Talkin' Texas Football: Oklahoma Week (Part 1)

by PB @ BON on Oct 6, 2008 4:13 PM CDT in Football

PB: Alright Big Roy. Think back to your summer expectations and compare with your thoughts now. What's changed?

Big Roy: Colt McCoy is better than expected. He looks incredibly strong and fast and he's making quick decisions with the ball. I'm less worried about the defense right now than I was because you can see they are playing with a "won't fail" attitude-particularly the defensive line. The secondary looks adequate, which was a huge question mark. I feel a little bit more confident about the upcoming schedule, but it still looks difficult.

PB: That's about where I am in terms of evaluations, but let's break this down starting with McCoy, because so much of any and all optimism where the next four weeks are concerned is founded on what we've seen from him so far.

True or False: McCoy can play at a high enough level in conference play to overcome Texas' lack of a rushing game from the tailback position.

Big Roy: True. I'm actually confident that Colt can run well in conference. We saw the quarterback draw for the first time against Arkansas and I like it. I was thinking about this yesterday: Colt is 30 pounds heavier than he was when he got here. At 180 pounds, he was the same size or smaller than every defensive player. Now, at 210 or so, he's closer in size to linebackers and bigger than most defensive backs. And he looks fast. I'm thinking that I want Colt running the ball 6-8 times against OU on designed plays. I think he can handle it. Name a big hitter on OU's defense.

PB: I'm not done with this line of questioning yet. A follow up, then: Does Texas need anything from the receiving corps in addition to Shipley-Cosby to win any/all of the upcoming four games?

Big Roy: That's a more difficult question. The tight ends worry me right now. I don't see anything from Greg Smith and Peter Ullman, while Ian Harris was flat-out awful pass blocking against Arkansas (and out injured against CU). As far as the receivers are concerned, I can't decide if it's good or bad that Williams, Kirkendoll, Collins, et al. haven't had more of an impact. On one hand, I think Colt has such a feel for where Shipley and Cosby are that he doesn't need to look for the others. On the other, it's particularly disturbing that none of the other receivers have shown anything more than glimpses. In the end, I think a lot of the success depends on how defenses decide to play Cosby and Shipley. Teams have given Texas everything underneath by playing soft coverage. If teams decide to press our receivers, can they get open?

The 2008 Texas offense.

PB: Here's the problem I see with accepting all of your statements to this point: You're forced to conclude that Texas' three Strong Elements (Colt passer, Colt runner, and two very solid WRs) is sufficiently outstanding that a good defense/defensive coordinator can't game plan it. That seem right to you?

Big Roy: Yup, I agree. But besides OU's good defensive line, does any defensive unit that Texas will face in the next month scare you? I mean, the offenses are great in the Big 12, but I think there are serious problems in every secondary around the conference. Look at Missouri letting Illini receivers run free all game.

PB: We can deal with the rest of the Big 12 another time; it's OU week. So let's start there. First, what scares you most about the Sooners?

Big Roy: The line play on both sides of the ball. With the running game looking like it has, the poor run blocking of our offensive line could be a huge problem. And their mammoth offensive line will test Will Muschamp's theory of playing smaller, quicker defenders inside against spread teams.

PB: I'm actually good with the smaller/quicker thing. My worry is not that Oklahoma will power its way past us; my fear involves streaking blurs of Johnson-Gresham-Iglesias. In fact, if I'm Will Muschamp, I'd absolutely focus 100% on taking out the big play from Oklahoma. Make Murray grind consistently and Bradford take what's there. Wrap tackles, hit hard, see about forcing a turnover if Bradford tries to overdo what we're giving him.

Big Roy: I think you're absolutely correct with your worries. Here's why I didn't list the OU receiving options as the biggest threats: OU has gotten big plays by throwing the ball down the field and I think the Texas defense is ready to combat that more than any other team OU has faced. Man up on the outside and get pressure with the front four and I think Texas can limit the big plays. Even though I'm worried about their offensive line, I think getting pressure in the face of Bradford could swing the game. Do you think the Texas D-Line is up to the task?

PB: They have to be, and no two players are more important than Houston & Miller inside. If either isn't available, it becomes too steep an uphill climb. Texas needs A+ games from those two, and a steady stream of Hell rotating on the ends: Orakpo, Melton, Jones, Acho, Carter--any fresh body who can go all out trying to force Bradford to make decisions a half-second before he'd like.

