• Contact
A couple of days ago, our old friend at the Houston Chronicle, Richard Justice penned this blog entry which has caused a good deal of debate and consternation among fans in various parts of the Longhorn internets.
To give you a quick synopsis, Mr. Justice’s thesis here is that Longhorn fans had better hope Mack Brown sticks around as long as possible, because the future for Texas football is likely to be very bleak after he leaves. He points to the experience we had at Texas after the departure of Darrell Royal, as well as the difficulty other programs have had in replacing legendary coaches and keeping their programs moving along at a very high level.
Given that I have been at times in the past sometimes unfairly critical of Mr. Justice’s skills as a writer and a thinker, I just wanted to weigh in on this latest bit of journalistic artistry.
Basically, I think he’s full of crap as usual. I completely disagree with Justice on whether or not another coach can continue the level of success Mack has created at Texas.
First of all, Fred Akers DID continue Royal’s level of success for the first 7 years of his tenure at Texas. That success ended only when the NCAA looked the other way as A&M, OU, TCU, Arkansas, UH and others turned the SWC and Big 8 into a player-purchasing free-for-all. Had that not happened, Akers may well have lasted 20 years in the Texas job just like DKR did. But because UT has higher standards than those other schools when it comes to playing by the rules, he lost the magic, and the program fell on hard times in the mid-1980s.
Then, UT made two consecutive horrible coaching hires. I love David McWilliams, but he was one of those guys who make a great assistant coach, but not a great head coach. John Mackovic, I couldn’t stand, but he basically had the same problem McWilliams had in terms of being the lead guy in a program. Bad coaching hires happen, at Texas and everywhere else, and that is the ONLY way that UT will not continue to be a football juggernaut after Mack Brown moves on to other things.
If Muschamp turns out to be a lousy hire, then yeah, the program will probably fall on hard times again. But if Muschamp turns out to be the coach most of us believe he will be, then the UT program will continue to roll right along, and maybe even win a few conference championships in the process.
Mack has been a great head coach for Texas. But the reality is that he has brought this program to the level any real, competent, well-rounded head coach should be able to achieve, given all the inherent advantages the program possesses. And let’s give credit where credit is due here: Many of the program’s current advantages have been brought about as the direct result of the success Mack has had in Austin, and the excitement and funding that has created among the alumni base. The incredible upgrade in facilities, the outstanding reputation the program now enjoys at the national level, and the image the Longhorns now have as a dominant, big-winning program are all tributes to Mack’s leadership.
All those advantages and many more will be passed on to Mack’s successor, whether that is ultimately Muschamp or someone else. My bet is that the program under Will Muschamp will continue to chug right along.
These were not advantages Akers, McWilliams or Mackovic enjoyed. Here’s a newsflash for Richard Justice: Akers’ winning % his first 7 years was virtually identical to Mack’s first 7 years, and better than Royal’s winning % at Texas. Akers won 3 conference titles during that time span, twice came within 1 game of national championships, and once within one freaking play of winning it all.
All emotion about Mack to the contrary, there was until very recently an outstanding case to be made that Fred Akers was the 2nd best coach in the program’s entire history. Mack has displaced him in that role at this point, and I agree with some who say that if Mack can win another national title, there will even be a case to be made he’s surpassed Royal, although the inability to win the conference will always be a weak spot in his record.
Fred Akers was one hell of a football coach, and won big during a period of time when UT’s facilities were not first rate, the football program was not all that well-funded, and the program did not have the support of the muckety-mucks who ran The University.
Mack has enjoyed all sorts of advantages that Akers did not enjoy, has created many other advantages out of his own hard work and success, and has made the most of them. Mack’s successor, barring a sea change in attitudes among the alumni base and the school’s higher ups, will also enjoy those advantages. The world has changed at UT in the last quarter century, and we all ought to look at this issue in that light.
