• Contact
Posted by TaylorTRoom on October 6th, 2008 under Football
Years ago, on a different board, I posted a transcript of Blair Cherry’s 1951 Saturday Evening Post article “Why I Quit Coaching Football”. Cherry had been an extremely successful HS coach in the ’30s, was Bible’s chief assistant at Texas, and had coached Texas to a 32 – 10 – 1 record from 1947 – 1950. Basically, he quit because the Texas fans expected to win every game, and complained about his coaching through every media available (basically- mail, newspaper letters, and telephone) all year round.When I posted the article, one of the good board members wrote, “You man it’s been like this for over 50 years?” Yep. But this post is not about the Texas fans or the Texas job. It’s about repetitive patterns in football, and how we confuse the causes of the repeating cycles with the resulting patterns. The lesson is not that Texas fans need to change to break the cycle of criticism (they won’t). The lesson is that Longhorn coaches either need rhino-thick skins or to perform at an obviously elite level in order to tolerate fan expectations. Even Royal came under criticism before his first MNC. Folksy manners and appeals to the base are just not enough to keep a coaching regime going in Austin.
I said this post wasn’t about Texas. I was musing recently about the coaches in SWC history, and noted that despite the number of Aggie coaches with notable accomplishments, none have retired from the job in College Station to iconic status. Look, very few coaches get to “retire”, or leave on something close to their own terms. At Texas, Royal and Bible got to. At Alabama, it’s pretty much just Bryant in the modern era. If Tressell gets to retire, he will be the first Buckeye coach since Paul Brown to get to leave willingly. The Ags have had some very accomplished coaches, and either fired them (Norton, Stallings, Sherrill, Slocum) or seen them leave for better situations (Bible, Bryant).
I had always wondered about the firing of Homer Norton. He actually won a MNC at TAMU, in 1939 (Mickey Herskowitz recently wrote a book about it). How does a guy like that get fired? From a school that is ridiculously proud of all past accomplishments?
I was researching old Dallas morning News articles recently, and looked into the events of 1947, when Norton was fired. Get this (the articles’ publication dates are listed first, then the gist of the article, then my comments in parentheses) -
1-29-47: Ag alums call for firing Norton. They feel that the Ags have too much talent to underperform as they did in 1946. (In ‘46, they went 4 – 6. It was a very volatile time in college football as teams assimilated returning war veterans.)
2-25-47: Norton is offered $10K to leave TAMU by the Former Students (based out of Houston). His contract called for him to be paid $10K/year to be AD and football coach, and he had three years remaining.
4-2-47: The TAMU President relieves him of his AD duties. He declines to fire him as coach. A reading from the state legal department says that the school cannot pay Norton his remaining salary without him working.
6-26-47: The interim AD hires Harry Stiteler (Rice OC) as an assistant, to coordinate TAMU’s offense. Norton has no comment. (Key point- TAMU ran the Single Wing. Rice had converted to the “T”, and finished 1947 #10 in the AP poll. I’m guessing Stiteler was considered a “T” formation expert)
8-13-47: Just before the season starts, longtime assistant Dimmit leaves. (The article implied he didn’t want to leave and that Norton wanted him to stay).
9-28-47: Great non-related headline from the season- “Tech Plays Confuse Aggie Defense” (the Ags did win, 28 – 7, so they mustnot have been too confused. Still, it’s too great a headline not to share).

12-13-47: $20K raised by Ag alums to get Norton to resign (they finished ‘47 with a 3-6-1 record). He continues to receive his $10k/year as an employee, serving as a special consultant. The Ags hope to hire Bob Neyland from Tennessee. (Seth Meyer voice- “Oh, really!” At that time, Neyland’s record at Tennessee was 128 – 16 – 8, 92.9%. What in the world gave the Ags the idea that he might leave Tennessee, where he had coached since 1926, to move to College Station? That’s besides the point that he was completely committed to the Single Wing. The Ag big cigars bring in Stiteler, and then want to hire a head coach who would fire him.)
Stiteler ended up getting the job, and lasted three years. His records were 0 – 9 – 1, 1 – 8 – 1, and 7 – 4. I don’t know if he had a newsletter. Norton’s record from 1934 to 1947 was 82 – 53 – 9.
There, you have it all. Upset Ag alums pull a coup, spend too much money buying the coach out, and have unreasonable expectations of who would want the job. That describes about every coaching change at TAMU we’ve seen. This may be the ur-Ag Power Play, where they ran off the coach who succeeded more than any other in College Station.
Think about it. Emory Bellard (Ag coach from ‘72 – ‘78, 48 – 27 record in a rebuilding job) built that team up to Top 10 status in the ’70s, and quit after his OC (Tom Wilson) convinced Houston alums that Bellard’s wishbone should be replaced by Wilson’s pro-set “I”. Bellard couldn’t tolerate the lack of university support in the face of booster pressure.
Tom Wilson was removed by (Dallas Ag alum and big cigar) Bum Bright.
Bright ran the search that flirted with Bo Schembechler and hired Jackie Sherrill.
Slocum (winningest Ag coach ever) was forced out by a booster coup, and Fran identified and hired by the same boosters (LeBreton of the FW Star-Telegram was writing about it in October, 2002) before current Ag AD Bill Byrne came aboard. When Fran failed to deliver the goods, the TAMU big cigars didn’t overtly run him. However, the key ingredient in his expulsion, the leaking of his secret newsletter, did come from a booster. Of course, the preferred replacement among Ag faithful was Steve Spurrier, a choice that seemed possible to nobody outside Brazos county.
Not every athletic program operates this way. This isn’t the NFL, where every team has the same basic structure- Owner, GM, and coach. At some schools the AD is autonomous, at others the President and/or Board of Regents are in charge. TAMU seems unique for its history of big donor boosters calling shots. The lesson from this story is that the Ags should stop letting their big time boosters call the shots in their program. I hear from Ag friends that this is changing under Byrne. The next few years should test that.
Milan Kundera (”The Unforgettable Lightness of Being”) wrote: “Human time does not turn in a circle; it runs ahead in a straight line. That is why man cannot be happy: happiness is the longing for repetition.”
Ags are happy. And you should be happy too in that I didn’t drag out the Santayana quote.
Scipio Tex said:
October 6th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Fascinating stuff, IMO.
lowery said:
October 7th, 2008 at 4:43 am
Very interesting, also hysterical. Neyland huh? That is rich.
TaylorTRoom said:
October 7th, 2008 at 5:12 am
Neyland was mentioned in two DMN articles about the situation (no quotes from him, obviously). I snickered the first time, and laughed out loud the second when I realized the Ags were serious.
Jeff said:
October 7th, 2008 at 6:08 am
Do the Ags teach root cause analysis?
lowery said:
October 7th, 2008 at 6:18 am
I also think it is hysterical that, in a century of pining, the one time they took the prom queen home, she was also a drag queen.
goofybevo said:
October 7th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Awesome. I can’t get enough Ag misery. Especially when they cause it themselves. Good read.
It’s Unbearable Lightness, BTW.
South '06 said:
October 7th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Pointing out things that happened in 1947? Don’t you guys have a huge top-5 showdown with OU this weekend?
I mean, I found it interesting, but I’m surprised you guys really give a shit about this right now.
srr50 said:
October 7th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Pointing out things that happened in 1947?
Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Scipio Tex said:
October 7th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
South:
I’m surprised you guys really give a shit about this right now.
Before our USC national championship game, Taylor wrote a scathing critique of Iowa State women’s soccer.
Kafka said:
October 7th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Taylor: always great stuff from you.
Thought I would post the slightly longer version of the Santayana quote:
“Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it….This is the condition of children and barbarians, in whom instinct has learned nothing from experience.”
“Life Of Reason”
It does seem like one of the great tragedies of mankind is that wisdom gets transmitted so ineffectively from one generation to the next generation.
Having said that, progress is not possible if the values of the past are not challenged. We are now immersed in a rapidly changing culture that is constantly destroying the philosophical truths that used to anchor our lives.
The one philosophical truth that seems like it will never be challenged is:
“OU sucks”.
