Questions Answered! (8-15)

[HornSports Staff]

This week's edition of Questions Answered is HERE

 

[hornrush]

Pretty sure Dylan Haines is a red-shirt sophomore.

Perhaps I'm wrong.

Hook'em!

 

[BudreauReye]

Pretty sure Dylan Haines is a red-shirt sophomore.

Perhaps I'm wrong.

Hook'em!

Yes he is.

 

[Matt Cotcher]

Pretty sure Dylan Haines is a red-shirt sophomore.

Perhaps I'm wrong.

Hook'em!

You're right. He's a 3rd year guy. I was supposed to edit that - thanks for catching it.

(It's correct now.)

 

[doc longhorn]

"Lukus Alderman - What is it that is setting guys like Taylor Doyle and Dylan Haines apart to the point that they are moving up from the scout team to finding a way into either the starting lineup or at least finding meaningful snaps?"

There is no way in hell a walk on should be able to beat out a scholarship player.  It proves how badly Mack and his coaches evaluated and developed the players they recruited.  Say what you will about Akina, but DB's were his responsibility and it's obvious he sucked as a recruiter - the last few years.

I would jerk the schollie, from the player(s) Haines beat out, and give it to him.

 

[Lukus Alderman]

Follow up question:

Are there any players that would be considered for a role playing on both offense AND defense?

 

[echeese]

"Lukus Alderman - What is it that is setting guys like Taylor Doyle and Dylan Haines apart to the point that they are moving up from the scout team to finding a way into either the starting lineup or at least finding meaningful snaps?"

There is no way in hell a walk on should be able to beat out a scholarship player.  It proves how badly Mack and his coaches evaluated and developed the players they recruited.  Say what you will about Akina, but DB's were his responsibility and it's obvious he sucked as a recruiter - the last few years.

I would jerk the schollie, from the player(s) Haines beat out, and give it to him.

Except it happens frequently around the nation. . . . ..btw, Chevigny Collins is now at bum flack state so his ship has already been revoked. . .

There are multiple factors contributing to Doyle & Haines moving up the depth chart:1) The previous staff (and scouts) misevaluated some guys.

So Doyle who was recruited by the previous staff has worked his ass off and pushed players who haven't worked as hard out of the way but somehow that's a "previous staff" flack up?

Wouldn't that be an example of good evaluations?   

Some of you need to let go of the butt hurt, apply some preparation H and admit our problem wasn't evaluations as much as development. . . .

Yeah, the axe grinding is getting really old.. . . .

Guess what (for those that have never played and yes, that is intended as a condescending comment). . .football is a game of passion and want to. . . . .

Bob Bowlsby has done an excellent job of improving the Big 12’s bowl lineup. Top billing is the Sugar Bowl deal which features the Big 12 Champion vs the SEC Champion, unless either is in the 4-team playoff. The two conferences will also face each other in the Russell Athletic Bowl and the Liberty Bowl. 

I like the Sugar bowl deal. . . not sure the Russell isn't just the Holiday Bowl East but the Liberty Bowl?    Weather is frequently CRAP. . and nasty cold. . . 

 

[texasdobbs]

Very good guys...

 

[Matt Cotcher]

Chuck,

First the answer specifically states that it was a combination of things. You chose to focus on only one.

Dylan Haines was not offered a scholarship. Doyle redshirted, was on the scout team for a year, then played in 2 games as a reserve. 'misevaluation' might not have been the perfect word choice, but in this context it was used as a way of illustrating that the previous staff seemed to miss something that the current staff likes. And, again, that was one of several reasons listed.

I really admire your mission of patrolling Texas sites and pointing out poorly crafted arguments that have no merit. I truly do.

But don't let those baseless arguments make you look for look for something when it's not there.

 

[java]

echeese,

I would agree with you (usually do, but never played football); however, it is my understanding that Mack did not let Wylie run the S&C program the way he wanted to.  In addition, as I understand it, there was not the year round accountability in S&C that there is now.  Therefore, workout warriors got bigger and stronger than the guys who came in, played around, got a smoothie, and left.

That makes a big difference.  I think it has really hurt us since Colt graduated.

Hook 'em

btw, one of the saddest days in my life was when my daddy told me I was too old to play football with the boys.  

