Mackovic is as good of, if not a better coach than Mack Brown, IMO. Recruiting is of course another matter. ------------------ "I know its too early to call for his head but you know who I would like to see coach our team? John Thompson." -cato13
Bobby Jack Wright was the replacement for Darnell. I don't see how you can say Mackovic was as good a coach as Brown. Mackovic has coached exactly two teams in his entire career that lost fewer than four games.
Then let's compare championships, conference or otherwise. A 7-4 season is just as good as a 9-3 season, IMO. Either way, you ain't winning a national championship. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com and, http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters!
Kagy, I know we've had many disagreements on this BBS, and some have turned mighty ugly, however, I must say that your last post is the worst thing anyone has ever said to me, ever. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com and, http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters!
You shouldn't have admitted that. I've added that to my 'How To Offend RM95' notes. You can expect to be called an Aggie Sympathizer if/when we next debate politics. With the fall of Communism, we John Birch Society conservatives need a new pejorative term. I can't call you a CommSymp anymore.
He is going to be in the same athletic department as Lute? Not a very exciting twosome. Mango ------------------ Lets get the Mo Go working! Test Your NBA Trade Ideas 1. Put new topics in the proper forum. Things happening in the rest of the NBA 2. Use clear wording for new threads. 3. No duplicate threads 4. Conduct yourself as an adult. The Serious Police are watching. Donate Blood or be assimilated!
A 7-4 season is just as good as a 9-3 season, IMO. Either way, you ain't winning a national championship. Hmm... So is a 6-5 season as good as a 7-4 season? If not, why not? That would make 6-5 and 9-3 the same thing. Is 5-6 as soon as 6-5? If so, then basically you're saying that anything from 0-11 to 9-3 is equivalent, right? ------------------ Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him? I didnt think so!!!!
Then let's compare championships, conference or otherwise. A 7-4 season is just as good as a 9-3 season, IMO. By the way, Mack Brown never had the luxury of coaching in the SWC. Outside of his SWC success, Mackovic pulled exactly one upset in his tenure as UT Coach - beating Nebraska. Otherwise, he could never win the big game -- losing to VTech and Penn State in big bowls, as well as an 0-4 record in home-and-home series against Colorado and Notre Dame (before the Big12 formed). That makes him a stellar 1-6 in big non-conference games. In Mack Brown's 3-yr tenure, it could be argued that he's won 2 big games (Nebraska both years), while losing 4 (UCLA, 2 vs. K-State, Nebraska). (He's also 1-1 in bowl games against decent opponents.) This all ignores OU & A&M, as I don't know all the stats for them. I believe Mackovic had a losing record vs A&M and a winning one vs OU. Mack Brown is 2-1 against each. In addition, I don't believe we've lost to Baylor under Mack Brown. To put it in perspective, Mackovic was 41-28-2 at Texas, for a 59% winning percentage (ignoring the ties). Mack Brown is 27-10, for a 73% WP against tougher competition. He could go 0-8 in our next 8 games and still have a better WP than Mackovic did. [This message has been edited by shanna (edited December 04, 2000).]
Blah, blah, blah. The fact is Mack Brown has never won a championship, Mackovic has. I don't care if it was in the SWC, ACC, or 19-5A, he hasn't won and Mackovic has. BTW, was Nebraska in the SWC in 1996? Oh wait, that was the Big XII? Still not as good as the ACC? Aren't you the same guy I recall as saying Huepel should win the Heisman despite worse stats because he plays better competition than Weinke? Does Weinke play in the ACC where Mack Brown coached, or does he play in the SWC, er, BigXII? Losses are losses. So Mackovic has a worse record than Brown. So what? 3 conference championships to ZERO is a little more impressive to me. I think Brown is a great recruiter and a decent coach. I think and hope one day he will win a championship at UT, BigXII or more. But until then, you cannot say he's a better coach than Mackovic. Also, I know you're smart enough to understand what I meant when I said that 7-4 is the same as 9-3. You're going to a bowl, you're getting money, you're NOT winning national championships, or in Brown's case, any championships. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com and, http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters!
