Mack Brown is the worst coach...

[the_meanstrosity]

in all of college football. Discuss amongst yourselves.

And Chance Mock...how is he a starting QB? Every time the guy gets touched, he loses yardage, lol.

[IMetTrentGreen]

eh, what?

[the_meanstrosity]

IMTG,

Mack Brown is the worst game day college football coach of all time. It's not a unique argument I know, but every time I watch this guy hit the field with the nation's top talent and find a way to waste it...I shudder.

Once Texas gets themselves a great football coach...watch out. But of course, it could be too late by then if Stoops and Franchione have their way.

[TroyF]

Originally posted by the_meanstrosity
IMTG,

Mack Brown is the worst game day college football coach of all time. It's not a unique argument I know, but every time I watch this guy hit the field with the nation's top talent and find a way to waste it...I shudder.

Once Texas gets themselves a great football coach...watch out. But of course, it could be too late by then if Stoops and Franchione have their way.

Nah, Mack isn't the worst. Snyder is right up there with him. Both have records against top 10 teams that make you shudder. I think both teams are excited to have each other on the schedule just so one of em can finally beat a top 10 team. Of course, after Arkansas and Marshall did them in this year, they don't even have that to look fondly on.

Mack is the best recruiter in college football. Snyder is one of the smartest minds in college football. (go to a low academic institution, recruit idiots, play a soft schedule that a junior high team would consider a cakewalk, get 9-11 wins a year and have everyone think you are a God)

Neither can coach their way out of a wet paper bag on gameday.

TroyF

[Huckleberry]

They're no Guy Morriss, that's for damn sure.

[IMetTrentGreen]

and with that, this thread has ended

[the_meanstrosity]

IMTG, I think this thread will be re-lived next week. If Mack Brown brings that same game plan out for OU, they are going to get rolled.

TroyF, agree on Snyder. He's not a great game day coach either. But he does well considering the talent they bring into that school.

[IMetTrentGreen]

texas is going to get rolled. im not arguing with you there. i jsut didnt understand the point of the post. now i do

[vex]

If that isn't some confidence.

[the_meanstrosity]

IMTG,

I have nothing against Mack Brown and to be honest, I love it that he's coach of Texas. He gives the rest of the Big 12 a chance to win despite the Longhorns' bevy of talent, lol. But I'm just amazed that he continues to have a job in Austin considering the deep pockets of that program. Look at A&M buying Franchione away from Alabama. I just wonder when Texas makes that move.

The Longhorns aren't the only Big 12 team I wonder about. I'm amazed how Ricardo Patton (basketball coach) still has a job at Colorado. That guy is still living off his one great season more than 5 years ago. Amazing how some of these coaches just continue to keep their jobs despite the expectations heaved upon them year after year.

[IMetTrentGreen]

mack is a fine coach. he has one big weakness: he's a pussy

he won't discipline players, he won't fire coaches, he has thin skin, and he just doesnt have any instinct at all. some players need to be yelled at, and he just hugs. he's a pussy. if he grows a pair and fires half his staff, texas would be un stoppable

and yet, here we are, doomed to underachieve

[TroyF]

Originally posted by IMetTrentGreen
mack is a fine coach. he has one big weakness: he's a pussy

he won't discipline players, he won't fire coaches, he has thin skin, and he just doesnt have any instinct at all. some players need to be yelled at, and he just hugs. he's a pussy. if he grows a pair and fires half his staff, texas would be un stoppable

and yet, here we are, doomed to underachieve

You can't be a "fine" coach and have the problems you speak of. A head coach is defined by the whole and not the parts. Gary Barnett has had a subpar defensive coordinater on his staff for 5 years. The results of that decision reflect on him and how he is judged. Forget the fact CU has won back to back north titles, Colorado is judged by how poorly the defense has performed.

Mack is judged and will be judged by having the most underacheiving talent in the entire country. Not really even a close second. I don't care if he has one weakness, or one hundred of them. His weakness, unlike Gary's, has prevented him from ever winning a single conference championship.

