Recap and grades
Wow. Well, it was definitely not the best game we've played. However, I don't think it was our worst game; I've seen us play worse (the first half against Tech is the worst by far), but we have to give due credit to Ohio State. Ohio State executed their gameplan to near perfection in the first half and very nearly took this game. So while the rest of the nation will continue to pile on the Buckeyes for not winning the big one, I will say nothing. They came out prepared, ready, and motivated, and Tressel did a great job preparing his guys. It was a great ball game, and when big name schools like Ohio State and Texas meet up, that's what it's supposed to be like because we don't see these matchups very often.
I was thinking that perhaps the football gods decided that after all the pain we endured after the Tech loss that we would be allowed to be on the other side of that kind of finish. It sure feels good, but I know it feels awful for Buckeye fans.
I already told people that I knew my 41-17 prediction was too much, but heck, it was 5 a.m. and I was clearly being biased. However, even a more realistic prediction on my part would have been something like 34-17 or 35-24 or something like that. In other words, a two or three score, comfortable Texas victory. That sure didn't happen; we didn't come out with our best and Ohio State really came in wanting to prove something. Fortunately, even though they definitely outplayed us in the first half, it was only a 6-3 ball game.
I wish we came out better but I'm happy with the win. I don't want to be overly critical or anything, but I'll take the time to grade each unit here in my worthless opinion. I'll grade the units first and then explain.
Quarterback - B
For another QB, this might be an A game, but I've seen much better from Colt. Nonetheless... THANK YOU SO MUCH. I love the guy. But in the interest of objectivity, I'll look at the good and bad.
Colt made some bad decisions and mistakes that otherwise could have prevented a lot of stress for Longhorn fans. Sometimes, he had receivers open and just missed, most notably his bad pass to Malcolm Williams which should have gone for six. That interception was horrible; Collins maybe had a chance, but that's a ball you overthrow so that the worst case scenario is that it sails over everybody and you boot the FG. That was the worst thing Colt could have done. Furthermore, he sometimes just needs to toss the ball away. When we were up 17-9 and Ohio State was reeling from our no-huddle attack, Colt fumbled the ball trying to do too much and that killed the drive right there (he could have salvaged it if he made a better pass to Williams, but he didn't). That was a huge mistake. With the lead and with Ohio State absolutely flummoxed, just toss the ball out of bounds and line up for second down. Ohio State would score a touchdown on the next possession to recapture momentum. Colt simply wasn't as "money" as he normally is, and he got fortunate on a few throws that could have been picked.
Still, despite his errors, he still delivered the game for us. That was a great TD run, putting a nifty move on Jenkins, and he passed for over 400 yards which obviously includes that last TD pass to Cosby. I think a lot of QB's will take this "B" game from Colt. Sometimes, you just don't play your best, and you have to overcome mistakes and fight for a win. He did that tonight for us.
Runnningback - B
One thing I will criticize GD for is that I felt, just like in the Tech game, that he abandoned the run too early. We got back to it some, especially in the no huddle attack, with some success, but I felt that a handful of unimpressive runs scared him away from it. Heck, McCoy threw nearly sixty freakin' times (58 to be exact), which I am positive is a career high. Goodness gracious. In any case, in their limited duty, I thought the runningbacks did well. Chris O. had a pretty stout game running the ball and he made his usual good receptions for us, and Fozzy ran decently. Cody Johnson saw limited duty and didn't do too much. I have no idea where McGee was, so I guess he just didn't have good practices or something. I feel like he's our best north-south runner, and I thought he should have gotten some carries over Chris O.
Wide Receiver - A+
Quan, you're the man. I said in my preview that I really hoped he scored two touchdowns to make his season total ten... well, I got my wish in a very, very good way. In my eyes, he's clearly the offensive player of the game, despite what McCoy did. Fourteen receptions for 171 yards and two touchdowns, including taking a slant for the game winner, is what you call a good day. I couldn't be happier for him. He's definitely a favorite among fans because he's clearly such a good guy to go with his hard work ethic and skill.
Considering Shipley's heroics against OU, it seemed like we didn't see him as much, but then again, he hauled in ten receptions for 78 yards. Brandon Collins was excellent today, as was James Kirkendoll who made a great effort to get that key first down on 4th and 3 (sorry, Buckeye fans, that was the right spot, and in fact, the spot was actually shorter than where it should have been). Malcolm Williams should have had a TD catch after he roasted Malcolm Jenkins, but alas, Colt didn't give him a good ball. I'll give him props for still making a great catch on it though.
