All Activity

Thanks for the answer I guess I can stop my Sark and flood hate for now 👀😭

Sark has hinted at this, but I think there was a hangover-type feeling after the Ohio State loss in the Cotton Bowl that a lot of stuff got overlooked.

I guess my question is this did they not see the signs in spring ball and fall camp or was it just them and there hubris thinking everything was good?

At least they recognized the mistake and went the other direction (into the portal) in '26.

That’s the game that is unforgivable to me and it’s the game I can’t get out of my head that Sark and Flood were like yep this is the OL for Arch. That’s why I’m so critical. Yes it got better but it took till what Miss state to right.

🤘

It's most likely him adding muscle. Getting his man body, as @Rod Babers would say.

🤘

I totally get it, but let's not rush baseball season! I enjoy the great game a great deal!

Thank you for the kind words!

I've seen so much underwhelming offensive line play from Texas in the post-Blalock/Sendlein/Studdard era that it takes a LOT to move the needle for me on negative O-line play. That said, I had to remind myself to exhale a few times during the Florida game after some of the shots Arch took.

I'll add that this year in college basketball is like the Celtics of the 1980s. Great size and skill in the front court is winning out. Even so, that didn't ultimately beat the combo of Magic and Kareem and the overall athleticism of the Lakers in the 1980s. Goobers who think "it's different now" need to study up some. It's a cycle with limits.

Winter's Triangle went back to the 1960s. Triangle worked for Phil because Pippen could play point on offense and Shaq and Kobe couldn't be defended one-on-one. Of course MJ couldn't either. You don't need a particular system; you need players. I'm sure Gerry would agree. That said, there are skills that the game itself rewards. Of course, this can be manipulated by rules. There's a limit to the amount of manipulation you can implement without doing damage to the game. The NBA crossed that line after the Lakers destroyed everyone in 2001. The NBA owners decided they didn't like the idea of 22 year old Kobe and Shaq dominating the league one-one-one. So they changed the rules. It took a while, but now we're seeing they screwed up. College basketball was at the mercy of the NBA until they started paying players. That's not the case now. We now have real basketball in college. That why interest in college is increasing and interest in the NBA is decreasing. PG is not a fungible position. A great PG is not a necessity if you have another great perimeter and post player, but having a great PG is better than having a combo guard and "stretch" 4. History proves this.

The transition from truly pure point guard to the kind of combo guard Gerry has described began in earnest with the advent of the Triangle offense Phil Jackson/Tex Winter pioneered in the Chicago Bulls/Michael Jordan era.

Whoever the next guy is has to be a three-point threat for me. I don't want a 6-3 better athlete that shoots 30% from three. If opponents don't have to respect on the perimeter, and can play under every ball screen... That's the opposite of appealing for me. For me, the two things I want from that position are have to be guarded out to 23-24 feet No. 1, and ability to get to 10-12 feet and make the correct play/read. I've said that if Texas could find a Cam Spencer type, that would be perfect for what Miller wants to do offensively. But that guy isn't easy to find either. 40+% from three, plays the right way, makes the correct reads off 2-3 bounces, play with or without the ball, is 6-3 and is a playmaker in transition without being an elite athlete. He's just an elite offensive player with enough size. If Sean said I found a 6-3.5 version of Pope, I would be okay with that too... if the roster has two guys around him that could make the plays off the bounce (had one last year). I'm very interested to see where the portal goes from an NIL stand point. I personally don't believe Texas will get the level of starting players at every position the majority of fans want, so there has to be a true mix and match while saving enough NIL to have 8-9 quality players. Can't spend 85-90% of NIL budget and five starters, and survive any key injury. Texas isn't going to get it all, but I'm betting on Miller to put it together to be effective. Shall be interesting.

Thanks for laying this out, very interesting note on the training to be more CGs versus PGs.. It's funny, I always grew up playing PG and I would go to the Hurley Pocono Camps back in PA (the dad is the absolute best) and this was even 15-20 years ago where both the dad and sons focused on more scoring / shooting type drills even if you called out you wanted to focus on PG drills. Thank god for high school coach didn't pick up on this because I had no shooting ability and my ass would have been on the bench LOL.

