Texas Bowl vs aTm

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
20,239
9,126
1,743
Earth
Indeed. Texas is a mess, and they haven't had a good coach there in a while. Coaching makes a huge difference. If they ever get it figured out, then they'll right back up there with uo year in and year out.
Just remember that IF it takes a program like Texas with all their $$$$ over a decade to "figure it out," how long is it going to take an Oklahoma State to right the ship after a mistake in a coaching change. Honestly, this has to be a concern for the ones (few) who think Gundy needs to go.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,086
6,822
1,743
Landlocked
Just remember that IF it takes a program like Texas with all their $$$$ over a decade to "figure it out," how long is it going to take an Oklahoma State to right the ship after a mistake in a coaching change. Honestly, this has to be a concern for the ones (few) who think Gundy needs to go.
Its obviously a real concern. But you're conflating a bunch of stuff that really shouldn't be, and my guess is that you're doing it to justify Gundy's coaching limitations instead of just admitting that he's limited. As far as I can tell, you assume that the more successful teams have dirty players, that more money = better coaching, and that changes always yield a negative result.

Success = dirty players
Sure, some successful teams have dirty players. So do a lot of unsuccessful teams. So do a lot of mediocre teams. I really don't think you could even determine a dirtiness level and correlate it to success on the field. I think you could look at legal problems per team, but I doubt there's any real correlation between that and wins. I believe our fanbase uses this idea as a crutch to justify why Gundy can't compete with the big boys.

More money = good coaches
False.
Good coaches = good coaches.
Its true that higher salaries can attract talented coaches, but as we've obviously seen with teams like Texas and Tennessee - big money doesn't always yield top tier results. Good coaching yields positive results.
Its also worth noting that some of these guys probably don't work out for LOTS of reasons that aren't directly related to coaching, like fan expectations, recruiting prowess, donor pressure, coordinators, injuries to key players, which conference they're in, etc......... in other words, a coach might suck at Texas, but find the right situation at Oregon or Florida State. There are way too many factors to make judgments based on a few season W-L records.

Changes = negative
Do we really need examples? Yes, there are high-profile examples of programs that have floundered after seemingly having blue-blood status (again - Texas, Nebraska, etc....). But there are examples of programs that made changes and improved. Clemson is the best one. I'd argue that Washington made a great hire with Chris Petersen (up until his sudden, recent retirement). Again - good coaches are good coaches.

If we hired a coach that could take us a step beyond what Gundy has done, wouldn't that be great? We have the facilities and recent history to keep us relevant, and I'm at the point where going to a lame bowl, losing to uo, and running vanilla game plans year after year just isn't cutting it for my expectations. I want more, and I think the program has what it takes to get there. I just don't think Gundy can do it anymore.
 

PokeJ

Sheriff
Oct 27, 2003
4,543
2,684
1,743
62
McKinney, TX
Visit site
Indeed. Texas is a mess, and they haven't had a good coach there in a while. Coaching makes a huge difference. If they ever get it figured out, then they'll right back up there with uo year in and year out.
Just remember that IF it takes a program like Texas with all their $$$$ over a decade to "figure it out," how long is it going to take an Oklahoma State to right the ship after a mistake in a coaching change. Honestly, this has to be a concern for the ones (few) who think Gundy needs to go.
10, 10, 10, 7 and 8 wins so far this year. 45 wins n the last 5 years. Texas would kill for those results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
20,239
9,126
1,743
Earth
Its obviously a real concern. But you're conflating a bunch of stuff that really shouldn't be, and my guess is that you're doing it to justify Gundy's coaching limitations instead of just admitting that he's limited. As far as I can tell, you assume that the more successful teams have dirty players, that more money = better coaching, and that changes always yield a negative result.

Success = dirty players
Sure, some successful teams have dirty players. So do a lot of unsuccessful teams. So do a lot of mediocre teams. I really don't think you could even determine a dirtiness level and correlate it to success on the field. I think you could look at legal problems per team, but I doubt there's any real correlation between that and wins. I believe our fanbase uses this idea as a crutch to justify why Gundy can't compete with the big boys.

