2007 Lessons
Back to back losses to Texas A&M.
Let that sink in a minute, if it hasn't already. If you need help getting depressed about it, remember that Aggieland exists for one reason only - beating Texas - and we lost to a head coach who was fired despite winning two in a row against the Longhorns.
Now are you properly morbid?
Good. Because you should be. We're not allowed to feel sorry for ourselves - the best football season of our lives was merely two years ago - but Longhorn fans have every right to be disappointed with the encore. One might call 2006 a near miss on an outstanding surprise year for Texas, but no reasonable evaluation of 2007 can be so generous.
Kansas State, a team that ultimately lost games to Iowa State, Nebraska, and Fresno State, didn't just pull off an upset over Texas. They whipped the Longhorns. At Darrel K. Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium.
The loss to Oklahoma, though painful, was at least forgivable - the team played hard and played well and could have won the football game. It's not a good outcome, but it wasn't an embarrassing effort, either.
But the season ending loss to Texas A&M... God. I wasn't kidding when I preached before the game it was a critical one for Texas and Mack Brown to win. With a victory, Texas finishes 10-2, winners of six straight, with a fanbase buzzing about the gutty turnaround of the season. With a loss, well... go re-read the first couple paragraphs of this post.
So here we are. The high from 2005 is worn off, a hangover is setting in, and our head coach has heretofore believed that 10 wins is Tylenol. We know better.
With that in mind, I note that we're hearing all the right points out of Texas practice camp this week. All jobs are open. Nothing is taken for granted. No one will be coddled. A player who makes a mistake has to stand in front of the entire team.
Good, good, and good. Great. I'm happy to hear it. And believe it or not, I'm pretty damn excited about our bowl game. But getting out of a rut requires more than hitting the high notes after a setback. It requires a legitimate evolution. So Mack, I propose three lessons for you to take from all this:
1. Don't confuse the outcome with the process. Winning the Holiday Bowl would be great. 10 wins looks nice in the media guide. Finishing on a good note is fun for the fans, players, and coaches. But the outcome of this football game is wholly irrelevant next to the fundamental change in approach that this season indicates is required. If the disappointment of the loss to A&M has lit a fire under your ass, Mack - don't let a Holiday Bowl win extinguish it. Embrace the urgency and carry it over to next year. All jobs open. The best talent plays. We win as a team, lose as a team. If you're a senior and you get outplayed, you do your job and support the young guy from the sideline. The process is what's important, Mack. Not the outcome.
2. Breed leadership. Without question, some leaders are born. But many, many others are bred. In a leadership vacuum, the top man of a program has to create an atmosphere that brings out the leadership qualities in people. Demanding accountability, coaching with tough love, and insisting on a meritocracy inspire people to do their best. Most importantly, not only do most elite athletes want that environment, most thrive in it. Treat them like you won't settle for anything short of their best and they will give you their best. If you acccept anything less... that's what you'll get.
3. Internalize what you learn about managing the players. All these lessons about getting the most out of your players? Very important for getting the best product possible on the field. But take these lessons a step further and apply them to yourself, Mack. If your assistant coaches aren't giving you winning gameplans, get new ones. If they're not helping you in the areas where you're weak, find better complementary parts.
It's not realistic to expect the head coach to be good at everything, and in fact, most who try to be wind up failing. Divesting responsibility is a good thing. But it requires knowing your strengths, knowing your weaknesses, and surrounding yourself with the right people for the right tasks. Just as you ask your players these tough questions - ask them about your own staff. Even if you think they're great football coaches who should always have a place on someone's staff, ask if they're the right people for your staff, right now.
Fundamental change doesn't often come about until there's been a serious setback. As you enter the twilight phase of your career, Mack, ask yourself if you have it in you to evolve one more time. Just as you evolved in 2004-05 to get the most out of the Vince Young era, ask yourself what you need to do to win at that level again. Ask hard questions. Make hard decisions. Do things you aren't comfortable with. Surround yourself with people who complement your weaknesses.
Your legacy at Texas is going to be a great one, whatever you do the rest of your time here. The status quo is, has been, and will be good. But as your career - that which you've devoted your life to - enters its final phase, challenge yourself as much as you've challenged these young kids over the years. You ask your players to aim high and shoot for the moon. Ask the same of yourself.
--PB--
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Food for thought
I am trying to not think too much about the football horns until the bowl game. When I evaluate mack's performance in the Holiday Bowl, I will look at:
- how many turnovers the horns have
- how well they tackle
- how well they pressure the QB
- do the young DBs play most of the minutes?
- does Beasley start at CB?
- do the horns win
- is a top flight DC hired right after the game
Mack is a quite good football coach (he won a NC with players he recruited himself). Unfortunately he is not as good as Stoops. I would be very happy if Mack could break even with Stoops from here on in but I don't think it is going to happen.
OU looked much better coached than the horns this year. Their offense looked well balanced and solid. UT's offense depended way too much on big runs by Jamaal and scrambles by Colt to complete passes on broken plays. Stoops picked up the extremely valuable Phil Loadholt at left tackle from a junior college. mack won't bring in JC talent (the horns could really have used Loadholt this year on the O line).
Stoops' D normally looks better than mack's and this year was no exception. the big difference is normally at LB and this year was no exception. What was particularly aggravating was that it did not appear that mack was even starting his best 3 LBs.
I doubt that Mack is going to fundamentally change the way he does things at this point in his career. He is what he is (pretty darn good but not as good as Stoops).
More
I will also be looking for:
- stupid, pointless penalties
- blown coverages
- pass protection
And wouldn't it be great if the Horns managed to block a kick?
you contradicted yourself here
remember that Aggieland exists for one reason only - beating Texas - and we lost to a head coach who was fired despite winning two in a row against the Longhorns.
If the only thing Aggies care about is beating texas, then Fran wouldn't have been fired.
Fran was fired b/c this season was yet another disappointment on top of many other disappointing seasons. The win over texas didn't change that. The only thing the texas win did (besides giving us in-state bragging rights for another year) was allow us to end the regular season on a high note.
defeating Texas...
...is everything to them. Fran beating us last year bought him another season. Unfortunately for him, this year's win was too little too late.
it imight not be everything
but we sure have been doing it a lot lately, wouldn't you say.
Ummm...No
I searched the internets, but I can't find a definition for "a lot lately". But I'm pretty sure that 4 of 5 dentists agree that winning 3 of the last 10 is not that definition.
Depends on Definition of "Lately"
If you define lately as "most recently" with A&M winning the last two games they have indeed won that lot lately.
If you define lately as since I was old enough to care about football in 1971 then the series is evenly matched with UT winning 19 and A&M winning 18, certainly not dominance by either program.
Or you can choose the window of time that most suits the argument that UT is dominating, the last ten years, where as you point out UT holds a 7-3 advantage. Kind of like the 6-3 advantage that OU holds over UT and dominates us - unless you want to parse that and claim the closeness of the games should count while you try to bleach out memory of the 50+ point routs we suffered.
Two schools of thought
Part of me simply wants to write this season off to unrealistic expectations spurred on by a false sense of athletic prowess thanks to the recruiting gurus and UT's past success...in other words, maybe we should feel lucky to have gone 9-3 given the overall inexperience and injuries that beset the 2007 team.
But I think what's driving our collective angst are the missed opportunities prior to this season...it's just killing us that Mack hasn't won more Big XII titles or beaten OU more often during his tenure given the talent that's passed through UT in the last 10 years.
Simms, Benson, and Roy Williams should have been enough to beat OU at least once. The disparity between Stoops' five Big XII Titles to Mack's one is just to hard to fathom.
So while I don't necessarily disagree with the lessons you're hoping Mack takes from this season, I'd argue that if he hasn't learned those lessons by now, it's doubtful he'll ever learn them.
Yeah
I'm trying to stay optimistic and frame it hopefully, but you and Kafka are, in all likelihood right: you are who you are. Fundamental change at this stage is unlikely.
