Posted on

Steve Young: An Example of a Paragon of GRIT

You cannot quit. You have the ability, so you need to go back and work this out.” - Steve Young’s Dad, (circa 1980s)
Drawing by Brian Nwokedi to explain the characteristics of a GRIT paragon
Steve Young: A Gridiron Paragon of Grit. From every touchdown to each hard-fought comeback, his relentless determination on the field defines the true essence of grit. A quarterback icon who faced challenges head-on, Young embodies the spirit of unwavering passion and perseverance.

Steve Young is the epitome of a GRIT Paragon. When he was a freshman at BYU, he was the 8th string quarterback and was barely even getting any practice time. Like most freshmen when things don’t go according to plan, Steve called his father (whose nickname was actually Grit). 

Steve’s dad basically said the following: “You can quit but you can’t come home because I’m not going to live with a quitter. You’ve known that since you were a kid. You’re not coming back here.”

With the words of his father ringing in his ears, Steve Young stepped up his game and put the work in. By all accounts, he threw over 10,000 spiral passes at a practice net the summer between his freshman and sophomore year. By his sophomore year, he had risen to QB2 and by his junior year he was BYU’s starting QB. In his final year with the Cougars, Steve Young won the Davey O’Brien award for the most outstanding college quarterback in the country.

Then … It happened all again when he got to the San Francisco 49ers. He spent 4 years on the bench as the backup to four-time Superbowl champion, Joe Montana. And because of his experience at BYU, Steve stayed, learned, and flourished under Montana’s apprenticeship. He eventually got his chance and the rest is history.

When Steve Young retired, he was the highest-rated quarterback in NFL history.

Posted on

With Matt Campbell as coach, Iowa State will win a Big 12 Championship

"Iowa State's upward rise has been all about identifying and developing talent"
---  Blair Angulo & Steve Wiltfong of 247 Sports
Iowa State Football is heading in the right direction under Matt Campbell
The foundation is built for Iowa State Football heading into the 2022 season. Although they lose a lot of veteran starters like Brock Purdy and Charlie Kolar, recruiting has picked up substantially. Iowa State is slowly becoming a solid contender for the Big 12 year in and year out.
Posted on

Big XII Should Expand Only If Two New Schools Add An Additional $3.0 Million per year in TV Revenue

Word Count:                                    1,126
Estimated Reading Time:         5 to 10 minutes

Summary

  • Big XII expansion seems eminent with 12 candidates from the Group of Five currently being discussed
  • Current television revenue per school in the Big XII is $25.2 million vs. the SEC at $31.2 million
  • Texas and Oklahoma each make an estimated $40.2 million and $33.7 million respectively due to additional 3rd party television deals 
  • Adding two schools to the conference will need to help generate an additional $3.0 million per year per school in order to get the conference payout on par with the SEC ($31.2 million) and Big Ten ($30.9 million)
  • My Top Three Expansion Candidates: Houston, BYU, Cincinnati 
  • I didn’t discuss the complexities of 3rd party television deals (Tier III TV rights). That is for another blog post
 

Introduction

 
Between 2010 and 2013, the Big XII was destabilized when Texas A&M, Missouri, Colorado, and Nebraska all left for greener pastures. The big catalyst for fleeing was the perceived unequal power of Texas and Oklahoma which ultimately led to unequal distribution of TV revenue.  Six years later, it is safe to say that the Big XII is at another crossroads, and the topic of discussion once again is conference realignment/expansion. 
 
If recent news is to be believed, the Big XII conference has narrowed its list of potential candidates for expansion down to fittingly 12 Group of Five candidates. And given Houston’s performance against Oklahoma yesterday afternoon, the chatter is only going to intensify.
 
 

The 12 Hopefuls

 
The potential schools stretch as far west as BYU to as far south as UCF and South Florida. And given where current member school West Virginia is located, it is not surprising that Cincinnati and Temple are being considered due to geographical reasons. I have compiled “resumes” of the 12 potential candidates for expansion (see chart below):
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The tentative plan is to access the viability of each of the 12 schools, and the representatives of each of the 10 Big XII schools will decide what to do at the board of directors meeting on October 17th of this year. 
 
