Morning Coffee Is Still Irritated and OU Still Sucks
Flavor of the Week at running back: Fozzy Whittaker. Given the performance of the Texas running backs on Saturday, it might make sense to put this feature to rest for the week. Although, as Scipio Tex would remind us all, the running backs aren't the problem with the Texas running game.
Part of the problem is that the two running backs who received most of the carries against Colorado have little in the way of tools to make something out of nothing. There is at least one running back on the team, however, who does have the ability to make the most out of broken plays and has the vision and quickness to find the cutback lanes -- the Mythical Fozzy creature his own self. Last week, I wasn't really drinking the Kool-Aid along with PB about Fozzy, but I'm starting to re-assess a little bit after the cutback run for a touchdown on Saturday on his only carry. At 12 yards, it was more than twice as long as the longest runs by Cody Johnson and Vondrell McGee of five yards.
The question is, why did it take so long for him to get his first carry after McGee and Johnson were so clearly ineffective? It's not that he wasn't on the field prior to receiving that first opportunity running the football -- he played at least 10 plays on offense prior to that, several times lined up at wide receiver. He's been healthy for two weeks, but he could take a helmet to a knee in practice and then could find himself out again extremely easily. It's happened three times already in barely more than a year. Davis would be well served by using him more when he's available.
It's not clear how much McCoy trusts him in the passing game, but he is known as one of the better receivers at the position on the Longhorn team, so it's not like he's a liability in that aspect of the game. Picking up blitzes has supposedly been a problem for him at his size, but he definitely looks jacked this year and as able to handle it physically as he ever has. It's something the coaches see in practice, so it's hard to speculate on.
Since McGee and Newton may be out for the Oklahoma game this weekend, could this be the time for the Mythical Fozzy creature to break out and take on legendary status? Coul he earn repeat status as the Flavor of the Week, an unheard of honor?
Bipolar special teams return. Much like the Wyoming game, the special teams were both good and bad on Saturday. First, the bad. The kickoff coverage is increasingly becoming worrisome and Justin Tucker isn't helping much by failing to get the ball into the end zone when given the opportunity, but the major issue is the coverage, which allowed kick returns of 34 and 48 yards against Colorado, the latter of which by Darrell Scott was way too easy, as he just ran up the sideline unobstructed until he was tackled without ever having to change direction. For the game, Colorado averaged 24 yards per return, a number brought down by returns on sky kicks by a linebacker and the fullback. Texas now ranks 75th in the country, behind Ball State, Central Michigan, and Florida Atlantic. As much as Mack Brown wants to talk about how difficult it is to cover kicks, there are still 74 teams in the country that do it better than Texas, which is inexcusable given that Brown allows Duane Akina to select any player on the roster besides Colt McCoy to use on special teams.
One of the other bad aspects of special teams was the work by Justin Tucker with his rugby punt. His attempt with the right foot was fine, as it went for 40 yards, but the second kick, from the Texas 32 no less, was a bit of a shank and only traveled 25 yards before going out of bounds. It was difficult to tell exactly what happened on the play, but there was a bit of pressure and he may simply have been trying to be too fine with it and put it right down the sideline. His second left-footed attempt went for 45 yards, with the only potential issue with it being that he may have kicked it too far, as the Colorado return man was able to field it on the fly. The third attempt presented the biggest issue, however, as Tucker really shanked it out of bounds only five yards past the line of scrimmage.
The bottom line is that it's great that he can kick with both feet, but if it happens again, then the coaching staff needs to seriously re-evaluating using the left-footed punts, which means they should really evaluate the use of the rugby punt at all, since teams can now hit the punters outside the tackle box and can also use two return men to make it less effective if Tucker only kicks right footed.
It appears that the coaching staff did re-evaluate this weekend, as John Gold is now listed first with an 'or' on the new depth chart. The coaching staff shouldn't forget that Gold is an excellent punter in his own right and it probably makes more sense to use him when Texas is in their own territory because he has the ability to kick it 50 or more yards.
The final bad aspect was the blocked field goal, clearly the fault of Ahmard Howard, as described here. It's likely his first year on the unit, so he may not have realized how important it was with the ball on the left hash to block the edge rusher, but it should be an easy fix in practice this week and shouldn't happen again.
