Whoops, We Found An Explosive Offense
First, join me: "WOOOOOO!!!!"
Whoop like an Aggie at a sheep farm, Longhorn fans. And not because we beat Nebraska - that was to be expected. Whoop because we got an explosive performance in the fourth quarter the likes of which we haven't seen since... well, since 2005.
No matter what Mack Brown was saying, this Texas offense was stuck in a deep, nasty rut. For three quarters today, the offense settled right into that rut, with moderate running success, non-existent vertical passing, Colt McCoy body-slamming, and general incompetence. It was an exercise in futility, until....
Well, let's just look at the Jamaal Charles rush chart, shall we?
Unofficial numbers.
Something pretty clearly changed there, now didn't it?
Let's take one more look, with a little graphic illustration for visual aid:
Let's be super-duper-extra-motherf-cking clear about the situation right now.
HALF-TRUTH #1: You're gonna hear a lot of BS like this:
That was the range of emotion Saturday when Texas scored a come-from-behind 28-25 victory over Nebraska at Royal-Memorial Stadium.
Charles, the Longhorn running back, had his share of one- and two-yard runs, bringing out occasional boos from the crowd of 85,968
And then he absolutely broke loose in the fourth quarter with three touchdown runs of 25, 86 and 40 yards.
THE TRUTH: Fans weren't booing Jamaal Charles. They were booing Greg Davis. They were booing one of the single worst offensive gameplans any Texas fan has ever seen, and for most folks, that's saying a lot. Few doubt Jamaal Charles' ability. Many tear their hair out watching Greg Davis fail to put together an offensive package that works well.
****
HALF-TRUTH #2: You're gonna hear a lot of BS like this:
THE TRUTH: Back it up to Tuesday's conversation at BON, when we talked about Charles' struggles. In particular, the following argument was articulated:
1. Begin transitioning from Colt McCoy to John Chiles, in an effort to rebuild the zone-read offensive firepower from 2005.
2. Accelerate the transition from the McCoy-based shotgun pass attack to a more balanced system featuring increased power rushing.
Ultimately, I said I had no faith in the coaches realistically thinking about #1 (where Charles could thrive), so we focused on #2 and whether the Texas offense could/would succeed with JC being the main guy.
Well, what happened today?
Texas went with JC as its main tailback, didn't change the system, and floundered for three quarters. After poor Colt McCoy got hammered for the fortieth time, he had to take a play off to recover. John Chiles came in, Texas ran the zone read, the defense paused to watch John Chiles, and off went Jamaal Charles for 25 yards. Even after McCoy returned, the offense kept running the zone read, with McCoy finally keeping the ball, and everything opened up as one would expect against a team like Nebraska.
It was, for the first time all year, an explosive offense.
In fact, the only bad play in the fourth quarter came when Greg Davis got away from the run, called a pass play, and let McCoy get hammered again. Nebraska intercepted the ball and the Texas defense was forced to make a stand.
Anyone who dares try to say I've sold Jamaal Charles short needs to re-read everything I've ever said about the kid and how he can and does thrive. My only argument for using Charles differently was centered around this staff's commitment to a Colt McCoy-based offense.
After today, with Jamaal Charles sticking his middle finger up at all of us who were prepared to let things drift that way, the better question might be: is it time to retire the ineffective Colt-based offense?
I mean, it was kinda cool having an explosive offense for one quarter, right?
And not just 'cause Mack says so.
--PB--
18 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Don't mean to be a downer, but...
Nebraska has one of the worst defenses against the rush in the country. We should have been running the whole game (something I think pretty much everyone knew except for GD and his abortion of a game plan), but I don't know that the fourth quarter offense we displayed would be "explosive" against a competent defense.
And today was the absolute perfect opportunity to get Chiles some meaningful playing time with the first team offense, and we screwed that up too. Yet another coaching failure.
Yes, but...
Just look at West Virginia. Look at Vince Young when he was a freshman. Look at any number of teams with a dynamic rushing threat at quarterback - whether he can pass or not.