I don't give a damn if he's the greatest X's and O's coach in the history of the game. I don't care if he's the best recruiter in college football. He can't win win it counts. His teams consistently fail in big games. He's not a fine coach. He's a joke. He can change. . . I just don't see any signs that he will.

TroyF

[IMetTrentGreen]

you'd have to define a "big game." last saturday was a big game. beating ksu in manhattan was a big game too. and NU in lincoln, washingotn in the holiday bowl, lsu last year, a top tewn aggie team in '98, and so on.

i agree that mack sucks for the most part, but i don't like how most people suddenly downgrade any big games texas actually wins

[the_meanstrosity]

IMTG,

I can't call KSU a big game for Texas. Now Texas is a big game for KSU, but for Texas it's just another game. My opinion is based on the fact that Texas is clearly the superior team to KSU. Every year Texas grabs top 5-10 recruiting classes while KSU is normally in the 20's to 40's.

It's akin to the New York Yankees. The Yankees may be a big game for the White Sox, but the Yankees would probably consider the Red Sox their big game based on the talent level and payrolls.

As for Mack Brown not having a pair...I have to agree with TroyF. He may be all that you say, but that's still not the trait of a good football coach. The Kansas Jayhawks were in a similar situation with former coach Terry Allen. Nice guy and everybody's friend. But that resulted in his players and staff walking all over him and absolutely no discipline on the football field. And hence Terry Allen put the Kansas football proram back 4 years.

Eventually it's going to catch up to Mack Brown just as it caught up with Terry Allen.

[IMetTrentGreen]

no shit you can't call it a big game. thats because texas won. it was a big game on friday, now its not. this is what im talking about

[The Afoci]

IMHO, the game vs. K-State was only a big game because of the loss to Arkansas.

[TroyF]

I didn't consider it a big game on Friday. I did think the KSU game last year was big and he got one. Nebraska last year? You're joking, right? I mean, CU went onto the same field and destroyed Nebraska. The game was over early in the third quarter.

The fact that the game was even CLOSE was a disgrace.

Washington in the Holiday Bowl a big game? No. That was a dissapointment game. The game right before it was the important one. You know, the one where the team was beaten by the inferior Buffs?

Mack Brown knows what his "Big Game" is year after year. It's Oklahoma and then the Big12 title game. He rarely gets to the second big game, because he needs help from everyone else to win the South. This year, Arkansas was a huge game. This was THE year. No more Simms to bash. Roy Williams back for his senior year. Playing a team that not only beat you, but disrespected you a couple of years ago to top it off. They layed another egg.

He doesn't lose EVERY big game. He loses most of them. His record against top 10 opponents is a spectacular 2-8. (Gary Barnett beat one more top 10 opponent in a single year than Mack has in his entirety at Texas) Hell, Mack has a below .500 record against top 25 opponents while at Texas. think about that for a second.

I understand you have bashed Mack and the team. The point is, you can't call him a "fine" coach when his record looks like that. He isn't. Maybe he will one day be one, he isn't now.

TroyF

[vex]

While Stoops is 8-1 vs the top 10 and 15-2 vs the top 25.

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by vexroid
While Stoops is 8-1 vs the top 10 and 15-2 vs the top 25.

He is a mighty fine coach.

[the_meanstrosity]

IMTG,

You bet Texas won. And they should have with much better talent. In fact, they should have rolled KSU.

I know a lot of KSU fans and they felt the only way they had a chance to beat Texas was if Mack Brown did his usual coaching job. The fact that Texas has some of the top talent in the nation is not lost on Big 12 fans. The only Big 12 school that can recruit right now on a year to year basis with Texas is OU.

I know how much you'd like to over-hype your opponent, but you have to look at things objectively. KSU doesn't have near the caliber of players that Texas has. Yet KSU has played Texas close both years. Why is that? Are they better coached? Bill Snyder is not known as a great game day coach so that can't be it. Are they better players? KSU clearly doesn't recruit a top 5 class like Texas can. So what is it that keeps KSU competitive against Texas?

