re: Why is it assumed Texas can pull a big name?

quote:

---

quote:
Look at the pic in the post above yours



That pic looked like it was from the seventies and it certainly doesn't look like this video.

LINK

A for effort from the Aggies, though.

---

Did you watch the video and compare it to Bama or A&M's? It's a joke. All Texas did was put up some FatHeads on the walls and buy some new weights (which aren't anything special). I love the part where he talks about the 60 meter 4 lane track and then you can see how the 2 outside lanes have columns or other equipment on them so you can't really even use them. They still have raised platforms for their weights which are outdated and dangerous because you can trip on them (most of the SEC has flush platforms). Place looks like a cave. He even goes on about the chrome weights but then you look around and most of their weights are different colors.

Here is the A&M weight room video: LINK

Notice how much more open it is, both taller and wider with lots of light. The platforms are all flush. The weights are all coordinated. The workout machines are all computerized to measure workouts in minute detail as every player logs in and are recorded on 2 different cameras to observe technique. There is a wall of 25 coordinated TV's for various things to be displayed.

Bama's is similarly impressive as is LSU's, though each has different attributes. Texas easily trails all 3 though. Tennessee has a great facility, so does USC and Oregon. Honestly I think you would struggle to say that Texas is Top 10 in facilities.

Another real problem they have is they built the indoor facility on top of the weight room and both are too small. Thus in order to keep up they are going to have to tear the whole thing down and start over. It was really cool when it was built but I would think a lot of recruits chuckle under their breath as some Texas coach is telling them how they have the best facilities when that kid has just toured at A&M, Bama, or LSU. It's not only wrong it makes the coach look like an idiot.

quote:

---

Did you watch the video and compare it to Bama or A&M's? It's a joke. All Texas did was put up some FatHeads on the walls and buy some new weights (which aren't anything special). I love the part where he talks about the 60 meter 4 lane track and then you can see how the 2 outside lanes have columns or other equipment on them so you can't really even use them. They still have raised platforms for their weights which are outdated and dangerous because you can trip on them (most of the SEC has flush platforms). Place looks like a cave. He even goes on about the chrome weights but then you look around and most of their weights are different colors.

Here is the A&M weight room video: LINK

Notice how much more open it is, both taller and wider with lots of light. The platforms are all flush. The weights are all coordinated. The workout machines are all computerized to measure workouts in minute detail as every player logs in and are recorded on 2 different cameras to observe technique. There is a wall of 25 coordinated TV's for various things to be displayed.

Bama's is similarly impressive as is LSU's, though each has different attributes. Texas easily trails all 3 though. Tennessee has a great facility, so does USC and Oregon. Honestly I think you would struggle to say that Texas is Top 10 in facilities.

Another real problem they have is they built the indoor facility on top of the weight room and both are too small. Thus in order to keep up they are going to have to tear the whole thing down and start over. It was really cool when it was built but I would think a lot of recruits chuckle under their breath as some Texas coach is telling them how they have the best facilities when that kid has just toured at A&M, Bama, or LSU. It's not only wrong it makes the coach look like an idiot.

---

Is there anything about t.u. that you don't know about? You have studied it more than I have. Wonder why?

First off, you can learn all I have said about Texas in 15 minutes of Youtube videos. Also, I do live in Austin though so it is hard not to know something about Texas. Mainly though, you hear all the Texas claims of superiority and it makes you curious to see what is legit and what isn't, after all we still compete with Texas heavily in recruiting.

Sounds like you are a typical Texas tshirt fan that gets most of your information from Ketchum and thinks the world revolves around Bellmont.

quote:

---

Waterfalls man….fricking waterfalls

---

Sad truth...Oregon's is even better. Those are the only facilities in the country I'm jealous of.

I really don't think it would matter though, you could spend anything, Phil Knight would take one look at it, stroke a check to Oregon and tell them "top it".

Are you fricking joking?? Good lord

quote:

---

Are you fricking joking?? Good lord

---

What did I say that is even close to being disputable?

quote:

---

They're constrained by being located in the downtown area of a major city

---

I'm only 20 right now, and started watching Texas football when I was 4/5, however old I was in Mack's first season, so I don't know too much personally about the state of the program before he came in. But, from what my dad has told me, the job wasn't nearly as big of a deal when it came open last time, as compared to this time.

The amount of money that comes into the program is day and night compared to then, plus the first 12 years of Mack's tenure brought the program back into the national spotlight. Sure, he only won one NC and 2 CCs, but 9 straight 10+ win seasons is nothing to scoff at. Because of that, he dominated instate recruiting for all but the last couple of years here.

The condition with which the program was left in this time around is considerably better than the first time, as Mack had established good relations with Texas HS coaches and programs, and besides the complete mismanagement of the QB position, there is still quite a bit of talent

It's still the second winningest DI program and has had much better success and exposure in the past 16 years than the almost 30 or so prior to that.

tl;dr The job is much more appealing due to Mack's tenure than it was last time it was open

I agree that it's hard to get big name guys to drop the gig they have for something that may or may not be better. I hope that some of our fan base learns that you can't just money whip someone into taking the job. Trust me when I say I get just as annoyed as a lot of you guys on this board with the sense of entitlement that many of them have, which is ironic because those same fans bitch about the football team having that very issue.

I'd much rather the program take a risk on a guy who, while maybe not coaching at the highest level already, has at least had success in other places, which would lend credence to the idea that he could probably succeed at Texas as well.

There's going to be a lot of bullshite rumors coming out in the next couple of weeks, but I fully expect the job to be filled by New Year, probably. And I think it'll be someone under the radar or not even mentioned yet.

that's just silly. USC publicly claimed they were ready to pay $6m. Then they "settled" on Sark at $3.5m. Big deal. You don't overpay just to do so.