We'll miss you Quan, but I have high hopes for Collins, Kirk, and Williams. I'm confident that we will have a dangerous aerial assault next year as well.
Offensive Line - B-
When we got into our no-huddle, they whipped the Buckeye defense around. For the most part, they were good in pass protection, particularly in the second half, and they opened up better holes for our runners in the second half. The first half, there were some whiffed blocks and we really give our backs a chance to do something with the ball. I guess it was more or less similar to the rest of the season: Decent to good pass protection, spotty run-blocking. It was a serviceable game but we definitely didn't dominate the line of scrimmage or anything. It was enough to allow Colt and Quan to win the game for us, so we'll worry about run-blocking next season.
Defensive Line - B+
I felt like they got penetration but they did whiff on Pryor on several occasions. He's a great athlete and he definitely gave me some VY flashbacks as he eased by some of our defenders, but sometimes he got loose due to poor containment and tackling. Also, Beanie Wells got a bit too loose in the first half, and while you can argue that may be more the fault of our LB's since his damage came when he was able to break big runs, it still shouldn't have happened. At the least, we tightened up on him in the second half, limiting him to ten yards on four carries. Big Roy made some plays up the middle and while I believe Orakpo only got that one sack at the end, it was a very important one and he did get into the backfield on several occasions. I thought Melton did well today, while Houston was just okay. Pryor isn't an accurate QB, but we made him less so with the pressure he got today. We'll definitely miss Roy, Melton, and Orakpo, and best of luck to them.
Linebackers - B-
Well, they definitely got challenged tonight. Beanie Wells was a handful in that first half and Pryor is an elite athlete. Our linebackers often got caught with bad angles which allowed either Pryor or Wells to spring free. One player who at least had the athleticism to keep up with Pryor in the backfield was Sergio Kindle, and so I'll thank him for that. Muckelroy made some good tackles but he also made some mistakes in coverage and, like I said above, he, Bobino, and Norton all got caught with bad angles this game. Bobino, at the least, converted a fake punt for us.
It was a solid effort, but it was often sloppy.
Secondary - C+
I like Deon Beasley a lot. It may not be fair to call him our most disappointing player because of his high expectations for the season, but fair or not, he was expected to be our best cornerback coming into the year. He's been outplayed by several players. He screwed up on that pass interference call that allowed the Buckeyes to score a touchdown, and then on one particularly 2nd and 13, he whiffed on a short route and allowed the receiver to pick up the first down. Eek.
I think Palmer may have had the best night at corner, while Chykie and Curtis were decent. Gideon and Thomas didn't give up anything huge, but they, like the LB's, had some trouble with Pryor and Wells. Also, Gideon's coverage on Pryor on that fade route was just terrible. It was a great pass and catch, so they arguably would have scored anyway, but I'd prefer to see our defenders actually be aware of the ball and take a stab at it.
Both Boeckman and Pryor had pretty crummy completion percentages, but I think that was more due to our good pressure, the fact that Pryor is simply inaccurate, and that they don't have any great wide receivers (though made props to Robiskie for a good game).
Special teams - B
Just average. We did convert a fake punt and Lawrence hit his lone field goal, but nothing snazzy here. We had pretty pedestrian returns and punts, but at least we didn't foul up on kickoff coverage.
Greg Davis - B
I was just telling the Buckeye fan I was watching the game with about Davis' love for the WR screen, and I wondered how long it would take for us to see it. Well... second play of the game, on a 2nd and 1, and it lost two yards and we ended up punting. D'oh. In his defense, Cosby was very successful on his screens, but I feel like we just see it too much.
I felt GD abandoned the run too early, as I said above, and I honestly really didn't like his playcalling in the first half. However, I'll give him major props for the no-huddle attack, and he did call a great series of plays to finish the game for us. I think we could have tested them deep more, but all in all, I'm not going to rip him for this game. We won, and that's what matters. Besides, we can't blame him for some of our mistakes, which are purely on the players.
Will Muschamp - B
Not even the great Muschamp gets an A. I'll give him this: We've been a bend-don't-break defense all season, and we held Ohio State to field goals on several occasions. We just gave up the yards on the ground that we are accustomed to giving up through the air. Containment was sometimes sloppy and so was tackling, and the fact that we didn't have an answer for Beanie Wells early was disappointing considering that everybody knew he was the guy our defense would focus on shutting down first. I wish we got more turnovers and we did drop a couple picks, which was disappointing. All in all, the defense's performance, while not awful, was slightly disappointing. We surrendered 379 yards of total offense and 21 points, and Ohio State missed a field goal and failed on a two point conversion due to a dropped pass.
