Friday, November 25, 2005


by BH

Entering today's game between Texas and Texas A&M, college football fans heard that this was going to be Vince Young's chance to answer those Heisman voters who were swayed last week by Reggie Bush's game against Fresno State. Texas A&M came in at 5-5, having lost three straight games. The Aggies were ranked 109th in total defense, giving up 455 yards per game, and 117th in pass defense, surrendering 319 yards per game. It was a real chance for Young to put up some huge numbers. He didn't. Young finished the game 13/24 for 162 yards, with a touchdown and an interception. He also had 19 rushing yards on 11 carries. After the game, during an interview with ESPN, Texas' slimy Mack Brown said that A&M have a "great defense," which gave the Longhorns trouble. No coach, they don't. Young deserves a lot of credit. I heard someone say this week that Young has "Mack Brown-proofed Texas," which is an allusion to Brown's inability to coach his team to a big win. It is such a great description of how useful Young has been to his team. If the Heisman were an MVP-type award, it's likely that Young would win. He has meant more to his team than Matt Leinart or Bush. Not only is he the focal point of every defense he plays, he has to make up for playing for a mediocre coach. Since the Heisman is supposed to go to the most outstanding college football player though, it seems to be Bush's to win or lose at this point.


Anonymous said...


Mack Brown may not be the next Vince Lombardi, but he's no "slimy" Barry Switzer either. Ten or more wins each season over the last 5 years, two top 5 finishes in that period and a likely chance to play for the National Championship this year sounds pretty successful to me. There's not an active Division I coach that can match that record. Mack Brown has been at Texas 8 years. Tom Osbourne, Bobby Bowden and Joe Pa all were with their respective programs for over 20 years before they won a National Championship. On top of that the guy is an incredible recruiter with perennial top 10 classes (consensus #1 in '06), 2 Heisman trophy winners and possibly a 3rd this year. Probably the best part of Mack Brown's success is he has never lost an underclassman to the NFL, he runs a squeaky clean program, has one of the top graduation rates in D-1 and his players love playing for him. I don't know how you measure a coach's success, but Mack Brown is far from mediocre.

SonDog said...

BH -
That comment is from John. Didn't mean for it to be anonymous.

bh said...

Mack Brown is no Barry Switzer, though I don't recall comparing the two. The "slimy" I used had something to do with his plea for votes during the stretch run last year, which was followed by Texas' leap over Cal. Every Brown interview I read or see has him talking out both sides of his mouth.
Secondly, though it may change after the Rose Bowl, Brown has yet to win a national championship, and I believe this is his 22nd season coaching college ball though only his eighth with Texas.
Finally, I guess mediocre might be too strong a word in describing Brown's coaching record, but it seems like a guy with "perennial top 10 classes (consensus #1 in '06), 2 Heisman trophy winners and possibly a 3rd this year" who "has never lost an underclassman to the NFL" would have a better record in bowl games than 3-4, a better record against Oklahoma than 1-5 over the past six seasons, and would have won a conference championship (though that's likely to change this year). He is a great recruiter, but so is Ron Zook. He has done some great things at other schools such as Appalachian State, Tulane, and North Carolina. Texas is such a proud and continually relevant school that there is no reason why, with the talent he gets there year after year, that he's only guided them to one BCS bowl and a 3-4 bowl record.

bh said...

I'm sorry, I wrote that Brown had a 3-4 bowl record, but I meant to write 4-3.