The results are the same - explosive ability to run the football. Could we reach VY championship heights again? That's a super tall order, and way, way down the line. But just taking the short-term view, it's hard to argue that we couldn't and wouldn't be better than the mess we've become in the status quo.
I think that's the big lesson.
Explosive against who?
Dynamic QBs who cant throw the ball make for huge problems against lesser opponents, but they do not make championship caliber offenses.
How many TDs would Vince have scored in the Big Easy? I mean East? My guess? One hundred thousand million.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 29, 2007 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions
I hate to disagree, but not so fast...
I think what you saw today was not a result of bringing in Chiles (for one play I might add), rather it was a result of GD pulling his head out from between the mounds of flesh that crack before his a**hole and realizing after 3 quarters of play that Nebraska was loading the line and leaving no one to cover the run should one break through the line. GD, i think, deserves the credit for calling some plays that he should have been calling the entire game. What happened to McGee after his 18 yard run early in the game? That should have been a signal to the ole' fart right away that the middle was soft on the run. Why wasn't GD calling that instead of letting Nebraska unload against the pass for 3 quarters. A more balanced offense is definitely what we need, but we need an offense that can run the ball every game like we did today. And we also need a coaching staff that realizes that and calls a game accordingly. If Texas does that, then Colt isn't spending the night in the hospital after every game.
So, I agree with point #2 in "The Truth" and I think that is what you saw today. Not a result of bringing in Chiles and scrapping the "Colt Style" offense.
yeah-
even the game announcers were talking about how suprised they were that we hadn't made adjustments after halftime.
by crocodile235 on Oct 28, 2007 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions
In reality
what we saw today was not an explosive offense, it was an expolsive performance by one member of that offense. By and large, the offense still sucks, which is mostly Davis's fault, but Colt is terrible. He had one good play today (his run in the 4th). And, just to defend the initial post, having actually been at the game today, there was no booing JC. It was booing Greg Davis, and Colt.
Nebraska sucks, and we almost lost to them. They have a shit awful defense, and we couldn't score a touchdown until late in the game. I cannot begin to express how happy I am that JC has finally performed like we all thought/hoped/wanted him to. There are still massive problems with the offense that will not allow us to win out if we don't fix them. I have seen NO improvement or adjustments since the beginning of the season. That is terrible coaching.
Anyone at the game today should have heard and felt the excitement when Chiles came in, and also should have heard and felt the disappointment when Colt came back. I am truly concerned that Mack won't have the sense to replace Colt with someone better, this year, or in the next 2. All that means is more of the same: accepted mediocrity.
by Texas Our Texas on Oct 27, 2007 7:59 PM CDT reply actions
Screw people
that boo Colt, JC (yes there were people booing him, I sat next to some of them), and the other teams we play.
Mildly screw people that boo coaches and refs, but not too seriously.
I was not as embarrassed as I usually am at our fans this time. We actually got loud before we started winning the game (Kindle's stop on 3rd and 1), and there was relatively little booing of the Nebraska players (even though the f---s that did boo, decided it was worth doing in the middle of singing "Texas Fight"). There was some kind of shit-storm coming down when Callahan was screaming at the refs about that weird play that got reviewed after another play had already been run, but I guess some of that will happen. Anyone who goes so far as to boo any player for making a mistake or a bad play, however, is falling far short of respectability. They're just out there giving the best they have within the play that's called, and no one should fault them for that.
In regards to Colt, specifically, it's obvious that he was stuck in Bad-Colt mode for much of the game, but you have to credit him for coming back out after getting his bell rung and running right at the defense. He stayed in there and took the shots and gave a hell of an effort even after we'd been ass-pounded for three quarters. Just like Ryan in the BC-VT game on Thursday; What was great about that performance was not giving up on your game plan and your team, even after about 45 minutes of reasons to just go back and chill in the comfy locker room and play some X-box. Oh, yeah, and there were those boos, just for support.
