Started By
Message
re: Aggies, are you guys concerned at all about Strong at UT?
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:46 am to Hugh McElroy
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:46 am to Hugh McElroy
You just made my point. Strong is a proven recruiter.
1
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:47 am to cas4t
quote:
That logic is just asinine.
No it has some merit.
Part of Mack Brown's "control the message" game is that he had high school coaches in the state so under his grip that they all feared if they pissed off Brown then Mack would use his political influence to get them fired. So coaches would push players to Texas to avoid any sort of retaliation. Strong doesn't have that same advantage. Even if he had the ability to build the same political capital, and he doesn't, he now has to contend with coaches like Sumlin and Briles that refuse to be pushed out of the process.
Another place the politics matters is perception. If Strong can't placate the Austin media and boosters, they will be out to find and create PR problems for Texas. Look at the Red McCombs comments or that racist T-Shirt for examples.
In Brown's day, Red would have never been that pissed (he would have placated him on the first phone call) and there would have been a PR event around that T-Shirt where Brown would have controlled the message ("no real Texas fans believe that" or some such BS). Instead we get silence out of Austin which does nothing to contain the story.
Brown changed the Texas job. Unless Strong just kills it out of the gate and wins the Big 12 year one, he will always have to deal with a faction of fans, media people, and boosters who expect him to be the major of Austin. As long as he does a poor job with the politics part of the role, it will keep a bad connotation floating over his time in Austin, which can effect recruit decisions.
It is not all one thing or another, and Strong is a good coach. He could kill it early on and none of this matters. Where it does matter is if he struggles in the first year or two, because he simply isn't talented enough with politics to get the political capital he needs to have a top 5 recruiting class after two down years.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:48 am to Hugh McElroy
And I'd assume you're being sarcastic about Mack being a terrible recruiter.
Mack fell off in the latter years. Strong is an up and coming coach with a solid resume.
Mack fell off in the latter years. Strong is an up and coming coach with a solid resume.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:52 am to cas4t
quote:
Strong is a proven recruiter.
Mack was a proven recruiter, too. More specifically, he was a proven recruiter to the specific, media-saturated situation that is found in Austin, and in Texas high schools. Strong's never done that. If Mack couldn't stop Sumlin, I see no reason to think Strong can.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:52 am to cardboardboxer
You don't need to control Texas HS coaches to be successful at UT. He can recruit just like anyone what and manage to get good players because of what Texas has to offer.
The political jargan plays no role to a 17 year old. They just want to win and go to the NFL.
The political jargan plays no role to a 17 year old. They just want to win and go to the NFL.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:53 am to roadGator
lol neaux
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:53 am to cas4t
quote:
The culture at UT has historically brought them a lot of success. Mack was the issue.
Actually the culture at Texas had historically hurt their chances of football success.
Brown was by far their second most successful coach, and the first since the 70's. The culture around Austin demands all sorts of things that is not winning- look good, don't cheat, graduate actual student athletes, placate the booster factions, etc. The culture values that stuff more than wins.
Brown was successful because he was such a politician he controlled the culture. DKR was successful because he was so strong he ruled the culture (it was less powerful back then too). Every coach between DRK and Brown got eaten alive by the culture. Not saying Strong will, but to imply their culture has helped them on the field is simply false.
There is a reason that the richest program in the country has played for and won the same amount of modern national titles as the second best school in Alabama. Texans simply demand too much style to go along with their winning to make it easy. This same demand has held us back too, and is part of the reason we are historic underachievers.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:54 am to roadGator
quote:
Kids want to play in the best conference?
How do you explain the kids that go to FSU then? ACC will clearly never be confused for the best conference.
Road trips in the ACC include Coral Gables, Atlanta, Chaple Hill, Durham, Releigh, Clemson, Charlettsville...
....compared to Aims, Lubbuck, Norman, Stoolwater, Waco...
The ACC experience verses the Big Twatever experience is much better when compared to the SEC.
Maybe I am speculating?
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:57 am to Hugh McElroy
quote:
Mack was a proven recruiter, too. More specifically, he was a proven recruiter to the specific, media-saturated situation that is found in Austin, and in Texas high schools. Strong's never done that. If Mack couldn't stop Sumlin, I see no reason to think Strong can.
So are all the aggies ni agreeance that politics will ruin Strong's chances of recruiting well?
Nobody seems to think if a guy like James Franklin can manage to pitch kids on the dream at Vanderbilt, that Strong can't do it at TEXAS?
They have world-class facilities, insanely wealthy boosters, a must-win attitude, and the history. All of that in itself is enough to get top 5 classes regularly.
I'm not saying aTm won't be fine, because you do have the SEC pitch in your favor, but no HS kid gives a damn about politics. Strong managed to get great recruiting classes at Louisville of all places. I think he's capable of pitching Texas to kids from Texas.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:57 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
It is not all one thing or another, and Strong is a good coach. He could kill it early on and none of this matters. Where it does matter is if he struggles in the first year or two, because he simply isn't talented enough with politics to get the political capital he needs to have a top 5 recruiting class after two down years.
