Published Tuesday, September 01, 2009 2:22 AM

Comments

Posted by: Observer On: 9/2/2009

Comment Title: Re; agjosh
Typical of the problem. You want to get away from the real issue and cover yourself with secondary trivia. A coach is hired to win games and that is it. Win games, bring in revenue to fund the department, further awareness of the university on national tv and media. While winning games he is no doubt expected to develop young men, build relationships, be active in the community, follow the rules, etc, etc. A great coach with a shortfall in these secondary areas gets a contract extension while a great ambassador with a losing record will get shown the door. You can hire a PR man and human resource director for much less than 1.8 million a year. Building back relationships with former coaches and influential individuals to the priority that has been placed on it is part of the problem to some degree. Influential people want to be too involved with the program to the extent of meddling and that is one of the reasons really good coaches may not be interested in coming here. It may also be one of the reasons sherman was hired. Like stars says, he is a nice guy who seems to be intent on pleasing people and making everyone like him. It seems to be such a priority in his life that it may affect his coaching. Watch what happens with tannehill as an example. You do not play your #2 QB at WR with a shoulder injury when there is such a dropoff to #3 but he may just do it to keep everyone happy even though he knows better and has said so. Your comment on who is ahead of us in recruiting is off target. It is who is behind us that we are talking about. Who is going by us in the next several months is what you need to consider before finalizing in your mind that we will have a top 10 recruiting finish.

---

Posted by: objective_Homer On: 9/2/2009

Comment Title: Agjosh
Your comments carry no better tone than anyone else. Its like you feel that you are the only one on here that's allowed to complain. That's all I'm saying. You may not intend for this but that's how it comes off....I feel that Sherman was hired quickly and without true research from other candidates. This implies to me that political issues are at play. This stuff goes on every day. It's a huge part of why our economy is bad. This behavior creates a conflict of interest within. Sure change was made and it seems like things are okay but all it ends up doing is prolonging the real soulution towards the problem. It will also be a huge part of A&M's future if they don't get some checks and balances in place. Just reading all the stuff about the school as a whole lately. it seems to be a real mess. i feel that the school overlooked other possible staffs because they knew sherman would be sort of a yes man meaning he would make appearances anywhere any time the regents wanted. That's all well and good but it doesn't really go hand and hand with winning (remember conflict of interest). Let alone winning for long periods of time. Its a band-aid at best. kind of like loosening mortgage regulations. Maybe we need a band-aid before we try open heart surgery but it just doesn't add up to me. Time will tell on this. i don't think i will change my mind on this but i do enjoy reading all the posts here. I know my analogies are extreme but i'm just trying stress the angle i see things from. I just cant get passed it.

---

Posted by: miller58 On: 9/2/2009

Comment Title: RE: SHERMAN LOSING HIS 24th OFFER IN THE LAST 21 WEEKS?
My personal opinions:_____Linebacker Rashod Favors 6-2 225 4.5 chose to go with a winner, Bob Stoops at ou!_____miller58

---

Posted by: agjosh On: 9/2/2009

Comment Title: actually observer...
I've read Sherman's contract. One would certainly believe that winning is an expectation, but the contract actually says "The football team’s win/loss record during the Term shall not be sufficient Cause for termination of this Agreement." Should it say that? Good question, but to say he was hired (only) to win certainly isn't 100% accurate. The contract however does imply in more than one place that relationships with student athletes, current and former students, and the national image are all part of his job. All that technical stuff aside....show me one top 25, make that top 50 program that doesn't put an emphasis on relationships with former players. You simply can't do it. TO your recruiting comments: Texas, LSU, OU, and Bama are all ahead of us in the current rankings and all have 19+ commits. So our 20 commits is not out of line with the other top recruiting teams. Even if the next five players we add are just on average with what we have now, we finish in the top 15 at worst. Other than maybe Notre Dame, show me another team that has done that with a one year coach following a 4-8 season. IF you can't show several, then wouldn't that logically mean Sherman is a darn good recruiter?

---

Posted by: Observer On: 9/2/2009

Comment Title:
Sherman was brought here to win games not build relationships. While that can probably be found in the job description it is not the primary concern. How about building relationships with some recruits and quit basking in the fact you currently rank #7 because you have used up all your commits. If 10 4 star players decide to come here in the next 5 months who are you going to pull back your offer on? Get a new defensive coordinator before a new coach has to.