But aren't we just too critical here at Texas. All in all, 21 points isn't horrible, and we limited Wells in the second half before his injury and we made Pryor very uncomfortable throwing the football.
Mack Brown - A-
I wish we came out sharper than we did, but I thought Mack had this team poised for this kind of thing. Mack is notorious for being allegedly "so classy" when talking about his opponents, but in this case, I really don't think he was just talking crap. He clearly suspected Ohio State to come out motivated to prove their naysayers wrong, and we eventually matched their intensity (almost too late, but whatever). He certainly was fired up on the sideline as well. He's been criticized a lot of his in-game coaching, but I think he can be underrated in this regard and we certainly came out a lot better in the second half after whatever speech or butt-kicking he gave our team in the locker room.
It was just one of those games that when you win them, you can look back and be glad that it had drama and excitement, but during the game you wish you would just win by thirty so you can slow your heartbeat. It was a great game and Ohio State shouldn't be ashamed. While I think we played sloppy and it was a B or B- game for us, you have course have to credit some of that to the way Ohio State played. Ohio State certainly made some mistakes as well, but they played hard and I respect the challenge they posed tonight. Great game.
Even if we won by 60, we aren't getting a split title. It just isn't happening. But this team gave us a heck of a ride this season, and I can't wait for the next. Hook'em!
Was I too nice? Too harsh? I actually set my mind to not giving anyone lower than a B-, since I'm still happy right now, but I guess I'll give a C+ to the secondary. And certainly, some grades would change, for better or for worse, after I calmed down and watched the game again. But screw it, I'm going to get ice cream now.
And once again, thank you Quan Cosby. You'll be missed.
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
0 recs |
35 comments
Comments
You are overly generous TES
I’m am proud of the victory, but we witnessed a lesson in how to thwart our painfully unbalanced offense. I’ll have to watch the game again, but at the moment Greg Davis would receive a failing grade for all the reasons Scipio Tex has described in his analyses of our run game.
Aside from that, Henry Melton’s inability to play contain aged me. Still, he should hold his head up and so should they all. It was perhaps not the culmination of burnt orange fantasy, but nevertheless a hard earned glory by a quality group of young men.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on
Jan 6, 2009 12:56 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Agree on the containment
And I do agree that GD abandoned the run too early and we definitely should have had more balance than allow Colt to throw a ridiculous 58 or 59 times. However, it’s just not in me to give anyone a failing grade right now.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 1:09 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And believe me, I was mad at him during many parts of the game
But that last drive is just all smiles.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 1:11 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You also have to realize the fundamental flow in our running game
If you go back and look at most of our runs that actually went somewhere, those are typically traps and guard/center pulls (sometimes a guard AND a center). These are run plays that require time to develop. tOSU had very good penetration thru out the game and their LB play was outstanding
These are very underachieving OLs (given their talent of course) that gave above average pass blocking this season. These guys have not been able to manhandle their assignments and allow our RBs to run sweeps and lateral plays that we loved so much during JC/VY backfield.
I think more opting to pass was the right call, but I still think he could have been more creative with the run game
my first born shall be named vy
by hookemkp on
Jan 6, 2009 11:10 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I cant go back and look at them
because all of our successful runs last night were not televised as Fox would not cut out of a replay early to show live action.
by Wells on
Jan 6, 2009 12:11 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Or cut away from shots of the band, or the direct tv flying camera.
-rBr-
by run Bevo run on
Jan 6, 2009 12:51 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
or the Gatorade buckets...
just what the heck what that about???
by Pflash on
Jan 6, 2009 1:59 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Maybe not overly generous
as we beat a really good team. I think the fans who expected a blowout win were not being realistic.
However, I will agree that Greg Davis nearly blew it for us. Can we get some tape of the Cotton Bowl, and force Greg to watch the offense that Ol’ Miss used against Tech? Maybe strap him in a chair and make him watch it 1000 times or so? If they could produce those numbers with those athletes, why the f*** couldn’t we run the ball against Tech? Or against pretty much anyone else, for that matter?
by Longhorn in Canada on
Jan 6, 2009 1:09 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Ha! I like that idea, LiC.