This. Majorly this. (Except I would phrase it more in terms of perception than political capital.)
And his recruiting is NOT starting well. If we steal Alaka from them after having already stole Henderson from them, it's going to look really badly. They have almost nobody we want in their recruiting class.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:58 am to KaiserSoze99
ACC football players never see Coral Gables when they play UM unless there is some tour set up. The stadium is outside of FLL and in the hood.
I've never been to the Big 12 towns you spoke of. I'm sure they are not as bad as you make them seem. Maybe
I've never been to the Big 12 towns you spoke of. I'm sure they are not as bad as you make them seem. Maybe
This post was edited on 1/14/14 at 10:59 am
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:58 am to roadGator
I can't see Strong out-recruiting Sumlin. Strong didn't have any competition in Joker Phillips in Kentucky but Sumlin is at an entirely different level. Sumlin's persona is honed and refined. Strong comes across as gruff and curmudgeonly in comparison.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:59 am to cas4t
quote:
You don't need to control Texas HS coaches to be successful at UT. He can recruit just like anyone what and manage to get good players because of what Texas has to offer.
Sure you don't NEED to control Texas HS school coaches, but it certainly helped Brown. It allowed him to put his recruiting resources only toward real battles (since every recruit isn't a battle) and it helped him steer talent away from us to hurt our chances of success which helped his long-term recruiting.
It is the difference between selecting recruits and having to actively recruit them.
quote:
The political jargan plays no role to a 17 year old. They just want to win and go to the NFL.
High school players DO care what their HS coaches say, where their HS coaches want them to go. Or at the very least the HS coaches influence where recruits DON'T go by poisoning the well.
All of this framework worked at a level higher than recruits. They were just pawns.
Texas had a system going where HS coaches pushed talent away FROM us to avoid possible retaliation from Brown. That is gone, and it really does matter.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 10:59 am to roadGator
quote:
Does he concern you guys at all with the balance of power?
Not at all.
Texass always recruits pretty well. Even with the mess they have now, even with the decommits, etc... they are still in the top 12 or 13 recruiting and may wind up in the top 10.
When Ags win, we recruit well. This was BEFORE we joined the SEC. SEC has only enhanced our recruiting.
If we take care of our own business it doesn't matter what Texass does. Ags that have been around know this already. Strong hire is largely irrelevant.
On top of this, there is NOTHING Texass can do to overshadow the launch of the SEC network. SEC games are going to be all the time and accessible to kids across Texas and other Big 12 states.
Those frickheads in Austin are shitting in their pants over this.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 11:00 am to roadGator
Serious question:
If Sumlin has been successful only because of Johnny (and even Keenum)...at least according to some over here...why isn't anyone questioning whether Strong has been successful only because of Bridgewater?
Both are top 5 NFL draft picks.
As far as strong being a "great recruiter"; landing Bridgewater is an example of him landing an elite recruit, but is Louisville just tearing it up on the recruiting trail? To be fair, UH wasn't either when Sumlin was there, he won with 3 stars, but Sumlin has now proven what he can do at a big program. When has Strong proven that he's a "great recruiter"?
If Sumlin has been successful only because of Johnny (and even Keenum)...at least according to some over here...why isn't anyone questioning whether Strong has been successful only because of Bridgewater?
Both are top 5 NFL draft picks.
As far as strong being a "great recruiter"; landing Bridgewater is an example of him landing an elite recruit, but is Louisville just tearing it up on the recruiting trail? To be fair, UH wasn't either when Sumlin was there, he won with 3 stars, but Sumlin has now proven what he can do at a big program. When has Strong proven that he's a "great recruiter"?
This post was edited on 1/14/14 at 11:01 am
Posted on 1/14/14 at 11:01 am to roadGator
quote:
I've never been to the Big 12 towns you spoke of. I'm sure they are not as bad as you make them seem. Maybe
They're bad.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 11:01 am to 3nOut
quote:
Mack Brown passed on the last 3 Heisman winners
Really? That's absolutely awesome if so.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 11:01 am to texasaggie08
He was known as an outstanding recruit at UF.
Can't really judge him on his time at Louisville because it's hard to recruit there obviously.
Can't really judge him on his time at Louisville because it's hard to recruit there obviously.
Posted on 1/14/14 at 11:02 am to texasaggie08
quote:
why isn't anyone questioning whether Strong has been successful only because of Bridgewater?
That doesn't fit the story...
Posted on 1/14/14 at 11:02 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
Or at the very least the HS coaches influence where recruits DON'T go by poisoning the well.
Exactly why we got boned under Fran. The dude was an arrogant arse that treated everyone like an underling so HS coaches got sick of his shite and actively steered away recruits form us.
I've talked to multiple 3A, 4A, and 5A coaches in the East Texas area that flat out said this.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News