Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About GoHornsGo90

  • Birthday 06/11/1990

GoHornsGo90's Achievements

  1. Myles is a phenomenal talent. Absolute freak of nature. Was nice to see 247 recognize him as the top player in the country, although recruiting websites are always inclined to DEs for whatever reason. Would certainly be the first guy I'd flip to UT if I had to choose.
  2. Problem with a certainly fantastic hire in Wickline is making him OC (assuming that happens) takes away a lot of the ability he has to just look over the OL, which requires a lot of dedication in its own right. Aside from that, he's never called plays before. Why risk that? It's unnecessary. But...still better than Watson. Not that that is saying much.
  3. False. Many of the hires were confirmed by LHN and the UT staff directory itself. And, assuming we are/were actually still looking for an OC, this was not the way to go about it. If we were planning on Wickline or Watson as OC from the outset, that obviously is self-defeating already.
  4. I don't think I've ever seen an offensive coaching staff hired in a more confusing, mind-boggling, and ass-backwards manner as the one we've seen over the past two weeks. Most of it seems to stem from Watson being QBs coach and Wickline possibly wanting to be co-OC, limiting our ability to hire whomever needs to be hired as OC, which should have ALWAYS been the first priority. Nonsensical.
  5. This is correct. WR/TE is sometimes combined (like "DBs" and "DL") into "receivers. It actually makes the most sense of any position to combine, sense all WRs have to block and TEs hypothetically (not in UT's case) have to catch nowadays. The only major difference is size. I think it's pretty obvious by now that Chambers isn't going to be TEs coach anymore. So we're bringing in a guy (likely a recruiting rainmaker) to coach all receivers, while Watson coaches QBs and the new OC coaches nobody. Question is what we do if Watson ends up taking the Ravens OC job like it was rumored he might if Caldwell got the Lions job. In that case, the new OC likely takes QBs, the rainmaker receivers coach takes only WRs, and Chambers stays at his undeserved TE position (or we get smart and go get Tim Brewster to coach TEs immediately).
  6. Juan: I'd say that definitely qualifies him as having Texas ties. My apologies.
  7. You misunderstood. I was referring to finding assistant coaches with Texas ties: Obviously Wickline is both a great hire and has some connections to the state. Watson's recruiting in Texas is minimal and unhelpful. Robinson coached in the NFL (no recruiting) with Dallas and in the mid 90's with TCU (too long ago to help much). Chambers is basically a zero if he's retained. Rumph has recruited Texas a tad. Jean-Mary has zero connection. Vaughn seems to have no connection unless he recruited Texas while at Arkansas or Mississippi. Vance is from Beaumont. Strong obviously has no connection. But if we're talking about "strong" connections to the state, the only guy is really Chambers. That's why I would have liked to have kept Wyatt on at WRs. Helps preserve a bit of continuity, and I think he's a very good coach. That said, I'd rather have good coaches than connections to Texas. Was just going off what Strong said.
  8. These are all far better reasons (well, except the Gruden rhetoric obviously) — thanks for expounding. Again, to stress, I think this would be a hire that would excite me, but in no way am I arguing we'll automatically be Baylor next year if Linehan turns out to be the guy. But I will say this: if you have a pass-blocking OL like the Lions do, a very good (albeit not always reliable) QB in Stafford, just picked up the 2nd best pass-catching RB in the league in Reggie Bush (who is devastating in the open field), and, oh yeah, arguably the best (and inarguably the most physically gifted) WR in world HISTORY on your team, wouldn't you feel like your best option is passing the ball? I would. Also, and please correct me if I'm mistaken, but Strong actually mentioned that he wanted an exciting, hurry up offense that CAN run the ball when it needs to. I believe Wickline ameliorates a lot of your (legitimate) concerns on that front, particularly if we're naming him run-coordinator or whatever. To the point about Texas, I never really understood that. Coordinators are generally not going to be the rainmakers in recruiting, or even be the guys that have roots in the state. That is more of a necessity for position coaches (admittedly we aren't doing great there either), but restricting our OC search...the second most important hire in this entire thing...to only guys that have Texas ties never made any sense. Sure, they should understand the love of spread offenses that has developed in the state and be able to leverage the awesome QBs and adroit WRs and OL the various high-level spread systems produce, but that doesn't mean the OC needs to be from here.
  9. I think I would too. NFL guys often seem to open it up a bit when they come to college. His play-calling is already about as wide open as it gets in the NFL, so it'd be fun to see what he did in NCAAs.
  10. This is just silly. It literally could not be less important that he didn't succeed as an HC. That's actually a positive for us because if he hypothetically succeeds as an OC here, he won't be looking to jump to another HC job. Being a good HC and a good coordinator are so disparate. It's always mind-boggling when somebody brings that up as a strike against. The second complaint is less absurd, but still wrong. He was let go along with the rest of the staff. That's often what happens when you change coaches. You're blaming the Lions' OFFENSE for Schwartz's failure there? Come on man. I understand if you don't think he's a HR. But aside from Morris, there isn't really that much higher to go in my opinion.
  11. The fact that 247 isn't spamming that all over the place and saying they broke the news makes it pretty obvious he isn't the sole OC.
  12. Let's look at it logically. If Linehan is seriously "meeting" with Strong tomorrow, he has to be the guy. There's no way we're preparing to announce without knowing who the guy is already. So "meeting" has to mean he's being introduced, right?
  13. Would actually be a positive for me. Makes him more likely to be content with offensive coaching success, instead of wanting to be the head honcho himself.
  14. Would certainly not be the highly-touted "HR hire." Although obviously a good hire if he's just WR coach.

Our Affiliation


Quick Links

  • Create New...