Big Roy: Definitely, it's all about disrupting the timing. Against inferior o-lines, the Texas defense has done that the last three weeks in spades. This is a seriously talented line going against another seriously talented line. You forgot to mention Sergio Kindle, who has the speed/power combination to give offensive linemen fits.

PB: He's the wild card, and I didn't mention him because I'm sitting here trying to think about what I'd do with him. Well, actually--what Muschamp will do with him. In four short games, we literally have witnessed Sergio Kindle transform from a pure beast of an athlete into Muschamp's personal weapon of precise destruction: the all-purpose, uniquely lethal assassin Muschamp can calibrate exactly to punctuate his defensive strategy for a given opponent. (God that felt good to type.)

So I continue to wonder... how is the Kindle best deployed to defeat OU?

Big Roy: I was thinking about this earlier and wonder about what the Buck Package can do. Can it confuse their offensive line? Shifting before the snap could really confuse their blocking assignments. I'm looking for Muschamp to use the package more than he has to this point in the year. That's being multiple and could be the ace up his sleeve. Stand up Kindle and Orakpo and let them exploit gaps.

PB: I think you're exactly right. The key to football--both ways--is thinking. You want your guys reacting, and the other team thinking. If we can count on that from Muschamp, less clear is the game plan on offense.

In Part 2, an exchange on the offense.

0 recs | Comment 42 comments | Add comment |

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I have a feeling...

… we’re not going to like part 2 as much as we do this one. This one went down like smooth quarter-baked corn bread, the gritty milkiness being the idea that our 175 lb DBs can tackle any of OUs WR’s. I can almost guarantee that Palmer gets a long ball thrown on him despite having good coverage, simply because he’s short and can’t afford to give up that single step to look for the ball. I’ll also bet Beasley blows a tackle that turns into a 50+ yard gain. If we can survive that, or somehow match it, we’re halfway home.

by Horn Brain on Oct 6, 2008 5:00 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Long ball on Palmer

I think it is more likely that Palmer gets a steady diet of 15 yard outs to deal with. On the long pass, Palmer will get safety help (and Bradford is more likely to get pressured). On the 15 yard out, Palmer is on his own. It is a quick pass to throw, so it will be difficult for UT to pressure Bradford.

I do think they will pick on Palmer somehow.

by Kafka on Oct 6, 2008 5:50 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

OU throws a ton of dink and dunk

At least it seems that way. DBs will need to make tackles early, the Sooners get a ton of yards after catch.

by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 6, 2008 7:07 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

DB's need to punish WR's on those passes.

DBs will need to make tackles early

It would go along ways towards slowing down their passing attack if our DB’s could absolutely punish the OU WR’s the way Ross and Co. did in 2006.

by Horncasting on Oct 7, 2008 9:29 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

A 15 yard out...

… isn’t exactly a quick pass to throw. It takes pretty good protection to let the route develop and allow the QB step up and make a good throw. I agree that he will have safety help most of the time (if he doesn’t, it could be a long day), but it will be very difficult for him to man up on Iglesias/Johnson/Chaney/Tennell and cover the deep out route. Any play that he’s on an island will require significant pressure. Without it, we’ll be hearing a lot of Boomer Sooner.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 6, 2008 7:20 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Quickness of 15 yard out

The QB actually has to throw the 15 yard out pretty quickly because the ball is in the air for awhile (because of the distance to the sideline) and is thrown before the WR makes his cut 15 yards down field. Pretty much the QB gets the snap, gets his feet set and throws the ball. There is no waiting for a pattern to develop. If the D is able to pressure the QB on quick outs, the O simply runs 10 yard outs instead.

The problem with a 10 yard or 15 yard out pattern is not that it takes a long time to get the pass off or that it requires good protection to throw. The problem for the QB is that you have to have a major league arm to throw it and that if it gets picked off, it is probably a quick 6 for the D.

Since Bradford has a real strong/accurate arm, OU has tall WRs and Palmer is short, the risk of interception is reduced a bunch. I’m guessing we see a lot of quick outs on Saturday.

by Kafka on Oct 6, 2008 8:08 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Yes, it's thrown before the cut...

