re: Is this coaching or culture?

quote:

---

ey have ALWAYS been able to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It is literally the main reason people in Arkansas, and Texas, make fun of them. The homo thing actually comes second.

Texas A&M ALWAYS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME underachieves. Sumlin has created a weird culture there. The swag thing that former player spoke of, but beyond that, their larger culture drove them to hire that drunk in the first place. They tried to make their image more hip by hiring a "hip" coach and it bit them in the arse. Like it always does. Their last coach did the exact same shite. It got him fired too.

---

None of this answers my question. I'm sorry, but no matter how long you've been watching them, saying 'culture' because it sounds like a sufficiently insightful thing to say isn't the same as making a cogent argument. What analysis or evidence can you offer that there's a cohesive 'culture' that can be demarcated and proven to lead to certain results? So Sumlin has his own style. Name a coach who doesn't. So the TAMU players and coaches screwed the pooch and started celebrating/slacking off too early. This is hardly an oddity in CFB. The only distinctive thing that happened in that game was that UCLA actually managed to pull off the comeback (and not laying a good portion of the credit at UCLA's feet comes across as confirmation bias at its most glaring.) If you're going to argue a direct correlation between 'swag' and attempts at 'hipness' and blowing the game, I'm going to question the claim until you offer a convincing chain of causality that specifically demonstrates that TAMU 'culture' lead to this specific game and outcome. I don't think that's unreasonable considering how vague the claim is.