Afternoon Brewsky Isn't Shocked At Losing Nelson
Nelson picks the Aggies. Two days ago, Skyline linebacker Corey Nelson confirmed what many had anticipated for some time -- that the Longhorns had little chance with the rangy linebacker, as Nelson chose to become an Aggie ($). Rated as the no. 3 outside linebacker by Rivals, Nelson has a combination of sideline-to-sideline speed and striking ability that is highly valued in these days of the spread offense. If there is one criticism of Nelson it's that he doesn't have prototypical linebacker size at this time and looks more like a safety. However, with another year of development and a scheme that keeps him from having to fill gaps and take on offensive lineman in the hole, Nelson should be able to contribute early and often.
Though the Longhorns do have a Skyline alumnus on the roster (Christian Scott), it has been an extremely difficult school for Texas to recruit for the past several years, with some speculation that members of the coaching staff don't particularly care for the state's flagship program. While the coaching staff may not have impacted Nelson's decision at all, things started off poorly for the Longhorns in the recruitment of Nelson when he was spotted in Norman throwing the "horns down" gesture. He later played it off as being caught up in the moment, but the writing was on the wall early.
Given that Will Muschamp his own self recruited Nelson personally, how did such a talented player end up an Aggie? While it's not as incomprehensible as some Texas fans might think (or outsiders think Texas fans think), Nelson related the scene of his commitment to head coach Mike Sherman and explained his decision in his own words:
He was telling me that I was the centerpiece of what they wanted to do on defense. He wanted me to be a leader of the rebirth of the Wrecking Crew. That got me pretty excited and I was ready to do it.
Some players want to join programs already on the verge of competing for championships and others like the appeal of a wide-open depth chart and the ability to resurrect a once-proud program. Sherman played on Nelson's ego to some extent, but that's the nature of recruiting. It also helped the Aggies that Nelson's high school teammate, fellow linebacker Dominique Patterson committed to A&M during the spring.
Those are the knowable factors. The unknowables include the possibility that Nelson just didn't like Austin that much. It's not uncommon for players coming from more conservative families to dislike what they perceive as a hedonistic culture in the capital city. Nelson's father is a minister, and though that doesn't mean that the family is conservative or that the younger Nelson is personally, it is possible that the family doesn't care much for Austin and it's vices.
Nelson's decision leaves two linebackers on the radar for the Longhorns: Aaron Franklin and Jordan Hicks, with no pressure on either one to make a decision because of limited spots. Franklin still doesn't have plans to visit Austin before he makes a decision in the next month or so and has similar speed and build as Nelson. Since he didn't play his junior season, it's possible that Franklin could prove himself just as talented as Nelson. Hicks now says that he doesn't have any official visits planned besides one to Ohio State for the USC game, but Austin is a likely destination when he does firm up his plans.
The name of Rashod Favors continues to surface among fans as a possibility, but he would need to answer significant questions about short-burst quickness before the Longhorn coaches would seriously consider him. After Franklin makes a decision, the coaches may consider looking at other linebackers if the Marshall product heads elsewhere, but probably wouldn't pull the trigger until after the football season as they have a chance to evaluate any rising prospects during the fall.
Until any new names surface on the radar, it's down to Franklin and Hicks at the position with the loss of Nelson to the Aggies, the first player with a Longhorn offer to commit to another school. The word on Jake Matthews after a visit to USC recently is that he's essentially down to the Trojans and Aggies, so the number of recruiting victories by A&M over Texas this year could double in the near future.
Stephenson back on the radar. Little more than the two early de-commitments from the 2010 class and the commitment of Nelson to A&M has gone wrong for the Longhorns. Sure, Seastrunk looks like he's headed elsewhere and Darius White still hasn't made a decision, but everything else has gone almost perfectly, and, if anything, the two de-commitments have opened up the possibility of another offer or two going out late in the process. Certainly adds some drama, no?
So far, Aaron Franklin is the only player to have received an offer after the Junior Days in February, contrary to early beliefs that predicted another defensive back or wide receiver offer to replace Ahmad Dixon and Ross Apo. If another defensive back does receive an offer, the most likely candidate is Lancaster's Tyler Stephenson, a player who has impressed with his pure speed in workouts (4.4) and is regarded as being a top cover corner in the state (along with Adrian White and Carrington Byndom).
He made the trip to Austin almost two weeks ago to visit with Duane Akina, exactly the type of pro-active move that Texas coaches appreciate and contributed greatly to Dominic Espinosa's offer. It's a pro-activeness that results from a deep desire for an offer from Texas ($). At the end of June, before he scheduled his visit to campus, Stephenson indicated that he would probably accept a Texas offer, which he might have received had he been able to attend the second Junior Day he was invited to in February.
