The difference in talent among the top teams is very slight. It's coaching, especially at the mid-tier schools, that makes all the difference in performance.

I was referring more to UT poorly evaluating its culture and the effect of that culture on the performance of the team.

Yes, they spend an ungodly amount of money at football, but I think their national image is outsized given the history of the program. That's all I was trying to get across.

I think the jury is still out on Herrman. He's doing better than Strong but 'on paper' the team was supposed to 'be back' by now. Granted, this is his first Power 5 job and he's a young coach so he's going to have gaffes. I think at most schools he'd be fine. But, UT thinks its more than what it is. If he's let go, he'd probably get another shot at a top job if he rebounds first at another school. ala Lane Kiffin

I'm probably coming off as harsh on both Herrman and UT. I lived in Austin and reading and seeing their entitlement over the years has soured me. The way that UT ran off Strong didn't sit right for me. Not so much because they decided to move on from Charlie (he was a really good man and you could tell the players loved him. He simply didn't win enough by the end.) But, and I know I'm being racial here, but Hermman just seems like he's a good 'ol boys wet dream. He's brash and outspoken and he's tough on his players. If he had a more mild mannered personality I'd probably be alright with him. i admit that that bias clouds my idea of him.