What bowl?

[LonghornCatholic]

Not sure how this thread got twisted like a pretzel into a Mack vs Herman debate? All I’m trying to say is we’re a blue blood program, so give me a big boy bowl over a lower tier. Blue bloods aren’t afraid

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

Not sure how this thread got twisted like a pretzel into a Mack vs Herman debate? All I’m trying to say is we’re a blue blood program, so give me a big boy bowl over a lower tier. Blue bloods aren’t afraid

 

[OrangeShogun]

All of those teams were equally or more qualified than the 2018 Longhorns for a tier 1 bowl.

Then why did they not get a bid? Because regardless of record or ranking, either A.) They were not the second best team in the Big 12 and/or B.) The conference champ did not qualify for the NC game or playoff. Those are the two factors that allowed two of Mack's teams to receive Tier 1 bids and are the same two factors that impacted this year's Sugar Bowl bid. If you choose to characterize this year's Tier 1 bid as undeserved, so should you dismiss two of Mack's Tier 1 bids.

He won more football games than any coach not named Bob Stoops in the 2000s. Not sure how doing better than all but one other coach in a decade is doing less with more.

Mack was 7-9 against OU 6-9 against stoops on the 2000s, which, while bad, was not “regularly curb-stomped”. Being blown out by OU 4 our of 16 times is bad, but is not “regular” and a 43% win percentage is bad but in now way supports we lose regularly. That is spin.

Unfortunately for Mack, and us, Stoops was not only in he same conference, but also the same division.
2000: Loss 14-63
2001: Loss 3-14
2002: Loss 24-35
2003: Loss 13-65
2004: Loss 0-12
So, in your opinion five losses in a row is not "regular"? In your opinion five losses in a row, by double digit deficits (outscored 54-189) isn't getting curb stomped? Spin. Spin. Spin.

Which season would you rather have? An 8 win John Mackovic conference championship season and do not finish in the top 20?

Or an 11 or 12 win Mack Brown season where we finish in the top 5?

I'll take the substance of championships over hollow win totals and the window dressing of rankings all day every day.

 

[zuckercanyon]

Mackovic went to Fiesta and Sugar Bowl. Only question is is Herman a Mackovic or a Mack?

I think Herman will equal and pass Mack Brown in victories at Texas and in major bowl appearances and wins.

 

[zuckercanyon]

Mack bashers need to pull up their big boy pants. Their bias is showing.

Mack wasn't perfect, but he won a lot of games, including several very big ones. He represented us well.

He didn't have many 4-loss seasons.

In 16 years at Texas he had FIVE 4-loss seasons which is basically a 3rd of the time. FOUR of those 4-loss seasons were in his last 4 seasons at Texas. You take away Ricky, Vince, and Colt, and we're having a different discussion. Brought you an extra pair, try 'em on, see if they fit.....

 

[Htown77]

Then why did they not get a bid? Because regardless of record or ranking, either A.) They were not the second best team in the Big 12 and/or B.) The conference champ did not qualify for the NC game or playoff. Those are the two factors that allowed two of Mack's teams to receive Tier 1 bids and are the same two factors that impacted this year's Sugar Bowl bid. If you choose to characterize this year's Tier 1 bid as undeserved, so should you dismiss two of Mack's Tier 1 bids

2000 Texas Longhorns 9-2 BCS #12

A) Final Big 12 Standings
1st Oklahoma 8-0
2nd Texas 7-1
3rd Kansas State 6-2
3rd Nebraska 6-2

B) Oklahoma qualified for a national title.
2000 BCS Bowls:
Orange/National Title: Oklahoma v. FSU
Rose: Washington v. Purdue
Fiesta: Oregon State v. Notre Dame
Sugar: Miami v. Florida

Texas A) finished second in the Big 12 and B) OU played for the national title.

I’ll also note that 10-3 Kansas State lost the Big 12 title game and finished #9 in the BCS.

Why did neither Texas nor Kansas State make the BCS?
A) There were 4, not 6, tier 1 bowls meaning 8 not 12 teams went
and
B) The Big 12 did not have an automatic tie-in for its number two team.

Why is this so hard to understand? I have literally just proved your scenario wrong.

Unfortunately for Mack, and us, Stoops was not only in he same conference, but also the same division.
2000: Loss 14-63
2001: Loss 3-14
2002: Loss 24-35
2003: Loss 13-65
2004: Loss 0-12
So, in your opinion five losses in a row is not "regular"? In your opinion five losses in a row, by double digit deficits (outscored 54-189) isn't getting curb stomped? Spin. Spin. Spin.

