Big 12 thread

Hey @Deep Creek read this, thought you would like it.. it's about the past 10 coaches hired at Texas.. Interesting to know after paying Dana Bible.. the school was cheap and cost them a couple shots with two other legendary coaches, however it worked since they backdoored into DKR.. Also didn't know about John Cooper ready to coach TX til the low balled him.

This is not a historical reprise of the intricacies of every hire in Texas football history. Let's keep this manageable. What I will illustrate is how often Texas, a clear Top 10 national football program, has thought small and/or hired unproven more often than not in its program history. History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme and our rhymes owe more to MC Hammer than Eric B and Rakim, if you catch my drift.

Whether simple bad luck, poor administrative hiring acumen, financial constraints, or a lack of awareness of what translates well to the 40, this program can go through some rough patches. We've also hit a lotto ticket here and there, including a power ball ticket named Darrell K Royal. A program can kick ass with a young, energetic riser. But you'd better have supreme confidence in the administration's ability to discern winning attributes, leadership, and what it takes to make it in Austin. Or just have really good luck. Take this ride with me - you'll find it interesting. (h/t to my friend @srr50 for his input on this piece)

**

Dana X Bible. I begin with the biggest hire in Texas football history - well, at least up until 1937. Bible won 5 SWC championships at Texas A&M and 6 Big 8 titles in 8 years at Nebraska. He had a 122-34-16 record with 19 years as a head coach under his belt before coming to Texas. The slam dunk hire of his era. Bible was an experienced coach with impeccable credentials and Texas alums, disgusted by slothful underachievement, passed around the hat and signed him to an unprecedented contract: $15,000 a year! A 25% bump over his salary at Nebraska. Bible came to Texas, went 3-14-1 in his first two years, puked and rallied, and then finished out with 3 SWC titles on a 60-17-2 run. Not shabby. We won't hire another coach with anything like his track record for over sixty years. Hire: Very experienced head coach, proven high level track record.

Blair Cherry. Bible's successor, Blair Cherry, was a longtime Bible assistant. He went 32-10-1 at Texas and then quit. Good coach. Good man. His essay Why I Quit Coaching holds up nicely still today. Insomnia and ulcers from dealing with media and fan criticism plagued him and he had his fill. It didn't help that he was named after a stripper. Hire: no head coaching experience, assistant promotion.

Ed Price was Cherry's assistant. He was promoted just as Cherry had been. He cruised on Cherry's fumes (23-8 in his first 3 seasons) and then drove it right into the ground (10-19-1) including his 1-9 final season. For an amusing description of that time period, read Jim Dent's portrait of a Longhorn football practice around that time in The Junction Boys. Star players reclining in the grass, flirting with their girlfriends in attendance, good times. Hire: no head coaching experience, assistant promotion.

DKR. Texas saw what lazy assistant succession had wrought and put on a national search. Let me amend that: a cheap unsuccessful national search. They were rebuffed by Bobby Dodd at Georgia Tech and Michigan State's Duffy Daugherty. Interestingly, both independently mentioned Royal as a good young coach, worthy of a look. Royal was a relatively obscure inexperienced young coach with no real track record. He'd coached the Edmonton Eskimos for a year in the CFL, coached Mississippi State for two, and the Washington Huskies for one. His experience, age, and career coaching record (17-13, never finished higher than 4th in conference) impressed few. Hire him today and Longhorn fans would riot wearing Coaching Matters shirts. He was young, cheap and had the recommendations of the football men of his era. Texas hired him. He went 167-47-5 in Austin. I guess it panned out. 🙂 Hire: limited head coaching experience, limited track record.

Fred Akers. The longtime Royal assistant and former high school coach led Wyoming for a scant two years, going 10-13 (but won his conference in Year 2). The politics and machinations of the Akers hire are long and fascinating, but let's just say that his primary qualification was that he was young, familiar, projected the right image, and wasn't DKR or his handpicked successor. He fit the image of the New Texas that the administration wanted: young, optimistic, dapper, affordable, and positive. Akers went 86-31-2 and had only one losing season in his ten years. Akers fielded some incredible defenses here and his time here is best described as...almost. Almost. Hire: limited head coaching experience, limited track record.

