Jump to content
The Smoakhouse Forums

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, WETSU said:

Some people have reported he was joking and doing that on purpose, hence why he was literally smiling and laughing through part of the video, but there were other indications that he is still very raw in terms of technique and rush moves and will need work. 

He will take some plays off also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, WETSU said:

I don’t set the rules for everyone. I just stated how I view teams of the past. If you guys think those games of the past are just as relevant as games now that’s your own opinions. My discussion with DB was mostly about him saying my parameters change or my goalpost were moving. 

I believe the last 10 or so years can effect recruiting which can have a drastic impact on the program as a whole.  A program can sell “being on the rise” for only so long without showing results.  Texas and Texas A&M are prime examples.  Teams that have been dominant for a decade still rule the recruiting cycle every year.  It’s the reason they have a 3 deep of 5* talent, don’t miss a beat when injuries happen, and keep churning out draft picks in droves.  It’s a cycle that keeps turning.    Let alabama or the others start winning 9 games for a while and watch a good bit of that talent go elsewhere.  Same with Clemson, Georgia, ohio St....  let them start struggling and it can linger.  Then getting top talent isn’t as easy as it once was.  Saying only 4-5 years prior is all that matters is kinda dumb in my opinion.  Those years are really important, but the previous 10-12 can be just as important.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

I believe the last 10 or so years can effect recruiting which can have a drastic impact on the program as a whole.  A program can sell “being on the rise” for only so long without showing results.  Texas and Texas A&M are prime examples.  Teams that have been dominant for a decade still rule the recruiting cycle every year.  It’s the reason they have a 3 deep of 5* talent, don’t miss a beat when injuries happen, and keep churning out draft picks in droves.  It’s a cycle that keeps turning.    Let alabama or the others start winning 9 games for a while and watch a good bit of that talent go elsewhere.  Same with Clemson, Georgia, ohio St....  let them start struggling and it can linger.  Then getting top talent isn’t as easy as it once was.  Saying only 4-5 years prior is all that matters is kinda dumb in my opinion.  Those years are really important, but the previous 10-12 can be just as important.  

They are both going about 8 years strong on that at least. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DB2point0 said:

I believe the last 10 or so years can effect recruiting which can have a drastic impact on the program as a whole.  A program can sell “being on the rise” for only so long without showing results.  Texas and Texas A&M are prime examples.  Teams that have been dominant for a decade still rule the recruiting cycle every year.  It’s the reason they have a 3 deep of 5* talent, don’t miss a beat when injuries happen, and keep churning out draft picks in droves.  It’s a cycle that keeps turning.    Let alabama or the others start winning 9 games for a while and watch a good bit of that talent go elsewhere.  Same with Clemson, Georgia, ohio St....  let them start struggling and it can linger.  Then getting top talent isn’t as easy as it once was.  Saying only 4-5 years prior is all that matters is kinda dumb in my opinion.  Those years are really important, but the previous 10-12 can be just as important.  

The flaw in your logic, is that programs who struggle for more than 4-5 years typically always bring in a new HC and recruiting gets a bump for 2-3 years while the new HC sells “being a team on the rise” then he either wins and it continues or he loses and the process starts all over after year 4. You’re not seeing anyone run out of “team on the rise momentum” because they are replacing HCs like candy these days. So to say 10 years effects recruiting is pretty inaccurate unless it’s the same HC for all 10 years. Insert my argument why nick saban and Bama is different than comparing these other schools for 4-5 years (the average length of the current HC tenures.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Valhalla said:

They are both going about 8 years strong on that at least. 

Exactly, and to say only the last 4-5 years is all that matters is dumb.  They’ve both missed out on top recruits the last couple of years due to mediocrity.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, WETSU said:

The flaw in your logic, is that programs who struggle for more than 4-5 years typically always bring in a new HC and recruiting gets a bump for 2-3 years while the new HC sells “being a team on the rise” then he either wins and it continues or he loses and the process starts all over after year 4. You’re not seeing anyone run out of “team on the rise momentum” because they are replacing HCs like candy these days. So to say 10 years effects recruiting is pretty inaccurate unless it’s the same HC for all 10 years. Insert my argument why nick saban and Bama is different than comparing these other schools for 4-5 years (the average length of the current HC tenures.) 