More money = good coaches
False.
Good coaches = good coaches.
Its true that higher salaries can attract talented coaches, but as we've obviously seen with teams like Texas and Tennessee - big money doesn't always yield top tier results. Good coaching yields positive results.
Its also worth noting that some of these guys probably don't work out for LOTS of reasons that aren't directly related to coaching, like fan expectations, recruiting prowess, donor pressure, coordinators, injuries to key players, which conference they're in, etc......... in other words, a coach might suck at Texas, but find the right situation at Oregon or Florida State. There are way too many factors to make judgments based on a few season W-L records.

Changes = negative
Do we really need examples? Yes, there are high-profile examples of programs that have floundered after seemingly having blue-blood status (again - Texas, Nebraska, etc....). But there are examples of programs that made changes and improved. Clemson is the best one. I'd argue that Washington made a great hire with Chris Petersen (up until his sudden, recent retirement). Again - good coaches are good coaches.

If we hired a coach that could take us a step beyond what Gundy has done, wouldn't that be great? We have the facilities and recent history to keep us relevant, and I'm at the point where going to a lame bowl, losing to uo, and running vanilla game plans year after year just isn't cutting it for my expectations. I want more, and I think the program has what it takes to get there. I just don't think Gundy can do it anymore.
Well, we can just agree that we disagree. I actually think momentum is what drives success and not simply coaching. One coach can make a big difference but momentum that is required at non-blue bloods is significantly more than just a head coach, like it might be at a blue blood, IMHO. We had that momentum fostered under Gundy in 2008-09 and it led to 2010-11. We have actually done the hard thing and sustained that success far longer than most teams having four 10 win seasons since that time and going 4-2 so far in bowls... what kind of fanbase creates momentum and then abandons the coach after momentum inevitably fades or wanes for an ever so short term? The way, to bring momentum back is not to flip coaches but to do the hard thing and stick by coaches and the program by actually increasing support for them to bring back that momentum, not to publically call for their heads and boycott successful programs. Bottom line, I feel we have created some positive momentum this year, and with a bowl victory and 9 victories we will sustain it. I do think the bowl, this year, is VERY important to that trajectory.

Btw, I agree with you that it's NEVER about bringing in dirty players and that good coaches, like Gundy, are always good coaches and don't grow on trees...that's exactly why I don't agree that changing a very successful head man is the right direction for this program. In our case, in all seriousness, that would be nearly exactly like what happened when we went another direction from Eddie...we have suffered for nearly 2 decades because of that...we need NOT make that program / fan base dividing colossal mistake again. Fanbase split (even ever so slightly right now) and our failure to create new momentum (although it's debatable that we haven't with more wins than last year so far and a very young team) IMHO is the problem not Gundy's performance. Heck he's the #6 winningest active college football coach by win percentage with 10 seasons or more under their belt. Btw, he's also 1-0 vs Petersen in a rebuilding year even. ;-)
 
Last edited:

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,086
6,822
1,743
Landlocked
Well, we can just agree that we disagree. I actually think momentum is what drives success and not simply coaching. One coach can make a big difference but momentum that is required at non-blue bloods is significantly more than just a head coach, like it might be at a blue blood, IMHO. We had that momentum fostered under Gundy in 2008-09 and it led to 2010-11. We have actually done the hard thing and sustained that success far longer than most teams having four 10 win season since that time and going 4-2 so far in bowls... what kind of fanbase creates momentum and then abandons the coach after momentum inevitably fades or wanes for an ever so short term? The way, to bring momentum back is not to flip coaches but to do the hard thing and stick by coaches and the program by actually increasing support for them to bring back that momentum, not to publically call for their heads and boycott successful programs. Bottom line, I feel we have created some positive momentum this year, and with a bowl victory and 9 victories we will sustain it. I do think the bowl, this year, is VERY important to that trajectory.