…but you still have to get good protection. Think back to Saturday against Colorado. With the pressure that Texas got most of the night, the Buffs had no chance to throw a 15 yard out (not that Cody Hawkins has the arm anyway, but that’s not the point). Even if the QB has to move his feet the slightest bit, the timing will be thrown off and he won’t be able to step into the throw like he wants and really rocket the ball out to the sideline. I see your points, but this is not a quick, 3-step-drop type of throw.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 6, 2008 8:35 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Number crunching

This arithmetic applies to a 10 yard out (since I already said that if 15 yards is too long, then shorten the quick out to 10 yards). A 10 yard out is long enough for a first down and short enough to make it difficult for the safety to break up the pass (i.e. the risk/reward ratio is even worse than a 15 yard out).

There is a minimal need for good pass protection on a quick out because it is thrown so quickly. Let’s assume the QB is standing at a point equidistant from each sideline, i.e. about 80 feet from the sideline. If he throws a 10 yard out, the ball travels about 90 feet (i.e. the square root of (80 squared plus 40 squared (where 40 = 30 feet downfield plus the QB is 10 feet behind the LOS)).

IIRC, a football pass tops out at about 60 mph or 88 fps. That means it takes about 1 second for the ball to travel that 90 feet to the receiver. The receiver travels that 10 yards downfield in maybe 1.2 seconds and is ready to catch the ball in maybe .2 seconds after that (for a total of < 1.5 seconds).

Since the ball has to get to the receiver in < 1.5 seconds and it takes a second to get there, that leaves the QB < .5 seconds to throw the pass. In other words, on a quick out, the QB has to get rid of the ball immediately. Might be a good idea to throw that baby from the shotgun.

UT will not get to Bradford as quickly as they got to the CU QB. OU has a running game that the horns will have to respect and an excellent pass blocking O line. If the OU QB gets rid of the ball immediately (say .5 seconds), UT cannot pressure him.

It is a difficult pass to throw (very few college QBs can make this throw reliably) but if OU can throw it well, it will be very difficult for Palmer to break it up.

by Kafka on Oct 7, 2008 12:16 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Very nice...

… I don’t care how good Orakpo is. If Bradford makes that throw from the shotgun in half a second, then nobody will touch him.

I’m glad you took the time to do the math. I did too, but in a different way. Cue up the Arkansas game on MBTF and watch two plays:

1.Scroll to 13 minutes left in the 3rd quarter. 2nd and 8, Texas ball on the Arkansas 35. Colt hits Jordan on a beautiful 10 yard out route (though he was lined up off the line so he actually runs about 12). I timed it and found that it took Colt about 2.4 seconds from snap to throw, and Shipley about 2.3 seconds from the start of his route to the cut. Notice the fantastic protection on the play.

2.Scroll to 10:03 remaining in the 1st quarter. 3rd and 6, Arkansas ball on the Texas 27. I’m not sure that any Hog receivers were running an out on the play, but Dick takes a drop similar to the one Colt took on the play above. From the time the ball is snapped to when Dick feels the pressure is about 1.5 seconds, and he basically had no chance to throw the ball anywhere with accuracy.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 7, 2008 8:44 AM CDT up reply reply 1 recs

Safety help

I forgot to mention that Palmer is not going to have any safety help on a quick out. The risk/reward ratio is too high for the safety to help out on a quick out. The safety is a safety net to prevent the long pass. If he comes up and tries to break up (relatively) short passes, there is a major risk that he gets burned by a long pass.

Palmer will be on an island when defending the quick out. The safety may help Palmer make the tackle after the reception but he won’t be able to help break up a pass play.

by Kafka on Oct 6, 2008 8:17 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Yes I agree...

…he’ll be on his own for out routes. I just meant I hope he has deep help for any vertical routes that OU runs. Sorry, now that I look at that, I did word it kind of ambiguously.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 6, 2008 8:40 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Isn't it great that we're not thinking about late hits

or face raping?

by abcdmetrius on Oct 6, 2008 6:20 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

4-3 vs. nickel

Doesn’t the size of OU’s line (and the relative smallness and lack of depth at DT for UT) encourage the Sooners to try to grind the horns down on the ground? The traditional thing for college coaches (and Stoops is a traditional kind of coach) is to establish the running game first. My guess is that Stoops does this to force the horns to play mostly 4-3 on downs that are not obvious passing downs. That makes play action passing much easier (i.e. because there are only two safeties to contend with and they are coming up to support the run D off the run fake). What do you think?

My guess is the horns play a lot of 4-3 to deal with OU’s power running, TE’s, and backs as receivers but the safeties are told to stay back and not provide run support until the running back passes the LOS. I’ve heard that Demarco Murray is still a step slower (from the injury he suffered last year vs Tech) and the horns play great run D so my guess is that the horns defend the run well against OU.