Teams with good histories will recruit well even in historical low times/standards.  Just look at Texas. Their brand recruits itself even while being a 7-5/8-4 type program.  That’s how history, and not just 4-5 years, keeps certain teams in some semblance of recruiting prominence.  Texas has had top 5 classes in the last 4 years and at worst a top 10.  It’s because of their history, while changing coaches they were able to still recruit well.  It’s not inaccurate as you say.  If the last 4-5 years is all that mattered then Texas shouldn’t be recruiting like they have been.  To me it goes beyond 10 years.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

Exactly, and to say only the last 4-5 years is all that matters is dumb.  They’ve both missed out on top recruits the last couple of years due to mediocrity.  

People will sign up to play for Texas. They all want to believe that Texas can become what is was from 2000-2009, but in reality that time period was the anomaly and Texas winning 8-9 games has really been what they are for most of their history.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

People will sign up to play for Texas. They all want to believe that Texas can become what is was from 2000-2009, but in reality that time period was the anomaly and Texas winning 8-9 games has really been what they are for most of their history.

What I find funny about that stretch also is they weren’t even the best team in the conference during that period. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WETSU said:

What I find funny about that stretch also is they weren’t even the best team in the conference during that period. 

They had a five year run from the 2005 season to the 2009 season where they should have dominated the conference more than they did. 

They went 4-1 against Oklahoma during that stretch, but still had only 2 conference titles to Oklahoma’s 3 during that same period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how I came to an Aggie thread to read how mediocre the Texas Longhorns have been throughout the history of the program.

  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lhornfan said:

Funny how I came to an Aggie thread to read how mediocre the Texas Longhorns have been throughout the history of the program.

#offseason #SmoakyAfterDark

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Valhalla said:

People will sign up to play for Texas. They all want to believe that Texas can become what is was from 2000-2009, but in reality that time period was the anomaly and Texas winning 8-9 games has really been what they are for most of their history.

Yet somehow is top 5 in total wins in college football history?....

🤘🏻

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

Yet somehow is top 5 in total wins in college football history?....

🤘🏻

126 seasons......

916 wins.....

About 7.2 wins per season 😬

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

126 seasons......

916 wins.....

About 7.2 wins per season 😬

I would imagine that’s probably a pretty high number of wins per year for a program. Alabama is probably similar since they have the same number wins as Texas. Michigan may be higher, I think they have the most wins all time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, JustAFan11 said:

I would imagine that’s probably a pretty high number of wins per year for a program. Alabama is probably similar since they have the same number wins as Texas. Michigan may be higher, I think they have the most wins all time. 

Shhhh lol.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Valhalla said:

126 seasons......

916 wins.....

About 7.2 wins per season 😬

Better than OU's average at 7.08 😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lhornfan said:

Better than OU's average at 7.08 😎

124 seasons

908 wins

I have that at 7.3 wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, the decimal points competition on SDC!!

😂

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

Haha, the decimal points competition on SDC!!

😂

It's February.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

124 seasons

908 wins

I have that at 7.3 wins.

Sorry... wasn't counting bowl wins. OU STILL ###!!! 😆😆

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JustAFan11 said:

I would imagine that’s probably a pretty high number of wins per year for a program. Alabama is probably similar since they have the same number wins as Texas. Michigan may be higher, I think they have the most wins all time. 

But only the prior 4-5 seasons are all that matter

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

Haha, the decimal points competition on SDC!!

😂

Better ask the resident know it all Aggie if it stops at the tenths or hundredths.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Valhalla said:

It's February.

Heard that! 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

Better ask the resident know it all Aggie if it stops at the tenths or hundredths.

It’s stops at the trophy case. OU has 49 conference and 7 national to Texas 32 conference and 4 national. You guys can argue all day over tenths of a point in the win column. But it’s hands down who the more successful program is imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...