The fact is Mack Brown has never won a championship, Mackovic has. Good point. Tom Osborne was a horrible coach until 1990 or so, right? I don't care if it was in the SWC, ACC, or 19-5A, he hasn't won and Mackovic has. BTW, was Nebraska in the SWC in 1996? Since you're obviously not reading posts, I'll repeat what I posted earlier -- italicized, so maybe you'll see it: Outside of his SWC success, Mackovic pulled exactly one upset in his tenure as UT Coach - beating Nebraska. Aren't you the same guy I recall as saying Huepel should win the Heisman despite worse stats because he plays better competition than Weinke? No -- I never mentioned the quality of competition. I did mention age as well as the perfect record. I do think that Weinke has a huge advantage being 28 years old. I would hope with 8 years of experience and training in professional baseball, he would have better tools such as strength, agility, endurance, etc to help be a damn good football player. What Josh Heupel has done is more impressive because of his age and the fact that he has less talent around him. Does Weinke play in the ACC where Mack Brown coached, I never said Weinke's numbers weren't great or that he had less competition. You really should try to build arguments on facts, not trying to twist people's words. or does he play in the SWC, er, BigXII? See, saying this over and over doesn't help you given that I already mentioned the exception. It helps if you read people's posts, though. Losses are losses. So Mackovic has a worse record than Brown. So what? Did I miss something, or is winning not one of the big factors in being a good coach? How do you dismiss wins and losses when saying one is a better coach than the other? 3 conference championships to ZERO is a little more impressive to me. Not me, when 2 are in the SWC, and one was a 5-way tie out of 7 teams (8-0 A&M was ineligible). But until then, you cannot say he's a better coach than Mackovic. Why not? You apparently said Bob Stoops was a better coach than Mack Brown well before this year, and he had no championships? Call me crazy, but I'd prefer to go 11-1 and end in the Top 5 in the country (as Mack Brown did at NC) over 7-5 but win the SWC in a 5-way tie. Why? Because at least then you know you're close to a National Title. Who's season was better, 10-1 Virginia Tech (no championship), 8-3 Big10 Co-Champion Purdue, or 7-5 MAC Champion Marshall? I'd pick Virginia Tech. You'd probably pick, Marshall, since they won a Championship outright, no (even if it is a weak conference, like say... the SWC)? Also, I know you're smart enough to understand what I meant when I said that 7-4 is the same as 9-3. Not really, because your point's not valid. You're going to a bowl, you're getting money Different amounts of money. Different quality of play. 7-4 vs. 9-2 is the difference between the Holiday Bowl and the Independence Bowl. Which would you prefer? So according to you, is Virginia Tech's 10-1 season the same as Texas Tech's 7-5 season, since both go to 2nd tier bowls and no conference title? you're NOT winning national championships, Which exactly one of 112 teams wins every season. Something Mackovic has never even been close to. or in Brown's case, any championships. What the highest ranking any of Mackovic's teams ended the season at? If we win the Holiday Bowl this year, Mack Brown in 3 yrs will have surpassed anything Mackovic ever did. Let me ask you, when Mackovic coached UT, did you ever once realistically think we could win a national title going into a season? Didn't you think that this year? If you think he's such a bad coach, why is this? Teams can't win national titles without pretty good coaches. We just have different opinions. You value artificial Conference Championships. I value quality teams, wins and overall rankings. [This message has been edited by shanna (edited December 04, 2000).]
(For those that don't know, RM95 and I know each other. I would not otherwise be this rude to anyone except Republicans. ) ------------------ Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him? I didnt think so!!!!
What you don't seem to understand about me is that I don't give a rat's ass about record. I really don't care about conference championships for that matter, even though they are more indicitve, in my opinion, than overall record. All that matters is a national championship. So, what I think is more important, conference championships over record, leads me to believe, at this point, that Mackovic is the superior coach. Do I think that will change, yes I do. I thought we'd win a national championship because we had an easy ass schedule. Losing to Stanford should not have happened, and it wouldn't have if Mack Brown didn't have such a political personality. Tom Osborne won conference championships before 1990. And yes, you have mentioned the fact that Weinke plays in the ACC while Huepel plays in the BigXII as one of your reasons why he should win the Heisman. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com and, http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters!