Undoubtedly Similar
Undoubtedly similar comments will be posted on this topic as was written on your Coaching Changes topic. I'm reading mostly similar sentiments as I and others wrote there already being expressed here. I agree that Mack is a very good coach and UT has benefited by his leadership of the football program while he's been here. MB has to ask himself, his staff and his players what kind of program and success do they want for themselves. If 10-win seasons are the mark of excellence they strive for each season they are a wildly successful program. And for 95% of the NCAA Div 1 (can't adapt to the BCS thing yet) teams peaking at 10-win seasons would satiate all the hunger and desires they have in them.
But there are 5% of the programs out there that see themselves as something more - they see themselves as champions year in and year out. By that measure UT is a pretender under MB, not a contender. One out of ten seasons does not make for champion status. And I'm not even speaking of National Championships, which even the top 5% of programs see themselves as lucky to attain. Attaining conference champion status is the measure, because once you are a conference champion you are usually in the mix for a national championship. While there is the rare Nebraska NC game appearance without winning the conference, it is an oddity.
I recognize the successes Mack has had. UT has more players in the NFL now than any time I can remember, if ever. Graduation rates are impressive. The work ethic of the Selvin Young's who go from unheralded to major contributors at the highest level is a testament to the coaching they benefit from at UT. But the main issue is the apparent satisfaction of consistently being the second best program in the conference.
Stoops and the coaches at the other top 5% programs strive to be the best. Their intensity and acceptance of nothing less distinguishes them from the other 95% of the programs out there. And that intensity distinguishes them from the 90-95% range that MB and UT find perennially find themselves in. From reading the posts under the last topic many UT fans are also content with that. They will find excuses and make comparisons, like "but for a few breaks UT would be tied with OU in head-to-head games", and "they were close games with the exception of a couple". Well, they are right, but they fail to realize that it is the intensity of Stoops' squads and refusal to lose that enabled them to pull out the win, and the acceptance of fate and satisfaction of "trying real hard" that foretold the losses by UT in those close games between evenly matched talent. A game or two in hand over the course of eight years (sorry, can't really give Brown credit for the win over Stoops in that first season, it really wasn't his program yet and OU didn't have time to take on Stoops' personality yet) is NOT just luck. And with OU taking 5 of 9 conference titles while UT has only 1 of 10 under their respective coaches is NOT just lucky breaks.
I, too, am rather dubious that MB has learned, or can learn to become a different kind of coach with higher expectations of himself and his players. I hoped that Vince's intensity would rub off on him and he would implement, force that same kind of will to win on his future squads that was lacking from 1998 to mid-2004 under his leadership. That old dog hasn't shown he learned that new trick. Despite this assessment, MB has earned another season or two at the helm based on his resume. I suppose I am an eternal optimist that he can get it figured out and the risk of changing captains exceeds the potential reward for now.
I truly have no expectations of them in the Holiday Bowl as this year's version has shown far too much apathy to think they'll reinvent themselves for a game against a talented, well-coached team like ASU. If MB has the courage to make major coaching changes and bring in a few type-A personality assistants to drive his talented recruits next season perhaps he can compete with OU and actually get over his self-imposed hump. But if he hasn't the external pressures or internal desire to raise the bar then either he must be replaced or we as alumni and fans must accept that this is as good as it will get and lower our expectations for the program. In that case, UT will be locked into second best status and we'll still love our alma matter - we just won't respect it as much.
Stoops' teams are what they are b/c of him
Stoops is a coach that believes in 'hard coaching'. This is the guy who is the unyielding taskmaster, who will berate and belittle every player for every single little mistake. Done right, you end up with a team that breathes fire, b/c they will die before they will let themselves lose a game, b/c what they put up with to play is too much to also accept losing in the bargain. Done wrong, and your players turn on you as a coach, you lose the team, lose games and, eventually, your job.
The only satisfaction Sooner players get is when they win a game, b/c they know then they'll have at least some relief in practice the next week. When they lose, I am sure it is damn near unbearable. Ever notice how delighted Sooner players are after they beat texas or win the Big 12 Championship Game? They look like little kids, they are so gleeful. I don't think it is simply the result of
This is the atmosphere that Stoops has fostered at OU, and it works for them.
Mack isn't like that. Mack is the 'player-coach', the friendly guy who recruits them and nurtures them as a father-figure. Mack doesn't believe in 'hard coaching', and that is okay, b/c you have to be who you are as a coach. The end result, though, at least for texas, is you're going to lose to OU often, simply b/c they are mentally tougher as a team, and they have more at stake every year when they tee it up with texas.
texas is playing to win a game; OU is playing for their happiness and personal sanity.
As HornsFan Wrote
When you're a leader you have to recognize your strengths and weaknesses and bring in assistants who compliment you not mirror you. Mack needs type-A assistant coaches to be the taskmasters. And he can still be the player-coach who lets off some emotion during a game like he did that one time this season against the refs during the OU game after some bad no calls. I truly believe that gave the UT players more spring in their step and they fired off the ball more for the next two quarters than we saw the rest of the season. It worked, but he never went back there. You're right, the proper mix of intensity gets results, and can go badly if done wrong. But a total absence of it on gameday also yields unsatisfactory results in games against equal talent.
Exactly
So while I don't necessarily disagree with the lessons you're hoping Mack takes from this season, I'd argue that if he hasn't learned those lessons by now, it's doubtful he'll ever learn them.
This is pretty much how I feel, too.
Ugh
But GD's offense won a BCS Title for us and DA produced two Thorpe winners. Gosh, Peter, I can't stand bandwaggon fans like you.
Happy Holidays.
bandwagon fans??!?
this is such a bullshit statement. i've been a die-hard horns fan since i stepped on campus in the mid-80s. just because i criticize the players and the coaches doesn't mean i don't support texas. on saturdays in fall, i live and die with the football team. i recognize where we are and where we've been, and these are relatively good times. but i would argue with the talent we have had over the last decade, there's almost no way we wouldn't have picked up some hardware. and these successes have in some measure come despite the coaching. whoever came up with the following said it all: mack brown -- doing less with more.
Obviously...
you did not catch the sarcasm emanating from Lincoln's post.
by Misterserious7 on Dec 18, 2007 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
also...
apologies to anyone i've offended with previous posts. i tend to get a bit passionate about this subject. happy holidays everyone!
is Mack the Tom Penders of football?
While we all need to recognize MB's contributions -- he exorcized the Mackovic demons, won us a NC (did he, or was it VY's? -- topic for another post), we might have to face the fact that he can't get us to where we think we should be -- consistently win the Big 12 South, and in the BCS Top Ten every year. Certainly, he rekindled our dormant high expectations -- like a old orangeblood told me, sitting outside the Columbus Marriott, "the swagger is back", even if it has re-disappeared. His recruiting prowess is unmatched, his ability to raise money equally impressive.
But maybe he is the Tom Penders of football. Got us as far as he could go, but it isn't enough. Maybe he needs to step aside for a guy who isn't trying to be the players best buddy -- a guy like Rick Barnes. A guy who is 50% loved, 50% feared -- Stoops, Rich Rodriguez come to mine. Pete Carroll is a fluke -- could only survive in SoCal. We need a guy who can sell the best product in the world. Texas Fooball, by God. Then, have players that would rather lie on a bed of fire ants than get busted for DUI or pot possession, not to even mention felony burglary. Hopefully, it won't take a football version of Luke Axtell to make a change.
by nvrforget63 on Dec 18, 2007 2:39 PM CST reply actions
Agree with...
...most of that but the fact is Mack will be the HC for several more years and we hope he optimizes the use of the talent and resources of the program during that time. I certainly hope that a win over ASU will not induce further complacency. For the record I'm certainly not assuming such a win is forthcoming. Its certainly possible and it should be a thrilling game but....
Also, college kids will be college kids and we have to expect some disciplinary problems. Obviously what has happened over the last year is eggregious and cannot be allowed to continue but I would guess that many of us did not (or are not for the youngsters here) behave with uniform primness in college. This obviously would go double for kids that are good enough to play football at Texas and have probably been spoiled and fawned over for most of their lives.
There has never been a greater sentence...
...summarizing Mack and the team than "If the disappointment of the loss to A&M has lit a fire under your ass, Mack - don't let a Holiday Bowl win extinguish it." It really says so much.

by 






