We definitely need a redesigned running and blocking scheme. Complete with quick openers, something the Horns offense doesn’t have. With experienced QB, RBs and OL, it’s time to fine tune this offense to get the max out of it for next year. The Horns can run an offense at several different tempos, something which should be retained as well. I think the future is not just wide open passing, but multiple schemes that will give defenses fits.
(I will note against Tech that normally we do run the ball early and beat them up; remember Jamaal getting 158 yards by halftime two years ago. That particular tactic failed this year, but I could clearly see how Ole Miss picked up on our regular formula against Tech to run early, put them in a hole and give them every opportunity to self-destruct, which they do with regularity.)
by whills on
Jan 6, 2009 1:04 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah, we need some quick runs
It’s kind of frustrating missing a third and short because our runs develop so long. Sigh.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 1:33 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Good review
After we drove down the field for the winning score, I found myself thinking about the difference between this team and the 2005 team. In the Rose Bowl, I felt, like most of us did I expect, that when we made the stop on 4th and short that the game was ours. We just knew that Vince would find a way to score. Why do you think Pete Carroll went for it? He knew as well as anyone that giving the ball back to Vince was going to lose him the game. Tonight, as we drove for the winning score, I felt like we had a good chance, and can honestly say I never expected to lose, but I didn’t have that same level of assurance that I had with Vince. Oh Ye (Me) of little faith!
by Longhorn in Canada on
Jan 6, 2009 1:01 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
I like it
already brought up but I thought Melton was disasterous out there. I can only think of 1 positive play that he made all night (when OSU ran a zone read and pryor lost 3 yards on the play). Other than that all I saw him do was run past every single play. It’s entirely possible I missed some things that he did out there though. On a side note I was VERY impressed with the non-throwing aspects of pryor’s game tonight
by andmyster on
Jan 6, 2009 1:53 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Great review
I agree as others on abandoning the run too early and that Colt’s performance was not his A game accept for the clutch final drive.
Regarding the spot "Brandon Collins was excellent today, as was James Kirkendoll who made a great effort to get that key first down on 4th and 3 (sorry, Buckeye fans, that was the right spot, and in fact, the spot was actually shorter than where it should have been). " I too thought the spot was a little short considering forward progress.
I am anxious to hear what Kindle decides regarding the NFL and hope he stays.
by mtntrance on
Jan 6, 2009 1:56 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
yeah i think this is really hysterically ridiculous
You really think Texas is THAAAAT much better than Ohio State where you can complain about loss like this. Hahahaha. WOW! Hello, if there are two programs that can basically match UT’s amazing decade its USC and Ohio State. They have athletes. They are well coached. They have slight dips (like Texas ‘06, ’07), but basically they are as good as you’re going to find. And then with both teams looking to make a big statement heading into ‘09 you think it’s going to be an easy game??
Wow. I totally disagree.
You can criticize the play calling a little bit but not the players. That was just great football. And even for the defenses’ shortcomings at times, they made huge plays when they had to, including that final sack by Orakpo where you know he just said i’m ending this game right here.
GIve some f’n credit where it’s due and appreciate this victory. This was as good a W as any in the Mack Brown era outside of Pasadena or the OU series.
by Blitzburgh on
Jan 6, 2009 3:25 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Wow
Clearly didn’t read the post, or didn’t do so carefully. Come on fella, I gave due credit to Ohio State, but anyone who thinks we played our best game didn’t watch us throughout our season. It was a great game and of course I’m happy. Perhaps you should read the posts more carefully before you tell me that I need to appreciate a good win in a good football game, or else you just look a little silly.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 4:18 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not the players?
you dont think there were problems with executing plays? gap responsibilities? finishing tackling? and not allowing for some freak freshman to stiff arm u all over the field?
A win is a win and I have no problem with that. I am ecstatic that we won. However, that doesnt mean there are rooms for improvement
my first born shall be named vy
by hookemkp on
Jan 6, 2009 11:16 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
decent write up, not many complaints except your saying we made pryor look like an accurate passer, that was just laughable.
did you see some of those wounded ducks he threw up there? did you see how hard and fast he could throw the ball straight into the turf at his receiver’s feet? did you see his completion percentage 35%? everyone saw pryor for the terrible passer he is, but the stronger runner and decent leader, who has, for the moment, a laughably bad arm.
by Displaced Longhorn on
Jan 6, 2009 5:40 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
That was a typo
I mean to say we made him look less so than he already is.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 1:16 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Actually, I guess there are no typos
Pryor isn’t an accurate QB, but we made him less so with the pressure he got today. We’ll definitely miss Roy, Melton, and Orakpo, and best of luck to them.
