Morning Open Thread: Mack's Presser
by Peter Bean on Feb 7, 2008 5:54 AM CST
in Texas Longhorns Recruiting
Email
PrintI'm slammed all the way through late afternoon today, so you're on your own. One thing I'd encourage everyone to read is the transcript from Mack Brown's press conference yesterday.
Some of the highlights:
42 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I wonder who that last paragraph was aimed at?
cough mom's job in Colorado cough
I'm just sayin...
Seniority
So we feel like we’ll bring every guy in, throw them out there and try our best, and if they’re the best athlete, then we may have to simplify some of the things we’re doing, but if they’re ready to play, we’ll just play them sooner.
{Will's words during Spring Training}
Yes Rashad, I know that you're a senior, and last year that meant you would have been the starter. But truth be told, you just aren't good enough to be our everyday Mike LB.
But don't worry, I've put a good word in for you to make sure you're on the punt team full-time. You better get your ass over there and practice protecting the ball and surging forward.
Stop pleading and go practice fake punts. Now. Boom Motherf*cker!!
Love that
fake punt.
We should try it once with Sergio as the upback. Boom.
oh man...
Now THAT is a visual to start the morning with!
I believe I'd be screaming for a fake punt every time it was less than 8 or 9 yards to go...
I think my favorite play of that Alamo Bowl last year was when Sergio came in at RB for a play. Looked like it was stacked up at the line, and all of a sudden, the line moved... about 5 yards or so.
by agent orange on Feb 7, 2008 9:48 AM CST up reply actions
Not so fast.....
I said, "Do you turn them in?" And he said, "Nah, it doesn’t do any good. Just stay away from them." So we try to recruit guys that want to come to Texas, and if they don’t want to come, very honestly that’s okay. And if they don’t want to come and you try to force them into coming by over-recruiting them, it usually doesn't work anyway.
.
And what if D.Scott's mom isn't working for a Colorado bank next season, then what can we expect to hear from you then Mack? I'm sorry, this reads more like a Roger Sonsini had assured a big-time college coach that he would deliver the star RB and then found himself drowning in embarrassment when the RB wouldn't follow his lead.
Why don't....
you ask the 1,000s of Longhorn fans (some on this blog) making that insinuation all over the internet?
In any case, perhaps we can expect his explanation.
Because
they are just a bunch of over reacting ninnies who can't understand that some players actually chose not to go to Texas, without starting a bunch of cheating rumors.
If you look at the transcript, it was an answer to a question, and if he thought DS was being bought by CU, he would not have recruited him.
But read carefully ...
Coach also said that 98% of the time, things work out. Sometimes you do get burned. Don't get me wrong, it would have been great to get D. Scott. But one of the things that has served Mack and Texas well is to get guys here who really want to be here. There will be dark days, particularly early on, and commitment to the program is huge.
It's hard to see those guys with all the hats on the tables and the melodrama, etc., fitting in well here. They might, and talent covers a multitude of sins, but still ...
Re: CU, one has to come to grips with what the culture is up there. They've had a history of playing fast and loose with rules. Barnett didn't invent it.
I read the NY Times story, and it looked like a little CYA by Mom. The bit re: the RB's coach, think about it ... I am certain that Texas would have discussed this with D. Scott before making the change. Maybe they were told that it wouldn't be an issue (they probably were). Maybe that's what Mack is talking about.
It is beyond asinine for a HS RB and his mom to be arguing that Alabama's OC can't coach their son adequately at RB, and conversely, alebeit impliedly, arguing that Colorado's RB coaching stability would be key. Who knew that the key to Colorado's 6-7 year last year was it's dynamite RB coach?
Remember when Jamaal's leaving was going to be the key? You get the picture.
I saw the presser and he had the look of a guy who felt bad about what he was doing. He seems like a good kid (albeit a momma's boy) who was pushed hard to make a tough decision he didn't fully agree with.
by B Orange on Feb 7, 2008 10:48 AM CST up reply actions
FSN used a blue screen
To get rid of his mom pulling his ear.
