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

SlickStreet

Members
  • Posts

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SlickStreet

  • Birthday 09/01/1963

SlickStreet's Achievements

  1. I've been checking out some of his Baseball one, and I agree it's good stuff. Having said that--and i want to preface by saying this is highly politically incorrect, I realize--I felt the 1940s one spent too much time on Jackie Robinson. Was it clearly THE biggest story of that decade? Absolutely! Was the man amazing, both as a ballplayer AND a person (for putting up with all the had to)? Again, abso-freakin'-lutely! Undoubtedly, then, he deserved the main spotlight for that decade. But, in the end, IMO it became too much about him, not enough about the several other stories that simply had to be a part of an intriguing WWII era period that we frankly didn't hear about. It seemed to me that the story on Jackie Robinson became so dominant, that Burns was indirectly preaching to everyone, and he was doing it long-winded, baptist style, to the point of exhaustion. I have several very close black friends who I consider every bit a friend as any white person, and I always believe in treating everyone fairly, something which obviously hasn't happened historically. So, this isn't some veiled racism coming from me. Just would have liked to see more balance, even still clearly in Jackie's favor for the decade's stories.
  2. I'm assuming they at least heard about the tackling woes the last seasons. It was better once GR took over Diaz's role, but the last few years have been pretty lame in that area
  3. I don't hate Mack like some might. But I do find it inexcusably incredible that he and Sally truly believed that he should have been able to go out on his terms when he's had four overall poor seasons in a row. It's ultra indicative of his program being run with an entitlement, relatively soft mentality. When the HC feels he should be bullet proof regardless of weak on field performances time and again, it's no surprise that he often gave players preference due to "having bled for the program" even when said players were woefully underperforming. Really a pretty sad excuse for a football coach during his last several years, and he certainly had lost all credit to call his shots on when to step down. I'm just glad someone else enforced his departure, as the idea of him hanging around until he beat DKR's win record was a travesty that didn't happen, thankfully. Mack did many good, some wonderful, things for UT, but his time had more than clearly past. That he wasn't fired after the '12 OU game was grace enough, all considering
  4. I definitely enjoy working out--enough to where I became a certified personal trainer several months back. I specialize in training in-home, providing the equipment, so that's where my expertise lies. I think that while squats, for example, have some advantages, they also can be very dangerous for those who don't know exactly what they're doing and, secondly, aren't big time focused on every moment they're doing them. I bring this up as an example of "common wisdom" regarding what most believe is necessary, in contrast to what I do, which is perform body weight squats with a weight belt or one-legged squats, for instance. I use an assortment of dumbbell exercises, exercise bands, stability ball, bodyweight exercises, pull/chin up bar (portable) and can do just about anything that a gym provides, and often safer. Needless to say, I find it both challenging and fun to come up with various exercises both for myself and for clients.
  5. or, another way of putting it, they may simply not be able to run enough to keep up with the rest.
  6. You may be right on all of this, but some reasons we whipped them was not only very poor QB play from them, but also a highly suspect strategy offensively with said QB. Meanwhile, Case played the best game of his life. That same Case, quite often, would have delivered some gifts to the Sooners. OU also was sorely missing their huge Nose Tackle Jordan Phillips, who had just been hurt the week before, along with their standout LB/pass rusher, Cory Nelson.
  7. It's interesting regarding OU's recruiting, and even from what I recall the last few years, because it doesn't seem like Stoops has fared as successfully in Texas as OU normally has. Many, in fact, have believed OU absolutely must recruit very well in Texas to be excellent. Yet, Stoops continues to have them at or near the top in the conference. This year was to be a rebuilding one for OU, since they were considered among the very least experienced teams in the country and having to replace a record-setting QB. Yet, despite suspect, even poor QB play much of the year, they go 11-2 and win the Sugar Bowl. Quite a season considering.
  8. both are vital. Though after all the top ten classes we had the last several years and yet still have managed no better than a 9-4 record (OU blowout with that) for nearly half a decade, I have to agree that development and application is at least as critical, and in some ways more.
  9. good points. Ideally, I believe as Coach Strong gets to know the state better and becomes a little more entrenched (with some on-field success), he'll be able to recruit the four and five star kids that also possess a burning desire to be great. 'Bama obviously does it, so it is attainable. Even so, if a kid is just a three-star but the coaches really like his motor and upside, then you may have an all-conference type player even then.
  10. was it simply not enough time to develop the relationship due to the official visit factor (at least in part)? On one hand, you have a kid who committed to Texas who now should be known more for D than before. On the other, he's a whole lot more familiar with the a&m coaches
