 preseason favorites to win the SEC. They will be ranked in the preseason and the expectation is Sweet 16 or bust for most that I've seen on this board so the expectations are high.
Most pundits are predicting a 7-5 type of season with no mentions for SEC contender or preseason rankings for the football team in 2017.
Yeah, starting this year I thought it was a no-brainer than the hoops program was healthier and better positioned for success next season. I guess that's not as clear to others which is surprising.
Which one is "healthier" wasn't the original argument. It was which one has had the better results.
mhayden's post that you argued with said:
Which is true.
I don't think it's even a question which ones results have been better. I also don't think it's a question which one looks like it's on better footing currently.
But those are separate arguments, and the "which one" is different.
mhayden's post that you argued with said:
Quote:
but the results have been far better than what BK has done.
Which is true.
I don't think it's even a question which ones results have been better. I also don't think it's a question which one looks like it's on better footing currently.
But those are separate arguments, and the "which one" is different.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Well, the question is which program is healthier now, not who had the least success in the past. Right? If you asked me that I could only pick one team to follow and I were to choose which one will have more success in the next couple of years, I'd pick basketball. I'll ask you that question. Which team will have more success in the next couple of years based on what you know about each team and each roster today?bobinator said:
It was "I think we can all agree that the idea that a program that has made the NCAA's once in the last six years is in better shape than our football program doesn't speak well about either one"
Well like I just posted, that wasn't the original question. That's a different question, with a different obvious answer.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,039
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
No, it started off who was the better coach and posters started litigating annual results and I countered that the talent pipeline and the current health of the program is as important or more important than historical results especially when the comparison is two mediocre records....8-5 vs.19-16 type of stuff. 8-5 seasons at Texas A&M aren't remarkable with all of the recent advantages in place as far as conference affiliation, brand new state-of-the-art facilities, and plenty of media exposure. Aside from the 11-2 in year one with mostly inherited players, the accomplishments just aren't there. In fact, the record is one of lost opportunity. Sumlin couldn't capitalize on the Heisman Trophy hype and all the swag hype, magnified even more when you consider that Texas was struggling throughout his tenure. Even OU was a non-factor in Texas recruiting for the first 2-3 years of Sumlin's tenure.bobinator said:
Which one is "healthier" wasn't the original argument. It was which one has had the better results.
mhayden said:Quote:
but the results have been far better than what BK has done.
Which is true.
I don't think it's even a question which ones results have been better. I also don't think it's a question which one looks like it's on better footing currently.
But those are separate arguments, and the "which one" is different.
I mean it literally started with that comment by mhayden which was about results. You decided to transform the argument into being about the current "health" of the respective programs.
It doesn't really matter though, I'm pretty sure everyone here actually agrees with two things, so it's like everyone is arguing with two different straw men.
1) Sumlin's results have been better. - This isn't even close. That's not say his results have been particularly impressive, but they're better than Kennedy's.
2) Kennedy's current and future outlook is better - This is also not close.
Does anyone actually disagree with either of those?
It doesn't really matter though, I'm pretty sure everyone here actually agrees with two things, so it's like everyone is arguing with two different straw men.
1) Sumlin's results have been better. - This isn't even close. That's not say his results have been particularly impressive, but they're better than Kennedy's.
2) Kennedy's current and future outlook is better - This is also not close.
Does anyone actually disagree with either of those?
1. Results - football, easilybobinator said:
I mean it literally started with that comment by mhayden which was about results. You decided to transform the argument into being about the current "health" of the respective programs.
It doesn't really matter though, I'm pretty sure everyone here actually agrees with two things, so it's like everyone is arguing with two different straw men.
1) Sumlin's results have been better. - This isn't even close. That's not say his results have been particularly impressive, but they're better than Kennedy's.
2) Kennedy's current and future outlook is better - This is also not close.
Does anyone actually disagree with either of those?
2a. Current outlook - basketball, easily
2b. Future outlook - too early to tell, would lean basketball because it's much easier for basketball to meet their respective expectations
I mean... obviously it's too early to tell on the future, that's why it's the future, but if you had to take a side on which one is more likely to have their job in two years it's obviously Kennedy right?
Nice summary, agree entirelybobinator said:
I mean it literally started with that comment by mhayden which was about results. You decided to transform the argument into being about the current "health" of the respective programs.
It doesn't really matter though, I'm pretty sure everyone here actually agrees with two things, so it's like everyone is arguing with two different straw men.
1) Sumlin's results have been better. - This isn't even close. That's not say his results have been particularly impressive, but they're better than Kennedy's.
2) Kennedy's current and future outlook is better - This is also not close.
Does anyone actually disagree with either of those?
Basketball coach is clearly the more stable job to hold at Texas A&M, and I don't expect Sumlin to be here in 2 years. But that speaks more to program expectations and conference competition than the difference in coaching talent between Sumlin and Kennedy.bobinator said:
I mean... obviously it's too early to tell on the future, that's why it's the future, but if you had to take a side on which one is more likely to have their job in two years it's obviously Kennedy right?
I only broke out current outlook and future outlook into separate items because we are always putting the cart before the horse with Kennedy (and Sumlin). And both have a way of making us look dumb.
I can agree with that, and honestly who really cares about looking beyond next season anyway? In basketball the whole world can change in a year.
I think all you have to do is look at the freshmen and juniors on the basketball team. We will have a VERY strong group of upperclassmen for at minimum the next four seasons. Land a top PF/C in the '18 recruiting class and you're looking at a program well-placed to make deep tournament runs year after year.wacarnolds said:Basketball coach is clearly the more stable job to hold at Texas A&M, and I don't expect Sumlin to be here in 2 years. But that speaks more to program expectations and conference competition than the difference in coaching talent between Sumlin and Kennedy.bobinator said:
I mean... obviously it's too early to tell on the future, that's why it's the future, but if you had to take a side on which one is more likely to have their job in two years it's obviously Kennedy right?
I only broke out current outlook and future outlook into separate items because we are always putting the cart before the horse with Kennedy (and Sumlin). And both have a way of making us look dumb.
I care. Inadequate pipeline management is what I see as the primary cause of most of the failures during BK's tenure.bobinator said:
I can agree with that, and honestly who really cares about looking beyond next season anyway? In basketball the whole world can change in a year.
well obviously the coaching staff should care, but I mean as fans there's no point worrying about two years down the road. Let's actually live up to expectations next year first.
Featured Stories
See All
14:28
17h ago
7.2k
Comparing metrics from Texas A&M's top teams throughout history
by David Sandhop
13:53
12h ago
2.3k
Reliever Evan Aschenbeck's JUCO path led him to Aggieland success
by Ryan Brauninger
43:16
14h ago
4.7k
Elko encouraged by strides exhibited during A&M's second scrimmage
by Olin Buchanan
12:56
17h ago
6.9k
Rattlin' Boggin' with Aggie sluggers Jace LaViolette & Hayden Schott
by Ryan Brauninger
ChillyAg19
Texas A&M Offers Colorado OT Savion Washington (Transfer Portal)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
10