Jump to content

Tom Herman To LSU


Coach85

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, D3zii said:

Bro I have no problem hiring Herman, Ima all for whatever Texas has to do to get back to national prominence , but Ima be a hot pistol as a partial football alum to see my money going to this coach who's not proven but is the highest paid coach in college football and hasn't even won a National championship

What if he's the second highest behind Harbaugh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

What if he's the second highest behind Harbaugh?

Personally, I feel ________ highest paid in the country shouldn't be by his name ..but I know since he's at Texas The green will come, but I just don't wanna see us go after a coach and just say F everyone else, just cause he's playing LSU for us to hurry and make a rash decision...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, D3zii said:

Personally, I feel ________ highest paid in the country shouldn't be by his name ..but I know since he's at Texas The green will come, but I just don't wanna see us go after a coach and just say F everyone else, just cause he's playing LSU for us to hurry and make a rash decision...

lol I feel your anger through your post..These next few days shell be interesting 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, UTfanatic said:

If Herman is the one?

Why would one loss matter when his team is not motivated after all the talk. 

Maybe a little cheaper now. 

 

1 hour ago, TxHoops said:

So do we let the crazy cajuns have him now?

The Herman naysayers are not Longhorns.

Horns up and Hookem 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UTfanatic said:

What other first time head coach can match his first two years?

lol he walked into a good situation...The team had made it to bowl games  with teams that went 8-5 for two seasons. So they were already winners...y'all act like he rose a program from the dead...He had one great season and then this year was good...They got OU early, the only real win was against Louisville 

like i always say, Herman is probably a decent coach, but he's not no first ballot Texas football coach like some are making him out to be 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, D3zii said:

lol he walked into a good situation...The team had made it to bowl games  with teams that went 8-5 for two seasons. So they were already winners...y'all act like he rose a program from the dead...He had one great season and then this year was good...They got OU early, the only real win was against Louisville 

like i always say, Herman is probably a decent coach, but he's not no first ballot Texas football coach like some are making him out to be 

What about David Shaw?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, D3zii said:

lol he walked into a good situation...The team had made it to bowl games  with teams that went 8-5 for two seasons. So they were already winners...y'all act like he rose a program from the dead...He had one great season and then this year was good...They got OU early, the only real win was against Louisville 

like i always say, Herman is probably a decent coach, but he's not no first ballot Texas football coach like some are making him out to be 

I tend to agree - but as an Aggie fan would love to see Texas get into another Strong with rose colored glasses again.

Herman could turn the system around - or could be the next Strong - remember Strong had just 2 good years at Louisville and was average before that.

In the big picture Herman is really new to the Head Coaching world.

But hell who am I to talk I want Sumlin fired and have A&M hire the Western Michigan coach - really the same situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, UTfanatic said:

What about David Shaw?

Difference between the two is one is a proven winner at a private school While the other had two good seasons and that's it..

I wanted David Shaw before They hired Strong...He can bring Dana Anika back to the 40 with him \m/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,968
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    yielder
    Newest Member
    yielder
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Trump walks to the beat of a different drummer so he could very likely pick a person that is on no one’s radar. Going by typical political logic, assuming that a VP pick might bring 0.5%-1% votes, who should it be? A half to one percent is not much but in a potentially razor thin election, a couple of thousand votes in a state could decide the presidency. Biden won AZ by just over 10,000 votes. The most recent Beaumont mayoral election, where almost no one votes, had over 15,000 votes cast. In GA it was 12,000 votes and Biden did not even get 50%. In WI it was 20,000 and again Biden didn’t get to 50%.  There are other states in that area of percent point difference. How important? If any two AZ, GA and WI flip, Trump would have won. So while the VP probably never matters…. can it this time? I think that it could. What then does the VP pick bring to the table? FL and SC were both won by Trump in 2020 so a favored son vote for Rubio or Scott won’t help Trump. Both are in a fairly comfortable position within the conservative community so they will neither hurt nor help with strong conservative voters.  What about the few fence riders that could and likely will determine the election by either sticking with Biden or switching from the last election? What about the people who did not vote in the last election, but may come out to vote in this one just to support the VP candidate? Could Scott sway a percentage point or two from Black support? Could Rubio help draw a percentage point or two of Hispanic support? Possibly on both counts. Like I already mentioned, they won’t help in their own states because Trump already won those in 2020. I personally think that either would actually do a good job as president (although VP picks are about the politics of being elected and not the “best” possible president) and might be the difference in a few votes but a few votes more is all that is needed.  Or…. My outlier, Tulsi Gabbard.  She had some decent support when are ran for the presidency in the Democrat primary. Could some people follow her because they support her and not necessarily the party? I’m sure that’s true for all candidates. Could she bring female support? As a strong mentally and physically person and a member of the military who was deployed into a combat zone into Iraq. Then she went to OCS and became an officer, then deployed to Kuwait. Can that military history, including deployment into a war swing some votes? As of late, she has been on a one person tirade against Biden and the Democrats. Let’s remember that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and so was Texas governor John Connally. Connally was not only a Democrat governor in Texas but also Secretary of the Navy under JFK. Both ended up switching to the Republican Party so there is a fairly strong history of former Democrats switching parties and being successful, all the way up to the presidency. Gabbard is a pretty fiery campaigner and doesn’t mince her words. She would really be a thorn in the Democrats’ hopes and has the inside knowledge of the party. Could she potentially swing more votes than Scott or Rubio? I think so. But…. I don’t think that Trump would pick her and I’m not sure that she would accept if offered. Her odds of being Trump's pick are at about 1%.  Scott or Rubio at about 10%. Trump being Trump, will choose someone who no one has ever heard of. 
    • So biden's a creepy old pedophile after all...shocker! But that's where the smart votes are landing.
    • You’re quibbling over the word “most”.  I agree that the UK is our most important military ally but we have overwhelming other support from Europe through NATO.   What other support do we have in the Middle East?  What are the “most” important issues? Military strength or intelligence that might head off the need for military action? It’s certainly debatable.  I honestly wouldn’t argue with any points on which if the most critical to our interests. I am sure that people can make valid arguments from different points of view. Military? The UK. Middle East intelligence? Israel.  As far as Israel, SmashMouth said that they “may very well be” the most important. ”May be” is not an adamant statement but a suggestion. They might be… depending on what the discussion is about. Worrying about the word “most” (especially “may be”) seems to be the definition of trivial. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...