All of which is a long way around to saying that, IMO, we have very good reason to believe the future of the UT football program is very, very bright and will continue to be so under Mack’s successor, and Justice’s article just proves, yet again, what a raging ignoramus and pedestrian writer he truly is.
Hook ‘em!!!
You must be logged in to post a comment. If you're not yet a member, please register before posting a comment.
srr50 said:
August 27th, 2009 at 5:30 am
First of all, Fred Akers DID continue Royal’s level of success for the first 7 years of his tenure at Texas. That success ended only when the NCAA looked the other way as A&M, OU, TCU, Arkansas, UH and others turned the SWC and Big 8 into a player-purchasing free-for-all.
I agree Eyes, but just as big a reason for Akers downfall was the divide within the program the size of the Grand Canyon. The nasty inside fighting over Royal’s departure doomed his successor from day one, which I believe is one of the reasons Texas (and Mack) have tried to make the transition when he steps down as smooth as possible.
EyesOfTX said:
August 27th, 2009 at 6:01 am
srr50: Yep, I agree with your point. Looking back on it, any successor to DKR would have had the same problem. In that light, it just serves to further demonstrate what an excellent job Akers truly did in very trying circumstances.
uthookem said:
August 27th, 2009 at 7:04 am
WTF happened around here?
Nice article though.
EyesOfTX said:
August 27th, 2009 at 7:13 am
uthookem: you got me. The new format is as new to me as it is to you. Hell, I can’t even figure out how to get the fonts changed using the new software. I like it, though.
TaylorTRoom said:
August 27th, 2009 at 7:35 am
Nice post. To add to your points, note that Mack Brown is 115 - 26 at UT, and 66 - 74 - 1 elsewhere. Mackovic was 41 - 28 - 2 at Texas, and 54 - 64 - 1 everywhere else. McWilliams is the only recent coach with a better record (percentage points) elsewhere. 31 - 26 at Texas and 7 - 4 at Tech. Akers was 86 - 31 at UT and 22 - 44 - 2 everwhere else. DKR was 167 - 47 - 5 on the 40 Acres, and 17 - 13in his other jobs. Overall, the past 5 Longhorn coaches were 440 - 158 in Austin and 166 - 199 - 4 in their other posts. This indicates that a coach can win at Texas, and this is the place to reach his potential.
flamingmonkeyass said:
August 27th, 2009 at 7:55 am
One key factor that Richard has forgetten in all of this, the real reason that Texas will continue to find success fter Mack Brown, is the money. As has been posted on here before, Texas is the biggest money maker in college football. There’s no way the people at the top allow that to change due to something as readily fixable as a poor coaching hire. If Muschamp has trouble (and I don’t believe he will) you can bet dollars to doughnuts that the next coach UT were to go go get would be the most proven commodity in CFB, money be damned.
bevonips said:
August 27th, 2009 at 8:02 am
Now I’m not math major but isn’t 7-4 a winning % of .636 and 31-26 a winning % of .543?
This is just someone writing a contrarian piece.
bateshorn said:
August 27th, 2009 at 8:06 am
I think that Eyes point about the current climate in UT’s leadership remaining static is important. Part of Notre Dame’s struggles, beyond some terrible head coach choices (although, I honestly thought Bob Davie would be good, but then again, I’d also never heard the man open his mouth), was the tightness of the school’s academic admission requirements for athletes. If a backlash against the athletics program were to occur, then much of Mack’s work could be unwound, althought it’s difficult to imagine a scenerio where that occurs, given the man’s focus on recruiting good kids.
The fact the program manages to pay for itself and all the other sports augers well for Muschamp. Perhaps the bigger question is what will be the fate of the program after Dodds retires.
Michael Beasley's Spiritual Guide said:
August 27th, 2009 at 8:26 am
I just dont see any future where Texas cant compete as one of the top 5 or 10 programs in the country. The in-state talent/amazing HS coaching alone ensures that a monkey fucking a coconut could win 8 games at Texas and anyone with thumbs should be able to win 9 or 10.