David McWilliams. McWilliams, a longtime DKR and Akers assistant, had exactly one year of head coaching experience. At Texas Tech. Where he went 7-4. The Texas administration was so out of touch with the financial reality of college football that when they interviewed hot national coaching candidate John Cooper (who won the Rose Bowl at Arizona State) their conversation went something like this.

Texas: We want to hire you, John.

Cooper: Fantastic. The Texas job speaks for itself. A lifelong dream.

Texas: We're offering you these $$$.

Cooper: (Long pause) My coordinators make that. Thank you for your time.

Texas: OK, who can we get cheap that will please all of the Royalists we've alienated?

Cooper went on to coach Ohio State. McWilliams was fired after five years. Hire: Very limited head coaching experience, no track record.

John Mackovic. If folksy, defense-oriented, and local burned us, let's go for icy, stand-offish, offense, NFL pedigree, and national. Unlike so many of his Longhorn predecessors, Mackovic was a decently experienced head coach with a legitimate track record. That track record was one of offensive modernity, defensive indifference, and alienated locker rooms. He was fired as head coach of the Chiefs after taking them to the playoffs for his inability to build player rapport. He had a respectable little run at Illinois with Top 25 rankings in 2 of 4 years, but his last team there went 6-5. He also had defenses led by legendary 3-4 LB DC Lou Tepper. Tepper literally wrote the book on 3-4 linebacking. Mackovic's DC hires at Texas were...less than successful. Hire: Reasonable head coaching experience, average track record.

Mack Brown. Mack was on the 1st tier of national coaching hires for what he built at UNC and was known as a recruiting marvel with extraordinary EQ and salesmanship, even if the Steve Spurriers of the world mocked his football acumen. Gary Barnett was a 1st tier national darling for what he'd done at Northwestern (they won the freaking Big 10) and thought to be the clear favorite. We were set to hire Barnett, but Mack blew everyone away in an interview. Dodds was told: this is your guy. Mack Brown was the most credentialed football hire in the history of Texas football since Dana X Bible. Dana X Bible was hired in 1937. Big time program, huh? Maybe in revenue and wins. But mindset!? Mack went 158-48 at Texas, with a 64-9 run between 2004-2009. Hire: Deep head coaching experience, strong track record.

Charlie Strong. National name. A Tier 2 or 3 candidate depending on your perspective at the time. Likable. Seen as "real" and "tough" juxtaposed against the now "fake" and "soft" Mack Brown regime. Political pressures. Korn Ferry consulting buffoons. Limited track record as a head coach (4 years at Louisville, 37-15 record) at a kingmaker program with natural advantages vis a vis peers in a weak conference. Gotta watch out for those. Three painful losing seasons at Texas. Hire: Limited head coaching experience, kingmaker program playing weak schedule, national name.

Tom Herman. National name. Limited track record as a head coach (only two years at Houston, 22-4) at a kingmaker program with natural advantages vis a vis peers in a weak conference. Gotta watch out for those. Seen as an offensive innovator, with organized, mentally tough teams. Concerns? Immaturity, inflexibility, insecurity. A furious Longhorn fanbase terrified that he'd slip away to another bidder and perceived (or real) lack of viable alternatives made the hire nearly fait accompli. Hire: Very limited head coaching experience, kingmaker program playing weak schedule, national name.

Pre-Texas years as college head coach for Texas hires since 1937 (then total as head coach, including NFL):

Bible- 19
Cherry - 0
Price- 0
DKR - 3
Akers - 2
McWilliams- 1
Mackovic - 4 (8)
Brown - 13
Strong - 4
Herman- 2

Since 1937, exactly 2 of 10 Texas head coaching hires had a decade or more as a head coach with an extensive proven track record preceding their Longhorn hire. Half of our coaches hired since 1937 had two years or less of head coaching experience when hired. 8 of 10 had four years or less as college head coaches before their hire. Texas is a big-time program that has traditionally hired small-time. Many programs have succeeded identifying and hiring young talent with a limited track record. Texas has not been one of them.
 