---

Posted by: Agjosh On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: "objective" homer
If you follow this site (and other similar sites) closely, you will find that I do call out people I agree with for name-calling and unsupported claims. I am curious as to where you think my tone was like "everyone else". Stars and I often disagree, but for the most part have always had civil conversations. I will (as here today) readily admit the points I agree with. If you would like to look at "this hire" and walk through the reason why it did and did not make sense, then by all means lets do so. I'll start: 1. As I submitted earlier, we were in desperate need of a coach that had ties to former players and could rebuild there involvement in the program. You can not name a top 25 program that does not have great relationships and involvement from former players (and often coaches). 2. Sherman can flat out recruit and had the connections to get Tim Cassidy back to A&M. Coach Cassidy is hands down one of the best assets to any athletic department anywhere....feel free to call around or research his reputation online. 3. Sherman had one of the best records as an NFL coach during his tenure as such. For the Green Bay Packers, he ranks only behind Lombardi for winning percentage. 4. Sherman makes a lot of money no doubt, but based on his peers, he was a bargain. He's not even in the top half of the Big 12. In fact, only two make less. Considering what Fran's buyout cost us, we needed to be fiscally wise.

---

Posted by: objective_Homer On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: Agjosh
Just curious, why don't you inform some of the other posters (mostly on your side) that might have facts and opinions blurred??? Many posters that feel the same as you do also get facts and opinions out of wack. I find it funny that you only point this out to those who disagree with your stance. My point is this, its not really a matter of how ones "tone" bothers you. You are just looking to challenge with those who disagree with you. Otherwise, if you were truly bothered from "tone" at least 10 more posters on your side would have received the same message you sent to stars. Don't let it get to you. Just debate the issue. The one fact i do see on just about every post from those that support sherman- Instead of providing "facts" to support their stance they directly insult the poster. This suggests to me they have nothing substantial to return so they change the subject. Also, your message to stars had no better "tone" than any of the others. Proper grammar without cussing doesn't automatically create a nice tone. It seems as though you are complaining about something while being guilty of it at the same time. I'm guilty of all of the above but it doesn't bother me at all. I love the excitement this subject brings...By the way, in my "opinion", there are a lot more facts that support stars stance than yours. Nothing really makes sense about this hire.

---

Posted by: On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: Aggies # 7 in National Recruiting
Go look at www.rivals.com and you will see that A&M is No. 7 in the nation for the class of 2010. Sherman is making great progress after inheriting the mess left behind by Fran-kenstein. Gig'em Aggies!

---

Posted by: On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: Sherman has out recruited 13 of the 2009 AP Top 20 during 2008 and 2009
Every coach deserves more than one season to get a new staff in place, change schemes and get rid of the dead wood.____________________ _______ He has out recruited 13 of the 2009 AP Top 20 during 2008 and 2009____ and now has the No 7 class in the nation for 2010. That is a miracle given where our program was when he came in. Well done Sherman!

---

Posted by: seeing stars On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: RE: agjosh
You and I look at things differently and there may be reason for that. Ultimately, Sherman will succeed or fail on his own without any help or direction from us or most others. Until then, we can provide our thoughts and watch the process unfold. And unfold it will, one way or the other. Out of here on this one.

---

Posted by: agjosh On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: Seeing Stars
I agree that the "shut the hell up" line was uncalled for. I cannot agree with you regarding Miller58 and the medicine he gets. He refuses to respond to challenges, questions, or when his lies are clearly revealed. Instead, he posts the same drivel day after day leading to one to logically assume his interest is not in A&M football or discussions about it, but rather only in creating dissent and aggravating people. As to your facts, you list many things you claim as fact sthat are out-and-out unsubstantiated opinions. Here are a few: He runs more shorts and helmet practices than others; he holds people out with hurts instead of injuries; what has or does not have a place in society to day...while I agree with you, this is a matter of opinion, not fact....these are just a few. I agree there are posters here that have a remedial at best football knowledge and it can be very frustrating. Many of your other observations are implications such as 1. being a good coach requires getting in players grills (I agree, but that's my opinion, not fact) 2. that Sherman was not good enough to have other colleges look at him...something you simply can't prove 3. that because he did not attend and graduate from A&M, he shouldn't be considered for a head coaching job for us. To the last point, make no doubt that part of the reason Sherman was brought back was to because he had been here and could repair the broken relationships from the Fran era. Another article today cited that Slocum stepped into the Bright building for the first time after Sherman arrived....because he said it was the first time he was invited! Fran broke ties with former coaches and players and Sherman could (and has) rebuilt those ties. Don't think that's important? Mac Brown says the best thing he did as head coach of tu was that the first call he made from his office was to Darrell Royal. He credits that single call with changing the direction of tu football. As to other assertions, I agree Sherman is not leaving anytime soon. I agree the defense needs to improve (though I do not think that means being top 50 this year as the highest rated Big 12 South defense last year was #51) and think if it fails to do so, the Kines situation will need to be seriously looked at. However, I cannot think of one time I have ever seen a coach given an ultimatum that it helped, so I would not be quick to put one on Kines.