An offer probably won't soon be forthcoming for Stephenson, however. Texas doesn't particularly need another corner in the class after losing Dixon, who is a pure safety -- each of other four commitments who might play in the defensive backfield could well end up being corners (White, Byndom, Jackson, and Phillips). Certainly, safety will be a priority in the 2011 class, but how important is another defensive back in the class?
Surprisingly, only Montre Webber and Aundre McGaskey transferred during the spring, a number certainly was expected to be a little higher (um, hello Philip Payne?). Defensive tackle Michael Wilcoxon has now become the third Longhorn this year to leave and one or two other players could decide to leave before the start of the season. The most likely candidate now is safety Ben Wells, who looked terrible in his backpedal in giving up a long touchdown last year to Baylor and is now buried on the depth chart behind players with more eligibility remaining.
Basketball players enrolled. All three 2009 recruits are on campus and taking classes for the second summer session, despite rumors about Jordan Hamilton not making it through the Clearinghouse. Early word had Hamilton putting in impressive performances in his early pick-up games, which still include Royal Ivey, DJ Augustin, and Kevin Durant, three NBA players on campus this summer taking classes.
J'Covan Brown is still in the Clearinghouse, so he isn't taking summer classes, but he has been in Austin off and on throughout the summer and has reportedly looked strong playing pick-up games. Those strong performances probably indicate that he has worked through the conditioning issues he had during the spring. In fact, observers say that Brown has looked stronger than Avery Bradley attacking the basket, as Bradley has settled mostly for the mid-range jumpshot and looked a little shaky with his ball-handling, which isn't a surprise considering how right-hand dominate he appeared during the spring.
The Johnson/Wilcoxon fall-out. There's a reason that the Fulmer Cup exists -- about the only news during the summer in terms of football is bad news. While no Longhorns have been arrested this summer (knock on wood), Sergio Kindle did have his encounter with the wall of an apartment building and yesterday the news broke that not only was freshman defensive tackle Derek Johnson heading back home to Hoxie, Arkansas until fall practice, but that sophomore defensive tackle Michael Wilcoxon was leaving the program due to an apparent lack of playing time.
It's probably not worth speculating too much about what's going to happen with Johnson, but the Wilcoxon case deserves mention. Known as a project when he was recruited in 2007, Wilcoxon saw the field in several games last season and was expected to have a chance to contribute this season due to the lack of experienced depth on the defensive line. However, Wilcoxon must have had some indication that Calvin Howell and/or Johnson (and possibly Kyle Kriegel) were set to pass him on the depth chart and made it nearly impossible for him to crack the rotation.
Wilcoxon certainly had time to develop into a solid, if unspectacular, contributor for Texas, but if he couldn't hold off kids fresh out of high school at a position that often demands significant time in a college weight program, there was probably little chance that he would ever be useful. In other words, Wilcoxon leaving may help the Longhorns by providing more guaranteed playing time for a player like Howell and open up a needed scholarship for a player who can actually contribute on the field. Playing in a 3-4 defense more often should help assuage the loss of depth -- Will Muschamp's ability to throw different looks at an offense should more than make up for the loss of a player barely expected to contribute.
0 recs |
96 comments
|
Comments
Looks to me like Sherman simply did a great job of recruiting. If we can land Shaun Lewis and Matthews, we will have put together a very nice class. This is assuming everyone who is committed signs on the dotted line in February. Does Apo not count as a player who had a Texas offer who committed elsewhere?
by miketag on Jul 14, 2009 4:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I was considering the two de-commits in a different category,
Dixon being the other.
As for Sherman, Nelson clearly bought what he was selling, which is good news for the Aggies moving forward because they don’t seem like they’re going to be able to afford a buyout for Sherman if he flames out at some point. The recruiting returns so far this year look positive though, particularly on the offensive line, even without Matthews.
by GhostofBigRoy on Jul 14, 2009 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There will be a few A&M commits who will rise
Nate Askew and Luke Joeckel come to mind.
Shaun Lewis, Toney Hurd, Jake Matthews, and DJ Jones/Dontae Williams are all well thought of players looking at committing to A&M as well.
Mike Farrell said today on Rivals Radio that if we close with who we lead for right now we will get a Top 10 class. Which is impressive considering our last bowl win as in the 2001 Galleryfurniture.com Bowl.
by K2HMFIC on Jul 16, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a&m
a&m should get great recruits every year. a&m is the second biggest school in Texas and the second richest school in Texas. Texas is RICH with football talent. The aggies stink, and they should still get a top 15 class every year.