Plus at what point does Richard surpass Skip Bayless as the token “Crazy Asshole Columnist from Texas”??? Im guessing we see Richard on the four letter network within a few months.
EyesOfTX said:
August 27th, 2009 at 8:31 am
I just want to thank Sailer Ripley or whoever it was who just fixed the fonts in my original piece. One of these days I’ll have to sign up for and take the official Barking Carnival tutorial on how to properly format posts.
hopefulhorn said:
August 27th, 2009 at 9:17 am
srr50 makes a good point. Akers was undone by the poisonous factional battle within the UT camp (specifically, the DKR faction who supported DC Mike Campbell as new coach). So long as Akers won, the divide was papered over. When things started to slip on the field and in recruiting (the cheating by other schools was a factor), Fred was toast.
The last point I will make about Akers is that he didn’t learn and adjust as Mack has as he neared the top of the heap. Fred won with defense and a powerful running game. But, the bigger the game, the more conservative he got. Loosening things up on offense would have
not only meant more offensive production (particularly in big games), it would have saved our RB’s from getting beat up every year. Perhaps Fred could sense the underlying fragility of his support and tightened up as a result.
Justice overstates a valid point: Mack and others like him possess a unique combination of qualities. Part football coach (X’s and O’s), part CEO, part politician, part psychologist/father figure. Even with all of our resources, if Mack’s successor has a significant deficit in any of these areas that he is unsuccessful in compensating for, we could experience a decline.
Mack combines all of these qualities seamlessly. He immediately charmed everyone and got them on his side. This was made easier by the fact that everyone was sick of losing enough to buy in.
It looks like Muschamp is pretty strong in all of those areas. My main concern for him would be that his intensity may complicate things for him politically. As Akers’ experience shows, he cannot afford to piss off and alienate factions within the UT community. He certainly can’t alienate Texas HS coaches as Mackovic seemed to.
EyesOfTX said:
August 27th, 2009 at 10:13 am
“Mack and others like him possess a unique combination of qualities. Part football coach (X’s and O’s), part CEO, part politician, part psychologist/father figure. Even with all of our resources, if Mack’s successor has a significant deficit in any of these areas that he is unsuccessful in compensating for, we could experience a decline.”
Not to be overly negative towards Mack, but you and Justice are the first two people I’ve ever seen classify him as a real “X’s and O’s” kind of coach. I’d say he actually has a bit of a deficit there, and particularly on the defensive side of the ball, but has made up for that weakness with a series of recent good DC hires.
All other aspects of the job that you mention, Mack has richly figured out and is perhaps the best in the country at several of them.
The key for any head coach is the ability to recognize his own weaknesses and ultimately make the right coaching hires to compensate for them. Muschamp will be no different in that regard.
texasfan said:
August 27th, 2009 at 10:39 am
EyesOfTX and ScipioTex: I’m curious whether you see any parallel between today and the mid-80s in terms of threat to the Texas program from cheating. Justice’s entry is lazy journalism and he doesn’t identify any rational reason to fear a decline, but I’m still less sanguine about Muschamp’s tenure. To be clear, I think his resume as a DC is second to none. But he’ll be hard-pressed to maintain the talent level of the last decade if recruiting degenerates into an 80-style free-for-all. Thoughts?
bateshorn said:
August 27th, 2009 at 10:45 am
texasfan just beat me to the question.
EyesOfTX said:
August 27th, 2009 at 10:51 am
texasfan: great question, and it is a real wildcard in the whole equation. I cannot see a day when UT will sanction cheating, er, accommodating the street agents the way the OUs, OSUs, LSUs and other outlaw programs are willing to do. Our hope there has to be that the NCAA sooner or later wakes up and takes some real steps to get these scumbags out of the picture. We can be damn sure those schools are not going to police themselves.
huge said:
August 27th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
how are we going to be able to leave pithy comments from “guests”?
hopefulhorn said:
August 27th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Eyes,
Great post, btw, as evidenced by the quality of the comments.