---

Posted by: miller58 On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: SINCE HIS HIRE IN 2007< SHERMAN HAS RECRUITED LIKE CRAP AND CONTINUES AS HE LOST THE 24TH OFFER IN THE LAST 21 WEEKS TO ou?
My personal opinions:_____Bob Stoops kicked Sherman's rear in recruiting for the multi time as Scout 4* LINEBACKER Rashod Favors 6-2 225 4.5 chose to play for a winner!_____Something is deastically wrong with A&M recruiting, and it may just be Sherman, himself?____Losing offers at a rate of more than one a week, is just not normal?_____But it must be corrected, before we can crawl out of the last place, Sherman has led us to!_____miller58

---

Posted by: seeing stars On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: RE: agjosh
Absolutely no intent to talk down to anyone (fact). Believe that before you believe anything else (fact). I did put facts with what I stated. Sherman runs more shorts and helmets workouts than others and the pricetag is poor tackling (fact). He also holds people out with hurts instead of injuries. I made a one line statement concerning returning starters (facts) which drew a biased remark and the "shut the hell up" that you never see out of any post I make on here (fact). So out of my one line post where do you draw the conclusion I was talking down to the no-name poster. I do not post in anger as others do (fact). Maybe some should take a moment before they post. Ask walt76 for some insight in that area. Review some of the comments to miller58 that have no place on a blog or anywhere else in society today (fact). Because of their position on the subject does that make them OK. Because it is miller58 does that make it OK. As far as Sherman, you never or very rarely see him in someones grill and you KNOW (sorry about the big letters) they need it from time to time. Joe Kines halftime rant on You-Tube speaks for itself. Then there is the cupboard bare, lack of talent, plugging holes excuses that was generated after the season was underway. That was not even close to the word out of fall camp last year when all that was being talked about was the attacking defense and the West Coast offense brought in by these pro coaches. Sorces on that have been provided several times over the year (fact). Back to the main point, I never intend to talk down to anyone on this site but you must admit there are some very football challenged individuals making comment in areas where they obviously have no clue (fact). If Sherman was a good hire for us why wasn't he a good hire for any other team that went before us? He is not an Aggie (fact) unless your definition of an Aggie is somewhat different than mainstream Aggie Nation. Matter of fact he pulled a Franchione on A&M one month after being named offensive coordinator (fact) when he bolted for Green Bay. My offer to share some defensive insight comes as a result of my desire for others to experience some of the joy I have taken from this game. When you understand a little about what is trying to be accomplished the game takes on new meaning and relevance. Some people do not realize what they are missing (fact). And just as I said, Sherman is not leaving soon (fact) so how do you speed up the team recovery process. The area that could show the most improvement over a short time is defense (fact) and if Kines fails with it this year he should be replaced in December (fact).

---

Posted by: agjosh On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: Seeing Stars
I am guessing that what upset "no name" wasn't so much the opinion as it was the condescending tone. I think you have the right to your opinion. However, I strongly disagree with the tone that you and certain others present when dialoging with anyone that supports the program. When you cannot make your arguements with facts and logic, you borrow from the current Deomcratic strategy of attacking the intelligence and person. Statements like "drink the koolaid", "folks need to wake up", "Sherman/Aggie spin machine". etc...are ridiculous. I have no problem addressing you and others as intelligent, thoughtful bloggers that I disagree with...I do have a problem with those more interested in inciting emotionalism than with having a quality discussion. You think Sherman was a bad hire...okay, tell me why...but don't try to bully me into a corner by insinuating I am unintelligent, uninformed, or whatever because I think he was a good hire. Let's both share our reasons, debate them even, and leave it at that. You suggest Sherman coddles his athletes....what facts do you have to back that up? Same with your statements about Kines. You give an analogy of knowing when you need a mechanic, but your analogy is not logical...we all agree that our program needs help, you are just choosing to argue with the mechanic about the diagnostic, parts needed, and cost (time) to repair. You then print the words FACT,OPINION, and UNKNOWN in big scary letters yet everything you said was OPINION. Not once did you site any real facts and you seem unwilling to leave anything to the UNKNOWN. Here are some facts: Sherman is our coach. He has reengaged former players (that Fran ran off) with the program which is part of the reason for our recent recruiting success. He has been here one year of a seven year contract (so he's not leaving soon) and has been very open about the fact this was going to take time from day one. I could go on, but I will await your response first.