The aggies need to find a way to get Texas’ sloppy seconds instead of ou getting them. The players that Texas doesn’t want, a&m needs to find a way to get. Texas doesn’t have enough scholarships to get every great athlete in Texas. Texas has plenty of talent for a&m to be good even if Texas gets first choice on who they want.
by Longhorns84 on Jul 18, 2009 11:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What are the chances we start to recruit Jeff Luc?
It’s a pipe dream I’m sure, but I’m trying to see Hicks and Luc on the same Texas defense.
by Hippie Killer on Jul 14, 2009 4:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Luc just isn't on the radar,
he has offers from every major program and I don’t see the Longhorns being able to get in on him late and make any type of impression. The coaches clearly felt like they could find what they wanted in-state this year and then possibly grab Hicks since he showed some interest making it down here for the camp last year.
by GhostofBigRoy on Jul 14, 2009 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unfinished though, GoBR?
“However, with another year of development and a scheme that keeps him from having to fill gaps and take on offensive lineman in the hole.”
However what?
by UT_BKC on Jul 14, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm over him.
"Football's so important in Texas. On the West Coast, it's a social. On the East Coast, it's a culture. Here, it's a religion."
-- Major Applewhite
by Sunkist on Jul 14, 2009 4:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Big Roy:
Along with Webber, ’Horns also lost OL Andre McGaskey in the spring. With Wilcoxon gone (and adding in Humphrey and Oduegwu), scholarship total should be 82. That leaves spots for 2-3 walkons to get a one-year grant in August.
Any word on whether DT Tyrell Higgins (once a scholarship player, now a walkon after leaving school for a time) might see the field?
by edsp on Jul 14, 2009 4:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Forgot about McGaskey. Sheesh I'm off today.
Haven’t heard anything about Higgins playing. He’s now listed at about 280, so he has the bulk to have a chance and he could conceivably fill the role that Wilcoxon was slated for, but there just isn’t any buzz around him right now.
by GhostofBigRoy on Jul 14, 2009 5:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
at 6'0, 210
Nelson is the perfect size to grow into a 3-4 OLB, which is what I’m sure Sherman was alluding to when he said Nelson would be a centerpiece of bringing back the Wrecking Crew
You put him in the S&C program, get him to 230-235 with no loss of speed, and you turn him loose on the weakside.
by Beergut on Jul 14, 2009 5:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
who would the other 3 LB's be?
I don’t think Nelson can play 4 positions. Who will the aggies have to play in the secondary? Can Nelson play DB too?
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unless you think he’ll get taller, that’s not really the perfect size. You really want a guy who is 6’3" or 6’4" who can bulk up to at least 235-240lbs. fairly soon.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he is 6'1 as a junior in HS
so yes, it is a safe bet he will grow a little taller
by Beergut on Jul 15, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rebirth of the Wrecking Crew
Did Sherman just steal a line from Fran?
Was Nelson not turned off by the black and white, grainy videos of the last version of the Wrecking Crew or did Byrne find some money in the budget to have them digitally remastered?
Maybe Muschamp could start selling recruits that they could be the rebirth of Texas’ defense from the early ’80’s.
by Horncasting on Jul 14, 2009 5:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Muschamp
deosn’t have to sell players garbage.
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
btw
I haven’t seen Nelson play in person, so I am only basing this on highlight video, but it looks to me like Skyline runs a multiple even-front defense featuring some 4-3 and 4-2-5, and a little 3-4. Nelson’s responsibilities are the playside C-gap mostly, so it isn’t a case that he doesn’t have to take on blockers, it is more of a case that blockers can’t get their hands on him.
He moves around a lot, but he is usually strongside, so the coaches trust him to get off blocks or beats blocks to the POA.
by Beergut on Jul 14, 2009 5:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This is what I’m trying to say:
Better attacking vertically and chasing from the backside than sifting through the wash laterally and stalemating blockers at the point of attack. Coverage skills need polish as well. Lack of ideal size could be exploited at the next level.
Per ESPN.
by GhostofBigRoy on Jul 14, 2009 5:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it really depends on what highlight film you're viewing
One video on rivals features him on the strongside a lot, beating blockers to the POA, and getting of blocks by backs and TEs.
He needs to learn to use his hands better, but he does a decent job of keeping his outside arm free, when he is on blocks. In the second video featured on ESPN, the teams run away from him a lot, so he gets a lot of tackles on the backside. The video on Rivals is the exact opposite, as teams run at him.