Listening to a Big12 podcast (ten12) as I code.. They bring up an interesting idea when it comes to expansion.

Option one, go in on Nebraska

Option two, offer WV to the ACC since they are going to a top 2 CCG instead of divisional. Go after both AZ schools.

Option three, offer BYU or the best G5 school (cincy, memph... but no uh)

The interesting part was changing the schedule.. instead of doing just 9 conference games, increase it to 10 (if 11 schools), play one P5 school and and one school of choice. The more conference games should increase the revenue when they do the next TV deal.

They feel that Nebraska is the toughest to pull, and they don't think adding PST games to CST games would work so no to option 2 as well. But if the ACC is willing to let WV happen, they would like a full swap with Louisville.

I like the idea of 10 conference games, I'm up in the air with which school should come in as #11. I feel WV stays put, and I don't think BYU works despite checking most boxes. Feel Memphis or Cincinnati may be the best of what the G5 has to offer right now.

Anyways thought it was interesting, especially adding another conference game. Had no idea that the ACC is looking to continue doing away with division winner facing off, rather just the top 2 teams regardless.
 
Nebraska may come back. Is Tom Osbourne totally out of the picture there? I always thought the Arizona schools made since as well as Lsu and Arkansas.
 
In business we have what we call the Need/Seed/Bleed/Feed cycle. If you have a serious need for a specific type of person in your organization you plant the seed with that person and his/her associates. Then when the time is right, you bleed money to hire them into your organization and give them all the support they require. After that, you feed them well financially and everybody ends up a winner. I'd be willing to bleed some money to get Nebraska back into the conference and then treat them right so they flourished.
 
In business we have what we call the Need/Seed/Bleed/Feed cycle. If you have a serious need for a specific type of person in your organization you plant the seed with that person and his/her associates. Then when the time is right, you bleed money to hire them into your organization and give them all the support they require. After that, you feed them well financially and everybody ends up a winner. I'd be willing to bleed some money to get Nebraska back into the conference and then treat them right so they flourished.
are you saying we should bring back the unequal revenue sharing?
 
are you saying we should bring back the unequal revenue sharing?
No. What I would be willing to do is help cover the cost of Nebraska withdrawing from the B1G to get them back. UT and OU might have to chip in the lion's share of that money but it would be worth it in the long run. Just get them back! Funny thing is when we used to have Big XII get togethers (fans from all the schools attending a pro basketball game together for example) the OU fans always had the Nebraska people talk to Texas to set things up and Nebraska always had the OU people talk to Colorado. But times change and we change with them or we suffer the consequences. Like it or not we're all facing a serious financial crisis in the U.S. economy and college athletics sometime in the near future. We need the highest profile teams we can get/keep in the Big XII to surive what is coming.

We could do things like have the conference basketball tournament in Kansas City occasionally which would make Nebraska happy. And have the baseball conference tournament in Omaha.
 
No. What I would be willing to do is help cover the cost of Nebraska withdrawing from the B1G to get them back. UT and OU might have to chip in the lion's share of that money but it would be worth it in the long run. Just get them back! Funny thing is when we used to have Big XII get togethers (fans from all the schools attending a pro basketball game together for example) the OU fans always had the Nebraska people talk to Texas to set things up and Nebraska always had the OU people talk to Colorado. But times change and we change with them or we suffer the consequences. Like it or not we're all facing a serious financial crisis in the U.S. economy and college athletics sometime in the near future. We need the highest profile teams we can get/keep in the Big XII to surive what is coming.

We could do things like have the conference basketball tournament in Kansas City occasionally which would make Nebraska happy. And have the baseball conference tournament in Omaha.
There GOR expires around the time the Big12 does as well.. there might not be an exit fee at that point.. but it would trigger more movement unless the BIG decides to have an odd number of schools.
 
No. What I would be willing to do is help cover the cost of Nebraska withdrawing from the B1G to get them back. UT and OU might have to chip in the lion's share of that money but it would be worth it in the long run. Just get them back! Funny thing is when we used to have Big XII get togethers (fans from all the schools attending a pro basketball game together for example) the OU fans always had the Nebraska people talk to Texas to set things up and Nebraska always had the OU people talk to Colorado. But times change and we change with them or we suffer the consequences. Like it or not we're all facing a serious financial crisis in the U.S. economy and college athletics sometime in the near future. We need the highest profile teams we can get/keep in the Big XII to surive what is coming.

