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

Captain Hookem

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Captain Hookem last won the day on October 15 2019

Captain Hookem had the most liked content!

About Captain Hookem

  • Birthday 05/27/1972

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Captain Hookem's Achievements

  1. What if the loan holder doesn't care if it gets paid back? Small time personal loans are available everywhere. Normally they operate on volume and high interest, knowing many will default. But the point is there are no penalties if the loan does not get paid back. Whether or not defaults are pursued are at the discretion of the private loan holder. These are no different than personal loans... just worth bajillions more. So if the understanding is these are loans that both parties know will never need to be paid (even if paperwork says otherwise), what's the legality there? Seems like a lot of big spenders think they've found a loophole.
  2. Is this for a recruit or a landscape reminder about weed prevention?
  3. So where does all this end up? A lot of folks who are concerned about where this is going can't answer that question. Look down the road a bit and tell you don't see potential problems. I agree that sometimes folks suffer from old timer syndrome. I was curious about when scholarship limits were placed and dug up this quote: However the argument being made here is that the imbalance of money... not just the money itself... but the imbalance of money is going to cause problems across all of college football. It's going to cause problems in conferences and most likely amongst players on teams themselves. The NFL has worked out most of these issues through player agreements. College football is jumping headlong into this new era with zero direction. State schools are run by politicians. You don't think there's going to be issues when teams who can't afford to pay $25mil to players start banding together? There's a lot more schools that don't have deep pockets than ones that do. Some players on teams get paid and others don't. Are they going to strike and demand they make the same money as well? The portal relieves some of that pressure right now, but it won't be long before the imbalance is keenly felt among certain groups. If college separates into the money league (looking like the SEC) and everybody else is that really going to feel like college football when it separates into stratified levels of conferences... created based on how much each can pay their teams? It won't be long before even the teams in the SEC demand that a salary cap is put into so the league doesn't get imbalanced. Will it still feel the same when the SEC only plays itself and there's no singular college champion? Will that pressure be contained within conferences or will it be applied to college football as a whole? Remember that just a handful of teams can really afford to spend millions on a yearly basis. Will there be a national push (like the original Title IX) to restrict how much teams can spend on their teams? These aren't just concerns in a vacuum but based on events that have actually occurred both in college football and decades of player/owner money struggles in the NFL. At least when NCAA players weren't getting (legitimately) paid the whole field was more or less equal. Whether that was right or wrong what's going to happen is a Pandora's Box that no one knows where it will lead. You can't tell me that you aren't concerned about any of that just a little.
  4. Mack never had a backup prepared after the Applewhite/Simms debate... most likely to avoid controversy. Early in Colt's career when he got a neck stinger we threw out Jevan Sneed who wasn't ready. We were winning games by double digits, but Mack wasn't bringing in backups until 5 mins left just to hand off. A lot of folks complained about that for years. Not to mention causing Mack to throw away the offense that had dominated for a decade because he wanted an Alabama offense. He didn't want an offense that relied so heavily on the QB because Colt had to be at a crazy high percentage for the offense to work. That bama type of offense certainly wasn't in Greg Davis' wheelhouse, and we didn't have the type of lineman required to make it work anyway. Garrett would have been much better in the offense he was recruited to play. Most likely bama still goes on to be a successful program. However it certainly derailed Texas for at least a decade.
  5. This was posted in another thread somewhere: https://usatodayhss.com/2017/what-does-it-mean-to-be-a-blue-shirt-recruit
  6. The idea that we have more recruits than we have space for in the 22 class is almost unbelievable. Sark has successfully filled spots, and created a feeling of scarcity for those that are remaining. Sometimes this helps with the final nudge. Also had no idea there were that many versions 'shirting'.
  7. https://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/college/jackson-state/2021/12/15/deion-sanders-2022-jackson-state-recruiting-class-shock-country/8905679002/
  8. I know what you mean, but don't forget about the other factors even if he never plays a down. His commitment will make it easier to attract other elite players. Getting the two big uglies this weekend wasn't a coincidence. We were in pretty big need of a momentum swing with how things went this year and aggie recruiting lights out. Remember when Simms committed for Mack it broke the seal to getting other elite players. Also, it helps erase some of the more painful side effects of the Herman experience.
  9. Landing Ewers from the portal has different dynamics than most. It's difficult for most people to publicly admit a mistake, especially young men. Part of what's going on in his mind must be insecurity about coming back to a place that basically turned on him when he decommitted. Of course we'd root for him now, but can an 18 year old forget about all of that? He's not looking at it from the same lens we are. I'm also not one to think program success rides on the decision of one 18 year old. He could be great, or he could be a product of a great system that can't read a defense worth squat. I can think of at least two 5 star QB recruits who came to Texas to "save the program" and ended up being mediocre or simply above average. This season showed how much we need several options at QB. Now more than ever it's easier to rebuild with so much movement in the portal than hoping a transfer will fall in our lap. Sark has not had the chance yet to identify and bring in his own QBs. He's getting that opportunity now to find guys who will work well in his system. Maybe Ewers can be that guy, and of course I'd love to see it. If not there are a lot of good options out there who can run a well coached offense.
  10. No... the hope is that Sark is another Dabo (or any other coach in the history of the football that eventually figured how to be successful). The actual list of coaches who struggled early in their HC career to find later success is rather extensive. The assumption is that after a mediocre first stint as a head coach, he's learned from the feet of the master Saban in how to run and build a successful program. It's not about optimists or pessimists. The realists know that rebuilding a program normally takes a while, and bellyaching over early struggles is nothing but sound and fury signifying nothing.
  11. He also wanted to bring his full staff to Texas, and we told him no (at least that was the rumor).
  12. Here is Dabo's first 4 years at Clemson Please tell me at what point you would have fired him in 2010... halfway through or waited until after the "Car Care Bowl"?
  13. Because the fanbase is too impatient? https://www.burntorangenation.com/2021/1/25/22248190/pete-kwiatkowski-hired-texas-longhorns-jeff-banks-steve-sarkisian The search for DC took longer than most anticipated. There's a lot of pressure to get a staff together quickly, so don't forget all the hyperventilating last year because we didn't have a full staff yet. Folks were panicked we'd lose all the recruits... ALL of them. Sark was hiring guys he knew and could recruit well, but had to extend that when his DC choices didn't work out. Remember the insistence to "Open the Checkbook!" Nobody wanted to hear the word 'alignment' anymore either after hearing Herman wear it out... "Hire the best available at every position!" The assumption is that position coaches can adapt to the coordinator, but that doesn't always work out. These hires aren't made in a vacuum, where Sark just points his finger and gets everyone he wants. Why do most coaches (like Strong and Herman but also including the likes of Dabo Swinney) want to bring their staffs with them? There's a trust and comfort level that everyone is at least on the same page. Sark had to hire folks he'd never worked with before and of course learned a thing or two over the past year. Given all of the factors involved, it's not hard to figure out how not everyone was a perfect fit.
  14. I hope so as well, and I don't know his reasoning. However I have a hard time believing guys who bail on the team sport that created them will be great team players. If they quit on their high school team they have a pretty good chance of quitting their college team. We shouldn't be at all surprised if they turn out to be the kind of guys who memorize 10 different endzone celebrations but refuse to dive in front of blizting LBs to protect their QB due to "career decisions". Honestly, would rather pass.

Our Affiliation


Quick Links

  • Create New...