---

Posted by: seeing stars On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: RE: (no name)
I have never been on a blog concerning any subject. I am on here because there are a couple of people on both sides of this issue that have knowledge of the game and some good points and counterpoints. There are also people on here who have great knowledge about the history of the program and how we may have gotten to this point. It is also an interesting subject being talked about on a national level more and more each day. I know people all over the country who, in the course of normal conversation, bring this topic up because it is growing into a story in the NCAA football world. This blog happens to be available thanks to The Eagle newspaper, not Texas A&M. So a pro Sherman attitude is neither solicited nor required to make a comment. University controlled sites can kick off those with "attitudes" if they desire. That said, my opinion is offered for you to consider, not to agree with. What would I and others like me do if we held the magic wand for just a moment? First of all, folks need to wake up about who is actually in control of certain areas of the university and for what reason. Not just athletics either. Sherman should have never been hired but that is history so lets talk about the present. Its too expensive to terminate him this year plus he is well-liked off the field. Not that being well-liked makes you a good coach but is does play to the agenda of the good old boys. He is about to earn some more points by paying Pickards salary next year. They can sell him to you on that alone. Coaching is another matter and so are Assistant Coaches and the defensive side of the ball needs attention before its too late. Kines is OUT OF HIS LEAGUE with todays game and Sherman knows it but, being the aforementioned well-liked individual he is, will not fire him. Paying off Kines would be chump change for what you get in defensive improvement. Plus he has a 3 year contract. It is almost as if Sherman is more of a Human Resource type than a coach these days. Players like him because he leans to the easy side on them (shorts and helmet practices instead of full pads, sitting out because you are hurt instead of sitting out because you are injured, water balloons, canoe rides, etc. All well and fine in moderation but it seems a little over the top compared to other teams. If you want examples I will provide them. And dont go to the "getting rid of the attitudes" as an example of toughness. That could have come by direction of higher authority (getting rid of franchiones starters has to go along with franchione) because attitude problems do not just confine themselves to the starting lineup. Plus it is lots easier to "get in the boat" as a backup when someone hands you a first class ticket and a starting job when you were on the bench before the "attitude" was run off. Yes sir/No sir/ Whatever you say sir. Sherman needs to terminate Kines and get a defensive coordinator who can recruit AND coach AND has a creative mind. These kids have never played a defense like this that you are about to see and you can be sure Kines never coached one. He was a good linebacker coach in the days of power football and that is it. New day, new scheme, new coaches. You think Sherman knew who Joe Kines was when he had to find a defensive coordinator in about a week. Kines was raising money for the band. You think we should do what other successful teams do and offer these guys contract extensions at the end of the year before someone hires them away from us. Players are STILL being switched around on the field and schemes are being changed (run the ball in West Coast; a 4-3 with a jack). Makes no sense if you have EVER been around this game at all. It may fly on Ladies Day. It makes it even more difficult to recruit when you do those things. You KNEW at the time Patterson was sent back to offense just what you had on defense to replace him. If you didn't, what have you been watching at practice and in camp this year. I am not a car mechanic but I know when I need one, I am not a broker but I know when I need one, I am not a Div-1 coach but I know you need one and so does the rest of the sporting world. If you want a specific answer about defense I would be happy to break it down in three parts: what is FACT, what is OPINION, and what is UNKNOWN. Unfortunately you will one day soon have to face the fact you need to put down your pom-poms and pick up your checkbook to get this situation corrected. In the meantime, if you want to be around only those who share your opinion, you may need to find another site.

---

Posted by: On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: seeing stars, are you a coach?
No, then shut the hell up!! You're just like miller lite, always a complaint and never a solution. What would you do? What players would you play and in what position? What schemes would you run? Spring and Fall camp are the opportunities to find out where players need to be, like Patterson, who I think will be better getting off the ball on offensive lineman having a better understanding of the position. Sherman obviously knows where the talent needs to go from working with them on a daily basis. Last year they were just hoping to fill voids with the players and skillsets that they had after injuries and guys that quit on the team. Last year is done. Every prognosticator has an opinion and none of the opinions matter until the players get on the field. FL, USC, OU, tu and a handful of others are picked to have an opportunity to win the NC, but that does not mean they will be there by the end of the year, all predictions are based on results from last year. Same goes for picking teams that had a bad year they think will not bounce back. I believe we beat BU and a few others and have a decent year. Once they strap the helmets on and play the game we will see. If I am wrong, I will admit it at the end of the year. For now, I will you choose to believe the coaches are doing their best to advance the program and will be optimistic for a good year.

---

Posted by: seeing stars On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: Returning Starters
16 returning starters on offense and defense and less than half (7) starting in the position they played last year.

---

Posted by: On: 9/1/2009

Comment Title: Redshirting
I'd be shocked if Rhontae Scales and Stephen Barrera redshirt. That ain't gonna happen.

---

Ticket broker Vividseats.com sells great sports tickets including NCAA Football tickets like Aggies football tickets for all games. Check out all the football tickets available today!