If the horns play a nickel and can still defend the sooners’ rushing attack well, the sooners are in trouble.

It is probably going to be a tough day for Ryan Palmer since Bradford has the accuracy and OU has tall receivers to make Palmer pay for being short. There is a good chance that UT is able to pressure Bradford effectively so that he is forced to make more short throws than usual.

It is quite simple to scheme against horns’ O. They have 3 receivers that Colt goes to: Ship, Quan, and Ogbonnaya. The horns don’t have much of a rushing attack. The horns TE is a complete non threat to receive a pass. The logical thing for Stoops to do is to play a nickel (with the nickel back being a CB rather than a safety) as his base formation and dare the horns to make him pay for it by rushing effectively.

Stoops should man up on Ship and Quan and press them on the LOS. This will disrupt the timing of pass patterns, extend the time it takes for them to get open, and encourage Colt to throw to somebody else (besides Ship and Quan). Stoops will encourage passes to Collins, Kirkendoll, and Buckner (i.e. whoever is playing the 3rd WR) in the hopes that his DB can force a fumble after the reception. That leaves two safeties to provide deep pass assistance. The sooners have a 230 pound All American safety they can deploy as either a safety or as an LB. My guess is they move him around a bunch so they are more “multiple”.

If the sooners succeed in significantly limiting the catches of Quan and Ship, then we are in trouble.

It is unlikely that Colt is going to get loose for big yards running the ball on the sooners but he should be able to turn some sacks into positive yardage. When the horns are in 3rd and long, my guess is that colt will not typically scramble for enough yards to get the first down. This would be a very good game for Colt to learn to get down before he takes the big hit. The sooners should hold the horns running attack to < 4 YPC.

The horns will be forced to pass a lot vs the sooners. They may not be able to protect Colt enough to throw long much from the pocket. Fortunately Colt runs well and throws great on the run so it will be easy for the horns to roll Colt right or left to get more time to throw downfield. This may be a critical difference in the game.

It would be a good idea to replace the TE with a 4th WR or an H back or a FB (Cody would be good at H back or FB) so there is an actual threat that OU has to deal with. An FB or H back also provides another blocker in the backfield to pick up those blitzers that Stoops sends from all angles.

The horns should play a ball control game with short passes and keep the clock running as much as possible to shorten the game and get the horn D (especially the DTs) get as much rest as possible.

by Kafka on Oct 6, 2008 7:14 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Hopefully a lot of 4-3...

…so the Horns can match personnel. A lot of OU’s offense comes from a 2 TE 1 RB personnel set. What makes them so hard to defend has a lot to do with Jermaine Gresham’s versatility. Out of this personnel, they can run a balanced Ace (1 WR and 1 TE on each side), a bunched Ace (1 WR on one side, 2 TEs and 1 WR bunched on the other), and multiple Shotgun formations (some with 2 WRs plus Gresham split out wide, or balanced with a TE and WR on each side, etc.). All these formations will be a challenge for a base 4-3 to defend against a passing offense as diverse as OU’s. If Texas’ LBs can’t handle all of these looks, they might have to resort to playing a nickel back.

This isn’t a bad thing if Muschamp brings in a nickel to match personnel or play the situation (long yardage situations; 3 or 4 WR sets), but it’s bad news if he has to put 5 DBs out there against OU’s base offense. Playing a nickel against OU’s base personnel would make it very difficult to defend the run, simply because the Sooners would have one more big body on the field than Texas would and thus, a considerable advantage up front.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 6, 2008 7:43 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

The UT LBs seem to be playing good pass D now

(much better than in the past). Muschamp has done a great job of teaching the LBs how to defend the pass and I bet they can defend OU’s TEs pretty well. They will also do a good job of tackling the OU TEs after they catch the ball.

I agree that matching up with OU physically is going to be easier with a 4-3 than a nickel. My guess is that UT plays a nickel only on obvious passing downs.

by Kafka on Oct 6, 2008 8:27 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Good pass D so far..