Btw, I agree with you that it's NEVER about bringing in dirty players and that good coaches, like Gundy, are always good coaches and don't grow on trees...that's exactly why I don't agree that changing a very successful head man is the right direction for this program. In our case, in all seriousness, that would be nearly exactly like what happened when we went another direction from Eddie...we have suffered for nearly 2 decades because of that...we need NOT make that program / fan base dividing colossal mistake again. Fanbase split (even ever so slightly right now) and our failure to create new momentum (although it's debatable that we haven't with more wins than last year so far and a very young team) IMHO is the problem not Gundy's performance.
See.....I guess you're just basing your "momentum" sentiments on our W-L record over the last few years. I base my opinions on individual coaching decisions in games and our simpleton gameplans, which I believe gives us zero chance against top tier opponents. Since W-L is your standard, let's look at some stuff.

Since Gundy took over (2005-2018, 14 seasons), here's where we've landed nationally at season's end.
Unranked: 7 (50%)
Ranked 25-15: 4 (29%)
Ranked 10-15: 2 (14%) Holgersen
Top 10 Finishes: 1 (7%) Monken

2 of our 3 top 10 finishes were when we had Holgersen, Monken, and W2B.

OSU vs (Final) Top 25 Teams: 52 total games
19 wins (37%)
33 losses (63%)

OSU vs (Final) Top 10 Teams: 20 total
2 wins (10%)
18 losses (90%)

*Note: In the (2) wins we've had against Top 10 opponents in the Gundy era, one was against Stanford when we finished 3rd, so pretty evenly matched. The second win was against Colorado when they finished 10th and we finished 12th on the season. Again - pretty evenly matched, and both in bowl games.

Our highest ranked win outside the two mentioned above was against TCU in 2015, who ended up the season ranked 11th in the nation.

So......our overall record looks kinda impressive, but when you look at who we're beating and who we're losing to, it just shows me that Gundy is not an elite coach. He can beat up on lower ranked teams, but his schemes simply don't allow us to compete with the big boys.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
20,239
9,126
1,743
Earth
See.....I guess you're just basing your "momentum" sentiments on our W-L record over the last few years. I base my opinions on individual coaching decisions in games and our simpleton gameplans, which I believe gives us zero chance against top tier opponents. Since W-L is your standard, let's look at some stuff.

Since Gundy took over (2005-2018, 14 seasons), here's where we've landed nationally at season's end.
Unranked: 7 (50%)
Ranked 25-15: 4 (29%)
Ranked 10-15: 2 (14%) Holgersen
Top 10 Finishes: 1 (7%) Monken

2 of our 3 top 10 finishes were when we had Holgersen, Monken, and W2B.

OSU vs (Final) Top 25 Teams: 52 total games
19 wins (37%)
33 losses (63%)

OSU vs (Final) Top 10 Teams: 20 total
2 wins (10%)
18 losses (90%)

*Note: In the (2) wins we've had against Top 10 opponents in the Gundy era, one was against Stanford when we finished 3rd, so pretty evenly matched. The second win was against Colorado when they finished 10th and we finished 12th on the season. Again - pretty evenly matched, and both in bowl games.

Our highest ranked win outside the two mentioned above was against TCU in 2015, who ended up the season ranked 11th in the nation.

So......our overall record looks kinda impressive, but when you look at who we're beating and who we're losing to, it just shows me that Gundy is not an elite coach. He can beat up on lower ranked teams, but his schemes simply don't allow us to compete with the big boys.
By "big boys" you mean ou...because if you take them out of your metric his stats become a LOT more favorable. Just last year he beat Texas and WVU (arguably top tier teams before we kicked their butts...one coached by your boy Holgy (2-5 vs Gundy BTW), and the other beat Georgia in a New years bowl, and we did it with perhaps less talented teams and by your estimation "bad schemes."..Certainly we ALL want to beat ou in our conference...but we are ALL having trouble doing it. Changing out your top head coach of all time ISN"T going to do anything but make us decline because of the fanbases intolerance for making foolish decisions. I know it's always "next year" BUT if...the guys come back...that "should" IMHO...next year is huge for us. Of course huge is 10 or 11 wins...and maybe more IF we are very fortunate. Plus on your metric, when you talk about "FINAL" top 10 teams...some teams we beat when they were in the top 10 aren't in the final directly because we beat them, so IMHO your metric doesn't mean much. I would guess only an ELITE VERY VERY small club of coaches stack up well against them odds.
 
Last edited:
Nov 6, 2010
1,057
399
713
See.....I guess you're just basing your "momentum" sentiments on our W-L record over the last few years. I base my opinions on individual coaching decisions in games and our simpleton gameplans, which I believe gives us zero chance against top tier opponents. Since W-L is your standard, let's look at some stuff.

Since Gundy took over (2005-2018, 14 seasons), here's where we've landed nationally at season's end.
Unranked: 7 (50%)
Ranked 25-15: 4 (29%)
Ranked 10-15: 2 (14%) Holgersen
Top 10 Finishes: 1 (7%) Monken

2 of our 3 top 10 finishes were when we had Holgersen, Monken, and W2B.

OSU vs (Final) Top 25 Teams: 52 total games
19 wins (37%)
33 losses (63%)

OSU vs (Final) Top 10 Teams: 20 total
2 wins (10%)
18 losses (90%)

*Note: In the (2) wins we've had against Top 10 opponents in the Gundy era, one was against Stanford when we finished 3rd, so pretty evenly matched. The second win was against Colorado when they finished 10th and we finished 12th on the season. Again - pretty evenly matched, and both in bowl games.

Our highest ranked win outside the two mentioned above was against TCU in 2015, who ended up the season ranked 11th in the nation.

So......our overall record looks kinda impressive, but when you look at who we're beating and who we're losing to, it just shows me that Gundy is not an elite coach. He can beat up on lower ranked teams, but his schemes simply don't allow us to compete with the big boys.
I think there is some merit in this. What bothers me is that the offenses Gundy prefers seem to rely on matchups for success. Meaning you have to have better players than the opponent. The spread we brought Holgy and the Tech QB in to implement was supposed to be a talent equalizer. Now, we don't run the spread anymore, so it seems we're going back to needing a talent edge to be successful (always helps of course no matter the scheme). But if we're now going to be stuck in the lower thirties in recruiting classes consistently, it's going to be pretty tough to win many games against the upper half of the conference, let alone OU. Also gone is the use of tempo. We ran it against Oregon St and put up 50, then it just slowly vanished. That seemed to always be a really good talent equalizer as well, when the defensive players were doubled over unable to breathe. I realize that is a philosophy change to protect the defense and get more stops, but again, takes away one of the few advantages we can get with a handful of good skill players against teams loaded with talent. I'm afraid what we're going to see moving forward is more conservative, ball control offense, with lower risk but lower reward. Probably means we'll not have any more Central Michigan's, but it probably also means that our days of owning Texas are over.
 