I don't disagree with anything you say, Gerry, but it doesn't change the fundamentals. Five years ago it was literally nuts to think you needed multiple big men to win a natty in CBB. What's going on now? NIL and the change in money have brought big men back big time. A less than similar change can make PGs much more important because the fundamentals of basketball don't simply change because of fads. NBA doesn't matter in the least. They've sucked ever since they changed the rules to keep Shaq and Kobe from winning 10 titles. Losing viewership and attendance by the day they suck so bad now. Those idiots have screwed up so bad they are going to have to change multiple rules just to keep real players on the floor. Back to PGs: Having a PG that can score doesn't equal a "combo" guard. All the greatest PGs could score. Not all combo guards can pass well enough to win a game if they don't score much. That's the difference.

Check that...Matt Coleman back in 2021 was last "true PG" we had. Since then, the position has been held down just fine by combo players.

Correct....we can find guys that can do it all now at the guard position. However that doesn't mean the true set-up PG still doesn't have value...its just a rarity these days. I mean who's the last "true PG" Texas has had worth a damn? Myke Kabongo?? Better to have 5 guys on the court that are real scoring threats.

Atleast if he doesn’t enter the portal when going through the draft Texas knows what they are up against. A lot of these guys are entering the portal and going through the process.

A very simple search will explain how the game has changed ... it's not even as hard as studying the game on a daily basis (if someone doesn't want to do that). The game has changed. The pure PG's are few and far between because the game has changed and kids are training differently growing up "Point guards (PGs) in basketball have evolved from pass-first, floor-general playmakers into high-scoring, versatile, and often "positionless" threats who prioritize shooting and creating their own offense. This shift has been driven by the rise of analytics, increased three-point shooting, and a decrease in physical, hand-checking defense. [1, 2, 3] Here are the key ways point guards have changed: From Facilitators to Scorers: Traditionally, PGs were expected to set up teammates and manage the tempo, like John Stockton or Magic Johnson. Modern point guards, exemplified by Stephen Curry, Damian Lillard, and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, are now primarily "score-first" players with high usage rates. The Rise of "Positionless" Basketball: Modern PGs are often taller and more versatile, blending with the shooting guard or small forward roles. Tall point guards like Luka Dončić (6'7") are becoming more common, utilizing their height to see over defenses, similar to Magic Johnson's era, but with the added ability to shoot from deep. Increased Three-Point Shooting: PGs have experienced a massive leap in three-point attempts, increasing from an average of 1.3 to over 4.0 attempts per game over the past three decades. Declining Assist Numbers: As PGs focus more on scoring, there has been a steady, slight decrease in assists per game over the last 30 years, moving away from the "pure" PG role."

True PG or Combo Guard...doesn't matter. We just need someone better & more athletic than Jordan Pope. If Miller proved he could eventually coach up & win big games with a guy like Jordan Pope running the point, then there's no telling how good we could be with a superior talent upgrade.

Even your last three NBA Champions ... not true or pure PG led. OKC Thunder - Shai is called the OKC lead guard, and he is ... not a pure PG. He's the modern day best lead guard. Boston Celtics (2023-24) - ball didn't run through their PG (Holiday or backup much at all). Denver Nuggets - Jamal Murray is their lead guard. Everything outside of ball screen game runs through Jokic, however. He's the primary playmaker for the Nuggets. Murray and Jokic pretty much split duties. Jokic will even be the offense initiator brining the ball up at times. The John Stockton, Jason Kidd, etc... days of basketball are few and far between. I do think there will be a few special/close to special guys come along, but it's difficult with the way the game is being taught at a young age right now. I believe the game isn't as much fun to watch offensively because of the modern game, but I still love it. The size/athleticism/skill combo is off the charts, but it's not as much of a fun watch because it's all drive and kick for 25 footer, or drive baseline and kick opposite corner. It's all 25 foot spacing, three-point analytics, etc... and I get it because of the length and athleticism in the game now.