Author Topic: Patterson  (Read 2273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Joker

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 994
  • Resident Play-Hard Chartologist
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #25 on: November 13, 2017, 09:32:38 AM »
I could live with this.



Offline DOD Take 2

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 644
  • Corndogs Jackie! Corndogs for all these people!
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #26 on: November 13, 2017, 10:36:16 AM »
Is he still at TCU completely by his choice though? Didn’t he flirt with Tennessee in 2009 before not getting offered the gig? Then more recently he made a dig about Tennessee not believing in him I thought. It sounds like he has at least interviewed other places in the past

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #27 on: November 13, 2017, 11:36:05 AM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 27597
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #28 on: November 13, 2017, 11:41:44 AM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

I would be good with continuing Snyder 2.0 with a younger, healthier LHC Bill Snyder.

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16328
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2017, 12:00:38 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

Bill hasn't had a Top 10 finish since 2002.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #30 on: November 13, 2017, 12:00:52 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

I would be good with continuing Snyder 2.0 with a younger, healthier LHC Bill Snyder.

Fair enough but does a younger LHC Bill Snyder translate to more wins, less headaches? This season we're having, right down to the coaching staff drama, they had just last year. Let's say this Sean vs. Dana thing gets resolved this off season, like their Meacham vs. Cumbie drama got resolved, I wouldn't think a 9-3 type season next year would be wildly out of the question.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #31 on: November 13, 2017, 12:06:13 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

Bill hasn't had a Top 10 finish since 2002.

There is literally no way possible that matters to you more than win loss record, I can't believe you even brought it up.

Offline KITNfury

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5259
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #32 on: November 13, 2017, 12:22:54 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.
No offense MIR, but anyone that would reject 10-15 more years with an approximate 68.5% winning percentage, with championship type years, is a giant dumbass.
I once blew clove smoke in a guy's face that cut in front of me in the line to KJ's.

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16328
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #33 on: November 13, 2017, 12:29:56 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

Bill hasn't had a Top 10 finish since 2002.

There is literally no way possible that matters to you more than win loss record, I can't believe you even brought it up.

it 100% does matter more. I would take TCU's run since they came into the conference without hesitation over what Bill's has been in 2.0 and what Bill has done since TCU came into the conference.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #34 on: November 13, 2017, 12:36:01 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.
No offense MIR, but anyone that would reject 10-15 more years with an approximate 68.5% winning percentage, with championship type years, is a giant dumbass.

Who's rejecting it? I'm not rejecting it, well done Gary! Running roughshod over Utah State, Idaho, and the UTEPs of the world hold no relevance in power five football. The unemployment line is littered with guys who dominated non P5 conferences, like Butch Jones and Jim McElwain.

I won't call you a dumbass for missing this obvious logic though, I'm all about decorum here.

Offline Steffy08

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1083
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #35 on: November 13, 2017, 12:40:03 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.
No offense MIR, but anyone that would reject 10-15 more years with an approximate 68.5% winning percentage, with championship type years, is a giant dumbass.

Who's rejecting it? I'm not rejecting it, well done Gary! Running roughshod over Utah State, Idaho, and the UTEPs of the world hold no relevance in power five football. The unemployment line is littered with guys who dominated non P5 conferences, like Butch Jones and Jim McElwain.

I won't call you a dumbass for missing this obvious logic though, I'm all about decorum here.

This is the dumbest argument.  Yes, GP is an awesome coach.  Yes, his record in the Big 12 is pretty much the same as Snyder's.  Yes, Snyder is an awesome coach.  Everybody is right.

But Snyder is 78, and GP is not.  So, we would be lucky to get GP, and it would be great if he replicated the success he has had at TCU in the Big 12/the success Snyder has had in 2.0.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #36 on: November 13, 2017, 12:40:43 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

Bill hasn't had a Top 10 finish since 2002.

There is literally no way possible that matters to you more than win loss record, I can't believe you even brought it up.

it 100% does matter more. I would take TCU's run since they came into the conference without hesitation over what Bill's has been in 2.0 and what Bill has done since TCU came into the conference.

I'm sorry but I don't believe you. And I don't believe you because there is no way you can name the teams 5-10'in the last two final AP polls. NO.ONE, LITERALLY NO ONE, cares who finishes outside of the top 4

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #37 on: November 13, 2017, 12:48:38 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.
No offense MIR, but anyone that would reject 10-15 more years with an approximate 68.5% winning percentage, with championship type years, is a giant dumbass.