CaymanS

Wrangler
Oct 20, 2018
52
17
58
60
OKC
And therein lies the reason Gundy has exploited our mindset of fear of the unknown, 'who else are you going to get' etc. K-State has had a great transition from their iconic coach. Baylor's coach has been like a phoenix rising from the ashes of the Briles cesspool dumpster fire. Tech is Tech but hey they beat us.
When we stop worrying about the unknown and 'who else' stuff and start thinking like a winner, we will find a winner that can take us beyond what Gundy has and to the level Boone was aspiring when he made his mega-donation. Until then, we just settle in and ho-hum another loss to ou and another blown chance to win the conference.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,086
6,822
1,743
Landlocked
By "big boys" you mean ou...because if you take them out of your metric his stats become a LOT more favorable. Just last year he beat Texas and WVU (arguably top tier teams before we kicked their butts...one coached by your boy Holgy (2-5 vs Gundy BTW), and the other beat Georgia in a New years bowl, and we did it with perhaps less talented teams and by your estimation "bad schemes."..Certainly we ALL want to beat ou in our conference...but we are ALL having trouble doing it. Changing out your top head coach of all time ISN"T going to do anything but make us decline because of the fanbases intolerance for making foolish decisions. I know it's always "next year" BUT if...the guys come back...that "should" IMHO...next year is huge for us. Of course huge is 10 or 11 wins...and maybe more IF we are very fortunate. Plus on your metric, when you talk about "FINAL" top 10 teams...some teams we beat when they were in the top 10 aren't in the final directly because we beat them, so IMHO your metric doesn't mean much. I would guess only an ELITE VERY VERY small club of coaches stack up well against them odds.
Here's what that would look like.
OSU vs Top 25
Including uo = 37%
Excluding uo = 45%

OSU vs Top 10:
Including uo = 10%
Excluding uo = 17%

A few things jump out when looking at these stats. uo has been really strong in Gundy's tenure (8 top 10 finishes in 14 years, and only two unranked finishes). Oddly enough, they had a head coaching change, and have finished 2 and 4 in the nation after the change occurred.

Here's uo's final rankings in the Gundy era.
2005: 22
2006: 11
2007: 8
2008: 5
2009: NR
2010: 6
2011: 16 (OSU ended ranked #3 this year, and beat uo)
2012: 15
2013: 6
2014: NR (OSU finished unranked, but beat uo)
2015: 4
2016: 7
2017: 2 <---- Coaching change
2018: 4

Some interesting things.....
We can only beat uo when they are having a down year, and even then, its only a 33% chance we can beat them when they finish outside the Top 10. Heck, its a 50% chance when they're outside the top 15, and only 50% when they're unranked. We've literally only beat them when they're 16th or worse in the country.
The one time we beat a legit uo team was when we had Monken and W2B.
uo has actually gotten better since changing coaches (albeit with a tiny sample size)

So....you're correct that uo has an impact on our win % against the top tier teams. BUT.....if we want to take the next step, we have to beat them. Sounds like you just don't want to try taking the next step.
 
Aug 22, 2006
1,411
525
1,743
SE Oklahoma
Two things....you ask what he has to gain for playing in the bowl. A higher draft position which is more money. Using your logic, Chubba should have just quit playing after the 5th game since it became apparent he was pretty good and didn't want to risk getting hurt. OSU has given him the platform and the opportunity to be in the position of playing in the NFL. The other players on the team give him the opportunity to showcase his skills. They open up the holes for him. The block for him. So yes, Chubba should have some allegiance to OSU and his teammates. They all helped him get to this position. Chubba did not do it all by himself.
Kinda similar to Justice Hill last season in response to quiting before the season was over
 

Cro

we need some celery and a can of fake snow
A/V Subscriber
Apr 6, 2010
4,324
2,230
1,743
Edmond
Here's what that would look like.
OSU vs Top 25
Including uo = 37%
Excluding uo = 45%

OSU vs Top 10:
Including uo = 10%
Excluding uo = 17%

A few things jump out when looking at these stats. uo has been really strong in Gundy's tenure (8 top 10 finishes in 14 years, and only two unranked finishes). Oddly enough, they had a head coaching change, and have finished 2 and 4 in the nation after the change occurred.