Beergut said:
October 8th, 2008 at 1:02 am
A texas fan calling out another school for letting their athletic department be run by boosters and big cigars is rich indeed. Does the name Joe Jamail mean anything to you?
I’m sure DeLoss Dodds hired Mack Brown all on his own, right? Tom Hicks had nothing to do with the search, right?
As for Norton and Slocum, both became the victims of their own previous success. Under both coaches, A&M experienced a great level of success in their heyday, and their inability to continue that high level of achievement got them fired. Nothing earth-shattering there.
As for schools having unrealistic expectations in who they can hire, I can remember wondering in 1997 why the hell any texas fan believed Mack Brown would leave the top 10 program he built at North Carolina to come to the coaching graveyard that was Austin. Fred Akers? Fired. David McWilliams? Fired. John Mackovic? Fired. Why would Brown want to be next?
Regarding Steve Spurrier, that wasn’t just wishful thinking. If we had been willing to pay him %3.5 million per, he’d be wearing maroon and white right now.
“TAMU seems unique for its history of big donor boosters calling shots.”
Ever heard of the SEC? Paul Bryant Jr., Bobby Lowder, Bud Walton, those names mean anything to you? You think Jerry Jones has nothing to say about what goes on at Arkansas? I’m not sure if you’re being incredibly biased with that comment, or you’re just incredibly naive.
“I hear from Ag friends that this is changing under Byrne.”
Your Ag friends are poor sources if they think $Bill doesn’t listen to the boosters.
While no coach has retired from the job to iconic status, I would argue that Norton and Slocum received their due years after they were forced out. Norton is looked on as our greatest coach at A&M, with RC being considered second (some will argue that Jackie is on that list, but his record doesn’t support that).
“The Ags have had some very accomplished coaches, and either fired them (Norton, Stallings, Sherrill, Slocum)”
Stallings does not belong on that list. He was fired with justification. He became the coach who would win the national title years later; we hired him too young, at 28, and he subsequently won only 33% of his games as head coach at A&M.
TaylorTRoom said:
October 8th, 2008 at 3:04 am
Scipio, don’t get me started on the Lady cyclones again…
TaylorTRoom said:
October 8th, 2008 at 5:07 am
Beergut, thanks for proving my point that Ag fans don’t undrstand that every school does not operate the way theirs does.
MilkmanDan said:
October 8th, 2008 at 6:04 am
Why would Brown want to be next?
Because he could recognize potential.
Why did A&M have to settle for Sherman?
TaylorTRoom said:
October 8th, 2008 at 6:18 am
Oh, and beergut, I understand that every program has influential boosters. Their $ buy access to the program. It’s only at TAMU that a booster will search for and select a new head coach, as happened with Sherrill and Fran.
Beergut said:
October 8th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Taylor,
You seem oblivious to the fact that texas operates in the very way you’re decrying on here.
Do you really believe DeLoss Dodds hired Mack Brown on his own? You think boosters don’t call the shots at texas?
Princeton Horn said:
October 8th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Royal was also severely criticized during the three 6-4 seasons, ‘65-’67. When we went 9-0-1 (tied by Rice) and were hammered by a mediocre LSU team in the Cotton Bowl (’62 season), people thought the season to have been an abject failure. The sense was that were loaded and should never lose. Austin has been a rough town for a while. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
TaylorTRoom said:
October 8th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Beergut, I know exactly how it was done. A committee that included athletics department, university administration, and the Board of Regents met, interviewed candidates, and made the selection. Dodds led it. A consensus on process and requirements was reached, and no candidate was forced on anyone. This is all public info.
Not every school operates like that. When Tech had to replace Dykes, Myers (the AD) contracted with a search firm to find the next coach. This firm identified two candidates- Rich Rodriguez and Mike Leach.
OU hired Stoops in still another way. The AD hired a search firm, but performed his own interviews and made his own selection.
It may be comforting to you to think that every school lets a Bum Bright make hiring and firing decisions, but it’s not true.
Bob in Houston said:
October 8th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
“Why would Brown want to be next?”
Coaches are something like recruits in that they don’t think that the failures or prospective failures of others apply to them.