An article about Herman but 6 of the 7 games they use for data are Houston.
Much like Tom Herman, making the narrative about him rather than the kids who actually made the plays.
Is any of this statistically significant? Of course not. Is it maintainable? You wouldn’t think so.
Hell, his lone Texas game as an underdog barely followed the established script at all. And besides, you don’t really expect Texas to frequently be an underdog anyway.
Cool, so, um, what’s the point of this article if everything mentioned is what he did at Houston.
7 games… 6 wins ALL Houston… 1 loss? Texas! He still lost that game, so the article is completely ignorant. They ought to have an article about how Houston (NOT Herman) has done well winning games as an underdog.
That wouldn’t get clicks
I think Herman’s style and practice methods get teams very ready for one game. But they make them susceptible to having down games for sub par opponents.
I THINK Major’s approach is more sustainable over the course if a season.
Maryland thinks that article is bunk.
With UTX being 3-2 with 2 of the wins in the misnamed B12 aren’t they entitled to be in the top 10?
The writer even says: “The USC-Texas game was quite the outlier in this series of games. Herman’s Longhorns had fewer plays and fewer yards and lost the turnover battle by four. It was a miracle they were able to force overtime, really.”
What an idiotic article.
try winning the games you are supposed to win
The ad money from tons of clicks from Texas and Oklahoma fans