  11. and my point remains--the fact that Powers' authority was ignored regarding Saban undoubtedly played a significant role in adding to his distaste probably induced greatly by Mack toward a Nick Saban hire. Whether other candidates were dying to come to Texas is largely an unknown, and I doubt any of us know enough about the details to be confident in making such an assessment of who Patterson did or didn't vet. One thing is without debate: all the supposed inside expertise on many matters, from the AD to the HC, ended up missing the boat. I'm one who recognize they stated what was known at the time, but the fact that so many things didn't pan out provides a hint that said inside info wasn't as objective as we'd like to have believed.
  12. thought I covered the critical fact that I am glad the BMD's got involved. Way too much power in the hands of a content Pres and AD. My point, though, remains that the BMD's made a mistake (again, assuming reports have been true) in the way they conducted their pursuit of Saban. Had they done things differently, they might have had more compliance/cooperation from Powers. Unfortunately, too though, Mack's political savvy probably perverted the process. In all, it was something of a giant cluster', which is going to happen when you have several power factions not in agreement from the get-go. Mack was going to be tough to remove regardless. You don't want to do anything to make that process more difficult.
  13. I agree regarding Powers needing to remove Mack more promptly, but I think you have the bolded part reversed. While the big money guys certainly have a right to influence, they obviously greatly usurped their position, going totally around the chain of authority to try and get Saban (obviously assumes the multiple rumors of such are true). Personally, I'm very glad they created far more urgency than Powers or Dodds ever would have, so we should be grateful. But they did themselves zero favors taking a hyper-independent approach that included a clear Powers adversary in Wallace Hall. Put yourself in Powers' position and see where you'd stand on such.
  14. We live in an age where we tend to want most things now, asap, with no (or minimal) delay. I think, too, the expectation by many of a Saban or Fischer (or even Harbaugh) hire has added to some frustration here regarding Charlie Strong not flipping four and five-star kids right and left while retaining anyone "worthy" (per our "expert analysis") from the prior regime's efforts. The reality, though, is that we obviously have now a whole different type of leadership that changes the dynamic about as much as can be expected. How many of the kids that committed under Mack are really guys that Strong would have taken on his own accord? A few, most likely, but perhaps very few. This not only was considered Mack's weakest class on a per-player rating, but most importantly, the kids picked Texas based probably in large part on the Mack "family atmosphere," at least in many cases. It's likely, right off the bat, that those same kids would have a great hesitancy about staying with the same school due to such a dramatic change of the guard. It's not just different names at HC and most of the assistant positions, but a whole new expectation of accountability and toughness. Total atmosphere overhaul. If a kid (even a four-star) doesn't feel an appeal to that, it's far better he move on NOW and leave that 'ship open, rather than suck a portion of the life out of the program. OTOH, the latter doesn't sound like it's likely to happen, especially if Strong's process creates an environment where the lesser effort guys will be naturally weeded out (their own lack of desire to put in the intense work, not so much being "trap doored" necessarily). Meanwhile, in addition to the holdover commits from this less-than-stellar class, Strong of course starts anew with just a few weeks to work in trying to grab his own type kids. I suspect that's a big reason, naturally, that he'd be pursuing a couple or so former Louisville commits, guys who no longer want to play for the Cardinals but for Strong instead. Whether these kids are 100% Texas-type talents remain to be seen, but they're probably at least as good as most of what Mack managed to bring in, and they're probably also more inclined to pay the price for excellence that Strong obviously insists on. Due to many factors, including Mack's strange last-minute whirlwind tour of recruiting prior to his departure (adding to an atmosphere of uncertainty and confusion, plus taking up visit allowances), Strong faces something of a steep uphill battle in this condensed time frame. I for one, while a bit concerned with recruiting, am willing to wait and see how it all shakes out, and that doesn't just include thru signing day 2014, but thru signing day 2015. We can say that it's "aggie-esque" to approach things this way, as if we're rationalizing "failure," but the reality is we just don't know what we've got. The man must not only change the type of kids he goes after compared to the prior regime (if we truly want the regime change we mostly craved), but also of course what the whole program has been infested with--a major sense of entitlement, a sense of lethargy and contentment, even bordering perhaps on laziness, at least in some pockets of the program. As a whole, Charlie Strong will be earning his money, at least in effort. This isn't going to be an overnight change. He not only has the prior class commits to sift thru, but a giant, deeply instilled culture. We mainly wanted cultural overhaul, and I think we'll get it. How much that requires early pain to produce is impossible to know. But I think we need to take a step back and deep breath and give the ride time to develop.
  15. I agree with this as a general principle. Next year, not quite so sure considering the schedule. As luck would have it, we again face UCLA at a strong point (thinking of Mack's first year in '98 when UCLA lost, I believe, just one game).

Our Affiliation

USATDP_Logo.png

Quick Links

×
×
  • Create New...