… but Gresham is in a whole other league. The optimist in me thinks that Texas’ LBs can do a decent job on him underneath, but the pessimist in me just isn’t sure. You’re right, tackling will be huge. Texas can’t afford to give OU cheap yards due to missed tackles.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 6, 2008 8:43 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

This is what does us in every year

We get so worried about the guys OU has on the field that we forget about the talent we have on defense. If the ’Horns are so worried about Gresham that Muschamp avoids the nickle we can forget about winning. We brought Muschamp in to change the mindset on defense — to attack rather than just defend. I expect we will use the nickle very often because it puts our best players on the field in places where they can be successful. I want to see Orakpo/Acho/Lewis/ Kindle line up over Gresham and dare him to go out in a pattern.

by BMG on Oct 6, 2008 9:36 PM CDT up reply reply 1 recs

I'm confused...

…Are you suggesting that Orakpo/Acho/Lewis/Kindle cover Gresham?

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 6, 2008 9:40 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

I don't think so

I think he’s saying, “I dare you not to stay in and block the fire-breathing defensive end who’s about to knock out your quarterback.”

--PB--

by PB @ BON on Oct 6, 2008 9:47 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Ah...

…much better. However, Orakpo, Lewis, and Kindle will be out there for most of the snaps anyway, not just in nickel packages.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 6, 2008 9:54 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

right, but

as beergut correctly points out below, if you line up in 4-3, OU will try to force a mismatch between WR/LB, WR/EARL THOMAS or BLAKE GIDEON, or TE/LB. If we line up in nickel we can still get pressure on the QB and still defend the run — not to mention we can rotate the defensive front and constantly bring fresh legs on the field. Additionally, we can blitz the extra DB which Muschamp has done often early on this year.

by BMG on Oct 7, 2008 9:46 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

True...

… the nickel will help Texas match up through the air. However, Beergut also points out that they can make that same personnel group into a ground-oriented formation without having to substitute, whereas Texas would be stuck with “small” defense on the field. I think you’re slightly underestimating the advantage that this would give OU in the run game.

This is exactly why they’re so good. You’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 7, 2008 11:12 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

good point

…of course, if we go 4-3 I naturally assume that at least one of our LBs will be taking a bad line to the RB and all but eliminating themselves from the play anyways.

There is no doubt a cost benefit analysis involved in Muschamp’s decisions (which I’ve talked about in other posts). You aren’t going to stop any single facet of OU’s offense – its just too good. Instead, you give OU something (short passes to TEs and backs, 3 or 4 yard gains on the ground) in order to really take away something more damaging (the deep ball and break away TD runs).

So, do you put a 4-3 on the field and run the risk of getting beat on single coverage against talented wide receivers and TEs while putting a greater emphasis in stopping the run? If you fail to stop the run at the point of attack here, you have 4 DBs spread over the field trying to catch a blazing fast Murray. Not a good situation.

Or, do you put a nickle on the field, take away the deep ball and by virtue of having an extra DB at least limit the running games ability to break a big run for a TD? If I’m Muschamp, I choose this one because its more consistent with my bend-but-don’t-break philosophy.

The more plays it takes for OU to go 80 yards downfield, the more chances we have to put Bradford on his a$$ or get a stop on 3rd down.

by BMG on Oct 7, 2008 11:50 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Chip block

The TE only needs to chip block the DT (i.e funnel the DE into the offensive tackle) and then is free to release. That is one of the great things about TEs, they can block effectively and receive effectively on the same play. They are multiple without being schizoid.

It will be difficult for UT to pressure Bradford on quick release passes. If the UT D can screw up the rhythm of longer passes, it will be doing well. The UT D line can’t focus completely on rushing the passer since it also has to stop the OU run game.

by Kafka on Oct 7, 2008 12:45 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

yes please

line the ends up over Gresham and force OU to make the choice. If one of those guys gets to Bradford untouched, OU will have to think about it. Muschamp will be trying to push buttons and attempting to force OU to have to do something they’d rather not — like bring in extra protection to keep Bradford upright.

by BMG on Oct 7, 2008 9:49 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

It is all about the matchups

UT has played a lot of nickel this year because the teams we were playing were primarily passing teams who were overwhelmed by the UT D line (could not run at all). OU will be the first team UT has played with an outstanding O line and a 5 star TB. Also, OU does not play a spread offense.