Funny that when asked who would be starting at TB in the game against Texas, his response was "on Texas?" instead of being about him and Colorado's tailback situation. Freud may have some insight as to what was going on there.
Kidding aside, the kid had to make a tough decisions that probably could have gone either way. Texas has been extremely successful over the past 7 to 8 years with guys who have wanted to wear orange all their life. It's a big state and there are tons of those types to go around. Why waste your time trying to recruit the out of state kids that go down to the wire? IMO look out of state for the rare talent only.
CU's cheating culture
was one that started with Rick Neuheisel and ended with Barnett. Barnett was the scape goat for a culture that Neuheisel created. When CU was cited for recruiting violations they were cited with 101, 99 of which were under Neuheisel and two were under Barnett, because Barnett put a stop to it.
Voice of Reason
Wells is dead-on. Barnett inherited a corrupt system, and made changes.
But I'm still pretty sure they won't be getting any female place kickers in the near future.
Interesting ... back to Neuheisel
CU hired him. That makes sense. Plus, he entered the D. Scott sweeps late.
Troutdog, that is a great point re: the RB coach. Did not know that. Now, it really smells bad.
by B Orange on Feb 7, 2008 11:44 AM CST up reply actions
Very.....
Because they are just a bunch of over reacting ninnies who can't understand that some players actually chose not to go to Texas, without starting a bunch of cheating rumors.
.
.....well done. A refreshing sense of reality.
I don't buy that
So a high school coach makes an accusation that could cost him his job just because he is embarrassed that he did not deliver Scott to Mack (who he may not see again for 10 years)? It could happen but it does not seem likely, right?
I've never heard Mack say this stuff before. He was obviously furious and thought there had been some cheating going on. He does not name names because he does not want to pursue it further. He isn't necessarily talking about Scott but it seems probable. It might have been Rod Davis (cheating used to be the Aggie thing and might still be) but I doubt it. Those were the only two recruits still in question so it has to be one of them.
Rather than just move along, if Mack thinks cheating has occurred, he should report it to the NCAA (unless, of course, he is living in a glass house (which I don't think is the case)).
Dallas Morning News
http://www.hsgametime.com/dfw/shared...
--start of Dallas Morning News quote--
In an interview Wednesday with The Dallas Morning News, Roger Sonsini, the recruiting coordinator for St. Bonaventure High School, questioned Scott's decision to choose Colorado.
"Colorado came in on Friday and said and did something and offered something that Darrell and his mom couldn't pass up," Sonsini said.
Sonsini refused to say what was offered. The Times report said that rumors of a bank job for Alexis Scott, Darrell's mother, had surfaced.
--end of Dallas Morning News quote--
Sonsini could be wrong but most likely he is saying what he actually thinks (right or wrong).
I did not suspect that CU cheated. My thinking was that his Mom wants to keep track of him (via her brother, Scott's uncle) while he is at school to reduce the probability of him getting into trouble (but who knows).
Clearly Mack also suspects cheating. Getting mad at the presser and talking about cheating coaches and lying families right after Scott signed with CU is just too much of a coincidence. It is not Mack's style to do this kind of thing so you know he was outraged. He might have ben upset about Rod Davis but I doubt it.
Mack is expert on college football recruiting so if he thinks cheating was involved, he might be right. If he does think there was cheating, he should report it to the NCAA.
Ok
Colorado offered to rebuild their offense around him, isn't that what was reported on Friday? Sonsini did not intimate that it was the bank job, that was the article you linked to, which I have been trying to find on the Dallas Morning News site and can not, maybe Colorado boosters got to the Dallas Morning News as well.
Hawkins also talked about cheating in his presser but that is obviously a cover up.
OR reporters asked about it at both pressers.
OK
I'm not going to defend the article. You asked me to find it and I did. You can always respond to the author if you have problems with it.
My original post was in response to the following statement:
"I'm sorry, this reads more like a Roger Sonsini had assured a big-time college coach that he would deliver the star RB and then found himself drowning in embarrassment when the RB wouldn't follow his lead.".