Perhaps misinterpretation. Obviously Pryor is not accurate even when he gets settled to make a throw. Some of the pressure got to him yesterday and made him look even worse than he was.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 1:18 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I would give a lower grade to the O-line
Colt got ROUGHED UP quite often. If the line could have allowed him just a quarter of a second longer, he would’ve been fine, but as it was, he got hit after release more times than we’ve seen this season.
Add to that the terrible first half blocking for our RBs and it was a pretty pitiful game for the line.
The line is where I was least impressed, followed by the linebackers (how many times can you flush out the QB and then allow him to run for the 1st!!!), followed by Colt (overthrows, bad accuracy) though his deficiencies may be a result of the pressure coming from the line’s breakdown.
by TXinDC on
Jan 6, 2009 9:37 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
And to stick up for Colt one more time...
I got the feeling that he knew very well that all eyes were on him to carry the team. I think the mental pressure was just as bad for him as the pressure from OSU’s D.
by TXinDC on
Jan 6, 2009 9:51 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Thanks for the write up
Appreciate the read, I have a few dissenting opinions to add to the discussion.
First and foremost, abandoning the run was the right call, and we should have done it sooner earlier. Our running game is complete ass, and will be until we change our scheme, and that wasn’t going to happen mid-game. Staying balanced is a goal you set out with at the beginning of the game, but once you are in it, if the pass is working and the run isnt, fuck it, throw the rock.
The conventional wisdom is to keep running the ball to keep the defense honest, but really, with our passing game, it is both unnecessary, and unwarranted. We keep the defense honest with underneath passes, and hopefully take the deep shots when they present themselves. Whether we did a good job of that or not is debatable, but abandoning the run, OUR run, was a good call, and necessary. The stagnation in the first half juxtaposed with our no huddle passing attack should be evidence enough of that.
Now Ill just nitpick some grades.
Running Back – I don’t know how you can call this a B performance. Now, as I said, I don’t think its really their fault, but you cant give a sub 100 team rushing effort a B performance. Our top runner had 46 yards, and we had a total of 4 receptions (out of 41). This should be C+ as best.
D-Line – I thought for sure we would see better contain on Pryor, but we didn’t. Pressure was there, but he got away with ease when he decided to run, as many times we didnt stay on the containment. The sack when we brought 3 was fun, but that was more Boeckman’s fault than our good play imo. Id give them a B- for the day.
Muschamp – Now to get really petty, I just cant see giving him a B for how bad we came out against Beanie. Like you said, we knew what was coming, we knew we had to stop him. And we just wouldn’t. If Beanie didnt get Beaned, I don’t know how this game turns out. I couldn’t believe how well he ran on us. B- at the greatest.
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Jan 6, 2009 9:45 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
On the Muschamp point...
I think it’s incredibly hard to prepare for a more traditional I-formation team when we’ve played against the spread all year and have never had to worry about a run attack that’s half as potent as Beanie.
And when you’re playing in practice against a squad that runs as bad or worse than our real run game, I can’t imagine that any amount of practice will REALLY prepare you for the attack that they brought.
I still agree that it was a bad showing, however.
by TXinDC on
Jan 6, 2009 9:54 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I disagree
Knowing the strengths (running game) and the weaknesses (passing game) of tOSU, the one and the foremost objective was to stop the run. Last night’s game was filled with missed assignments, gap responsibilities, and poor tackling.
Granted that Muschamp is not actually playing on the field, last night’s performance is not entirely his fault. But, he is the defensive coordinator of this team and the future Head Coach. We all are impressed by what he has done this season, but I believe he is now held for much higher standards.
Observations
-cornerback blitz and rolling over gideon to cover Pryor?? that was very questionable near our goal line
-Gap responsibilities, linebackers failed to hit their gaps or wrap up Pryor and Beanie
-Gideon was awful last night, he really looked like a freshman safety (he fell down a lot at times, got rolled over, stiff armed, AND blown coverages). He needs to bulk up and step his game up. No more overachieving freshman crap
-Beasley and Curtis….not the best of the bunch. time to shake up the depth chart
my first born shall be named vy
by hookemkp on
Jan 6, 2009 12:40 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I will add that I think Muschamp
was too complex in the first half. When we settled into more standard D with fewer blitzes in the second half, and the Horns’ D played better, more instinctively.
