- Joined: Sep 5, 2018
- Last Login: Nov 15, 2021, 1:10pm EST
- Posts: 1
- Comments: 7
Share this profile
Comment 1 reply
A very sensible remark, but not quite to my intended point.
What you say sounds exactly right to me. ("championship mode" a "false narrative"? You might better have said, pure organic fertilizer!) Perhaps, however, it does not quite connect with the point I was attempting to make. The sloppy, ugly, football that UT has presented its alumni the last several decades is well indicated by the fact that, as poor as the Big 12 has been lately, Mighty Texas, notwithstanding recruiting classes of which our opponents can only dream, has managed to fumble-stumble its way to losses against even the likes of these. Your helpful insight only makes all the more clear the vast under-performance of a whole that manages almost every year to be much less than the sum of its parts. My somewhat eccentric suggestion is that perhaps lesser, more coachable, parts might result in a much larger sum than we have seen in a long time.
Comment 2 replies, 3 recs
A little history does indeed help
Thank you for reminding us that, indeed, "a little history helps." The problem, however, is that there is actually a lot of history, much more history than any one of us can deal with. The perspective therefore matters a great deal from which questions are put to the historical record.
I have no objection at all to the perspective that emphasizes wins and losses, numbers of national championships won, number of players placed in the NFL, and so on, but it is not my perspective on things, nor, I think, that displayed in the Post on which you have commented. I enjoy watching football. There. It’s out. I admit it. Guilty as charged. I am a confirmed football-game-watcher. In fact — I might as admit it also since I know it could be proved in a court of law — I especially enjoy watching well-played football. This is indicated by my comment, which perhaps you did not notice, that I used to "enjoy the Texas-KSU game since I would at least get to see a good football team, that is, a team playing good football." Perhaps, since "a little history helps," you will wish to inform me of Bill Snyder’s win-loss record over his long career, or remind me that he never got anywhere near a National Championship game, things which you are entitled to value as you will, but which have very little to do with watching football. More interesting from my perspective — Have I mentioned that I enjoy watching football? — is another "little" bit of history; the fact, namely, that Snyder’s teams were never known for shooting themselves in their collective foot quite as often as Mighty Texas has done these thirty years; nor do I remember Snyder’s teams (or the university he represented) being quite so often as ours are, the laughing stocks of the entire nation! Rather, his much less talented teams were always a genuine pleasure to watch; it was always a pleasure to watch a football team playing as a team, with discipline and tenacity and mutual responsibility, and with unwavering respect for their coach and for the sport itself. Perhaps, given our different perspectives, we are not so far apart as it might seem.
I sought in the Post above to consider the question whether well-played football can ever again be the normal expectation on the Forty-Acres, and under what conditions. This is closely related to, but not quite the same as, the question whether winning football can ever again be the normal expectation. I believe that the former leads to the latter, that submission to the discipline and humility essential to playing well naturally leads more often than not to playing victoriously. Perhaps — O blasphemy! — the necessary conditions of discipline and humility are not consistent, at least not at this time, with the blandishments necessary to recruit (seduce?) the most talented players. Perhaps we have to begin elsewhere.
Give me coachable, unranked, biters-and-scratchers any day of the week. They at least, given a little time, might be fun to watch.
Comment 10 recs
Congratulations to Mr. Bo Davis! The appropriate message, delivered with verve and artistry! How fortunate we are to have an assistant coach with such beautiful music in him. I enjoyed every second of it.
Comment 1 rec
I don’t see why it should be better in the first year:
(1) It seems that Texas football is exactly the sum of its parts, whereas what we are hoping to see is something much greater than the sum of the parts. Sark is the genius we hoped for, but his system has to be internalized by the team; it has to be something they can execute without having to think about it. They get a lead and they start thinking about things; like Robert Griffin III in his second year with the Redskins; like Charlie Strong’s first UT defense; too much thinking, not enough having fun.
(2) Harvey Martin, the All-Pro defensive tackle for the Cowboys, famously said that if he were trapped in a dark alley by a bunch of thugs the one guy he would want with him was Roger Staubach. Staubach is a fine, accomplished, gentleman, but he is also a "killer." Sam Ehlinger, another fine man, is a "killer." Casey Thompson seems a very fine young man, someone who will be a credit to the University in whatever he does, but is he a "killer"? Is he the leader that can inspire his teammates to forget about themselves and just play?