In this high risk game of conference realignment and television contracts, I believe it is important for the Big XII to consider the longer term ramifications of expansion and not jump into a knee jerk reaction, adding two “subpar” schools just in an effort to get back to 12 teams. Specifically, the two schools that the Big XII adds will need to at minimum add an additional $3.0 million in incremental television revenue per school to be worth the trouble.

 

 

Why This Time is Different than 2012 

 
On July 1, 2012 out of necessity, TCU and West Virginia became official members of the Big XII Conference. Both schools joined the Big XII after winning their conference championships the year before in football, and from a stability standpoint, the addition of these two schools was absolutely necessary to keep the conference from complete disintegration.
 
After surviving near annihilation, the Big XII member schools (specifically Texas) learned its lesson and voted to equally distribute Tier 1 and Tier II television revenues:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
It’s hard to pinpoint exactly how much tangible value TCU and West Virginia brought to the Big XII. Over the past 3 years, Big XII television revenue has grown at a compound annual growth rate of 10.5%. And although its conference revenue is 19.2% less on a per school basis than the SEC (due to SEC network), there is absolutely no denying that revenue per school in the Big XII has stabilized and steadily grown. 
 
On top of this, unlike other conferences, the Big XII allows schools to make additional television revenue through their 3rd party deals. At this point, Texas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Kansas each make an additional $8.5 to $15.0 million per year.
 
Given where the Big XII is currently, this time expansion talk feels a bit different. Rather than being about survival and necessity, the Big XII now can take its time and figure out which two schools will help them create the most incremental value to the current ten member schools.
 

 

Deregulated Conference Championship Game Doesn’t Necessitate the Big XII Expanding

 
Under the new NCAA rules which passed earlier this year, the Big XII will be able to hold a conference championship game in football while retaining its 10-member structure[1]. Previous rules stated that conferences needed a minimum of 12 members to play a championship game between two division winners. Given this, the Big XII doesn’t necessarily need to get to 12 members to reap the benefits of the conference championship game.
 
Research has shown that even at 10-members a Big XII championship would net an incremental $1.7 million to $2.4 million per year for each school[2]. Although going to 12 teams may help bolster the credibility of their conference championship game, from an incremental revenue standpoint, the Big XII can gain an additional $1.7 to $2.4 million for each of its members per year simply by adding a conference championship game without adding two new members:
 
 
 
 
So given where the Big XII is, the question it must ask it itself is will the addition of the two new schools net more than $3.0 million per year in incremental revenue?
 
 
 

Do Two New Schools = $3.0 million extra per school each year?

 
Given the geographical variety of the 12 potential candidates for expansion, I believe it is important to access the likelihood that the two additional schools in question will add at least $3.0 million in value per year.
Using the most recent update from Nielsen Year in Sports (pdf can be found here) you can see the density of college football fans by region:
 
Not surprising, when you overlay the 12 candidates for potential expansion (see map below), you will see that a majority of these candidates are in states that have high density college football footprints:
 
 
 
When it comes to capturing incremental television revenue, it’s imperative that the two schools that Big XII officials choose have locations that are highly saturated by college football fans and have an expansive alumni base that stretches from coast to coast. Both these reasons give the Big XII leverage in their discussions with ESPN and Fox, and ultimately drive up the value of their television deals.
 
As you can see from the above two maps, three schools standout to me as candidates that meet these two qualities: Houston, Cincinnati, and BYU.
 
Each of these three schools has footprints in high density locations. Specifically, the Nielsen TV market rankings of each of these locations are 10th, 35th, and 33rdrespectively. On top of this, these three schools on paper seem to meet the criteria of having alumni that expand from coast to coast in a similar fashion the alumni from the Big Ten schools (as an aside, the BIG Ten is absolutely killing it when it comes to TV deal negotiations. See article here.) 
 

 

Conclusion

On October 17th when the Big XII gets together to decide the fate of its conference, it must keep in mind that the two schools they decide to add, must add at least $3.0 million in incremental television revenue per school to be worth the trouble. As the SEC and Big Ten have shown, 12 to 14 team conferences with their own conference network should net at least $30 million in revenue per school each year. Given where they Big XII currently is, expansion should only move forward if they can identify two schools that help them catch these two.