If you defend a spread offense, then probably you want to play a nickel. OU does not play a spread O and features big ass TEs that are tough to tackle and can obliterate a small safety with a block. A LB matches up better with a real big TE than a small safety.

by Kafka on Oct 7, 2008 12:30 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

what about OU's new, no-huddle tempo?

from my limited game-watching this season, the tempo of OU’s new no-huddle offense can really motor, often getting lined up and snapped before the television cameramen can even get the next shot set.

this may keep texas from effectively substituting (to keep fresh bodies in the game) and limiting their depth advantage at DE (if we’re going to be unleashing the them upfield) and at DB (if we continue to play man under); i’d worry then about getting beat downfield with tired corners and a gassed pass rush.

do you see the multiple nature of OU’s jet-tempo 21-personnel look giving us problems on the ground if we get caught in weak nickel (sans-kindle/orakpo), or conversely through the air in a weak 4-3 (with a slow norton and a blitzing kindle)?

bleeding orange up in nyc. get a rope.

by cwofford on Oct 6, 2008 11:29 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Good point about tempo and substitutions...

…That could definitely be an advantage for OU, whether they catch Texas in unfavorable personnel, tire them out, cause a substitution penalty, or force them to use a timeout.

Those two situations you mentioned are exactly what makes OU so tough to defend, and yes I think both should be cause for concern. I’m more afraid of Texas getting caught in a nickel against OU’s 2 TE, 1 RB package. In this scenario, Deon Beasley becomes the de facto weak side linebacker (cue video of OU O-Line drooling). I think this case brings more potential for huge play/touchdown because the OU’s size advantage becomes even greater than usual. We all know what DeMarco Murray can do with room to run.

As for against Texas’ 4-3, I still think their 2 TEs/1 RB presents a problem, but not as much of a huge play threat. While none of Texas’ LBs match up all that well with Gresham (whose do?), I would expect Muschamp to try to leave both safeties high to help the LBs when Gresham goes vertical. Of course, this strategy assumes that Texas can keep OU’s run game in check without bringing a safety into the box. This would definitely be a challenge for the Horns front 7, but considering how well they’ve played so far, it’s definitely within the realm of possibility.

by Sweed4Heisman on Oct 7, 2008 12:00 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Both UT and OU run the no huddle

so I don’t see why it would be any more advantage for OU than UT. UT probably does it better than OU since UT has been running the no huddle much longer than OU.

Muschamp will definitely expect the front 7 to defend the run and will leave the safeties high to protect against the long pass or run. The UT front 7 should do fine against OU (if not, UT has real problems). LBs should not be expected to cover anybody deep but will do a good job (i.e. defend the pass well and tackle well) on the short passes.

by Kafka on Oct 7, 2008 1:03 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

UT's no-huddle

i know we’ve used it extensively in the past (mostly with a 21 balanced shotgun ace and an 11 5-wide shotgun look, i think) trying to catch opposing defenses in nickel and 4-3 packages, respectively. but the 5-wide look was when we’ve had a thomas/finley-type TE who can stand up and present a legit downfield threat.

now with irby out, we’re reduced to going 4WR-1TE, which i believe limits the effectiveness of the strategy. plus, our 2TE sets can’t run block very effectively. and have we even run much no-huddle this season? i don’t recall specifically.

given OU’s superior TE talent, i would give their no-huddle a big edge over texas’.

bleeding orange up in nyc. get a rope.

by cwofford on Oct 7, 2008 10:31 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

UTwon't go 4WR-1TE

If UT goes with 4 WRs, then likely there will be a QB and TB. If there is no TB, then UT will go with 5 WOs.

There is absolutely no reason that UT can not go with 3 WRs, a TB and a H back or FB. You get most of the advantages of a TE with an H back plus (with cody at H back) another running threat. Cody played FB in high school so he is proficient at run blocking.

UT’s LBs are big, strong, and fast. They have learned this year how to play pass D well. There is a good chance that they are going to match up well with OU’s TEs. OU splitting out a TE does not make him any faster (though he can get off the LOS more quickly). Gresham runs well for a big man but I don’t think he is faster than Muck or Sergio.

I believe that UT runs no huddle most of the time.

by Kafka on Oct 7, 2008 1:02 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Gresham' speed: 4.6?

I looked up Gresham’s speed on rivals.com. It is listed at 4.6 (when he was about 35 pounds lighter!). Now the guy is enormous (6’7", 260) but I don’t think he can outrun Sergio Kindle or Muckelroy and they are definitely strong enough to bring his big ass down.

If Gresham goes deep, the LB gets help from the safety. It will also take a while for Gresham to motor down the field, time that Bradford may not have (especially if Gresham is not helping blocking).