What is really interesting is to watch his footwork in the ESPN video; someone has been working with him on being more efficient with his feet, and taking fewer steps before pursuing.
by Beergut on Jul 15, 2009 3:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
FYI Beergut -
He’s an Aggie now, so we no longer care about his fit into scheme.
by Horndogger on Jul 14, 2009 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Congrats to Aggies
With Nelson and Matthews heading to College Station – Sherman definitely hit a home run this year. This proves he does indeed have a personality. With studs like these 2 – sheep get nervous.
by realmccoy on Jul 14, 2009 8:55 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Matthews hasn’t committed yet, has he?
by burntorangehorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok. I've moved on.
Goodbye, Corey. I hope all his Coach Sherman fueled dreams come true, but I wouldn’t bet on it. It will take a ton more talent then just him for the true “Wrecking Crew” defense to return. I saw that defense up close in the ’90s when I was at Texas and it was a site to behold.
by TexasGarcia37 on Jul 14, 2009 6:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Jake Matthews
would make a nice Aggie too. haha
by carsondude on Jul 14, 2009 8:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Aggies get a good commit
and all of a sudden they, and the wrecking crew, are revived? I doubt it. The only thing that is a wreck is their program.
Per Rivals they have 5 four star recruits, 8 three star recruits, and 6 unranked guys. They only have 6 spots left. The Aggies will be lucky to finish with a top 10 ranked class, but a top 20 ranked class is probably more realistic. If they play as expected this year and it is clear Sherman is gone, they may even lose a few of their better commits.
The fact that Texas was in even in the hunt for Nelson and Matthews shows just how far the Aggie program has fallen. Matthews is good, but look at the depth at OL and the year advantage of the 2009 OL class at Texas. Having a solid depth chart is not a bad reason for losing a recruit.
Matthews needs to decide if he wants to compete for PT and a national championship, or go to A&M and be sure of PT and on a team that will be lucky to go to a bowl game.
As long as we lose a few kids to A&M that is fine. We have become spoiled. A&M and OU offered almost all 19 of our commits. We just need to get commits from White, Jeffcoat, Hicks and Franklin and close this class out. at the top—clean run wire to wire as the number 1 recruiting class. Let’s forget the clown from Waco and start the 2011 class as the No. 1 class again with some solid RB commits on day one.
by jkovach on Jul 14, 2009 10:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
so
We just need to get commits from White, Jeffcoat, Hicks and Franklin and close this class out. at the top
You’ve given up on Seastrunk?
by Beergut on Jul 15, 2009 3:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Terrell Owens and Chad Ochocinco had a baby
It would be LS.
by Tackchevy on Jul 15, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
White and Frankilin seem like the only players left for UT (maybe)
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jeffcoat is still pretty likely isn't he?
I can’t imagine him actually going into the mess of NCAA violations at USC and that was our real competition for him I thought, but I may be wrong.
by jkovach on Jul 15, 2009 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is certainly still in the mix. Things are just quiet right now.
"Football's so important in Texas. On the West Coast, it's a social. On the East Coast, it's a culture. Here, it's a religion."
-- Major Applewhite
by Sunkist on Jul 15, 2009 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
GhostofBigRoy
…….has Mack Brown scheduled an in-home visit for either (or both) Hicks or Franklin?
--- All roads to the Big-XII Championship lead through OU/RRS. It's not just another game! We're all about championships here. ---
by HornChamps on Jul 15, 2009 10:31 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Still looking for you to provide an explanation as to whether or not you consider Mack Brown a hands-on recruiter, since you apparently think Muschamp is.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has already said Mack isn't hands-on enough
He implied that our last attempts at OOS recruits (Kennard and Kirkpatrick, I believe) failed because Mack didn’t do in-homes with them.
by Rickyspub on Jul 16, 2009 7:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess where I’m going with this is finding out what evidence he has that Muschamp is so much more hands-on than Brown or other UT coaches are.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 16, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wrecking Crew
this was kind of before my era. Was the Wrecking Crew that good, or did the competition make them look better than they really were? Texas and ou were in down years during this tme weren’t they? a&m didn’t win any championships during the Wrecking Crww period, so they couldn’t have bee too good.
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 11:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
A&M had five appearances in the top ten during a 10 year period, and for most of that time “wrecking crew” defensivemen were widely considered for Butkus, Thorpe and Lombardi awards. Those teams went to the cotton bowl often (pre-BCS it was a much bigger deal, USC and Notre Dame were opponents), but only won twice.
Beergut or someone else probably knows better when the “wrecking crew” ended, but they won 6 SWC championships during that time – unless it extended all the way to Dat Nguyen’s tenure then give them the inaugural Big 12 championship as well.