[Huckleberry]

meanstrosity -

KSU had an excellent team last year. They freaking rolled USC at home, despite what the final score was. You are citing recruiting rankings that are based on high school recruits. Hopefully you pay enough attention to realize that KSU pulls in stud JUCO players (Sproles, for example) that don't factor into those rankings, right?

[Huckleberry]

Maybe Gary Barnett was a fine coach at one point, he isn't now.

[IMetTrentGreen]

mack's problem is not firing his shitty assisstants. as far as teaching, he's fine, and as far as gameplanning, he's fine, too. if he had even decent coordinators, we'd be nrealy unbeatable. but he has too mauch loyalty, blah blah blah, and we're stuck

and all those games i said were big at the time. its really easy to sit back and say "nah, they weren't big in hindsight," but at the time, they all were. arkansas is in hindishgt, but before, we were all expecting a fairly easy win. it was big to UA fans, thats it.

im not going to stand up for mack anymore than i have to, but he does win big games at times

and one more thing about "talent,"is that it's not as big a gap as people think. rtupid media members who write about our "#1 class the last 5 years" (false, btw) brainwashed a lot of you ionto thinking we're an nfl team now. there are a lot of good players, but not so much to where we can roll a team like KSU just by showing up

but regardless of what the yahoos on this baord think of him, a guy who gets a down team into the top 10 consistently in a span of 3-4 years can't be all that bad

ps- i forgot beating NU in lincoln the first time in 99 or 00. that game was huge

[TroyF]

Originally posted by Huckleberry
Maybe Gary Barnett was a fine coach at one point, he isn't now.

Well, he's had a bad year to be sure. Still, he has conference championships to fall back on. He's also taken a downtrodden team and won a BCS conference with them. . . three different times.

My guess is you'll see the Buffs start to rise back up next year if they get a real DC. No matter what you two want to think, there is talent on the Colorado roster. It's also very important to note, Colorado is one of the youngest teams in the Big12.

There are 25 true freshman or sophomores seeing signifigent time. Our starting backfield is all true SO. or below. Compare that to the 8 seniors who see a ton of playing time.

We knew this would be a tough year. The only dissapointing thing about it thus far is how poorly the defense is schemed. Playing man on man coverage on the outside WR all the time against teams like FSU and WSU is a recipe for disaster. Now the young CB's confidence is shattered and it's going to take time to repair.

We'll find out how good Gary is as this season progresses into next season. A new DC will certainly be manning the CU sidelines. The schedule is a bit easier to start the year off. My guess is they'll be contending for the North again next year.

TroyF

[IMetTrentGreen]

i'd guess that too, since the north sucks

and there is no talent on the defense. any amount of talent could beat baylor without a coach

"here are 25 true freshman or sophomores seeing signifigent time. Our starting backfield is all true SO. or below. Compare that to the 8 seniors who see a ton of playing time. "

and this is true on almost every single team. everyone has about 25 these days. it's not a big deal anymore, with the 85 limit

[TroyF]

Yeah, but most of the teams have senior leadership at the top. The Buffs have very little. There aren't a lot of teams starting 5 true freshmen/soph on the defensive side of the ball. A few. Not a lot.

As for the talent part, you are wrong. Period. Don't talk to me about it now. Lets wait for a few years and see how the kids develop. JJ Billingsley and Sammy Joeseph will be in the NFL before it is done. Joeseph will likely be a day one pick. Even though he's struggled this year, he's light years ahead of where Donald Strickland was his freshmen season. He has more natural talent as well. JJ has been moving all over the place. Strong safety one week, weak safety the next. He'll be better when they settle on his role.

What I can't believe is that you claim to know so much about football, but are completely oblivious as to how other factors besides talent play into a game. In your analysis of the CU/Texas Big 12 title game, you belittled me over and over again because I said CU would win the game because Chris Simms would get confused and turn the ball over. No, you said, Texas has so much more talent and the game at Texas earlier in the year proved it. I said that you were right, you did have talent, but that the earlier game really meant nothing for CU. They didn't have their heads in the game. They fell behind at the end of the first half and caved for the only time that season. You called me an idiot a few more times and was so upset about being wrong you cried for three months telling everyone on the board about how lucky CU was and how they'd finish 3rd or 4th in the Big12 North the following year. I even remember how proud you were when CSU beat us to open up the season. I'm RIGHT, you're WRONG. Good call. You now do the same thing starting the Baylor thread. I'm glad you get so much enjoyment out of the Buffs losing. Rest assured, I get just as much enjoyment out of the Longhorns getting their asses kicked after listening to their fans brag about having 5DT's better than Tommie Harris on the roster. Just for reference:

In 1998, Temple beat Virginia Tech. In 1999 Virginia Tech went 11-1 and competed for a national title. Nebraska lost to an Iowa State team which won a total of four Big8 games in 4 years. The Huskers followed that up with four losses in the next FIVE years, with the national title rings thrown into that mix.

You can criticize Barnett all you want for losing to Baylor. It was a bad loss. It shows just how deep the problems are running in Boulder THIS season. It doesn't indicate there isn't any talent on the roster. That's just nonsense. Sometimes you lose a big game. Sometimes you lose a game to an inferior team. If CU wins 4 or 5 games the next two seasons in a row. . . you are dead right, we have a lack of talent. I doubt very seriously that will be the case.

TroyF

[the_meanstrosity]

Um Huck...Darren Sproles was not a JUCO running back. He went directly to KSU from high school. He's in his 3rd year at KSU.

As for these 'stud' JUCO recruits they get, you have it all wrong. KSU uses the JUCO's to fill holes. Their best players are normally 4-5 year guys from high schools; Terrance Newman, Terry Pierce, etc.

Originally posted by Huckleberry
meanstrosity -

KSU had an excellent team last year. They freaking rolled USC at home, despite what the final score was. You are citing recruiting rankings that are based on high school recruits. Hopefully you pay enough attention to realize that KSU pulls in stud JUCO players (Sproles, for example) that don't factor into those rankings, right?

[the_meanstrosity]

TroyF and IMTG,

I agree with TroyF in that Colorado does have some talent. Most of that talent is young at this point, but they do have talent. Barnett normally does a good job in recruiting, but when it comes to execution on Saturdays...sometimes it's not there.

As for Texas, there were a lot of us who expected Texas to roll KSU this year. Last year, Texas came in and played a good game against KSU in Manhattan and grabbed a quality win. Most of us assumed that with a down KSU defense, we expected Texas to roll.

This is not the KSU team that the press hyped up early in the season. Normally KSU fills the gaps from their defensive defections. But this season the gaps haven't been filled due to players not progressing like they should. They still have some talent, but it's very raw. So KSU is struggling.

I do think Mack Brown will come up with something this weekend for OU. He surprised me last year when the Longhorns played the Sooners close.

As for other Big 12 games that I'll be watching...

I think the Kansas - Colorado game could be a good one. Barnett has to really rally his troops and KU is hoping to build off of their win over Missouri.

The KSU - OSU game could be a win or a blowout depending on OSU's offensive execution. If OSU can move the ball with Fields and Woods...it could be a long day for KSU. But I have a feeling Snyder has something up his sleeve.

[Airhog]

I think the fact that he is using a two qb system shows how he is a great coach...:D

[IMetTrentGreen]

believe me, nobody knows how many factors go into good football players outside of talent. you are preaching to the choir

but there is no such thing as a talentless good football player (outside of tommie harris of course). admittedly i have not seen a lot of CU football this year, but i have seen them the past three, and i know that the front seven has never been good, not at any point

CU won the big 12 game because they came out in a brand new, never before scheme that game. i went to both games, and i was floored. their defense went front westlake high school do a real, bonafied scheme. more importantly to the present, they have never played like that again. i don't know why, either, because they only have a few coverages and don't bother diguising anything. not to mention they are small and slow. even the ones who do execute well end up not being very good

i see the point that you are trying to make, that somehow all these good players are being factored out. i know its possible, i see it every saturday from my own team. why you need to realize is that while i may not be 100% correct, you aren't either. the truth is, even if you have two DBs who run fast, what you don't have is good football players, i.e. talent

i know what a good football player is, and i can usually tell when a good player is in a bad position. what happens then is a lot like whats happening at texas now. score oodles of points against tulane, then lose against teams that are your equal. whats happening at CU is neither, its getting BLOWN OUT by BAYLOR. thats not good anything. barnett road the coattails of skippy's players, recruited badly, and now is paying for it. same thing a&m is going through now. you'll have a few good players, but you need more than 5 guys to win games in the big 12. even if they were being taught well, im not sure they'd be any more impressive than the porous units of the last 4 years