[1] WOLKEN, DAN. “NCAA members OK football championship games for all conferences.” 14 Jan. 2016. Web Retrieved 3 Sep. 2016

[2] CRUPI, ANTHONY. “Fox Sports Signs Up Six Big Ten Title Games in 2011-16.” 18 Nov. 2010. Web Retrieved 3 Sep. 2016
 
 

Posted on

College Football Nouveau Riche, the Rise of the Oregon Ducks and the Oklahoma State Cowboys and the Correlation to Influential Benefactors

You have probably heard of the old financial axioms, “You have to spend money to make money,”, or “It takes money to make money.” Although we can find examples within our lives that counter this argument, nowhere do these axioms ring truer than in Big-Time college football. On December 30, 2008 in front of 59,106 fans, the 9-3 Oregon Ducks faced off against the 9-3 Oklahoma State Cowboys. In what would be a battle between two newer more financial wealthy programs (I’ll speak about this point shortly) and Oregon Coach Mike Bellotti’s final game, the Ducks beat the Cowboys in a thrilling 42-31 contest.

Fast forward to the present, as I sat watching the inaugural College Football Playoff final between Ohio State (old wealth) and Oregon (nouveau riche), I couldn’t help but smile as I watched the Oregon Ducks take the field. Just one week prior to the final, the Ducks played in their 3rd Rose Bowl in six years. And over the last decade, the Oregon Ducks boast a 106-26 record (80.3% win percentage) which is 4th best in college football; they have two national championship appearances, and four conference titles to boot.

There is absolutely no denying that Oregon’s meteoric rise to the top of college football directly correlates to their colossal increases in football specific spending. Since 2005, the University of Oregon’s Athletic Department’s spending on football specific activities averaged $16.7 million and has grown at a compound annual growth rate of +15.75%. And as mentioned before, during this same time period the Ducks have won four conference titles and have appeared in two national championships. For a school that captured a grand total of three conference titles from 1986 to 2004 this isn’t half bad! During the same time frame, the Oklahoma State University’s Athletic Department’s spending on football specific activities averaged $15.2 million and has grown at a compound annual growth rate of +9.93%. Over the last decade, the Cowboys boast an 83-44 record (65.4% win percentage) during which they also captured one Big XII championship and the 2012 Fiesta Bowl. For a school that captured a grand total of zero conference titles from 1986 to 2004 and boasted a very subpar 102-113 record (47.4% win percentage) things are definitely looking up.

No two nouveau riche programs in college football have had more influential benefactors that these two programs. Phil Knight and T. Boone Pickens have each donated roughly $300 and $400 million to their respective Universities, with $265 million specifically going to the OSU football program. And just last year alone, Phil Knight gifted nearly $100 million to the Ducks and a new training facility for the football team[1]. Given these very large financial contributions, I want to take a look at the financial data and compare the investments to wins and losses on the field. My argument here is actually quite simple: Oklahoma State and Oregon’s success is due in large part to the funding received from T. Boone Pickens and Phil Knight. The excessive levels of cash have transformed both of these programs into perennial powers that are here to stay, and the data will show how much.

Using a regression based analysis and looking at the financial data for the Oklahoma State and Oregon athletic departments since 2008 I focused on comparing wins-losses to the following five crucial variables for each program:

(1) Football Specific Contributions: money contributed by donors/benefactors designated to be use only for the football program.

(2) Non-Program Specific Donations: money contributed by donors/benefactors designated to be used for any athletic program

(3) Football Specific Expenses: money spent by the athletic department specifically on football activities.

(4) Non-Sport Specific Expenses: money spent by the athletic department on activities across all sports at the universities

(5) Marketing and Fund Raising Expenses: money spent on marketing initiatives to raise brand awareness for the universities’ athletic programs.

When considering financial investments in football, it is my opinion that the above mentioned five variables are the most directly correlated to wins and losses on the gridiron, and the data proves this point to a tee.

Looking at the regression outputs for wins for Oregon and Oklahoma State (see bottom of page for output), the Ducks have an R-squared of 95.8% and the Cowboys have an R-squared of 89.5%. What this means is that the financial data I selected (the five variables above) explains 95.8% of the variation in Oregon’s wins and 89.5% of the variation in Oklahoma State’s wins. Looking at the regression outputs for losses for Oregon and Oklahoma (see bottom of page for output), the Ducks have an R-squared of 88.7% and the Cowboys have an R-squared of 86.1%. What this means is that the financial data I selected (the five variables above) explains 88.7% of the variation in Oregon’s losses and 86.1% of the variation in Oklahoma State’s losses. Put even simpler than all of the above … Oregon and Oklahoma State should thank Phil Knight and T. Boone Pickens and make sure to do whatever they need to do to make sure that the money doesn’t ever stop flowing in!

In closing, all data naturally contains an amount of variability that is in-explainable and this simple regression model is no different. Simply because I obtained a very high R-squared value for each of the regressions that I ran, doesn’t mean that the actual model in and of itself is adequate. As we know with Big-Time College Football, it is more than simply a money game. You need great talent and good coaching to give you a chance to be successful (both of which Oregon and Oklahoma State have had over the last decade). You also need a bit of luck … But having more money to invest and spend on your football program is definitely going to help!


Fun Fact: Since 2004, the Oregon Ducks have not worn the same exact uniform for two games in a row (see pictures below)[2]. I guess money can also buy very nice swag … especially if that money comes from an ex-Nike CEO!


Regression Outputs:

Oregon Ducks – 2008 to 2014 Wins vs. Five Variables of Investment

Oklahoma State Cowboys – 2008 to 2014 Wins vs. Five Variables of Investment

Oregon Ducks – 2008 to 2014 Losses vs. Five Variables of Investment

Oklahoma State Cowboys – 2008 to 2014 Losses vs. Five Variables of Investment

[1] Matthew Kish, Portland Business Journal. (January, 21, 2014). Thanks to Phil Knight gift, Oregon athletic department likely tops in 2014. Retried from <http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/blog/threads_and_laces/2015/01/phil-knight-gift-oregon-athletics-top-2014.html?page=all>
[2] CBS Interactive Inc. (April 23, 2012). A gridiron fashion statement. Retrieved from <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-gridiron-fashion-statement/>
Posted on

Past performance is no guarantee of future success. In Charlie Strong’s case it is.

158 wins to 48 losses…

That’s Mack Brown’s record during his 16 year coaching career at the University of Texas; a coaching career that saw him go 3-1 in BCS bowls, win a national championship, play for another, win 2 conference titles, and make the University of Texas a whole lot of money in the process. And notwithstanding his recent struggles over the past four years (30-21), his consistent struggles against Bob Stoops and Oklahoma (7-9), and the general feeling that the Longhorns underachieved during his tenure, Mack Brown is responsible for the resurgence of a Texas program that lay dormant for 30+ years since its 1969 and 1970 national championships. So before I continue on to talk about the topic at hand … Charlie Strong and the future of the Horns … I want to do something that I never did enough of during the Mack Brown Tenure:


“Thank you Mack Brown for 16 solid years. With its own television network and a valuation of $139M you have created a secure foundation for the future of the Longhorns, and you are a big reason the University of Texas is relevant again in college football. You have always been a class act in the face of all the scrutiny from spoiled fans like me. I truly wish you the best in the next endeavor (hopefully a color commentary spot on Longhorn Network?).” 




Today, the Texas Longhorns will “officially” name Charlie Strong their 29th coach and this appointment will mark the first time a black head coach will be in charge of a major men’s sport (football, basketball, baseball) at the University of Texas. If the reports are accurate, Charlie Strong was probably not the Longhorns first choice. But in my opinion, the appointment of Charlie Strong is the right overall move from a football X’s and O’s standpoint. He will right the defensive side of the football for the Longhorns and ultimately jump start the program back to its winning ways.



At 53 years of age, Strong’s resume speaks for itself; especially on the defensive side of the ball. While at South Carolina in the early 2000s, Strong bucked traditional defensive formations and invented the 3-3-5 stack defense. Predicated on speed, athleticism, and a “fly around a play football attitude,” the 3-3-5 stack placed a myriad of “hybrid” defenders on the field that could do multiple things to disrupt offensive schemes (especially the spread). The result of Strong’s defensive innovation was an 8 game win improvement (8-4 overall after an 0-11 season the year before) for the Gamecocks and an Outback Bowl victory over the Ohio State Buckeyes.

After his three year stint with the Gamecocks, Charlie Strong went on to serve as the defensive coordinator for the Florida Gators from 2002 to 2009. And as the defensive coordinator of the Gators, Strong more than proved his worth with top rated defenses in the 2006 and 2008 national championship years. 

Specifically:
2006
2008
Points per game:
13.5 (7th)
12.8 (5th)
Yards per game:
268.8 (10th)
279.3 (8th)
Total sacks:
36 (5th)
31 (11th)
Total interceptions:
21 (4th)
26 (1st)
Pick 6s
1
5




















In the 2006 national championship game against the Ohio State Buckeyes, the Gator defense held the Buckeyes to 82 yards in their 41-14 victory. In the 2008 title game against the Oklahoma Sooners, the Gators defense held the Sooners to 14 points. During that season the Sooners were averaging 54.0 points per game and had scored a FBS record 702 points. Needless to say, Charlie Strong knows what he is doing on defense.

His tenure as the head football coach at the University of Louisville has been marked by rapid success. In the three seasons before Strong, the Louisville Cardinals were 15-21 with a 5-16 conference record. Over the last four years under Strong’s leadership, the Cardinals have posted a 37-15 record with a 20-9 conference record and a 2012 Sugar Bowl win over the Florida Gators. And not surprisingly during Strong’s tenure the Cardinals have been absolutely stout on defense. From 2010 to 2013 the Cardinals ranked 7th in points per game (18.8), 6th in yards per game (308.1), 10th in yards per play (4.9) and 3rd in sack percentage at 8.3% (1).

Since the early 2000s, the trend in college football and the Big 12 in particular has been for offenses to move towards speed and spread. A consistent theme in Charlie Strong led defenses is to attack the spread with athleticism on defense. An attacking-playmaking defense is something that the current Texas Longhorns haven’t had lately (see the 30-7 Alamo Bowl shellacking they received this past Monday from the Oregon Ducks).

In hiring Charlie Strong, the Texas Longhorns are getting a proven defensive guru. Although past performance is no guarantee of future success at Texas, Charlie Strong’s track record has me convinced that he is the man to turn the Horns around, especially on the defensive side of the ball. If the old adage often rings true, Offense scores points but Defense wins Championships, Strong will be raising a crystal ball during his time in Texas. And at $5.0 million per year, for the next five years the expectation is nothing less.

Posted on

Did Mack Brown just buy himself another year? At a minimum he bought himself one more week.

One year ago to the date (see blog post below) I wrote that it was time for the Texas Longhorns to part ways with Mack Brown. To be more specific, I stated that from a win-loss perspective, the Texas Longhorns can’t afford to have Mack Brown as their coach. Since their last national championship appearance in 2009, the Longhorns are 25-18 overall and 13-15 in conference (not including yesterday’s win). And during this same time period, Texas A&M has re-surged on the back of a quarterback that Mack Brown passed on.


The Texas Longhorns are losing the war for the state of Texas to the A&M Aggies and General William Mack Brown is a sleep at the wheel!


Admittedly, I have been one of Mack Brown’s biggest detractors during his most recent struggles. I can list countless issues I have with him till I am blue in the face, the biggest of them being his inability to rally a group of 4 and 5 star recruits to achieve their full potential especially against their biggest rival Oklahoma. But today I am stopping for a moment to give him some serious credit for yesterday’s performance. 

All week long, Mack was defiant when asked about his future, even going as far as to guarantee that he was not going to be fired from Texas. He was adamant that his Longhorns still had everything to play for and his team was going to get this ship righted (i.e. win the Big XII championship and play for a BCS bowl). He was also very bullish on his team’s chances in the Red River Rivalry game against Oklahoma.

I’d be a liar if I said that I believed him and I’d be lying if I told you that I believed the Longhorns had much of a shot heading into yesterday’s game with the Sooners. 

They hadn’t really given me a reason to believe that they were going to be good enough defensively to stop the Sooners run game and Thursday’s last minute victory against Iowa State on the road did little to change my mind. Vegas odds makers seemed to agree with me, listing the Horns a two-touchdown underdog against the Sooners. 

But then Saturday, October 12, 2013 happened…. The Longhorns shocked the Sooners with a 36-20 victory in Dallas. And to be fair, they dominated Oklahoma on both sides of the ball. To borrow a line from Burnt Orange Nation: “Texas thoroughly whipped OU up and down the field, on both sides of the football, from start to finish.” The stats of the game do not lie: of the 82 total plays ran by the Longhorns, 60 of them were rushes for a total of 277 yards. The Horns played old fashioned grown man ground and pound offense. And their defense stepped up in a way we haven’t seen since 2009.

Maybe it was Mack Brown’s “Hulk Hogan” like performance the night before that inspired his Horns to show up and play in all three phases of the game: 


Whatever it was, Mack Brown and his Longhorn players ignored the media and so-called pundits like myself, showed up and simply played great football on Saturday. They ended their three-year losing streak to Bob Stoops and the Sooners and in the process bought Mack some much needed time … At least for one more week.

So with that I say congratulations to William Mack Brown and the Texas Longhorns for a world class performance on Saturday. You circled with wagons, thoroughly whipped your biggest rival, and have set yourselves up for a chance at something bigger.

Posted on

From a win-loss perspective, the Texas Longhorns can no longer afford to have Mack Brown as their coach

First let me say that my heart goes out to Texas DT Brandon Moore who was injured in the third quarter of today’s game. He has movement in all of his limbs and is in stable condition at a local hospital. This post or better yet rant is clearly irrelevant in the grand scheme of life given the fact that it’s only football games I am talking about.
I started calling for Mack Brown’s resignation after last weekend’s 48-45 home loss to West Virginia, a move that had most of my Texas brethren calling me ungrateful. On Thursday, I wrote that today’s game against Oklahoma would be a referendum on the tenure of Mack Brown. And after today’s 63-21 shellacking, no Longhorn fan can deny that the time has come for the Texas Longhorns to part ways with Mack Brown.

Since 1998, the Longhorns are 145-41 under Mack Brown. With a win percentage of 78% (give or take a couple decimal places), Mack Brown’s tenure at Texas has been one of the most successful in Longhorn history. But like the old adage says … All good things must come to an end.

Since 2002, the Texas Longhorns have had recruiting classes ranked higher than the Oklahoma Sooners 7 out of 11 times (see following chart).
Final Recruiting Rankings Based on Rivals.com
Texas Longhorns
Oklahoma Sooners
2012
2
11
2011
3
14
2010
3
7
2009
5
13
2008
14
6
2007
5
14
2006
5
9
2005
20
3
2004
18
11
2003
15
4
2002
1
7
But during this same time period, the Longhorn’s record against their arch rival has been downright abysmal. Since ‘02 (including today’s game), the Longhorns are 4-7 with blowout losses of 65-13 (2003), 55-17 (2011) and 63-15 (2012). To make matters worse, there was also a blowout in 2000, 63-14.

After today’s game the ‘Horns are now 6-9 overall against the Sooners during Mack Brown’s tenure began in 1998. Like I said in Thursday’s post, this is simply not good enough given how much money Brown is currently being paid by the Texas athletic department and how much next-level talent there is in the program.

My issue with the Longhorns during Brown’s tenure isn’t talent level. Since Mack Brown has been at Texas, 52 players have been drafted into the NFL and 20 have been first round picks. Since Bob Stoops has been at Oklahoma, 53 players have been drafted into the NFL and 12 have been first round picks.

But given the fact that the ‘Horns out-recruit the Sooners (at least based on class rankings) their record against their biggest rival is downright appalling, and the number of blowout losses is unsettling. From and X’s and O’s and motivational standpoint, when it comes to Oklahoma vs. Texas, Bob Stoops is simply better at getting his boys ready to play. His 9-5 record against Texas post today’s game only serve to further proof this fact.


Football can be a very cruel sport to head coaches. When their teams win, they get a fair bit of credit. But when their teams lose, they get all the blame. Fans like me start criticizing their tactics and schemes and start (at times irrationally) calling for their heads. An argument can be made that this isn’t right, but regardless this is the way it is especially given the amount of money coaches are making in college football. Something is no longer working anymore and that something is William Mack Brown. From a purely win-loss perspective the Texas Longhorns can no longer afford to have Mack Brown as their lead head coach.

After today’s dreadful performance, the Longhorns are now 17-14 since their 2009 BCS National Championship appearance. What was once considered the strength of the program, this year’s defense is average at best and the offense is … well … they scored 21 points and gained a total of 289 yards in four quarters of football so enough said. The game was so bad today that ABC stopped showing coverage in my area with 9:00 minutes left in the 4thquarter (probably better for my overall mental health).

The “blame” shouldn’t fall solely on Mack Brown’s shoulders especially since he’s not out there actually playing. But ultimately as the head coach, he is supposed to push the right buttons to get his players to play at their best level. Because he has been unable to do this recently (over the last three years) as the “CEO” of the Texas Longhorns, it’s time for him to step aside and open the door for someone new.
2005 was such a long time ago ….


Posted on

Saturday, October 13, 2012 … Dallas, Texas … Oklahoma-Texas … Mack Brown’s last stand…?

Every year about this time (Thursday evening before the Oklahoma-Texas game), I start to get butterflies in my stomach as if I am taking the field in Dallas on Saturday. You may think I’m crazy for this, but if truth be told, my nerves are simply a reflection of the magnitude and importantance of a win in this game (clearly not life magnitude or a matter of life and death but still very important).
Once known as the Red River Shootout (still my favorite name), the OU-Texas Game (now known as the Red River Rivalry) has been played 106 times since October 10, 1900. The Longhorns lead the current series 59-42-5, and since 1945, one or both of the two teams have been ranked within the top 25 61 out of 66 games. This Saturday is no different.


The #15 Texas Longhorns hobble into Dallas to face the #13 Oklahoma Sooners and the stakes couldn’t be any higher. Given last weekend’s home loss to West Virginia and Oklahoma’s early season loss to Kansas State, Saturday’s game is pretty much for all the marbles.
The winner of six of the last ten matchups between the Longhorns and Sooners has played for the BCS National Championship (the Sooners 4 times and the ‘Horns 2 times). The loser of Saturday’s game will have two conference losses, which will all but relegate them to a second place finish and an outside chance at a BCS bowl (although stranger things have happened… See two-loss LSU vs. two-loss Ohio State circa 2007).
To call Saturday’s game “Put up or Shut up Time” for the ‘Horns is an understatement. Since the Mack Brown era began in 1998, Texas has only won six of the last 14 matchups against the Sooners and has lost the last two consecutive matchups. In the past two seasons, the Longhorns are a measly 13-12 and will be taking an eight-game losing streak against teams ranked in the AP Top 25 into Saturday’s Red River Rivalry. To make matters even worse, the ‘Horns are 1-10 in their last 11 games against Top 25 teams. To be frank, things haven’t been this bad in Austin in a while. Saturday’s game in Dallas may be a referendum on the 15 year tenure of William Mack Brown.
Now to be fair, from 2001 through 2009, Mack won 10 or more games each year, won a national championship, played for another, and went 3-1 in big time BCS bowl games. He has worked tirelessly to make Texas relevant on the national stage once again. But like a Fortune 500 CEO, his recent performance is simply not good enough given his annual salary of $5.2 million (which makes him one of top three highest paid coaches in America).
So this Saturday, the Texas Longhorns have a chance to right the ship and stay in the national championship picture. A win Saturday will go a long way towards erasing some of the ‘Horns recent failure. A loss Saturday and the ‘Horns will drop to 1-2 in conference all but sealing their second place finish.
No pressure ….
So let’s hope that Saturday my ‘Horns feel like this ….














And not like this …. 














Favorite Red River Rivalry Game:
October 11, 2008:
Texas 45, Oklahoma 35
Hands down one of the best regular season college football games ever played. It ended as the highest scoring game in the rivalry’s history with the most fans to ever see this game. My boy Chris Ogbonnaya sealed the game with a 62-yard run … Hook ‘Em



Most regrettable Red River Rivalry Game:
October 6, 2001
Texas 3, Oklahoma 14
Down 7-3 late in the 4th quarter the Longhorns had the ball on their own three-yard line. On first down the ‘Horns decided to air it out. As Chris Simms (who I’m still irrationally angry at) dropped back to pass, Roy Williams, starting safety for the Sooner leapt over an offensive lineman (see picture below) and deflected the pass which fell unfortunately into the hands of Teddy Lehman, the Sooners starting linebacker… Game, Set, Match Sooners