Here's uo's final rankings in the Gundy era.
2005: 22
2006: 11
2007: 8
2008: 5
2009: NR
2010: 6
2011: 16 (OSU ended ranked #3 this year, and beat uo)
2012: 15
2013: 6
2014: NR (OSU finished unranked, but beat uo)
2015: 4
2016: 7
2017: 2 <---- Coaching change
2018: 4

Some interesting things.....
We can only beat uo when they are having a down year, and even then, its only a 33% chance we can beat them when they finish outside the Top 10. Heck, its a 50% chance when they're outside the top 15, and only 50% when they're unranked. We've literally only beat them when they're 16th or worse in the country.
The one time we beat a legit uo team was when we had Monken and W2B.
uo has actually gotten better since changing coaches (albeit with a tiny sample size)

So....you're correct that uo has an impact on our win % against the top tier teams. BUT.....if we want to take the next step, we have to beat them. Sounds like you just don't want to try taking the next step.
so, who do you suggest we hire? you and cayman (aka cowboyethics) and all the rest of the "fire gundy" crowd cry for change, but don't have any serious, viable candidates to ever throw out as a potential replacement.........
 
Aug 7, 2006
1,342
1,019
1,743
And therein lies the reason Gundy has exploited our mindset of fear of the unknown, 'who else are you going to get' etc. K-State has had a great transition from their iconic coach. Baylor's coach has been like a phoenix rising from the ashes of the Briles cesspool dumpster fire. Tech is Tech but hey they beat us.
When we stop worrying about the unknown and 'who else' stuff and start thinking like a winner, we will find a winner that can take us beyond what Gundy has and to the level Boone was aspiring when he made his mega-donation. Until then, we just settle in and ho-hum another loss to ou and another blown chance to win the conference.
K-State also had a terrible transition from the same iconic coach, forcing him to come back to fix the problem. Kinda shows you how it can definitely go either way.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
20,239
9,126
1,743
Earth
Here's what that would look like.
OSU vs Top 25
Including uo = 37%
Excluding uo = 45%

OSU vs Top 10:
Including uo = 10%
Excluding uo = 17%

A few things jump out when looking at these stats. uo has been really strong in Gundy's tenure (8 top 10 finishes in 14 years, and only two unranked finishes). Oddly enough, they had a head coaching change, and have finished 2 and 4 in the nation after the change occurred.

Here's uo's final rankings in the Gundy era.
2005: 22
2006: 11
2007: 8
2008: 5
2009: NR
2010: 6
2011: 16 (OSU ended ranked #3 this year, and beat uo)
2012: 15
2013: 6
2014: NR (OSU finished unranked, but beat uo)
2015: 4
2016: 7
2017: 2 <---- Coaching change
2018: 4

Some interesting things.....
We can only beat uo when they are having a down year, and even then, its only a 33% chance we can beat them when they finish outside the Top 10. Heck, its a 50% chance when they're outside the top 15, and only 50% when they're unranked. We've literally only beat them when they're 16th or worse in the country.
The one time we beat a legit uo team was when we had Monken and W2B.
uo has actually gotten better since changing coaches (albeit with a tiny sample size)

So....you're correct that uo has an impact on our win % against the top tier teams. BUT.....if we want to take the next step, we have to beat them. Sounds like you just don't want to try taking the next step.
Selective stats are just that...why not go back to when they changed out coach Gary Gibbs instead of when they simple continues Bob Stoops tenure with his hand picked clone? Because selective stats are selective and bias is bias. You have a bias against coach Gundy...it is what it is.

I do want to take the next step, but your suggestion of that step would be off a cliff.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,086
6,822
1,743
Landlocked
Selective stats are just that...why not go back to when they changed out coach Gary Gibbs instead of when they simple continues Bob Stoops tenure with his hand picked clone? Because selective stats are selective and bias is bias. You have a bias against coach Gundy...it is what it is.
My stats are for the Gundy era, because that's the context of this discussion. I'm showing you that he isn't a "great" coach. He's better than most that have been at OSU, but he isn't "great". He's created a system that can beat up on teams with lesser talent, and really can't compete with the Top 10. If that's cool with you, then we're just on different planes.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
20,239
9,126
1,743
Earth
And therein lies the reason Gundy has exploited our mindset of fear of the unknown, 'who else are you going to get' etc. K-State has had a great transition from their iconic coach. Baylor's coach has been like a phoenix rising from the ashes of the Briles cesspool dumpster fire. Tech is Tech but hey they beat us.
When we stop worrying about the unknown and 'who else' stuff and start thinking like a winner, we will find a winner that can take us beyond what Gundy has and to the level Boone was aspiring when he made his mega-donation. Until then, we just settle in and ho-hum another loss to ou and another blown chance to win the conference.
When our iconic coach retires we will transition well just as KSU has...BUT barring some really bad years...you fire him for a new face and you, as a fan base, fall apart (see Eddie / Sean 2.0). It just is what it is.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
20,239
9,126
1,743
Earth
My stats are for the Gundy era, because that's the context of this discussion. I'm showing you that he isn't a "great" coach. He's better than most that have been at OSU, but he isn't "great". He's created a system that can beat up on teams with lesser talent, and really can't compete with the Top 10. If that's cool with you, then we're just on different planes.
I'm on the reality plane...and on the improvement plane...not on the fantasy one without factual basis out of nothing but hot air and anti coach Gundy rhetoric. You have to realize that you are in a very small minority regarding your desire to see Gundy fired.

As far as Gundy being a great coach...it's pretty much a consensus nationally that he's at least top 15 in the college coaching ranks. Guys who consistently show up on these list higher have losing records against him like Mike Leech, Gary Patterson, and Tom Herman among others. So there's that.
 
Last edited:

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,086
6,822
1,743
Landlocked
I'm on the reality plane...and on the improvement plane...not on the fantasy one without factual basis out of nothing but hot air and anti coach Gundy rhetoric. You have to realize that you are in a very small minority regarding your desire to see Gundy fired.

As far as Gundy being a great coach...it's pretty much a consensus nationally that he's at least top 15 in the college coaching ranks. So there's that.
Where are you seeing improvement with our football program at the moment? W-L records? Recruiting classes? Bowl games? Rivalry games? What's your metric?
 

PokeJ

Sheriff
Oct 27, 2003
4,543
2,684
1,743
62
McKinney, TX
Visit site
And therein lies the reason Gundy has exploited our mindset of fear of the unknown, 'who else are you going to get' etc. K-State has had a great transition from their iconic coach. Baylor's coach has been like a phoenix rising from the ashes of the Briles cesspool dumpster fire. Tech is Tech but hey they beat us.
When we stop worrying about the unknown and 'who else' stuff and start thinking like a winner, we will find a winner that can take us beyond what Gundy has and to the level Boone was aspiring when he made his mega-donation. Until then, we just settle in and ho-hum another loss to ou and another blown chance to win the conference.
Obviously you forgot the Prince regime at KSU.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
20,239
9,126
1,743
Earth
Where are you seeing improvement with our football program at the moment? W-L records? Recruiting classes? Bowl games? Rivalry games? What's your metric?
Year to year...last year we lost to teams we should beat and beat teams we should lose too.. This year we beat teams we should beat (sans Tech), beat a team we were favored to lose too (@ISU) and won games despite major setbacks in terms of injured stars including our QB1 and the best receiver in college football. We have 8 wins so far with a chance at 9...last year we won 6 and 7 with the bowl. We are 3rd in Conference from 7th last year. Big opportunity come bowl time. Recruiting means bunk to me look at Texas over Gundy's tenure for facts. Btw, another metric for me is having good citizen players that make their grades and serve in their communities. Bowl games, are a big deal if you win them as they provide momentum for the following year...We suck vs OU, ALWAYS have...that's our ONLY problem in my eyes and NOT an easy one to fix...a systemic program entranced historic problem that takes decades to solve...it certainly won't be solved with a head coaching change at this point in time (which isn't happening, Thank God, so why even throw it out there?) What "great" coach in his right mind would even consider OSU if we fired this coach at this point in our history? He'd have to come coach to a half full BPS with a mad fanbase because we fired our historic coach. What is your metric? What IF KSU had FIRED Snyder? Actually it's stupid to even discuss.
 
Last edited: