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

    46,206
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Ceb2000
    Newest Member
    Ceb2000
    Joined



  • Posts

    • You got a LOT more than that, you’ve got Riceland filling up. GCM is dropping down from 23-6A back down to 5A in ‘26.  GCCISD is redrawing attendance zones to make sure of that.  At the same time, BH was only about 100 students under the 6A threshold last time UIL drew districts so BH is definitely going up to 6A when those maps get redrawn, probably right into the empty spot in 23-6A GCM is leaving when they drop down.
    • Like I said, even if it’s only 10% of the 100 kids BHISD takes from GCCISD each year, that’s 10 athletes per year and that’s being generous.  You’re right about the jobs with BHISD, BTW.  There’s more than 1 athlete from Baytown originally who got transferred to BHISD after a job opened up for Mama.
    • Here’s a link to another story about it This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • It’s behind a paywall but here’s Baytown Sun’s story on it.  It was reported on in other papers statewide so if you search by the date I think you’ll find other stories on it. UIL strengthens student transfer rules By Ron McDowell [email protected] Oct 18, 2024   In order to maintain a level playing field for all member schools, the University Interscholastic League strengthened rules regarding transfer student eligibility at its most recent meeting in Austin. Every year thousands of students transfer schools in the state of Texas. A student’s ability to participate in UIL sanctioned activities may be limited base on the reasons for the transfer. A change in family status, work transfers, enrollment in an academic magnet program, or a move across town, receive scrutiny, but only rarely does one of these reasons result in the loss of eligibility. The only reason to automatically cause the loss of participation eligibility is a transfer for athletic purposes. The current rule, which has been in place since 1981, does not require a Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPFs) to be submitted if the student-athlete does not participate in a varsity level sport during the first year of enrollment. There has been growing concern among some member schools, that other members are breaking the current rule and creating “super teams” with new transfer enrollees, and that the UIL is not doing enough to police, what appear to be, the inordinate number of transfers among high school athletes. To mitigate these concerns, the UIL approved a proposal to expand the power of the State Executive Committee (SEC) and allow it to investigate schools based upon the number of PAPFs submitted. Schools that submit an inordinate number of PAPFs would face heightened scrutiny and possible public reprimand and future sanctions. The UIL has also changed the requirements for PAPF submission, mandating that the form be submitted before a grade 9-12 transfer student may participate at any level of school athletics. This is a marked departure from the current policy which encourages schools not to complete PAPFs for students who transfer in, if the school believes that the student will not play a varsity sport in the first year the student is enrolled at the new school. Some critics of the current system think that the change doesn’t go far enough. Speaking on background, one local school district source suggested that there should be an automatic year wait for transfer students due to the number of loopholes in the waiver process. “If a student transfers, it should be a year out of competition automatically,” the source said. In addition, the UIL also approved a proposal that gives the SEC the power to appoint an independent administrator to oversee the conduct of the local District Executive Committee (DEC) if it is determined that the DEC is not consistently enforcing the rules of the governing body. The change is significant since all appeals that a school brings, starts and usually ends with the DEC. That includes the determination of transfer student eligibility. It is believed that with the implementation of this change, schools in a UIL district will be less likely to face retribution from the DEC chair and other members. The policy changes will go into effect, Aug. 1, 2025 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
    • I was hoping WOS was going to win. To get another chance to redeem ourself. Silsbee did not look good in that game and has not played consistent during the season. Hopefully against La Vega they will play 4quarters of football
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...