Who's rejecting it? I'm not rejecting it, well done Gary! Running roughshod over Utah State, Idaho, and the UTEPs of the world hold no relevance in power five football. The unemployment line is littered with guys who dominated non P5 conferences, like Butch Jones and Jim McElwain.

I won't call you a dumbass for missing this obvious logic though, I'm all about decorum here.

This is the dumbest argument.  Yes, GP is an awesome coach.  Yes, his record in the Big 12 is pretty much the same as Snyder's.  Yes, Snyder is an awesome coach.  Everybody is right.

But Snyder is 78, and GP is not.  So, we would be lucky to get GP, and it would be great if he replicated the success he has had at TCU in the Big 12/the success Snyder has had in 2.0.

Right. The argument I made is that if you want Gary then you'd be fine with keeping Bill as long as he wants to stay, I'm glad we agree. I won't even get into the possibility of his recruiting potentially being worse after he left Ft. Worth for Manhattan.

Look the bottom line is that if you hire a coach you at least want the hope that they'd do better than the guy you're replacing. There's no evidence that Gary has the capacity to improve what's currently being done. He has a great situation now and his program is identical to what we have.

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16328
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #38 on: November 13, 2017, 12:48:48 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.

Bill hasn't had a Top 10 finish since 2002.

There is literally no way possible that matters to you more than win loss record, I can't believe you even brought it up.

it 100% does matter more. I would take TCU's run since they came into the conference without hesitation over what Bill's has been in 2.0 and what Bill has done since TCU came into the conference.

I'm sorry but I don't believe you. And I don't believe you because there is no way you can name the teams 5-10'in the last two final AP polls. NO.ONE, LITERALLY NO ONE, cares who finishes outside of the top 4

At the end of this season i would take TCU's top 3 seasons vs our top 3 seasons since they joined the conference without hesitation. I would guess you would too. And at the end of this season our bottom 3 seasons aren't that much better than TCU's. That is exactly why i would take TCU's run in the Big 12 over ours.

Offline KITNfury

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5259
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #39 on: November 13, 2017, 01:07:41 PM »
I could live with this.




I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

You guys are weird with this Gary stuff.
No offense MIR, but anyone that would reject 10-15 more years with an approximate 68.5% winning percentage, with championship type years, is a giant dumbass.

Who's rejecting it? I'm not rejecting it, well done Gary! Running roughshod over Utah State, Idaho, and the UTEPs of the world hold no relevance in power five football. The unemployment line is littered with guys who dominated non P5 conferences, like Butch Jones and Jim McElwain.

I won't call you a dumbass for missing this obvious logic though, I'm all about decorum here.
I wasn't actually referring to you in the last post, that's why said "no offense". Generally if I call someone a dumbass I expect some offense to occur. Of course, now I am calling you a  dumbass because 68.5% is what he has had in the Big 12, not Utah St or whoever. I'm comfortable evaluating him on what he's done since being in the P5. And that's bringing a team from a situation with way less money, resources, or prestige.

I don't know what people expect from our next coach, but I highly suspect it's either a major crap shoot we take on a lower level coach or an assistant of some time. Both have high failure rates at P5 level.  Or, we go with a current HC at a P5 conference...and if we're honest, Gary would be the absolute best current P5 head coach we have a shot at. And I think that shot is virtually nil. In the end, he has won at a similar clip to our greatest coach ever, at a school that doesn't sell itself (like ours). Having our next coach be successful is important on many levels. Not least of which the "nobody can win there except Snyder" would dissipate.


I once blew clove smoke in a guy's face that cut in front of me in the line to KJ's.

Offline big orange

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #40 on: November 13, 2017, 01:27:36 PM »
Is he still at TCU completely by his choice though? Didn’t he flirt with Tennessee in 2009 before not getting offered the gig? Then more recently he made a dig about Tennessee not believing in him I thought. It sounds like he has at least interviewed other places in the past

Yes, he was supposedly interested in Tennessee in 2009. The story goes that our AD told him that he was perceived as a mid-major coach. That apparently rubbed GP the wrong way.

Offline Joker

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 994
  • Resident Play-Hard Chartologist
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #41 on: November 13, 2017, 01:58:00 PM »
Quote
I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

By and large, Snyder 2.0 has been a fun ride.  If the next coach can achieve similar results I would consider that a successful hire.