What you don't seem to understand about me is that I don't give a rat's ass about record. Well, I think that is r****ded logic. All that matters is a national championship. So, what I think is more important, conference championships over record, leads me to believe, at this point, that Mackovic is the superior coach. Well that's silly. Don't you think a coach that can consistently go 10-1 or 9-2 is more likely to win a national title than one who wins conference titles by going 7-5 or 7-4? I thought we'd win a national championship because we had an easy ass schedule. Yes, but we had just-as-easy schedules under Mackovic in the SWC -- did you ever think we'd win a title then? And yes, you have mentioned the fact that Weinke plays in the ACC while Huepel plays in the BigXII as one of your reasons why he should win the Heisman. No, I said that Heupel's performance against top Big12 teams (Nebraska, K-State and Texas) helped. But now that you mention it, yes, I think doing it in the Big12 does make Heupel's performance that much more impressive. To win more games against a tougher schedule is more impressive in my mind (this is what Brown does compared to Mackovic). Thank you for supporting my point. ------------------ Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him? I didnt think so!!!!
Is this some kind of joke? Granted Mackovic helped Texas win the Big XII and brought in Ricky Williams, but Mackovic? Has the coaching pool become that thin? http://www.espn.go.com/ncf/news/2000/1204/923019.html ------------------
Mackovic is a great coach who made one bad decision at UT, hiring (I can't, for the life of me, remember his name) the replacement for Gary Darnell. If he'd brought in Stoops or another high profile DC, he might still be the coach. The 4-7 season wasn't all his fault. Losing McGarrity and Akins to season ending injuries in the same game and not having Brown healthy for most of the season doesn't normally help. He'll fit right in with the PAC-10. He's a great offensive mind without much defense. I'll be rooting for him. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com and, http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters!
I think Arizona plans on adding a few letters and getting John Malkovich. ------------------ Ceo of the Walt Williams fan club. Web site coming soon atheistalliance.org
OK. In that case, given that Mackovic only coached two teams in his entire career (1989 Illinois at 10-2, 1995 Texas at 10-2-1) that lost fewer than four games, how can you say he's a better coach than Brown? Mackovic has never coached a team that had even an outside shot at a national championship. If his teams are pre-disposed to lose at least two and most of the time four games a year, the only thing he can hope for is an occasional shared conference title. That makes him a great fit at Arizona-- they've never been to the Rose Bowl and I think at this point they would take any appearance therein they could get. Brown's last two teams at UNC were national championship caliber. He had the great misfortune of sharing the conference with the country's best football program, Florida State. He built the program into a national power and then in his two opportunities to win a national title, couldn't beat Florida State. Remember that-- it was only two years. What if UNC had gone 10-1 for six or eight years and still couldn't beat FSU? Well, shanna made a Tom Osborne reference, which kinda fits. How often did Nebraska head into the OU game unbeaten or in a position to win the MNC? A ton. And Osborne was 5-12-1 against Switzer-- and yet eventually NU broke through and won three national titles. You're more likely to accomplish that if you've got a coach who can get a team into position to win all of its games. Brown, going 11-1 and 10-1 at UNC, has proven he can do that. Mackovic hasn't and won't. ------------------ There's nothing like the NET... clutchcity.net [This message has been edited by BrianKagy (edited December 05, 2000).]
What is the difference in talent level between the Mackovic-led UT teams and the Brown ones? (I'm not a big college football buff, that's why I'm asking).
Well, until he does win a championship, any championship, all he has is the potential, which we all know doesn't mean that much. Oh wait, I forgot, he's won these mythical recruiting championships. You'd think with all this talent that he seems to be getting, and with a joke of a schedule, we'd be close this year. Bottom line, if he ain't winning a national championship, he's ain't winning a national championship. I don't care if he's 9-3 or 7-4 every year. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com and, http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters! [This message has been edited by Rocketman95 (edited December 05, 2000).]