A lot of good football teams, but I don’t know if anyone would call them great. Va. Tech in recent years might be the closest comparison. They had the SWC championship on lockdown, but weren’t often in the discussion for the best team in the country.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jul 15, 2009 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thanks
I don’t know how great they could have been if they didn’t even play for a national championship. If the Wrecking Crew was around today, could they stop the Big 12 offenses?
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The defense was actually pretty good, and from what I remember, the offense usually just stank it up.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Inaugural Big 12 title
was won by Texas over Nebraska (Mackovic’s late fourth-down gamble on the pass to the TE) . . . Aggies won in 1998, the third year of the Big 12.
Aggies defenses truly were dominant. They weren’t playing OU most of that time, since it was pre-Big 12. SWC was surprisingly balanced in its latter years, though Aggies were clearly the best. But Baylor, Tech, Texas, Arkansas (before they left), SMU (pre death penalty) were forces.
Aggies were one win away from being a national title contender several times:
1985: 10-2, lost at Alabama and at Baylor (by 5); crushed Auburn (and Bo Jackson) in bowl
1987: 10-2, lost to Tech and LSU early and closed with 8 straight wins; blitzed N. Dame in bowl
1991: lost by a point at Tulsa early or would have been 11-0 pre-bowl
1992: 11-0 before losing to Notre Dame in Cotton Bowl, but played only 1 ranked team (Stanford)
1993: 10-1 regular season, losing badly at OU (lost to Notre Dame in Cotton Bowl)
1994: 10-0-1 (tied SMU), but ineligible for Cotton Bowl by SWC dictate
by edsp on Jul 15, 2009 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the correction
The only team I (loosely) followed growing up was Michigan and the Big 12 was already in full swing by the time I got to campus in Austin. Some of the details I’m still learning.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jul 15, 2009 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would say the last true Wrecking Crew defense was the 2001 team
we had an atrocious offense that year (thank you Dino Babers), but the defense was awesome
Rocky Bernard and Ty Warren led the defensive front, and Sammy Davis was a junior that year.
The ’02 defense was very talented, but underachieved badly.
The reason we didn’t win a national championship that period was b/c our offense wasn’t balaned enough. We would go to bowl games and the defense would play valiantly, but the run-heavy offense would be shut down.
A combination of factors came into play there, though. We’re also talking about a time period where no SWC school could take partial qualifiers, which meant out-of-state schools could come in and raid Texas and take away a lot of talent. Non-qualifiers from Texas played a big part in Nebraska’s “walk-on” program.
by Beergut on Jul 15, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Add to it a weak conference...
A&M dominated when the conference was really weak. Houston was good for a couple of years with the Run-N-Shoot and we had two years where we looked good, which bookended several seasons where we were horrible. As you say, A&M would get a team from OOC and that team would shut down the offense. It always seemed like A&M would lose an early season game and you would think they were coming back to the pack, then they would dominate the conference, but then get beat in their bowl game. I think the SWC just sucked in early ’90s which is why it died.
by Rickyspub on Jul 16, 2009 7:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
RC's inability to string together...
offensive success and develop those players was huge. Part of it lies at the feet that he had a revolving door of offensive coaches(Ensmiger, Toledo, Kragthorpe, Babers[ugh…], etc, etc).
Brandon Stewart and Sirr Parker were supposed to have done amazing things for us, but the one time they produced was in the 3OT of the ’98 B12 Champ.
by K2HMFIC on Jul 16, 2009 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually
the ‘weak conference’ excuse is bunk
I believe the SWC always had two or more teams highly ranked every year, at least until texas got prison-raped by Miami in the ‘91 Cotton Bowl. I think that game hurt the image of the SWC more than anything. Houston was good for a short period, Tech was sometimes good, sometimes bad, TCU was so-so, and Baylor (believe it or not) was good for a bowl at least every other year. They didn’t become ridiculously bad until they entered the Big 12.
by Beergut on Jul 17, 2009 4:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the conference was pretty weak...
I think the Miami loss was somewhat emblematic of the weakness in the conference by the 90’s. From the last season Akers finished with a ranked team (1984) until the demise of the SWC we finished the season ranked only three times (that ill-fated year of 1990, we were barely got in at the end of 1994, and the last year of the SWC in 1995).
The conference averaged less than 3 ranked teams at the end of the season during its last decade and in many of the early 90’s seasons (91-93) only A&M finished ranked. In that 10 year period the conference champ went 1-9 in their bowl game (we lost to VT in the Sugar Bowl in 1995 rather than playing in the Cotton Bowl). We were a horrible 8-16-2 vs ranked OOC opponents (even worse if you take OU out: 3-12-1). A&M was only 9-14 against ranked OOC opponents during that 10 year period.
by Rickyspub on Jul 17, 2009 9:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just b/c texas was down
doesn’t mean the whole conference was done. The Miami loss was emblematic of how overrated texas was that season, nothing more.