Offline KITNfury

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5259
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #42 on: November 13, 2017, 02:02:04 PM »
Quote
I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

By and large, Snyder 2.0 has been a fun ride.  If the next coach can achieve similar results I would consider that a successful hire.
The only downside to Snyder 2.0 is that we all pretty much assume it's over, and if it's not over, it's on a non-correctable downhill slide.

If you could lather, rinse, repeat Sndyer 2.0 for eternity, it would be fuckin' great. And we all know it. And Patterson would give us a great chance at that (minus eternity part). I'm still saying we can't get him, but we should all want him (unless you like Venables more, I can get down with that although it's more risky).
I once blew clove smoke in a guy's face that cut in front of me in the line to KJ's.

Offline Steffy08

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1083
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #43 on: November 13, 2017, 02:59:54 PM »
Quote
I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

By and large, Snyder 2.0 has been a fun ride.  If the next coach can achieve similar results I would consider that a successful hire.
The only downside to Snyder 2.0 is that we all pretty much assume it's over, and if it's not over, it's on a non-correctable downhill slide.

If you could lather, rinse, repeat Sndyer 2.0 for eternity, it would be fuckin' great. And we all know it. And Patterson would give us a great chance at that (minus eternity part). I'm still saying we can't get him, but we should all want him (unless you like Venables more, I can get down with that although it's more risky).

Yes, this is what I was trying to say.  You don't want GP because you think he can do better than Snyder (can anyone?), you want GP because he might be able to replicate what Snyder has done.  This is not a conversation about firing Snyder to hire GP.  This is a conversation about hiring GP once Snyder retires.

Offline Whisker Biscuit

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #44 on: November 13, 2017, 03:21:44 PM »
I'm beginning to think Gary touched MIR as a child. 

Offline meow meow

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7443
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #45 on: November 13, 2017, 03:29:09 PM »
getting Gary would be a great hire, but there's no way he's coming here so why bother

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #46 on: November 13, 2017, 04:17:46 PM »
Quote
I'd assume you're good with continuing Snyder 2.0?  Since TCU joined the Big 12, Bill is 54-27 with one conference championship, Gary is 48-22 with one conference championship.

By and large, Snyder 2.0 has been a fun ride.  If the next coach can achieve similar results I would consider that a successful hire.
The only downside to Snyder 2.0 is that we all pretty much assume it's over, and if it's not over, it's on a non-correctable downhill slide.

If you could lather, rinse, repeat Sndyer 2.0 for eternity, it would be fuckin' great. And we all know it. And Patterson would give us a great chance at that (minus eternity part). I'm still saying we can't get him, but we should all want him (unless you like Venables more, I can get down with that although it's more risky).

Yes, this is what I was trying to say.  You don't want GP because you think he can do better than Snyder (can anyone?), you want GP because he might be able to replicate what Snyder has done.  This is not a conversation about firing Snyder to hire GP.  This is a conversation about hiring GP once Snyder retires.

I don't want Patterson because I don't think he can replicate what he's done at TCU here. He's a successful coach at a football school in one of the biggest metro areas in the state of Texas and his program is no better than a guy 20 years older in Manhattan, Kansas who doesn't recruit. Does this make sense now? You think he's going to be able to get better players here?

Isn't the attraction to someone like Venables, is that he and his staff would have the energy needed to recruit here? I'm not arguing that Gary isn't a good coach, that'd be silly. I would like to understand how he's going to be able to continue on what he's doing now, minus some of the advantages he has now.

Offline CATILLAC

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 164
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #47 on: November 15, 2017, 06:58:59 PM »
I'd rather have Smoke Patterson than gross weirdo, Sweaty Gary. Smoke would be awesome.

He's still in the game.

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2553
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #48 on: November 15, 2017, 09:20:59 PM »
I want a coach that can get us to 5-0 6-0, 7-0 with high frequency, and once every 10 years or so push for the title, Snyder 1 gave us that, Snyder 2 has had a title run but too many seasons where we are out of it early.  It may be too much to ask for, and frankly I don’t believe we will remotely approach that but it is what I want.
Gaslighting...... It's like acting you bafoons

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 23792
    • View Profile
Re: Patterson
« Reply #49 on: November 16, 2017, 03:14:45 PM »
I'd rather have Smoke Patterson than gross weirdo, Sweaty Gary. Smoke would be awesome.

He's still in the game.

  :love: