I'm not here to pile on at all or give fans any more pain than they already are dealing with I take no joy in this; I'm an Austinite (despite my username) and want UT to succeed. It's a lot more fun around here when the team is good for a lot of reasons, including my dealings with a lot of alumni, wanting to be able to go to games and see some good football, etc. I made a similar post in Herman's penultimate year.
So with all that, I'll just say this: when you have more money than anyone, a top-5 recruiting situation, a city that, while it has some issues, is still very attractive to recruits, coaches, their families, etc., a history as a blue blood, and various other top-5 or top-10 attributes, you don't need to screw around with elevating assistants who aren't sure things. I know nobody wants to emulate the Aggies or what I've seen framed as "money whipping," but like it or not, they did what UT should do, and perhaps could do even better. Just pay up for a proven winner who you know will win at a high level, no matter what the cost. That's more cost-effective and more effective overall than streaming through then-hot assistants or whoever else, who have some upside but aren't anything close to sure things, and having to buy them out constantly. It also is, of course, much more conducive to success and all the second-order benefits that come from that. The longer this doesn't happen, the harder even this is to pull off, since no proven winner wants to be in a circus or shitshow. I think it's still possible, though.
BTW, not saying it's realistic or sensible to can Sarkisian now. I'm talking about the next time this comes up.
bleacherreport.com