Splitting Gresham out as a WR doesn’t make him any faster and it removes him from the run game blocking and pass protection blocking so I’ll be quite happy whenever OU splits out Gresham.

by Kafka on Oct 7, 2008 12:36 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

thoughts

Maybe it’s just weird timing, but most of the long td passes I’ve seen from Bradford to who(m?)ever have been those 15-20 yard outs where the receiver creates separation then takes it to the house. I haven’t actually seen many deep bombs 50 yards downfield, and I don’t anticipate Bradford having that kind of time against our d-line to throw one. It’s the outs that we need to defend like the plague.

Big Roy, you stated

Name a big hitter on OU’s defense

This game brings the big hitter out in everyone. Bodies will fly with pretty reckless abandon and extreme speed. These guys want to send a message every play in this rivalry. I remember in the 06 game our secondary laid some seriously nasty licks on OU, which came as a surprise to me because those guys had not been known as big hitters. Everyone tries to lay down the hammer in this one.

Lastly, I don’t know if anyone here watches “It’s Always Sunny…” but if you do: Everytime Sergio makes a tackle, he should scream “WILDCARD, BITCHES!!” as prompted by his role in the defense.

That is all.

by BigTexBD on Oct 6, 2008 7:28 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

I love "It's Always Sunny..."

And I think that Kindle should also dress up as Greenman and appear out of nowhere to do crazy crap.

by billyzane on Oct 6, 2008 11:44 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Colt LOS option pass to Ogbonnaya

That play got a lot of attention because many thought that Colt was beyond the LOS. I thought the actual play itself, an option pass play was even more interesting.

I have long thought that the traditional QB option play is an effective way to gain yards but that it is risky because the option pitch might be fumbled. It occurred to me that an option pass would be much less risky because, if the pass is not completed, it is an incomplete pass rather than a fumble.

Colt is an athletic guy who throws great on the run. I don’t know if that option pass play was a designed play but it should be added to the horn playlist. It is also nice because the normal way to run it is to the left.

by Kafka on Oct 6, 2008 7:30 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

PB, GHOB

Mack said this today:

This is one of those times a year when you try to break some of your tendencies.

Which ones?

With Mack talking, this has to be offense. What do ya finger?

Instead of slow pulls on my drink, I’m going with shots.

by whills on Oct 6, 2008 10:06 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Something else: a great omen

“Man, I’ve been having dreams all week.”

Orakpo is having dreams of OU, of smashing Bradford and causing fumbles.

Muschamp is brewing up a storm. As noted this late summer, players were having dreams about Muschamp. Now he’s in their hearts and their minds, defining their intent and directing his stings of misfortune in their dreams.

This game is approaching a mythical level.

(Via KXAN 36 interview tonight.)

It’s 10:35 and OU still sucks. And afraid to go to sleep.

by whills on Oct 6, 2008 10:34 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

While we're adding wildly to the significance of this year's tilt...

…anybody else wondering if this game may be a very significant audition if Muschamp is to seize the role of Mack Brown’s replacement in the wings?*

(*Assuming the rumors regarding Mack Brown’s supposed thoughts about retirement have some grains of truth)

proud to swim home

by learned hand on Oct 6, 2008 10:44 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

He could earn a marker.

But, without experiencing the RRS yet, in some ways, he doesn’t know. But he’s been in the big venues, so he does have more than a passing idea.

BTW, with the expansion this past year, this will be the loudest Cotton Bowl in history and the loudest RRS. 46k vs. 46k or more.

by whills on Oct 7, 2008 12:27 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

OU's personnel groupings is what makes them dangerous

OU can put 11 or 21 personnel on the field, and it is the same players who can switch to 10 or 0 personnel.

Gresham is the biggest mismatch on the field for texas; there isn’t anyone on your defense who can cover him. That isn’t an insult; the guy is the best TE in the nation. Gresham is the one who makes OU’s personnel groupings work, b/c he is so versatile, he can be split out wide as a receiver, and you have to put a CB on him b/c he is that big of a receiving threat.

OU’s no-huddle attack allows them to control tempo, and they can put Gresham, Iglesias, Johnson, Broyles, and Murray on the field to make you want to go with a 4-3 look. The minute you put 3 LBs on the field, they switch those players to 0 personnel, going empty to force you to cover a receiver with a LB, giving them a mismatch automatically.

texas just needs to make sure they substitute in on any incompletions, especially long passes that fall incomplete, and they’ll be ok.

I Am The 12th Man.com

by Beergut on Oct 7, 2008 12:59 AM CDT reply reply 0 recs