Wasn’t meaning to say that Mack is a great X’s and O’s guy. Agree that has been where he has had to compensate, particularly on the defensive side with Robinson/Tomey and Muschamp.
The real question is how well Muschamp will succeed Mack. I think the main area of question at this point will be political. I am guessing he can throttle back on the intensity when he needs to (turn it on and off as needed). He will probably never be as warm and charming as Mack. Few will, as you point out. However, in Will’s public presentation so far I sense an earnest dedication and integrity that I think can be very appealing and fits Texas perfectly. His players all seem to love him which would suggest the psychologist/father figure area may be a strength. I know nothing about him as a delegator/organizer but would guess he is competent there.
The other big question is whether Will can be flexible and learn/adjust as needed. Intense people can struggle with that one. That has been a strength of Mack’s since ‘03, when he seemed to lighten up some and empower his players to lead better along with getting tough when he needed to.
BEHorn said:
August 27th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
As a veteran of the 40 during the 80s decline, I’d like to take a crack at the question above about le renaissance de cheating:
While it certainly played a role then, and it may play some role now, I don’t think that role will be as large because I don’t think the cheating will be as rampant. Why? Two words: S-M-U. While the odds of the Nutless Capuchin Asshole Association ever slapping the death penalty on a program again are pretty remote, they’re more than zero. (Just as the odds of the US dropping a nuke on someone are seen to be more than zero, simply because we’ve done it once — okay, twice.) I believe many (most?) programs realize that, and thusly will put a brake on the more egregious forms of institutional cheating that were screwing us back in the day.
Example: Is there any chance that Oklahoma would have “self-reported” the Big Red Autos gambit if it were 1983 and Barry Switzer was the head man? Hell, and I mean HELL, no — on the contrary,the Bootlicker’s Boy would have been first in line to fetch him up a new Lexus.
I’m not saying that cheating doesn’t go on - of course it does. But the kind of institutionalized cheating that characterized the SWC in the 70s and 80s has, I suspect, mostly given way to the off-campus chicanery of street agents and Auburn-style boosters. With all due respect (which isn’t much) to those individuals, they’re just not as effective when the universities themselves are at least spending a little bit of time (and in some cases a lot of time) trying to curtail their effectiveness.
So, will cheating continue? Sure. Will some schools turn more of a blind eye to it than others? You can’t spell “of course” without “OU”. But will it be the wide-open cattle market of the 70s/80s that was, in my view, a significant factor in Texas’ decline (though not “the” significant factor, as Eyes explains above)? Don’t think so — and that means while it may hurt us some, it won’t hurt us as much.
tko1st said:
August 27th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Hopefulhorn: Great assessment of Muschamp as successor. Importantly, I think Muschamp agrees with you as well. He acknowledged as much when he agreed to the head coach in waiting arrangement, noting at the time Mack’s strengths at PR and glad-handing.
As a motivator, teacher and an Xs-and-Os guy, Will is pretty much concededly an A-plus. Though we’re none privy to it, I don’t doubt his organizational skills, either. But, like you, I do wonder about his ability to fill the PR role. It’s not something I’m inordinately concerned about, as he’s got some time to grow into the role, and he’s clearly a smart and self-aware guy, but as head coach this is not a role that can be delegated or shored up by a brilliant assistant coach hiring. He’s eventually going to have to do it and get at least passably good at it. For right now, he looks like he’s in a dentist’s chair when the red light is on.
Betting FBCC: Dallas Cowboys » JetBlue becomes the official airline sponsor of UT Athletics said:
August 28th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
[...] No, Richard, The Program Won’t Fall Apart …thesis here is that Longhorn fans had better hope Mack Brown sticks around as long as possible, because the future for Texas football is… [...]