[TroyF]

Wait a minute. . . losing 42-30 when you have 5 turnovers in the game is getting BLOWN OUT? CU was in the game all the way. They had the ball 4th and goal at the 1 down 35-30. They missed it, gave up a TD on the following drive and lost. It wasn't a blow out.

As for the talent, you must not have seen any CU football. You must not have seen any the previous 3 seasons either. They were actually pretty good up front in 2000. The group included Brayton (#1 pick), Bannon (#3 pick), Wahlroos (NFL). Throw in Strickland and Lewis (3rd and 2nd round) picks played in the defensive backfield. Jashon Sykes also played on that team in the front seven the first few weeks of the season. That included the loss to Fresno State when they moved the ball up and down the field. In other words, 6 players who started the season on that 2000 Buff defense are currently on NFL rosters. Explain how they sucked so bad while they were at CU as UPPER CLASSMEN.

You can't. That may not be Texas or Oklahoma talent, but most teams would be proud to have that much NFL talent on the roster. Now lets take the same coaching staff and give them young guys who are learning the game. Do you see the recipe for disaster that brings?

I equate it very much to the WR at CU last year. I told anyone who would listen that the CU WR core was much better than it was given credit for. Websites previewing the CU season this year pointed that as being one of our biggest weaknesses. They were never a weakness. Having a QB who could get them the ball and an offensive gameplan designed to throw the ball more than 5 yards down the field was the weakness.

I know football talent. I know that this is the BEST defensive backfield talent in Boulder since the 1990 national title team. Throw out the piece of garbage Phil Jackson, and you have a ton of BIG CB's who can flat out fly. (I could check, but I believe CU has recruited 7 four star defensive backs the past 2 years, and that doesn't include JJ Billingsley who may be one of the best talents I've ever seen in the CU secondary)

The front 6 (not 7, CU plays a 4-2-5) are average at best. Tufts never developed into the player everyone thought he'd be. Neinheis is a bitch against the run, but generates zero pass rush. McChesney actually has 2nd or 3rd round talent, but possesses a ten cent head. The DT's are all young. Two JUCO guys are redshirting and wil give us some depth there next year.

Thadeus Washington is a LB who can flat out hit like a truck. Chad Evans, James Garee and Alex Ligon are all frosh defensive ends seeing a lot of playing time now. Evans chose CU over UCLA and Oklahoma. (he was a 3 star)

There is talent on that side of the ball. I'm not the idiot you seem to think I am. If CU did have zero talent on that side of the ball, I wouldn't be frustrated. I'd admit they sucked and move on. (like our kicker Patrick Bragham last year. No sinse in getting pissed, he sucks and always will)

The overall scouting on CU? OL has a lot of young talent. Brian Daniels will be a good one. Ditto for Sam Wilder the DT who moved to T this fall. Derek Steimrich may be the best center CU has had. In all, 4 of the 5 return next year. They should be a vastly improved group. QB Joel Klatt will return as well. He looks pretty good. CU has loaded up on QB's the past couple of years. Bernard Jackson (a four star scrambler from California will be in the mix next year if Klatt falters) RB's are solid. Calhoun is a small guy, Daniel Jolley is a good looking runner. Ditto for Lawerence Vickers the true SO starting at FB. WR's will be a little worse than last year, but it's another position CU has stocked up on. Blake Mackey will be starting next year. Don't forget the name Dusty Sprague. He'll be on an all Big-12 team before he leaves the campus.

