Texas loses 50-7: players tweet about transferring at HALFTIME

Submitted by wolverine1987 on

It is getting really hot for Charlie Strong at Texas, a guy I thought was a great hire but sheesh, this does not look good. I don't care how good TCU has become, you can't be Texas and lose 50-7, espicially when you are known as a defensive coach. Plus at least one, and reportedely two, pleyers were tweeting about transferring DURING the game. 

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13799709/kris-boyd-texas…

 

MGoBoard
Football

bluinohio

October 4th, 2015 at 12:17 AM ^

no, you don't.  i'm not sure where this 4 year thing became so popular but it isn't right.  it's either a good fit and you are on the right track and improving or you're not.  it's usually obvious in a pretty short period of time.  he should be fired soon.

Joined: 08/24/2015

MGoPoints: 10725

Gulogulo37

October 4th, 2015 at 7:01 AM ^

"The criticism of Pete Carroll became louder when Carroll's first USC team opened the 2001 season going 2–5"

That was Carroll's second season. I don't think you have to give a guy 4 years, but canning Charlie after 2 years would be a mistake. A lot of elite coaches do well quickly, but not all situations are the same. Besides which, I don't know Strong's contract details, but I'm guessing there's still a hefty buyout after year 2.

Also, to the poster above, giving a coach 4 years didn't become a thing. Programs used to have way more patience with coaches than they do nowadays.

On another note, I didn't see the game but saw in that short little clip that another punt sailed over the punter's head. Jesus. Their special teams coach might be worse than Dan Ferrigno.

Joined: 03/16/2010

MGoPoints: 28300

HimJarbaugh

October 4th, 2015 at 8:42 AM ^

"The criticism of Pete Carroll became louder when Carroll's first USC team opened the 2001 season going 2–5"

That was Carroll's first team. The next year they were 11-2 and won the Orange Bowl.

I do agree with your point. Strong's first two Louisville teams were 7-6 and Texas has probably had the hardest schedule so far this year, and hung in there with Cal and Oklahoma State.

Joined: 12/23/2014

MGoPoints: 4292

Gulogulo37

October 4th, 2015 at 9:22 AM ^

Ah you're right. On wikipedia it listed his tenure as starting in 2000, so I assumed that was his first season but he didn't get hired until mid-December of that year.

Another thing I didn't mention though (not as a reply to the above poster), is that it just would look awful to fire a coach less than a year and half into his tenure. You don't need to go to Texas to win big. Who would want a job with a leash that short? They at least have to be perceived as giving Strong a shot, whether they think the writing is on the wall or not

Joined: 03/16/2010

MGoPoints: 28300

bluinohio

October 4th, 2015 at 12:32 PM ^

you're right, nobody has patience anymore.  i guess i was referring more to the fans who claim a coach needs 4 years.  there are certain circumstances where a coach does need "his players" to run the system he likes, but even then i don't think 4 years is needed. 

btw, i didn't downvote

Joined: 08/24/2015

MGoPoints: 10725

UMxWolverines

October 4th, 2015 at 1:30 AM ^

Where do people come up with this stuff? Is it just to make themselves sound like they know what they're talking about? What good hire in recent history required the coach four years to start looking like a good team? Mack Brown might have not left Texas in great shape but you can't tell me losing 50-7 and the beyond horrible defense Texas has this year is Mack Brown's fault. It's not Mack brown's fault at this point. Hell, Texas isn't even recruiting well to boot! I'm not sure Charlie lasts past this season if Texas goes 3-9 or 4-8...cuz that's what the rest of their schedule looks like. 

Joined: 03/01/2009

MGoPoints: 65366

Doctor Wolverine

October 4th, 2015 at 8:05 AM ^

I think the rumblings were that the AD was a big part of the problem. If I were the new AD, I would be putting my feelers out to my "plan A" coaching options. If it looks like those are a no-go, then I think you stick with Strong. There is no need to reach out of desperation at this point. Strong is a proven commodity.

Joined: 08/13/2009

MGoPoints: 3045

MichiganStudent

October 4th, 2015 at 10:01 AM ^

I disagree. Strong has been known as a good defensive coach for some time but his head coaching record is underwhelming. Teddy Bridgewater and the strength of the old Big East Conference have a lot to do with his final 2 Louisville teams records.

I thought Texas was crazy for hiring him when they did. I know he was the "sexy" hire of the time, but I'm always reserved against coaches that seem to be riding one star player to victory in a mediocre conference.

Joined: 08/27/2008

MGoPoints: 7223