If Sonsini simply thought the offer was a great legal offer that Scott could not turn down, why would Sonsini be drowning in embarrassment? Sonsini is St. Bonaventure's recruiting coordinator, which means he can't go around promising to deliver specific recruits to a specific college coach. That would be a serious violation of ethics and making that charge with absolutely no proof is a real low blow. Why would Sonsini be so obligated to helping Mack?
I still don't get the attack on Sonsini. Maybe you can explain that.
If Sonsini was hinting that Colorado had offered something improper (as the DMN article implies), it strains credibility that Sonsini would manufacture a false allegation out of whole cloth just because he was drowning in embarrassment for having not delivered Scott to Mack. His job as recruiting coordinator means that he can't go around making up stuff about colleges (that could be a career limiting move). Again, the quoted statement above to which I originally responded makes no sense.
So why did Mack talk so directly and passionately about lying families and cheating colleges and get mad at this particular time? Are you saying that the reporter forced Mack to blast lying families and cheating coaches? So, just because the reporter asked the question, Mack just had to answer it in such a passionate way (instead of brushing it off?). Mack has the Austin press corps intimidated and does not answer a question directly and completely unless it serves his purpose.
I'm not sure where you are going with your comment about coverups but if you think I am alleging that Scott was illegally recruited you are mistaken.
I was saying
That Hawkins talked equally as directly and passionately about cheating as Mack did, but no one is saying that he is accusing UT of cheating.
Who cares what Hawkins said?
Not me. I have not accused Colorado of cheating and am not debating that issue so what Hawkins said has no relevance to this discussion.
This discussion is about:
- the original (probably scurrilous) remarks about Sonsini to which I objected
- the idea that Mack's intense little talk at the presser about families lying and coaches cheating and JoPa's advice that it is futile to turn in cheating coaches had nothing to do with Scott.
The NYT published an interview with Scott and his mom where Scott revealed that he had promised the horns that he was committing to them a couple of weeks ago. Scott never told Mack that his commit to UT was not bona fide (i.e. mack only found out about Scott going to CU on signing day). Scott also permitted an NYT reporter to sit in on a phone conversation with the UT recruiter. There is no indication that the UT recruiter was even made aware that the UT reporter was listening in to these last minute pleadings by UT. Scott also attributed his change of heart to the hiring of Major as running backs coach (even though that announcement had been made several days before Scott committed to UT) which says that Mack blew it by switching coaches at the last second.
Clearly Mack had reason to be angry with Scott and his mom for saying that they had committed to UT but not honoring that committment for even telling Mack that they had changed their minds (thus the talk about lying families).
Letting the NYT reporter listen in to the UT recruiter's last minute pleadings and also saying that Major was the reason for the last minute switch just rubbed salt into the wounds and probably pushed Mack over the edge.
In summary, I think the remarks about Sonsini should be considered scurrilous until proven otherwise and that Mack's presser remarks were at least somewhat about the Scott recruiting process.
Do you agree?
Funniest thread ever on recruiting
Over at Barking Carnival they have a hilarious thread about the whole D. Scott thing:
http://www.barkingcarnival.com/henry...
BTW, you were right that nothing has been proven about Colorado cheating in the Scott recruiting.
So when....
...did Roger Sonsini get fired for his comment?
For every instance of reading of supposed illegal inducements, I've read/seen 10 situations where a HS staff member was trying to steer a recruit. When Mrs. Scott took exception to it, banning Sonsini from the inner circle, he had his feelings hurt and lashed out.
Back to the presser...
a few observations:
To the dismay of probably many posters here, I think this offense is moving more and more towards a spread that utilizing WR screens to move the ball down the field.
Athletes: We've got a bunch of guys that fit the flanker or DB mold in Hales, Gideon, Fitzhenry etc. Where do they shake out? I definitely do not believe Hales has the size to be a tailback. Mack talked a lot of about YAC with these guys (read more bubble screens).