Were we the strongest conference in the nation? No.
Was the whole conference down? No.
The whole “the SWC was weak” excuse always comes from people who try to diminish what A&M did during that time period.
by Beergut on Jul 17, 2009 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It wasn't just Texas...
Houston was ranked at the end of the season just 3 times in the last decade of the SWC (88-90). Tech made 2 showings (89,95). Baylor made one (86). Arkie was ranked 3 times in their last 5 season in the conference (86,88,89). I don’t think any of those teams were even in the Top 10 either. That’s pretty paltry numbers for a decade as a ‘major’ conference. In fact there were 4 seasons with only one ranked team. The ACC and Big East (prior to realignment) were the only other current major conferences to ever have less than two ranked teams at the end of any season during that decade.
We were at the lower edge of the power conferences in the late 80s and then collapsed in the 90s during realignment. While we rarely outperformed the Pac10, Big 10, SEC, or Big 8 in the late 80s we at least weren’t as bad as the ACC or Big East, but after ’91 the Big East and ACC blew by us by gaining Miami, VT, and FSU and our stature as a conference plummeted.
I think the Cotton Bowl record bears out just how weak the conference was at the top. Add to it the fact that rarely did more than one other team even crack the Top 20 and you have a weak conference. The fact that A&M cheated during that period and was twice ineligible to even go to bowl games diminishes what they accomplished during that period more than anything.
by Rickyspub on Jul 17, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I go by bowl games more than rankings
Like I said, we weren’t the best conference, but we weren’t the worst conference either. You remember the WAC?
The Big East wasn’t anything special, the Bowl Alliance actually put in rules to disqualify a conference champion from the Alliance b/c Syracuse kept winning the Big East and then bombing in bowl games.
The problem with looking only at Cotton Bowl results ignores the teams they were playing. When A&M lost to Notre Dame in the ’94 Cotton Bowl, that was the team that knocked off undefeated and eventual national champion Florida State, and then was upset the next week by Boston College. If not for the BC upset, that Notre Dame team would have been playing for the national championship. When we lost to Florida State in the ’92 Cotton Bowl, we lost to the pre-season favorite for the national championship. FSU spent the majority of the year at #1 before losing to Miami in a heartbreaker, and then dropping a game to rival Florida.
So yes, we were not performing incredibly in the Cotton Bowl, but the teams we were losing to were some of the best teams in the nation.
As for the cheating issue, if cheating was all it took to become a good team, texas wouldn’t have sucked so hard during the mid-‘80s through the mid-’90s, b/c y’all were busted twice for cheating, too.
by Beergut on Jul 17, 2009 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Funny you bring up competition in the Cotton Bowl...
I think 1-9 speaks for itself but if you want to deride us for getting stomped by Miami in 90 and blaming us for the demise of the conference then you need to use your own rules. That Miami team was preseason #1 and got caught in their first game by BYU (I believe it was the year that Detmer won the Heisman). They won the national championship the next year, but the talent that left after the Cotton Bowl had accumulated a 54-5 record, won 2 national titles and finished ranked either 1 or 2 for 4 straight years! We got beat by the best team to play in the Cotton Bowl in that 10 year period.
Perhaps if the conference had been stronger (and 89-90 was probably the last heyday of the conference) maybe A&M and Texas would have performed better against these teams. You can hold up the strength of the competition but all these teams were flawed (Miami losing to BYU, FSU losing to Miami AND Florida, ND getting beat by BC). In fact these teams wouldn’t have been ridiculed too highly for coming into the Cotton Bowl feeling like they had underperformed for the season. They all had reasons to go into Dallas being somewhat undermotivated while the SWC champ should have had a lot of motivation and was playing on ‘home’ turf, but our conference champs came up short year after year.
Ultimately I say good riddance to the SWC. It was a corrupt collection and it was this hubris led to its downfall.
by Rickyspub on Jul 20, 2009 8:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ou was down too
If ou and Texas were down in the Big 12, the conference would be garbage.
by Longhorns84 on Jul 18, 2009 11:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was at Texas from ‘90-’96, and I saw the true “Wrecking Crew” defense in person and it was a truly awesome defense. It was a base 3-4, but because of their incredible talent level it could morph and change to multiple defenses when needed. On that defense there were NFL-caliber players on every level of the defense. Everybody knows the names: Sam Adams, Brandon Mitchell, Reggie Brown, Keith Mitchell, Quentin Coryatt, Aaron Glenn, Kevin Smith, etc. The one thing Slocum could do was recruit top level defensive players. The “Wrecking Crew” defense was always in the top 5-10 in total defense every year for those 10+ years.
by TexasGarcia37 on Jul 15, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
why didn't they play for any national championships?