I said Mack Brown went 7-9 against OU and 6-9 against Stoops for his career. You engaged in spin by taking a snapshot.

I can do the same thing:
2005 Texas 45 OU 12
2006 Texas 28 OU 10
2007 Texas 21 OU 28
2008 Texas 45 OU 35
2009 Texas 16 OU 13
Hey, for the next 5 year period, Mack won 4 of 5!

Overall he was 7-9 against OU and 6-9 against Stoops. Taking a snapshot instead of looking at the overall record is spin. You literally just cherry picked 5 out of 16 years.

I'll take the substance of championships over hollow win totals and the window dressing of rankings all day every day.

How substantive is an SWC championship when the conference does not exist anymore? Will the Big XII exist 20 years from now?

In 16 years at Texas he had FIVE 4-loss seasons which is basically a 3rd of the time. FOUR of those 4-loss seasons were in his last 4 seasons at Texas. You take away Ricky, Vince, and Colt, and we're having a different discussion. Brought you an extra pair, try 'em on, see if they fit.....

Unfortunately for Herman, 100% of his seasons have been four loss seasons and he already has two. That said, I hope he exceeds Mack Brown, never loses another game and wins 20 national championships. I hope the next coach after that does better than Herman and the coach after the next coach does better than the next coach. Herman, following Charlie Strong, did get the worst hand dealt to a Texas coach since DKR took over for Ed Price.

 

[LonghornCatholic]

 

[zuckercanyon]

Unfortunately for Herman, 100% of his seasons have been four loss seasons and he already has two. That said, I hope he exceeds Mack Brown, never loses another game and wins 20 national championships. I hope the next coach after that does better than Herman and the coach after the next coach does better than the next coach. Herman, following Charlie Strong, did get the worst hand dealt to a Texas coach since DKR took over for Ed Price.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately for you, I was being "nice" and only including Mack's Texas years, but since you're going for 100% of the seasons, let me expound:

1983 Appalachian State 6-5
1985 Tulane 1-10
1986 Tulane 4-7
1987 Tulane 6-6
1988 North Carolina 1-10
1989 North Carolina 1-10
1990 North Carolina 6-4-1
1991 North Carolina 7-4
1994 North Carolina 8-4
1995 North Carolina 7-5

So, in 30 years of coaching, Mack has 15 seasons of 4 losses or more, when they played less games then now. So Mack is at 50% of his games 4 losses or more. I'm anxious now for your response.

 

[OrangeShogun]

You engaged in spin by taking a snapshot.

No sir, listing those five beat downs in a row was simply to illustrate how utterly ridiculous your assertion was that Mack did not "regularly" get owned by Stoops.

How substantive is an SWC championship when the conference does not exist anymore? Will the Big XII exist 20 years from now?

Equally as substantive as a championship from the former PAC-10, Big 8, Big 10, Big East, etc., etc., etc. Just because a conference has morphed into a different entity does nothing to diminish the accomplishment of becoming a champion.

Texas A) finished second in the Big 12 and B) OU played for the national title.

No sir, in 2000, Texas did not qualify to play in the CCG, so no, they did not finish second in the Big 12. As loser of the CCG, KSt. finished second and were extended the better bowl bid (Cotton).
Look, bowl selection guidelines are what they are. IMO, two of Mack's teams were fortunate to receive Tier 1 bowl bids. Same can be said of this year's team. I guess I mainly took issue with the assertion that this team did not earn the bid. Under this years bowl selection guidelines, and the way various factors shook out, Texas has earned the Sugar Bowl bid. No sheepish feelings of undeserved accomplishment here.

 

[Htown77]

So, in 30 years of coaching, Mack has 15 seasons of 4 losses or more, when they played less games then now. So Mack is at 50% of his games 4 losses or more. I'm anxious now for your response.

We are comparing coaching at UT. How is coaching at Tulane comparable to UT? That is completely irrelevant. DKR went 6-4 and 6-4 at Mississippi State and 5-5 at Washington. So what? Mack Brown did well enough at Tulane to get a job at North Carolina. He did well enough at North Carolina to get a job at Texas. He did well enough at Texas to win a national championship and became only the second coach here to do it. I hope Herman wins more national titles than Mack Brown and DKR combined.

None of this is relevant to the fact your original bashing was a bad point. Herman got to a tier 1 bowl game year 2 because it is easier to get into them now than it was even 5 years ago. Under the current system, Brown would have played in a lot more tier 1 games. Under the old system, this team would not be in the Sugar Bowl. You tried to compare a result in two different systems and it was a poor comparison.