This may not be Will’s complete fault. For years I’ve seen Texas defenses come with all sorts of blitzes and gadgets early in the game when, in fact, straight up defense was all that was needed. Granted, some of this would happen in early games and could be termed “practice” for on-the-field execution and for the staff to call them, to get plays on film. Sometimes doing too much is just as bad as doing too little.
The good news is that we’ll have the same DC next year with many of the same players and that should be a great boost for the D. I expect real top 10 performance next year and much more stability and consistency on a game-by-game basis. The back seven should be much vastly improved by then.
by whills on
Jan 6, 2009 1:17 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Several points
Good points BiC, but if I may
As for grades in general, in my happy state I wanted to err on the good side, so I didn’t want to to give anyone less than a B- (although visions of Beasley’s and Gideon’s goofs still made me give them a C+). Besides, I didn’t want Ohio State fans or anyone else interpreting all this as disrespect to the Buckeyes, who played a great game and were definitely a big reason why we didn’t play our best to begin with. Unfortunately, it seems some people interpreted it that away anyway.
RB: I think they did as well as they could have considering what we asked of them. Chris O. had a solid game catching the ball, and both he and Fozzy were able to pick up some decent runs, particularly in our no-huddle. On some runs, they could have done more, but it’s hard to fault the run game when your OC doesn’t seem to plan for any balance at all.
D-line: Yes, containment was frustrating, but Pryor is a great athlete, so it’s easier said than done. As far as getting penetration and disrupting plays in the backfield, I thought our line did a good job. The problem was simply making sure Pryor stayed put. I was sure glad we have an LB in Sergio Kindle to throw at Pryor, one player Pryor would have difficultly simply outrunning.
Muschamp: Beanie Wells was frustrating, but while he got knocked out in the second half, he also wasn’t a factor when he was in, getting stuffed on all four of his runs. What I am frustrated about was that they were able to score 15 points in the fourth quarter without Wells. Granted, they didn’t necessarily need him at that point, but that was annoying. Perhaps you are right and it should be a B-, but when you’re giddy after a win, you are generous. In some instances, I don’t know who to blame: I see bad angles and missed tackles, and I lean to merely blaming the player who screwed up.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 1:27 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Like I said its nitpicky
And I understand crediting the other team as well. Its tougher breaking down the units to assign blame especially if you are taking into consideration the opponents.
If we were going more macro I think we would be more similar
Texas: A (A+ only missed for not covering the spread)
Offense: B+ (Wont give an A for scoring only 24 points, but in all aspects except for scoring, not much was left wanting)
Defense: B (I think we can beat anyone that we hold to 21 points, lost the A in the 4th quarter)
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Jan 6, 2009 1:56 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Shadow, thanks for the time and insight
I do think Muschamp was rated low: The schemes were effective. Beanie was going to get his yards because he’s a STUD back. The passing game was totally controlled — if Robiskie doesn’t make two unconscious grabs, the QBs are 8-for-25 for about 140 yards. The biggest failure was on the PLAYERS for taking bad angles when pursuing Pryor; like Stud Back he was going to get his yards, but poor pursuit angles let him get twice as much as he should have had. . . . blocking on KO returns was terrible; coaches or players, dunno?
by edsp on
Jan 6, 2009 11:17 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Special Teams - D
Every kick return it seemed that Shipley was getting creamed before reaching the 20, every punt return seemed to be a fair catch inside the 15… and for pete’s sake, why can’t Tucker angle his punts instead of rolling them into the end zone?
May Colt be with you. Yeah, that's right.
by bfaut86 on
Jan 6, 2009 11:31 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Punts
I don’t think he is that accurate. We should have had Gold in there for the short kicks.
by Wells on
Jan 6, 2009 12:15 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Good points
I remember one of the few times we had a chance to pin the back, we kicked a rugby punt that obviously just rolled in the end zone. Eh? That’s when you want a traditional punter to punt that sucker high and try to get a backwards bounce.
by TheElusiveShadow on
Jan 6, 2009 1:30 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Gideon
had a bad game. He had a TON of missed tackles. He must be better in coverage than C. Scott but he can’t be a better tackler.
This was a good win for Texas, and sets up next year very well. I think if Wells played against USC, the score would’ve been much closer. He is by far the best RB in the country. I think Ohio State will beat USC next year in Columbus.
I don’t know why Fozzy didn’t play more. He got good yardage when he did play. I’m looking forward to see him play the next few years.
Texas is Rose Bowl(national championship) bound in 2009!
by Longhorns84 on
Jan 6, 2009 12:37 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs