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
91 was probably the closest
But they got beat by Notre Dame to ruin their undefeated season. Not that it would have mattered, as #1 Miami played #2 Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, booth undefeated going into the game.
by Wells on Jul 15, 2009 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
90 they were good too
But they lost early in the season @ Tulsa and then lost 2-10 to Florida A&M. The Score in the Cotton Bowl next year against ND was 3-28.
The lack of offense seemed to be the issue.
by Wells on Jul 15, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"The lack of offense seemed to be the issue."
The Ags seem to have had that problem for about, oh, 50 years.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jul 15, 2009 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
you do realize....
that there wasn’t actually a championship game to play in those years, right?
by billyzane on Jul 15, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ah, to remember
the joys of the Bowl Alliance and the Bowl Coalition
by Beergut on Jul 15, 2009 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know if "given up" is the right term, but
I no longer want him at Texas. I want a RB that I can cheer for on Saturday and that will put his heart and sould into the team. Traylon Shead seems eager to work hard and prove he is worthy of the schollie, and I will cheer for him like a madman. I like awesome team player type guys like McCoy and Shipley. I think LS is a complete tool. Earlier I really thought he was our guy, but now I hope we have revoked his offer because I don’t want him. This is easy to say since we have a plethora of RBs and 2011 also has a bunch of top tier talent. We seriously don’t need the distraction of the Seastrunk non-comedy show.
by jkovach on Jul 15, 2009 12:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree
plus it looks like next year is going the be christmas at the RB position.
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I agree about next year's class...
there are still no guarantees. Malcolm Brown (#2 in Texas) doesn’t think much of going to Texas so if Seastrunk wants to come, we take him. We don’t have many offers out there remaining, so I think we can keep going after him as well as others equally.
"Football's so important in Texas. On the West Coast, it's a social. On the East Coast, it's a culture. Here, it's a religion."
-- Major Applewhite
by Sunkist on Jul 15, 2009 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
MB
he doesn’t think much about Texas? Why do you say that?
by Longhorns84 on Jul 18, 2009 11:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's considered an early OU lean,
wouldn’t say that he doesn’t like Texas.
by GhostofBigRoy on Jul 20, 2009 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
who gives a damn how he acts during his recruitment?
I don’t care how egotistical they act while being recruited, b/c I think that attitude will change real quick on the first day of two-a-days.
As long as the guys on the team like him, that will be taken care of.
Y’all had primadonna crybabies like Cedric Benson at texas, you really think Seastrunk could be any worse?
by Beergut on Jul 15, 2009 5:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you about Seastrunk.
He is having fun with all the attention now, but that will be tamed down once he arrives on campus. I for one would love to see him in Burnt Orange next year. I am sure I acted like an ass a time or two when I was 17, I just didn’t have the scrutiny of 7-8 sets of rabid college football fans.
by NeTexHorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m a big fan of pulling the hardass card on kids like Seastrunk. I just wonder if UT has any coaches who can do that.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the coaches don't need to do that
you let the seniors on defense handle that
by Beergut on Jul 16, 2009 4:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don’t send a boy to do a man’s job. Seniors are there for leadership, not hardassery. For example, I wouldn’t put a kid who is about to graduate basic training in charge of a bunch of fresh-off-the-bus troops. Drill sergeants are there to break them all down and build them all up.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 16, 2009 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
disagree
I think one hard hit from a player like Orakpo or Kindle will do more to shut a mouthy freshman up than anything a coach can say.
by Beergut on Jul 17, 2009 5:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s sending a message, but not breaking someone. A defensive player can hardly play the hardass cultivator role for a young offensive player.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 17, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
White and Franklin
seems like the only players UT has a chance with that is left on the table this year. I think USC will start pouring in the 5* soon (Jeffcoat & Seastrunk).
I’m happy with the class how it is, but the addition of White would be great! Texas got everything they really need (DT’s).
by Longhorns84 on Jul 15, 2009 1:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think USC is a hornet's nest
I just don’t see how they are not going to get stung with a “lack of institutional control” violation. Who knows with the NCAA. But, USC’s failure to self penalizing is considered a major mistake by most and the NCAA finally has serious amo with the Mayo/Floyd fiasco.
by jkovach on Jul 15, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Conservative
It’s not uncommon for players coming from more conservative families to dislike what they perceive as a hedonistic culture in the capital city.
Well, Austin is pretty hedonistic, but I doubt that’s enough reason to dissuade a player from the Longhorns. (e.g., Colt not exactly a pot-smoking hippie)
I’m a conservative who does not like Austin “culture” much, but I love my University with all my heart!
by bfaut86 on Jul 15, 2009 2:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’d say the WC days were over when Jason Glenn graduated
by miketag on Jul 15, 2009 2:41 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
What’s so hedonistic about Austin? It’s my favorite city on the planet, but it’s pretty damn tame compared the last two places I’ve lived (SF and DC ‘burbs). Much more conservative, too, although it’s certainly my beloved liberal oasis in the middle of a sea of neoliberalism and conservatism.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hedonistic suburbs? I think that would make a good cartoon strip.
by NeTexHorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You couldn’t sling a dead Sooner without hitting a swinger or naturist here.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 15, 2009 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I fail to see how that's any different than Austin.
"From the waist down, Earl Campbell has the biggest legs I have ever seen on a running back." -John Madden
by run Bevo run on Jul 16, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dead Sooners don't carry as far.
Damn humidity.
by ctex80 on Jul 16, 2009 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Austin’s much more conservative than around here, IMO.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 16, 2009 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Austin being in the bible belt, I think holds its own amongst the granola crowd.
Football really needs to get here if we are having this debate.
"From the waist down, Earl Campbell has the biggest legs I have ever seen on a running back." -John Madden
by run Bevo run on Jul 17, 2009 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s exactly why I love Austin: I can enjoy a great counter-culture scene for a while, and then head to a good BBQ joint for a full rack of beef ribs. SF and DC have never heard of good BBQ without it being Mongolian.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 17, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Head south of DC and the suburbs are a little more conservative.
by Wells on Jul 17, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean Arlington, Fairfax Cty, Falls Church, etc.? Not at all, really. Those are the places where the exploding progressive population has tipped the state blue. “Red state” Virginia is outside the suburbs, wouldn’t you say?
by burntorangehorn on Jul 17, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have you been to McLean?
In general, northern Virginia is though of as the conservative side of DC suburbs, and the liberal side of the commonwealth.
Looking at the results of the last presidential elections for the three states:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/va.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/tx.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/md.htm
Fairfax and Loudoun Counties voted democratic (53% and 60%) but not as much as Travis (64%) but much more than the surrounding counties in Texas. None of these compare with DC’s Maryland Suburbs, which voted democratic 72% (Montgomery) and 82% (PG).
So as I said, Northern VA is more conservative than Maryland Suburbs.
The question is whether this is a good judge of hedonism. If hedonism is the pursuit of or devotion to pleasure, then this really is not a good measure, as I know some liberals who hate having fun. Looking at things like restaurants per capita, the music scene, and the general the demeanor of people in Austin compared to in DC, and I would have to say Austin wins this one easy. But neither stand up to San Fran.
by Wells on Jul 17, 2009 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, been to McLean. Interviewed there a few times before going for the job I’m starting in a couple weeks. And NoVA might be more likely to vote republican than the Maryland suburbs, but that’s like saying they’re more likely to vote republican than Massachusetts.
In terms of social conservatism, I completely disagree with your assessment of NoVA. I would say social conservatism vs. social liberalism has more to do with social liberties than with having fun. Social conservatives are generally opposed to gay rights and the progressive agenda, but “having fun” is a different issue entirely. Austin has its own progressive scene and counter-culture movements, definitely the most concentrated in Texas, but also has a lot more pickup-truck culture than NoVA does.
by burntorangehorn on Jul 17, 2009 8:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would say hedonism has little to do with being liberal...
You see way more strip clubs in the South than in the North. New England is very liberal but you can see the Puritan roots run pretty deep. New Orleans, while a liberal enclave in LA, is probably about the most hedonistic place I have been to in the US. I haven’t really found San Fran to be all that hedonistic (but I’ll admit my excursions there have all been for work) and NYC has become relatively staid compared to what it was prior to the 90s (lived there in the 90s, visited in the 80s)…I certainly don’t recall there being a concentration of partying in either place like you would see on 6th Street on a Saturday night when school’s in session.
I think I agree with burntorangehorn regarding social conservatism vs. social liberalism. Hedonism in a broad cultural sense is often a reaction to stronger authority, so while social conservatism rules the day in the South you see a lot more hedonism at night in reaction to the norms. Social liberals are about expanding rights, which doesn’t correlate to the need to break taboos in a hedonistic sense.
by Rickyspub on Jul 20, 2009 9:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 





