O-line: Mack is definitely recruiting a different O-lineman than he used to. It's not size anymore. These guys can get out to the edge and make a block on the 2nd and 3rd levels guys on defense. Kudos for the job they've done the last couple of years finding guys that have good feet. They will pay dividends.
WR: There's a ton of potential between Buckner, Grant, and Hicks. All three could potentially devastate secondaries.
D-Line: With Randall and Humphreys in the class who needs Rod Davis?
Hopefully the horns will quickly solidify their QB, RB, and DE needs for 2009.
Good stuff
It is encouraging if UT commits to recruiting people that are optimal for a spread offense. UT won the 2005 MNC with a spread offense QBed by a dual purpose QB.
The ability to run the two wideout (WO)screen (aka bubble screen) effectively is the mark of a good offense. UT has not run it super well but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
Some good things about the 2 WO screen:
- It forces the D to cover the whole field,
- is an easy throw for the QB to practise repeatedly and execute well, making it easier to put a dual purpose QB (eg: Chiles) on the field
- it permits OL to get downfield and block (because the pass is behind the line of scrimmage),
- it nullifies a blitz (thus discouraging the opposition D) because the ball is thrown so quickly
- it encourages the DBs to take chances, creating big play opportunities
- it can get the ball to explosive athletes in space
For the 2 wideout screen to be most effective, I think it is best that one wideout is big and an outstanding blocker and that the other wideout is an explosive runner (rather than have two generic WOs who are not especially explosive and great at blocking).
Because the pass can be practised so much, the explosive WO need not be an accomplished WO in terms of running routes, catching 50-50 balls, catching in traffic, catching long passes, etc. He just needs to be able to catch an easy short pass and then run with it. This means that you can put a small, explosive running back at WO.
Recruiting the tall WOs is great because they should be good at 50-50 balls (turning potential interceptions into big plays). This again facilitates using a dual purpose QB who might not be quite as accurate at passing as a pro style QB.
Faster OL translates into better screen blocking and more big plays off runs and short passes (because of better downfield blocking).
I like the screen, but...
Please no more than one per possession. There are myriad ways to get the playmakers the ball with room to run. If they're good route runners, make them do hitches and quick outs. If they're just fast, how bout a drag or quick slant? Put DeSean in the backfield and run the option with him. Do a reverse.
The screen is good for a change of pace, and should be utilized with the fast and slippery receivers coming in, but we need to change it up more often than we have been the last couple years.
Whatever works
You are right that there are a lot of ways to get the ball to explosive guys playing wide receiver and it is an interesting discussion to figure out the best ways. I am assuming (just for the sake of this discussion) that the explosive guys are young guys who are not good route runners yet (so let's eliminate the hitch and quick out). Let's further assume that they can't get snaps at TB but we still need to get the ball to them (because they are explosive).
The problems with the slant for a small explosive guy who is primarily a TB, is that he is a small target, is more likely to have a deflection in the middle (which is deadly) because he is not as sure handed as a classic WO, and can take some big hits going across the middle (i.e. he may not be a good enough receiver to hang onto the ball).
Drag has the same problems as the slant.
The reverse is a good option.
If the option is based on the wide receiver going in motion to become part of the option play, that is a pretty cool way to get the ball to the explosive WO. The problem, of course, is that the option play is a high risk play (because if the lateral is dropped it is a fumble, not an incomplete pass) that requires lots of reps to execute properly. It would be a great fake at a bare minimum.
Just getting the ball to the WO as he goes in motion and crosses the middle would work great and would be lower risk (because the hand off or toss to the motion man is not under duress and the QB is standing still).
The most interesting point to me about the two WO screen is that it will work much better if one of the WOs is explosive and the other is a big guy who is a good blocker (like a tight end type or a big physical wide receiver type). UT normally runs it with two WOs who are good pass receivers (i.e. they run good routes and catch the ball well, even 50-50 balls) but are not necessarily great blockers or explosive.
I saw USC use a TB (Joe McKnight) as a WO on screens against Arizone State over and over and over (it was devastating). I also love the way Urban Meyer uses WOs both in his running offense and in screens that actually work well.