No sir, listing those five beat downs in a row was simply to illustrate how utterly ridiculous your assertion was that Mack did not "regularly" get owned by Stoops.

Yes Bob Stoops regularly beat Texas for a period of 5 years out of a 15 year period. Bob Stoops did not regularly beat Mack Brown over the entire 15 year period they coached against each other. If Mack Brown went 6-9 and had a 5 year period in which he went 4-1, he was not "regularly" owned. You could say he was regularly owned from 2000-2004 and I could say he regularly owned Bob Stoops from 2005-2009 with the exception of 2007. Overall Bob Stoops generally beat Mack Brown, but 60% is "more times than not" not "regularly'. Mack Brown going 13-3 against Texas Tech and 10-4 against A&M however could be described as regularly.

Equally as substantive as a championship from the former PAC-10, Big 8, Big 10, Big East, etc., etc., etc. Just because a conference has morphed into a different entity does nothing to diminish the accomplishment of becoming a champion.

Champion of what though? I mean whoever wins the MAC is a champion. Notre Dame has no conference titles. Being champion of a conference is relevant to the other members, but is meaningless on a national scale and the pollsters of every poll and the committee treat it as meaningless.

No sir, in 2000, Texas did not qualify to play in the CCG, so no, they did not finish second in the Big 12. As loser of the CCG, KSt. finished second and were extended the better bowl bid (Cotton).

The Cotton was not a tier 1 bowl at the time. Kansas State was still left out of a tier 1 (BCS) bowl.

Look, bowl selection guidelines are what they are. IMO, two of Mack's teams were fortunate to receive Tier 1 bowl bids. Same can be said of this year's team. I guess I mainly took issue with the assertion that this team did not earn the bid. Under this years bowl selection guidelines, and the way various factors shook out, Texas has earned the Sugar Bowl bid. No sheepish feelings of undeserved accomplishment here.

My entire point was bowl selection guidelines in 2018 are not what they were in 1998 or 2008. The team did earn this year's bid. I 100% agree with that. Under the current rules, they earned the bid. The problem is @zuckercanyon who has gone off into discussing Tulane, tried to compare earning a bid now to earning a bid in the 2000s, which was far more difficult with there being fewer tier 1 bowls and the Big 12 having no contractual tie-in for its number 2 team.

Some things are not comparable across eras. Conference championships, for one, are also meaningless when determining national program prestige because for most of college football history, there are a lot of major teams (Penn State, West Virginia, Florida State, Miami, etc.) that were never in a conference until the 1980s or 90s. You cannot compare conference titles nationally as teams like Penn State, who did not join a conference until 1992, will never catch Texas, OU, Nebraska, etc, who joined conferences 50-80 years earlier. Plus conferences are all different with different teams. They only matter amongst the teams that are part of the same conference for the same time period. Conference titles mean the most to teams that will never win national titles like Iowa State, Vanderbilt or Texas A&M and a conference title is the most they hope for and all they hope to be champions of.

Bowl games are the same way as far as comparing in different eras. There were 4 tier 1 bowls. Then there were 5. Now there are 6.

In 1960 there were 9 bowl games.
In 1980 there were 16 bowl games.
In 2018 there are 40 bowl games.
A bowl appearance in 1960 meant a lot more than it does in 2018.

Someone could say "Mack Brown only missed a bowl game 1 time and DKR missed a bowl game 4 times".

Well, Mack Brown missed a bowl game because he had a losing season. DKR never had a losing season, but missed 4 bowl games because not having a losing season did not guarantee you a spot in the limited number of available bowl games.

So my whole point in all of this was, it is a different era and it is now easier to get into a tier 1 bowl game than it was even 5 years ago. A 9-4 15th ranked team was not more deserving or a better season than a 10-2 team that finished #6, just like DKR's 1958 team which finished 7-3 and did not make a bowl had a better season than Charlie Strong's 2014 team which finished 6-7 but made a bowl game because there were more bowls in 2016 than in 1958.

 

[X Misn Tx]

IMO, two of Mack's teams were fortunate to receive Tier 1 bowl bids. Same can be said of this year's team. I guess I mainly took issue with the assertion that this team did not earn the bid. Under this years bowl selection guidelines, and the way various factors shook out, Texas has earned the Sugar Bowl bid. No sheepish feelings of undeserved accomplishment here.

That's fair

 

[Joe Fan]

Stern's injury will not need surgery
We think he will play in the Suga Bowl

Hager also has a "accidental hand injury"
Will also play in Suga Bowl

Spoiler

 

[Joe Fan]