Well,
Colt has been stuck in Bad Colt mode since K-State last year. I don't fault him for having a noddle for an arm, or for trying to run through 300 pound linemen when he should have stayed in the pocket. I fault the coaches for keeping him in the game when there are superior players on the bench.
I think booing the players is disgusting. I think booing the coaches, especially after terrible coaching, game afer game, play after play, is quite warranted. Mack doesn't seem to care that our offense is in the shitter, so until he opens his eyes and starts making the tough decisions that will get the team back to where we need to be, I see no problem with expressing our dissatisfaction.
by Texas Our Texas on Oct 28, 2007 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, which is it boys and girls?
You've been clamoring at various times for more vondrell, more ogbonnaya, less charles, less colt, more chiles, more zone read, more i-formation, less shotgun, more north-south, less east-west. you can't have it all.
if you noticed, all those runs that charles had were east-west with zone blocking from the o-line. it worked because colt showed nebraska he was a threat to run. there's nothing inherently wrong with east-west running if the holes open up, as they did today. this is great, but neither vondrell nor oggie is particularly suited to this type of running. chiles is more capable with this style of offense, but colt showed today that he can run it too.
colt, vondrell and oggie are much better suited to a traditional pro-style offense with the QB under center and more downhill running (and a bit of FB action). colt can run this offense very well, i think. chiles absolutely cannot - at least not anytime soon. as a result, this set has the added advantage of us actually using our ridiculous corps of WR's.
which is preferable? i don't know. it's all very confusing. but let's not pretend there are eternal truths about how everything should be done that would automatically fix this team and that we somehow understand them. because obviosuly, with our list of demands being so contradictory, we don't.
[p.s. SERIOUSLY. that was the worst offensive game plan i've ever seen in my life. GD had 2 good weeks against OU and ISU and nothing but crap since. i guess even a broken clock is right twice a day -- or was it a terrible coordinator is right twice a season? One of those two....]
This reminds me of a criticism
of Charlie Weiss that I heard earlier this season. It basically stated that, instead of adopting an offensive identity, he changes his offense from week to week based on the opposition. He thinks he's clever enough to implement any gameplan he wants.
History shows this is unprecedented. Successful teams have an identity. They get into a rhythm.
One problem I haven't heard [specifically] addressed here is the fact that Mack recruits different types of players. We have some skill-position guys that are "Zone Read" guys, and we have some skill-position guys that are "Traditional Pro-Style" guys. And we can neither mix the personnel, nor can we go back and forth between them.
Perhaps Mack needs to decide on a long-term philosophy and recruit for it, rather than just taking the best athletes available. McCoy and Chiles have no business being offered scholarships at the same school during the same era. It doesn't make any sense.
Between the two, I would normally prefer to build around McCoy. That is to say, if we fired GD tomorrow, I'd say stick with McCoy. The reason is that I think the Spread/ZoneRead thing is a trend. It may stick around, it may not, but my money says defenses will figure it out within a few years. Also, a Pro package allows for you to insert different kinds of talent.
The problem is that GD will not be fired tomorrow. And since that is the reality, the pragmatist in me says stick with the ZoneRead and use Chiles. Two reasons:
- Its the only system GD has been able to succeed with and...
- It is an offense that puts the game in the hands of the QB and not in the hands of GD.
So this is what we've come to. We have to make longterm revisions in order to counter the liability that GD creates within our game plans. But either way, a clear path needs to be paved, because this mixed scheme, mixed personnel thing is not flying.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 27, 2007 8:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed PB
Once the decision was made to run the zone readish style running attack in the 4th, why do it with McCoy when you have Chiles?
Also, if Chiles does plays more, it is a virtual lock he gets Finley involved in the game much more than Colt/GD's gameplan when he has to throw. Inexperienced QB's love the TE.
I could envision an offense where Finley is the main receiving option and Chiles, Charles and McGee run a zone read style offense. Shipley and Cosby play Wes Welker type roles catching short slants or even occasional screen plays (Davis wouldn't totally abandon his attempt to castrate the offense). This is our most explosive personnel set and plays to our relative strengths.
You just don't run that kind of offense with Colt against anyone else but Nebraska and get a win.
by Useful Idiot on Oct 27, 2007 8:23 PM CDT reply actions
Why McCoy?
I assume the advantage of keeping McCoy in when they were playing a style more suited for Chiles is that with McCoy the defense always has to be aware of the possibility of the pass; not so with Chiles. (Has Chiles yet completed a pass this year?)
odd
It sounds like each of us watched 4 different games.
Lokey is nice to have and use when you are on the goal line but lets not get carried away.
Jamaal is cut happy.
Curiously, what game were the refs watching?
Personally, Jon chiles coming in the one play cannot be understated. Watch the linebacker and the end spying him. To freeze one side side of the defensive unit is a weapon.
Thank you Ryan Bailey and mostly the defense for keeping us in the game.
Greg Davis time has come and gone.
by anonyMoose on Oct 27, 2007 8:29 PM CDT reply actions
We only have two problems....
Obviously a more astute and aggressive OC is desperately needed. But lets get real guys, our problems with the offensive line is the core issue why Colt is getting hammered every game and why the run game only works occasionally.
Nebraska is horrible against the run, but played with emotion for 3 quarters, then wore out.
We need some more NFL quality linemen....until then the debate will only get louder.
If we are lucky we'll win 2 out of the next 3, and win another secondary bowl. 10-3
Maybe white mettalic painted helmets is what we need.
by MeatchickenHorn on Oct 27, 2007 10:52 PM CDT reply actions
Frustration
This was probably the most frustrating game for me to watch in a long time.
We have to have running plays that allow our "Olympic caliber speed" running back to not get caught by a blitzing cornerback. The problem is the scheme, the problem is the scheme, our scheme sucks. Who wouldn't pound the ball against Nebraska? Only Texas.
With McGee to relieve Charles, we should have seen 50+ rushing attempts out there, and NONE BY COLT. For the love, its like we are trying to kill the guy. I know he is tough, I know he wants to escape our poor blocking, but tell the kid to slide, or he'll be Troy-ed before he even gets to the NFL. Trent Green is cringing watching Colt play. If a play breaks down, and he can make some yards on the ground, ok do it, but slide man. No more concussions. I cant believe we keep putting him at risk like that, especially in games where he is already getting beat up behind the line.
I sure am glad we burned Chiles' redshirt. At least when we have perfect opportunities to use him and the "storm offense" we capitalize on it, and not just give him one drive a game except in the one game where he would really shine. Oh wait...
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 29, 2007 10:20 AM CDT reply actions
I don't think...
...it has been said enough. Greg Davis needs to be "removed" from his "offensive" position. There. As far as the Zone read, no Colt isn't your guy for that tactic. But I cannot emphisize enough how surprised, elated and proud of Colt I was on Saturday. It's almost like I could see this going on in the huddle between plays. 1st down run (2yards) 2nd down run (2yards) 3rd down drop back to pass (black shirt surround McCoy he just gets the ball away and is mauled from behind steps after the throw) No flag. I guess it's okay to hit late as long as it's on Colt. I've seen it week after weekk. What does Colt say to the refs before the game? Maybe he sould avoid talking about the refs daughters. They sure seem to not see some of these licks he's been taking. So next series, zone read McCoy, slips through the left side off tackle and is hammered by the same guy who hit him late earlier. I know that hit hurt. I still have a bruise from it. But this kid who has had mulitple concussions gets up and puts the ball down in front of the guy and starts pumping up the crowd like he's hulk hogan. My point is that everytime these kids have been against the wall, it seems to me that it is their own talent that has helped them bounce back and stand tall. You think greg davis would have called a flag route with 7 seconds left at the 20 yard line? or would he have kicked it? we don't even need to talk about that one. Chiles is your zone read guy for sure. But Colt showed me something Saturday. He showed me he's got some guts some huevos, and hopefully some anger in that mild mannered boy next door. Shiney, happy, mild mannered people rarely win football games.

by 




