Defense wise, the defensive backfield has more talent than I've ever seen at CU. Sammy Joeseph, Terrance Wheatley, Lorenzo Sims, Tyrone Henderson are all 6 foot CB's who can fly. The safeties are led by Brian Iwuh, JJ Billingsley and Dominique Brooks. Every player I just mentioned there is a true SO. or Frosh. The LB core sucks hard. Washington, Chris Hollis and Akarika Dawn all need big jumps next year. The defensive line will be strong vs. the run, poor at getting a pass rush. Marcus Harris will be back. He's a run stuffer. Daubab (strongest player on the team) and the two JC's will man the DT position. Evans will likely win the other DE spot.

What's that all add up to? Hell, I don't know. I do know the defense does have the talen to finish in the upper half of the Big 12 in scoring defense. If CU gets a good DC and still fails next year, I'll have to back off on that statement. The offense will depend on the development of the new WR's.

If I end up wrong about the talent CU has on the defensive side of the ball, so be it. I'll live and go along my merry way just fine. I'll be absolutely stunned if three of those DB's don't end up being in the NFL though.

TroyF

[dawgfan]

Troy, haven't you figured out by now that everyone else on this board doesn't know squat about football and the only one here that can accurately evaluate talent, coaching and schemes is IMTG? It's his world, we just live in it...

[T.C.M]

Is there any other coach coming off a 10-win season with so many no-lifers spending their energy on lynch mob web sites? It's amazing.

Brown can't win, really. Until he wins the elusive conference title. Then folks will expect a national title. And if he wins that, they'll just say, "it's about damn time." Can't win.

Still, Mack would be better off just addressing the "big game" questions. To brush them aside is disingenuous. Everybody knows his record against top five, top 10, and top 25 opponents is not good. Most coaches don't have great marks against the nation's best teams. But Texas is not most teams and the talent level (thanks to great recruiting by Brown and his staff) is among the best around. So far, Mack, his staff, and his teams have clearly not mastered the tricky art of playing and coaching their best when it counts most.

This is not the rant of a Texas fan. Just the facts. I've watched the last two Texas-Oklahoma games from the field. What has separated the teams is a play or two. Really, that's it. A tackle, a throw, or a catch made.

A mistake or two cost the Longhorns the 2001 Big 12 title game against Colorado, which truly rates as the "biggest" game lost by the current Horns. Do you simply blame a head coach for his team's inability to make a winning play? It's simplistic, talk radio fodder.



That was part of an opinion column written by Chris Fowler on ESPN.com last week. I have to say I agree.

T.C.M

[vex]

While you can't blame the coach for not making a play or two, you can definitely blame the coach and his assistants for their conservative playcalling that doesn't put the team in a situation to make the winning play.

[TroyF]

I disagree. There was a pretty long article about Mack in the Sporting News a few weeks ago. It held the opposite view.

Look at the game last year. If you want to say it came down to a couple of plays, you can do that. Oklahoma threw four INT's. Texas added another three. Simms missed a couple of really big passes. Yet, do you really think Texas deserved to win that game? They were outgained 397-209. They allowed 266 rushing yards. They rushed for 53.

Fact is, Texas didn't deserve the game. Had they made a couple of plays and won it, they would have considered themselves very fortunate to have escaped. Oklahoma beat them up on both lines. 9 times out of 10 that will result in a win. The last two seasons Texas has ran the ball 60 times for 80 yards against the OU defense. OU has turned them one dimensional and dominated those games.

Mack is 2-8 against top 10 teams. 2-8. That's just at Texas. He didn't fare much better at North Carolina in those situations. As for the pressure of winning a national title. . . cry me a river. He's in one of the most high profile positions in college football. He has one of the most talented teams in the nation. (some would say THE most talented team) What do you expect? Does anyone really think the expectations are unfair? Mackovic, a man not looked at with a lot of pride down in Texas, won TWO conference titles in his tenure with the team. You think it's unreasonable to expect Mack not to win ONE? You can sell, I'm not buying.

TroyF

[the_meanstrosity]

IMTG,

I hope you're seeing the OSU - KSU game. Now you'll understand why I stated KSU's defense is not up to snuff this year. Texas should have rolled KSU.