Is Mack Brown the most overrated coach in college football

The "best player in college football at the time" completed only 56% of his passes that season, and averaged a career-worst 8.7 yards per attempt; there wasn't much of a dropoff when Jones came in in terms of the team's offensive output that year, because it simply wasn't that good to begin with, due mostly to problems up front.

It's like saying Jordan didn't play in 1995. He did play, his team wasn't good enough.

 

If you watched the game it was a lot closer than that. They had a chance to tie or win (either Alabama was up by 3 or 7) the game in the 4th quarter with GG at qb. GG turned out to not to be a very good QB. If they had Colt who was one of the better college QBs there is a chance they win the game. At least a lot better chance than GG.

 

Exactly. And had it not been for such a terrible play call at the end of the first half, that game is much different.

 

you must be joking lol

we sucked the following years but not that year when we made the bcs. we would have made it again had it not been for the tech game. so your argument/claim has no basis. keep hatin bro

 

That's true, but you're pulling from a sample size that is ridiculously small (69 attempts) and also tainted by lingering injury.

No matter how bad their OL was, I think it's pretty disingenuous to suggest that they wouldn't have done better vs. UT with a 3 year starter and heisman winner playing than a freshman with only 3 starts under his belt. Sounds remarkably similar to UT's situation vs. Bama, doesn't it?

It's like saying Jordan played in 1995, in one particular game, but left in the 1st quarter and his team still barely lost the game.

It boils down to this, if you're going to say Colt would've beat Bama (which is possible), then you have to entertain the idea that Bradford would've beat UT. Does a 1-loss UT still get in the title game? Maybe. But I take issue with anybody who uses the "Colt was hurt" excuse without acknowleding that a similar injury to an opponent played a large role in putting them in that position in the first place. Luck giveth and luck taketh away.

Anyway, it's all conjecture and people are going to believe what they want to believe. If you want to think a healthy Bradford wouldn't have made a difference, more power to you. I don't think it makes a big difference in terms of Mack's resume, FWIW. 13-1 would still be very impressive, regardless of how the post-season played out.

 

saban's D barely won them the game against a 18 year old qb in his first major pt.

nobody is saying mccoy is a god, we are just saying that ut was definitely the #2 team that year they had an unfortunate injury in the title game that may have affected the outcome.

just like how uh guys are big on keenum, we were all big fans of mccoy and young.

at least we make title games/big bowl games though lol, can't say the same for many of the schools that yall posters go to.

 

That's great and all, and I absolutely agree, but my point revolves around the fact that if you want to take credit for hypothetically winning a title with a healthy Colt McCoy, then you also have to realize that you hypothetically don't even get a chance to play for one with a healthy Sam Bradford.

I would be a lot more sympathetic to UT's situation if not for the circumstances that put them in that position in the first place. Sucks for everyone, really, because you hate to see injuries affect the outcome of anything.

 

Tainted by lingering injury....due to the putrid nature of the OL.

Look, they weren't that good that year. That's why they lost 5 games. It's not because they got poor QB play.

He barely completed 50% of his passes...against Baylor the week before. 92nd in the country on defense, 3-8 Baylor. Not sure how you propose he improves ont hat vs. the 11th ranked team, he certainly didn't appear like he handled pressure very well when he had the opportunity.

 

I agree that OUs O-line play was not good that year, but the Baylor game was Bradford's first significant action since the injury against BYU. And Jones' had some inflated stats which is why you cannot look at the year as a whole for Landry. I think Donny is right in thinking that if McCoy is worth 17 against Bama, then Bradford in worth 4 against UT.

I was at the OU/Neb game that year, and Jones played absolutely awful. OU put up 3 points (I believe), and 80% of the student section hated Landry. Jones has nver been a good road QB, and the RRS is easily one of the most hostile environments he'd face as a QB.

 

Only Texas haters feel that they would have lost with Colt. They were wrecking before he went down and would have won the game. Period.

 

Fixed.

The one thing that I hated was all of the "growing up in front of our eyes" talk for Garrett Gilbert. 15/40 with 4 ints and 2 fumbles... what a star. And yes, Gilbert was getting his first action in college, but he was a decorated stud coming out of HS. Gatorade POY, he was the next big thing, so he should have performed better (I'm saying 50% comp. and less TOs). I hate all of the SEC, SEC, SEC talk, but Alabama was clearly the better team that year.

 

Yup you can't just say that for sure. Texas started that game with all the momentum. I'm not saying it would've carried on through the whole game but people acting like Alabama was outright better is just nonsense. Texas had a defense too, and their offense too a huge hit when McCoy went out. Didn't have much of a running game (not that it would have mattered, I think Bama would stop the run, but our passing attack was awesome that season).

The Garett Gilbert thing was a product of how he played in his first game of his collegiate career at the biggest stage on the NCAA level. Almost led Texas back.

 

There is no doubt, McCoy was taking their vanilla defense apart.

And it was a freak injury, danged shame, sort of like D. Rose this year.

Just unlucky....UT had that hands down, probably by 14 or more points too.

DD

 

The idea that Texas would have won the National Championship with Colt McCoy at QB for the whole game isn't so much about how good Colt was... it's about what they couldn't do when he went down.

Texas couldn't rely on a very young and inexperienced QB like Gilbert to throw the ball against Alabama. This forced them to rely on a weak running game that made them predictable and easy to stop.

Would Texas have won that game with Colt at QB? I don't know, but they wouldn't have been forced to try to come back from a large deficit in the second half... that's for damn sure.

 

Well, he has doubled the value of the UT Athletics program

 

Are you serious? That'd be like an NBA player getting hot for the first few possessions and declaring that the game is over. Ridiculous to think that Colt would have tore Bama up. "Uh-oh. Colt is 2 for 2 with 9 yards... game over for Alabama". That reasoning is some of the more ridiculous thinking you have had DD.

Yes I said earlier that I think Bama would have won the game regardless, but it is so hard to declare the game as a sure thing either way.

 

Seems like a bunch of UT haters in here.

 

he played a half against BYU
a game against Baylor
and a Quarter against texas. you act like he played the entire year.

 

5-7

nuff said.

Texas is what, 13-12 in the last 2 seasons? with all those BIG recruits.....

Stoops over Mack all day everyday. common sense.

 

Are people really talking **** about Colt McCoy's college career?