We could do things like have the conference basketball tournament in Kansas City occasionally which would make Nebraska happy. And have the baseball conference tournament in Omaha.
Is the football championship always locked in at AT&T? Rotate that back to alternating North then South location, put it back in KC every other year.
 
Reason why the CCG stayed in Dallas permanently was because of the money Jerry threw at it. Basketball Tournament was also being rotated between KC and Dallas.. but now it's exclusively in KC.
 
Doesn't Nebraska get shit tons more money in Research Dollars than they could possibly replace with football dollars, in the B1G??

I thought they did.
So, if true, they ain't never coming back.
 
Doesn't Nebraska get shit tons more money in Research Dollars than they could possibly replace with football dollars, in the B1G??

I thought they did.
So, if true, they ain't never coming back.
The institution justifies the research dollars not the conference. Best example: Texas which gets a running ton of research dollars. Put Stanford in the Big XII and nobody's going to cut the dollars for their fantastic research facilities and programs. Nebraska might not come back but it wouldn't be the research dollars that would hold them back. It would have more to do with pride but that could be overcome if the right pitch could be made and put into writing.
 
The institution justifies the research dollars not the conference. Best example: Texas which gets a running ton of research dollars. Put Stanford in the Big XII and nobody's going to cut the dollars for their fantastic research facilities and programs. Nebraska might not come back but it wouldn't be the research dollars that would hold them back. It would have more to do with pride but that could be overcome if the right pitch could be made and put into writing.


Well, a lot of the Nebraska fans tell us that the research dollars are a lot more in the B1G.

I'm just going on that.

It would be great to get them back though. And think you are right, in helping them do it.
 
Well, a lot of the Nebraska fans tell us that the research dollars are a lot more in the B1G.

I'm just going on that.

It would be great to get them back though. And think you are right, in helping them do it.
So it's ok that they are no longer part of the AAU and can get research dollars? Shame that Texas still did the right thing by voting yes for them to keep it's AAU s status, but it's new friends in the BIG voted no.. dick move if you ask me.
 
Well, a lot of the Nebraska fans tell us that the research dollars are a lot more in the B1G.

I'm just going on that.

It would be great to get them back though. And think you are right, in helping them do it.
The credit should go to Nebraska itself not the conference. They are doing a super job of increasing their research capabilities in agriculture, education, materials research and virology which are all high priority research areas. Good going, Nebraska! They received nearly $350 Million last year because they are doing things the right way. (Oklahoma gets about $230 Million. Helluva difference, huh?)
 
The credit should go to Nebraska itself not the conference. They are doing a super job of increasing their research capabilities in agriculture, education, materials research and virology which are all high priority research areas. Good going, Nebraska! They received nearly $350 Million last year because they are doing things the right way. (Oklahoma gets about $230 Million. Helluva difference, huh?)
yeah but $230 million of ou money is really like 50k in Texas money..
 
yeah but $230 million of ou money is really like 50k in Texas money..

Ya never miss a chance to take a shot do ya? Well, here are some numbers for you math-challenged Horns fans: UT Austin pulls down a little over $420 Million by itself and when you add in the UT Health Centers it's about $1.2 Billion.
 
Ya never miss a chance to take a shot do ya? Well, here are some numbers for you math-challenged Horns fans: UT Austin pulls down a little over $420 Million by itself and when you add in the UT Health Centers it's about $1.2 Billion.
All I can do is take shots.. It's not like we can get any wins right now :(
 
Oklahoma State carrying the water and only hope for the Big 12.
 
We beat Texas next weekend and we've basically clenched a spot in the CCG.

Us and KSU are undefeated and they lost their qb. We have scoreboard against ISU and everyone else has at least two conference losses.

Shit if things bounce right ou could be a throwaway game for us. I have no realistic aspirations of being a legitimate playoff contender so our annual loss there will suck, but might suck less if they are trying to play the spoiler.
 
Top