 

[echeese]

Chuck,

First the answer specifically states that it was a combination of things. You chose to focus on only one.

Generally people put the most important issue first and label it as such then work down. . . . .perhaps you are different

Having said that. . . .I questioned the idea that TAylor Doyle is somehow a "evaluation" problem considering he was "evaluated" by the very staff you are trying to hammer for poor "evalutations". ..  .though I will also point out, short of Anderson breaking into the starting line up. . .all of our starters and most of our backups were "evaluated" by the previous staff that now you claim did a poor job.

I'd argue the talent we have on campus is the best in the conference. . . with the 2014 class getting 50% credit to CFS cuz he still came in and closed (except for players like Nelson and Ford). . .our biggest problem was a lack of development. . . .were we perfect evaluation wise?  Nope, noone ever is. . . .

And yes, I would make the same commentary to Ketch or Jeff Howe. . . .

 

[echeese]

echeese,

I would agree with you (usually do, but never played football); however, it is my understanding that Mack did not let Wylie run the S&C program the way he wanted to.  In addition, as I understand it, there was not the year round accountability in S&C that there is now.  Therefore, workout warriors got bigger and stronger than the guys who came in, played around, got a smoothie, and left.

That makes a big difference.  I think it has really hurt us since Colt graduated.

Hook 'em

btw, one of the saddest days in my life was when my daddy told me I was too old to play football with the boys.  

I agree completely and said in 2009, Mack should have stuck to plan. . . .though I doubt the last 4 years would be much different other than a bowl game in 2010. . .. . but that is another story . .. 

But blasting Mack for poor evaluations as a result of Taylor Doyle (who is finally healthy. . .and a decent recruit coming ut). making noise is pretty goofy. . . .considering he was recruited by them.

 

[echeese]

But don't let those baseless arguments make you look for look for something when it's not there.

Dude,

I can only read the words you type. . . .

Don't get mad at me if you said one thing and meant something else. . . .

 

[CCausey11]

Generally people put the most important issue first and label it as such then work down. . . . .perhaps you are different

Having said that. . . .I questioned the idea that TAylor Doyle is somehow a "evaluation" problem considering he was "evaluated" by the very staff you are trying to hammer for poor "evalutations". ..  .though I will also point out, short of Anderson breaking into the starting line up. . .all of our starters and most of our backups were "evaluated" by the previous staff that now you claim did a poor job.

I'd argue the talent we have on campus is the best in the conference. . . with the 2014 class getting 50% credit to CFS cuz he still came in and closed (except for players like Nelson and Ford). . .our biggest problem was a lack of development. . . .were we perfect evaluation wise?  Nope, noone ever is. . . .

And yes, I would make the same commentary to Ketch or Jeff Howe. . . .

I think this will be a great thing to watch and evaluate.  Only time and a few years will tell whether it was great talent with poor development, or if the recruiting was actually sub-par.  I don't know that we have the best talent in the conference, I hope we do!  But this will be very interesting to watch and we will have hard data in 2-3 years.  Until then, let's hope you are right about the talent.

The other thought I have and am waiting to verify is that while we recruited some great talent, we didn't wisely choose what positions that talent played and are thus very thin and under-stocked in some critical positions.  This may turn out to be the bigger mistake of the previous staff vs. the talent level they recruited.

 

[java]

I think this will be a great thing to watch and evaluate.  Only time and a few years will tell whether it was great talent with poor development, or if the recruiting was actually sub-par.  I don't know that we have the best talent in the conference, I hope we do!  But this will be very interesting to watch and we will have hard data in 2-3 years.  Until then, let's hope you are right about the talent.

The other thought I have and am waiting to verify is that while we recruited some great talent, we didn't wisely choose what positions that talent played and are thus very thin and under-stocked in some critical positions.  This may turn out to be the bigger mistake of the previous staff vs. the talent level they recruited.

I don't know if any of you fellows ever watch chick flicks, but there was a line in Pretty Woman, "Ya gotta have a plan.  Do you have a plan?  Ya gotta have a plan."

Unfortunately, our offensive plan used to change on a yearly basis...we had a one year plan, but didn't have a five year plan.  I hope it doesn't come back to bite us.  We've got talent.  

Great info, everyone.  Thank you for the hard work.