Did we win a conference title to get to the Sugar Bowl this year? Did we even win 10 games?
The premise:
“Ok, Mack basher here (getting ahead of the angered responses), but besides the Vince Rose Bowls and the Colt Fiesta and BCS NCG games, Mack made a living at the also-ran bowls(Holiday/Alamo/Cotton after it was lessmeaningful).”
The assertion:
“So I'm grateful for Herman getting
into a New Year's Day bowl in his second season,regardless of who we play and regardless of outcome.”
The argument here is that Mack did not get to Tier 1 Bowls often while Herman has already done so in year 2. This is a very problematic assertion. Getting to a tier 1 game mainly has to do with things outside the control of Brown or Herman beyond going undefeated, which Herman certainly did not do this year.
For starters, there are 6 Tier 1 games now instead of 4 (1998-2005) and 5 (2006-2013). The Big 12 did not have an automatic tie in with any BCS Bowl to take a Big 12 team if the champion went to the playoff as currently exists with the Sugar Bowl.
Herman has achieved a Tier 1 game going 9-4, finishing #15 in the Committee Poll and losing to 5-7 Maryland, 6-6 Okie State, 8-3 West Virginia and 12-1 Oklahoma.
Our opponent breakdown:
Maryland 5-7 L
Tulsa 3-9 W
USC 5-7 W
TCU 6-6 W
Kansas State 5-7 W
OU 12-1 W
Baylor 6-6 W
Okie State 6-6 L
West Virginia 8-3 L
Texas Tech 5-7 W
Iowa State 8-4 W
Kansas 3-9 W
Oklahoma 12-1 L
Right now we have only played 4 games against teams with winning records. Yes, we played a pretty mediocre schedule this year with half our opponents finishing below .500.
Mack Brown got to BCS games going:
10-1 - Rose Bowl - BCS #4 - (loss to #2 12-0 OU)
12-0 - Rose Bowl - BCS #2
12-1 - Fiesta Bowl - BCS #3 - (loss to #7 11-1 Texas Tech)
13-0 - BCS National Title - BCS #2
Mack Brown teams that did not make BCS games:
1998: 8-3 - Cotton Bowl - BCS did not rank beyond the top 15. Texas was #20 in the AP and #22 in the Coaches - (losses: 10-1 UCLA, 11-1 Kansas State, 7-4 Texas Tech)
1999: 9-4 - Cotton Bowl - BCS #15 - (losses: 6-6 NC State, 10-1 Kansas State, 8-3 Texas A&M, 11-1 Nebraska)
2000: 9-2 - Holiday Bowl - BCS #12 - (losses: 5-6 Stanford, 12-0 OU)
2001: 10-2 - Holiday Bowl - BCS #7 - (losses: 10-2 OU, 10-2 Colorado)
2002: 10-2 - Cotton Bowl - BCS #10 - (losses: 11-2 OU, 8-5 Texas Tech)
2003: 10-2 - Holiday Bowl - BCS #6 - (losses: 8-4 Arkansas, 12-1 Oklahoma)
2006: 9-3 - Alamo Bowl - BCS #19 - (losses: 12-0 Ohio State, 7-5 Kansas State, 9-3 Texas A&M)
2007: 9-3 - Holiday Bowl - BCS #19 - (losses: 5-7 Kansas State, 11-2 Oklahoma, 7-5 Texas A&M)
2012: 8-4 - Alamo Bowl - BCS #23 - (losses: 7-5 West Virginia, 10-2 Oklahoma, 7-5 TCU, 11-1 Kansas State)
Mack Brown has comparable teams with better records and higher finishes that did not make the BCS.
During the BCS era, not a single 4 loss team received an at-large bid to the BCS. #13 9-3 Illinois in 2007 was the only 3 loss non-conference champion to make the BCS and the lowest ranked at large team, non-conference champion bid in BCS history. #13 10-2 Michigan did receive an at-large bid in 2011.
The only 4 loss teams in the history of the BCS or New Year's 6 to qualify for a tier 1 bowl as an at-large team are 2016 #14 8-4 Auburn and 2018 #15 9-4 Texas who both got in through contractual bids with the Sugar Bowl. #16 10-2 Oklahoma State is the lowest ranked at-large bid in history and also got in through the Big 12's contractual agreement with the Sugar Bowl.
You conveniently omit the fact that we got into two of those Tier 1 bowl games because OU was playing in the MNC game. Not quite a contractual agreement, but pretty damn close. For those of us that have been around long enough, your attempts at statistical cherry picking and revisionist history just won't fly. Mack did a great job winning games vs. mediocre opposition, hence the 10 win seasonmantra. Only rarely, however, were his teams able to play for championships.
The point I made, that seems to have gone over
@OrangeShogun's head as his responses are non-sensical to my point, was that you cannot really use qualifying to this Sugar Bowl to bash Mack Brown as it was far harder to qualify for a Tier 1 Bowl when Mack Brown was coaching if you did not win your conference. There were less tier 1 bowls when Brown was coaching, you generally had to finish in the top 4 and at worst top 13, you could lose no more than 3 games, no contractual agreement with the Sugar Bowl existed, Mack Brown fielded 8 teams to finish the regular season with the same or fewer losses that did not qualify and, most importantly,
Brown fielded 5 teams with the same or better record and the same or better finish than this team that did not qualify due to a harder path. Being the second lowest ranked at-large team and one of only two 4 loss teams to qualify for a tier 1 bowl due to a contractual arrangement is not an accomplishment. Brown finishing with 2 our fewer losses was a better season every time. Unfortunately for him, the path to a tier 1 bowl was far less forgiving. In short, the bashing of him is completely unfair and
@OrangeShogun's points are completely irrelevant to this discussion other than, as he pointed out, for Mack to get an at-large tier 1 bid, he could only afford one loss to a top 10 team. It is way easier for Herman and all Texas coaches to qualify for a Tier 1 bowl game now.
As I said with high risk, high reward, this would be a monumental upset victory that would go down as one of Texas's best bowl victories if Herman could pull it off.