At this point...
He'd probably state that Texas runs the bubble screen so much because they're racist.
all are options
and that's what could make this offense dangerous. I think the offense has really missed a guy like Ramonce Taylor who was very effective as a WR or a RB on screens. While Quan has been a great hands guy, he's not the type of guy who has break away speed or the necessary shiftiness to make people miss. Hales & Fitzhenry do have that ability.
The appeal of the screen plays is that it is a high percentage play compared to reverses and there is less risk to screens than to options. Screens are rarely interecepted and at worst result in an incompletion or no gain. However, they can easily pick up 3 to 5 yards or break something for a bigger gain. Additionally, the play develops quicker than a reverse by quickly forcing defenders to make decisions.
Interestingly the Horns picked up several types of WRs - the slashers, the possession receiver (Buckner), and two physical receivers Hicks and Grant. Both of these guys played multiple positions and are said to be great blockers. To your point, with these guys on the field in a 4 or 5 WR set the screen could come from anywhere.
by BMG on Feb 8, 2008 8:14 AM CST up reply actions
Good stuff
Have to agree with you on all points.
Hope that we can bump that 3 to 5 yards up to 5 to 10 yards this year.
I hope that GD (with Major's help) can figure out how to use this talent most effectively. It will be a challenge to use the young talented guys without paying a big penalty in mistakes.
another thing about the presser ...
Mack is supremely confident about this class. You could see that in watching him.
One thing I thought was telling was his remark that it's numbers that gets you to the #1, #2, etc. He was basically saying that our class is as good as anybody's.
I also loved the dig he made on recruiting services. We nabbed Fitzhenry b/f any one had heard of him, and so they really couldn't up his "stars" above 3. But you can tell Mack is really jacked about this kid, you can tell.
by B Orange on Feb 7, 2008 11:21 AM CST reply actions
Ah.....
I also loved the dig he made on recruiting services. We nabbed Fitzhenry b/f any one had heard of him, and so they really couldn't up his "stars" above 3. But you can tell Mack is really jacked about this kid, you can tell.
.
Faulty logic. Derrick Grant was "an unknown" to the recruiting services when Bob Stoops found him and started the red lights flashing when he offered Grant. After Texas offered, with Grant accepting, the services had no problem jumping him from 2-star to 4-star*. The young man is a real stud and is deserving of every star. Unlike the vast majority of WR recruits to hit the 40 Acres in the past, he already knows to catch the ball with his hands extended.
I'd distinguish that case re: Grant
Re: Grant, I think it's different if two schools, not just any two, mind you, but UT and OU offer a kid a scholarship.
Also ... I think the overall point Mack is making is still valid. Sure, there might be exceptions to the rule, i.e., Grant, even though I think you make the point that he is different.
But as a rule, when there is an overlooked player, and then one school (even a Texas) offers a scholarship, it's pretty much a stretch to start throwing down stars. Too risky, b/c Texas might be wrong. If Bob Stoops and Mack Brown agree that a guy is a stud, then the risk is gone. He is, officially, a stud.
by B Orange on Feb 7, 2008 2:25 PM CST up reply actions
As expected...
Sonsini's quote miffed Alexis Scott enough to schedule a meeting Friday with Sonsini, according to The New York Times. Hagan said Alexis Scott, who could not be reached, asked him, "Since when did (Sonsini) become a spokesman for the family?"
Hagan, the Buffs assistant who credited a long-term relationship with Scott among the reasons for Scott spurning Texas, said he called Sonsini about the quote the day before it was published.
"He told me he didn't say that," Hagan said. "He said as far as he knew, Darrell was going to Texas and he (told the newspaper) 'Colorado did something to make him change his mind' - and that was all. . . . I think he was trying to backpedal real fast."
Hagan said he believed Sonsini, for whatever reason, wanted Scott to sign with Texas "more than a normal coach would . . . a normal coach would say, 'I like this or that about Texas.' He kept pushing Texas; he was always in the paper talking up Texas.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Burnt Orange Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
