Postgame React: Iowa State
by Peter Bean on Oct 13, 2007 10:20 PM CDT
in Football
28 comments
How committed am I to talking Texas football with you? I'm sitting down during my Chicago weekend to bang out a post before heading out. That's love, people. True love.
The outcome was: Delightful. Hey, Iowa State is a bad football team. Sadly - amazingly - there isn't much to differentiate this from the win over Rice. Still, this was a game we needed to see. The Longhorns took the field against an inferior opponent and throttled 'em. That's how it's supposed to go.
The Offensive MVP was: Colt McCoy. You know, for all the trouble Colt's had this year, and for all the re-evaluating we've had to do, if there's one thing McCoy keeps proving it's that he's a gutty, tough, bounce-back, winner of a kid. Whether the coaching staff can make this an elite offense with McCoy remains to be seen, but even if you skeptically wonder whether we need to start giving John Chiles more snaps, it's impossible not to like Colt McCoy. Even when Texas' offense looks broken, he's out there scrapping to make a play. I respect this young man a lot.
The Defensive MVP was: Sergio Kindle and Lamarr Houston. I couldn't choose between the two, so let's take a moment to shake our heads in awe at each. Houston has a motor that just won't quit, but unlike Aaron Lewis, he's not just determined - he's also physically gifted. As for Kindle? The slow start to his career at Texas made it easy to forget how highly touted a prospect he was when he arrived. We're starting to see it.
The offensive Offensive Player Of The Week was: Nah, let's not go there. All these young men played well. It was easy to be a Longhorn fan today.
The offensive Defensive Player Of The Week was: Again, let's just not. We've spent so much time being frustrated this season; let's take a day just to clap for the guys and their performance. Iowa State managed just 228 yards of total offense and 3 points.
John Chiles Watch: 9 carries, 58 yards, 1 TD. 0-1 passing. He sure can look slick out there, can't he? As great an effort as McCoy had today, it was nice to see Chiles get some action. Again, even if the coaches firmly believe that McCoy is the best quarterback for Texas for the next two and a half years, it's not debatable that they need to have a contingency plan. More than that, there's positively no reason to assume McCoy has to be the main man. He may very well be, but it would be positively stupid not to see what else you've got with Chiles.
Again, this is basic stuff: maximize your options, be flexible, plan thoughtfully for the future.
Vondrell McGee Watch: 7 carries, 26 yards. Let's just say it wasn't the young man's finest afternoon and leave it at that. We clamor about the coaches needing to play more the guys with difference-making talent, but it's also on these players to make the most of it. With that said? It's indisputable that players succeed when you place trust in them, use them in meaningful situations, and let them work.
Baylor Fear Factor: 0 out of 10.... (5) is the baseline. (-1) for Texas took care of business today. (-1) for the season's big goals being long shots. (-1) for this defense is pretty darn solid. (-2) for Baylor is a bad football team.
Heading into next week I feel: Apprehensive. Not because I think Texas can, should, or will struggle with Baylor, but because I worry that decisive results against bad teams will prevent the staff from looking critically enough at the big questions we've been tackling in our midseason reviews. It's one thing to make changes against the bad teams. Can they be sustained when Texas plays better competition?
Honestly? I'm cautiously optimistic about the rest of this season, insofar as I believe that having two losses - among them an ugly home loss to Kansas State - should help this team work on developing players for 2008 and beyond. The key now is for the coaching staff to embrace this transition opportunity. Not just against Iowa State and Baylor, but throughout the rest of the season.
If they do, this season can be an interesting development showcase of the future of this team.
Quote of the day: SP: "We're looking at a big blowout here, don't you think?" PB: "Well, yeah. I mean, 35-10 or so sounds right. A comfortable win, but maybe not a thrashing." SP: "Bah - I'm guessing 57-3." Three hours later. PB: "You were way off. Way, way off."
--PB--
0 recs |
28 comments
Email
Print
Comments
10-2 a real possibility
The only that we might lose is to Tech b/c they are so good on offense and we are almost always in shootouts with them with the exception of 2005. They could beat us but i think are d will be just good enough to slow them down.
The only teams that give texas real problems are well balanced teams and extremely good passing offenses and that A&M is not. I have never seen a more inept quaterback passing qb for a major college football than stephen mcgee. He makes Eric Crouch look like Matt Leinart. He absoloutely does not how to throw the ball.
All we have to do is get a double digit lead on them and the game is over. When A&M chases the game it is over. That will be Fran's swan song.
Looking ahead it only makes me even more mad that we were beat by special teams miscues and a fumble at the goal line otherwise we would be undefeated.
by longhorn4life on Oct 13, 2007 10:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
uh...
You really think we might loose to Tech, but OSU shouldn't be a problem? Did you see the Tech-OSU, and Nebraska-OSU games? I'm not sure that OSU isn't one of the toughest teams left on the schedule. Also, assuming that Nebraska and A&M are in the bag is not a good idea, especially if you are basing that on our performance against Iowa State. I'm sure Colt and the rest of the team would look pretty good playing Austin High, too.
And to say that the only thing standing between us and an undefeated season were "special teams miscues and a fumble at the goal line" makes me wonder if you have even seen the other games this season. The entire team has been in the shitter, especially the offense. Special teams definitely cost us as well, but even against the powder puff teams that we played early on, the whole team looked terrible.
The Iowa State game was good, and I'm happy about that. But to think that because we beat the hell out of a terrible team, the rest of the schedule is in the bag, and we could have beaten K-State and OU, is naïve and short sighted.
Lets not confuse what happened against Iowa State as a significant victory, or an actual display that Texas has turned things around. If we win out (including whatever Tier 3 bowl game we will go to), I will admit I was wrong, but, sadly, I don't think that is going to happen.
by Texas Our Texas on Oct 14, 2007 8:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We proably would have lost vs. KSU
Okay KSU was a loss no matter what but did you watch the OU game? JC doesn't fumble we win that game there is no question about and i think this team has turned a corner to a certain degree. Have you watched Nebraska and A&M.
Nebraska has no clue on any side of the ball. Their defense is atrocious. We will be able to move the ball down the field the whole game. A&M could give us problems but they will be playing for a lame duck coach and they are so one dimensional on offense and their defense is extremely mediocre. You honestly don't think we won't blow out A&M?
While, true, OSU has looked excellent they beat up on a pretty bad Nebraska team but also got wooped by Troy and blew a 17 nothing lead to A&M. I am not going to lie we have a good shot at losing to them but their defense doesn't look that good and our pass defense has not been our weakest link this year.
We struggled against OU at times (who hasn't) but overall our D played solid and KSU only scored 7 points of our defense.
Tech is the only team that truly scares me b/c it seems like their defense has turned a corner and their offense is more dangerous than ever. Have you seen this conference? It is really a weak and bad conference and we have a 90% shot at running the table. You are also discrediting this team way to much. It is much better than you think. We are not top 10 but i think we are the second or third best team in this conference.
They have turned a corner b/c though ISU is bad we came in and put the hammer on them and we didn't do that to UCF, Arkie State, or TCU.
by longhorn4life on Oct 14, 2007 8:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
PB -
I agreed with you about Colt McCoy ---> He definitely deserved to be an Offensive MVP!
He played like never had concussion injury before. Today, he can pass + run anywhere he wants.
One of his greatest plays was two defensive lineman were sandwich him & he got almost fell down but he still able to balance his body and stood up & escaped the tackle & threw a TD. Unbelievable! I wish he was that elusive when he was playin Kansas State & OU game. Oh well...
Anyway, I am very glad to see He Is Back! This is the Real McCoy we want to see coming to the rest of this season:)
Hook'em!
by Horns98 on Oct 13, 2007 11:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
yea...that was pretty badass...
colt looked almost like vy against iowa defense...lol
by hookemkp on Oct 13, 2007 11:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmmm so i guess this means...
i should give killbrew a break?? god i swear that guy is a @#$(!@#%(!@%(*^(!#P$#@(^!(%@...excuse my french
by hookemkp on Oct 13, 2007 11:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
that just can't be...
I don't think we're obligated to give Killebrew a break until he's watching the young LBs full-time along with his veteran compadres... I suppose doing all his damage on special teams. Bad as that is, I'd live with it easier if that was the only damage.
I've given up on Mack ever not starting his terrifically experienced LBs. I don't know what hold they've got on him, but I sure hope it was worth this whole year...
sorry... actually feeling pretty good about today's game and all, and I like all the upsets continuing this year, but the very thought of Derry/Bobino/Killebrew taking most of the snaps away from Kindle/Norton/Muckelroy (and btw- please, Muck, don't make that a Shipley-style hamstring!!!) just aggravates me still.
by agent orange on Oct 14, 2007 3:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do we have too be nice to Kill????q
He did have 2 PF's on special teams.
by Bevoboy94 on Oct 14, 2007 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess
I think Mack has stuck with Killebrew beyond all reason because at the start of the season he was annointed as the leader of the defense. He was the rah-rah guy that would motivate the others. Sadly, he has become a major embarrassment and is hurting the team so much that he can't be allowed to start. And this week he showed that he cannot be allowed play on special teams either.
by Caradoc on Oct 14, 2007 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mack not paying attention to midseason concerns?
I guess I beg to differ, PB. Yes it's true that we played Iowa State so it's hard to know how much better or worse we are, but I noticed several things that made me think Mack is at least half awake.
- Jamaal Charles did not start the game and did not play until the second quarter. Obviously there was no mention of fumbling as the reason for this, but it seemed clear to me. Also, Jamaal was holding the ball in his right hand on all runs (since it seems that his left hand isn't as strong since a "stinger" to his left arm in the TCU game), and wrapping up with both hands often. I think he got the message - no more fumbling.
- After taking the wrong angle on several plays and overrunning the hole on 3-4 more, plus his personal fouls, Robert Killebrew was pulled from the game and didn't show up again until the score was 49-3. The cameras showed Killebrew talking to Mack twice, and though Mack didn't look mad, Kellibrew was playing with his feet. I don't know what will be reported publicly, but it seemed clear to me that Mack has seen enough and Killebrew is officially demoted.
- Kindle deserves starter staus for the rest of the year. On Iowa State's first three drives, with Killebrew in the game, Iowa State had 11 first downs and two field goal attempts. The game was 14-3 and had the feel of our earlier Arkie State and UCF games. Erick Jackson or someone else in the secondary was making all the tackles. Killebrew exits, Kindle in. Every other play is Kindle smacking someone. The LB's start making most of the tackles. The pass rush starts getting in Meyer's face. Jared Norton also got some major PT, and while I think he is a good pass rusher, he made several poor plays where he took the wrong angle in attacking the ball carrier and the guy just ran right by him, so. One never knows for sure, but I think we've seen at least one change in the guard.
- The coaching staff showed offensive creativity in several ways. They played Chiles when the game was still on the line. They put in packages designed for the personnel in the game. For example, UT started off no-huddle with an empty backfield. This "surprise" led directly to the long pass to Shipley because the safety on that side had too many people to choose from and the corner gave up. When JC finally came into the game, the offense started running counter pitches, sweeps, and traps rather than the zone read draw. Charles lined up at wide receiver about six times. They didn't run the packages with Chiles in the backfield, but I suspect that's because they knew he would be taking lots of snaps at QB. Heck they even ran the option with both McCoy and Chiles.
- Offensive linemen Michael Huey, Kyle Hix, and Buck Burnette all got significant numbers of snaps. They were in on the third series when Chiles and the second team as a unit ran 7 plays. Burnette is clearly not ready for prime time and right now isn't an upgrade to Griffin, but the other two plus Tray Allen did OK. Without Burnette's holding call, that second unit might have put together a decent drive. In any case, the coaches took a pretty good look, and it wasn't all in garbage time.
I agree that not all the problem areas, particularly the secondary, saw much change, but there was a sense of toughness about playing time and an offensive adaptability that I don't recall seeing at a UT game.
by burnt in ny on Oct 14, 2007 7:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My son..
was defensive MVP! yes sir.
He was laying lick, after lick, after lick, on any ISU ball carrier. He also used his speed and recorded a couple QB hurries if i'm not mistaken.
by mvplonghorns on Oct 14, 2007 10:36 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Amen on Kindle
Whenever he arrived at the ballcarrier, the play was OVER immediately! And not only did he bring them down, he brought them down with authority. That's how you play linebacker - arrive angry and put down the guy carrying the ball with extreme prejudice.
The entire defense played well after the first quarter, but Kindle stood head and shoulders above them all.
by beast in bama on Oct 14, 2007 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My concerns are similar
If we see the trio of Babino, Derry, and Killebrew trotted out against Texas Tech and possibly even Okie State things won't be good.
In addition, Drew Kelson must really be a bad player at safety if he cannot displace Jackson. Also, not playing a younger player and developing him out of the fear of mistakes leaves one to ask, are you watching Jackson? This secondary is not a good match-up for the big receivers of Okie State and the scheme of Texas Tech. The only chance, and it has been 10 years in the waiting, is a pass rush. The young, aggressive LB corp is our best hope for that.
Even the aggie ground game is problematic for the woeful group of LB's we have.
by thirtyandzero on Oct 14, 2007 11:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Charles...
Let me get this straight. Charles does just about everything he can in this system to contribute to the team, but he's been fumble-prone, so he gets benched to start the game. Meanwhile, the mighty trio of Bobino, Killebrew and Derry do absolutely NOTHING right pretty much the entire season, and they're allowed to get 2:1 reps on the better players? Explain that to me, Mack.
And "face rape" announcer actually had a good point about Charles that no one has bothered to bring up. He did suffer some kind of injury at the end of the TCU half, something akin to a stinger. Could "face rape" announcer actually be correct in that is the reason Charles has been fumbling with his left arm? The coaches did a great job hiding Limas' wrist injury before dropping the bombshell that he was done for the season; could the Charles injury be in the same boat?
by jc25 on Oct 14, 2007 12:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i read somewhere
that all 4 of charles' fumbles this year have been with him carrying the ball in his left hand (and all 4 have come since the TCU game).
and the "face rape" color guy did a good job of pointing out times when jamaal would normally have the ball in his left hand but kept it in this right. and then one time he was holding it in his left hand and he almost fumbled. unfortunately, that color guys also used the phrase "face rape" like 7 times.
by billyzane on Oct 14, 2007 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Will he get reprimanded
Do you think that he will get punished or ostracized b/c he said "face rape". You know that there are people that will take this think over the top espically women's activists.
by longhorn4life on Oct 14, 2007 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i hope he does get reprimanded
that's an incredibly offensive and insensitive thing to say in any context, let alone multiple times on a national television broadcast.
the kid had his helmet ripped off. that sucks. it should have been called a penalty. but it's in no way comparable to rape of any kind, no matter how humorous-sounding the phrase is.
by billyzane on Oct 14, 2007 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Face raked" maybe?
I think it could have been either raked or raped. For his sake, I hope it was the former.
by funk on Oct 14, 2007 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
IF Kill isn't benched for next
week, I absolutely understand why we are having off the field problems. If you can't control one of your "leaders", you can't control anyone. Kill looked like a kid asking for one more chance after beng grounded. I thought the scene was pathetic. Where's Akina in this? He went to Mack before Akina? I don't get it. This team needs leadership badly.
I know everyone wants to be happy but what changes really occurred?
Colt is still under throwing everyone deep.
The coaches kept Colt in the game far too long and missed a great opportunity to play Chiles and Harris more.
Chiles isn't being given a real chance to succeed. He knows he has a series to produce or he wont see playing time until it's garbage. No one can learn in that type of environment. It's natural to press.
They lined Charles up wide and threw to him once?
PB is right in that these scrimmages mask reality.
Glad we won but my concerns for this team didn't change a bit.
by thanos on Oct 14, 2007 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It didn't make sense to me either
to play Colt as long as he did.
Maybe he was trying to get Colt in rhythm after some bad outings, or build up his confidence, or maybe just get him some stats so the press will lay off his td-int ratio (that last one might not be the worst idea in the world).
But I think he sent a clear message that he has no plans for Chiles any time soon. Chiles easily could have had 4-6 good series with which the coaching staff could have either given him valuable back-up experience or evaluated the potential for building part of the offense around him. Instead he got one or two garbage series before Harris was put in.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 14, 2007 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hear you. I truly
struggle comprehending what our plan is for development. If you are just this obstinate, we are better off with different leadership. When I ask myself what I would miss about Mack Brown, his recruiting prowness is the only thing that I worry about replacing. Even at that, UT recruits itself to a very large degree so long as it wins.
by thanos on Oct 14, 2007 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Closed Captioning typed it as "raked"
Another possibility: "face scraped"
by the other Andrew on Oct 14, 2007 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah it was poor taste
It was poor taste and there were maybe 10,000 people that actually saw the broadcast but there is no such thing as face rape so it isn't to offensive. It was poor taste and judgement but i don't think it was offensive b/c there is no such thing as face rape.
by longhorn4life on Oct 14, 2007 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the point is
that he was saying "what happened to blythe was like him getting raped." it's the same thing as him saying "he got raped on that play" on a pass-interference call. the fact that he used the qualifying term "face" because the offense was directed at Blythe's head doesn't make it any less offensive.
oh, and on a lighter note, if you don't think there's such a thing as face rape, you clearly haven't been perusing urban dictionary lately. [link not recommended for work]
by billyzane on Oct 14, 2007 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright You Win
Fine it is offensive but this is just one more example of the wussification and over PC of America. He made a crude joke but i guess in this day and age anything is offensive.
by longhorn4life on Oct 14, 2007 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you and i differ on that last point
at least to a certain degree, anyway. but whatever, we don't need to get into it on a sports blog.
but i will note that one someone who might agree with you is our old (banned multiple times) friend Cap'n Dhab: he's a progressive one, that Dhab.
by billyzane on Oct 14, 2007 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats cool
You are completely right. This not the place to argue about stuff. We will agree to disagree.
by longhorn4life on Oct 14, 2007 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chiles and Charles
I was almost at the end of my comments when I bumped a key and it all disappeared into the ether and I was suddenly looking at the Windows screen. Rather than try to recreate it all, I will boil it down to these 2 points. First, I agree we need to see more Chiles, but it does little good if he is not allowed to work on his passing. Second, I don't know if Charles had limited duty as a punishment for his fumble and tipped pass or they just wanted to work on McCoy's passing and confidence. (They hardly ran at all the first quarter or so except when McCoy took off running.) However, unless they have given up on Charles (a mistake IMHO), then he should have been used much more to give him practice holding onto the ball when the games is not on the line.
by OBdoc on Oct 15, 2007 8:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