With the bad out of the way, there were some excellent aspects to the special teams play once again this week. The Longhorns brought pressure on three punts by Colorado, with Marquise Goodwin finally getting his hands on the third punt early in the third quarter and after Ben Wells scooped it up and took it three yards for the touchdown, Texas took a 17-14 lead that it would not relinquish. Give credit to Duane Akina for using Goodwin on the unit -- the remarkable thing about it was that Goodwin came unblocked on two prior punts and nearly blocked them, but Colorado never adjusted and tried to block the guy who was clearly the fastest player on the field. Expect OU to make that adjustment next week.
Of course, the punt block can't be on all the time, especially with a returner like Jordan Shipley back there. Impressively, Goodwin did just as well blocking, according to Brown:
For him [Akina] to be able to take a guy like Marquise Goodwin, who is a freshman, who has not played defense, who was not around in the spring, not around in the summer, and to have him be part of two great plays Saturday, one, blocking the punt, but number two, he had the best block on Jordan's punt return because he took his guy, he knocked him to the ground, and as the guy got up, he stays on him. If you go back and review that, it is one of the great plays of the year, and I am really really happy for Marquise because he is getting involved in the kicking game in a lot of ways.
Blake Gideon also threw a nice block on the play to help Jordan Shipley return the punt for a touchdown, taking it back 74 yards, by far the longest of his three career punt returns for touchdowns. It also made four out of five games that Texas has scored a touchdown on special teams.
It did not appear likely last week, but Shipley is now back with Monroe on kick returns and will will get some chances against Oklahoma, particularly since Colorado kicked away from Monroe with the exception of a ball kicked into the end zone and most teams will probably follow that formula for the rest of the season. Two returns for 38 yards is far from exceptional, but it's unlikely that anyone needs to be reminded about what happened last year in the Cotton Bowl with Shipley. Brown mentioned that there was a little bit of confusion on Saturday, with Monroe trailing Shipley on one of the returns, so they should continue to get a better feel for each other as they work in practice this week and have more opportunities in the game against Oklahoma.
Tracking: playmaking defense. For the third game in a row, the Longhorns brought their playmaking ability on defense, as Earl Thomas finally got the pick six that seems to have been coming with him ever since he jumped a route in the spring game and took it to the house. Midway through the third quarter, Shipley had failed to haul in a pass from McCoy and it turned into an interception deep in Texas territory. Reading Cody Hawkins all the way, Thomas jumped in front of the pass and went 92 yards untouched to stretch the Texas lead to 24-14.
For the second game in a row, Blake Gideon got in on the action, intercepting the second pass of his career deep down the middle with an extremely athletic catch, battling the receiver for the football, then managing to secure it after it hit his stomach as he fell. His limitations are still painfully apparent, especially on the first CU touchdown when he was too late to react to the throw and failed to make a play on the ball when he got there, as well as taking three bad angles and completely whiffing on two tackles. Gideon probably simply is who he is at this point, but he's going to need to consistently force turnovers to help the team because he's a liability tackling in the open field, a huge problem for a free safety -- and that's a massive understatement.
On the negative side, Roddrick Muckelroy missed a sure interception, as Cody Hawkins pretty much threw him the ball and all he had to do was jump a little bit and bring it in, about the easiest interception a linebacker will ever get. After the play, it occurred to me that Muckelroy hasn't forced many turnovers at Texas and looking back through his stats, that has been the case. Only in 2007 did Muckelroy make an interception or force any fumbles, hauling in one of the former and causing two of the latter. As excellent as he has been at Texas, it's clear that he's just not going to cause many turnovers and Brown specifically mentioned the lack of a forced fumble on Saturday as distressing.
All of the defense deserves a great deal of credit for another dominating performance, but several players deserve individual recognition. Despite a shaky start to the season, Chykie Brown has settled down and played excellently with the exception of several plays against Texas Tech, allowing only one completed pass against Colorado before immediately tackling the offensive player. Opposite Brown, Curtis Brown only allowed two completed passes on the night, both of which were for minimal gains.
On the defensive line, Ben Alexander also had an exceptional game, registering five tackles, including splitting a double team on one play before making the tackle at the line of scrimmage. Simply calling him a space eater at this point may be selling him short. The two starting defensive ends also had strong performances, as Sergio Kindle made seven tackles, including two behind the line of scrimmage. So much more than just a speed rusher, Kindle almost never takes himself upfield out of plays and continues to read and react to plays with incredible speed and accuracy. After doing so, he gets to the football with alacrity and evil intentions and finishes plays.
On the other end of the line of scrimmage, Sam Acho had another strong effort, with three of his five tackles going for loss and a sack as well. One of the tackles for loss came as Rodney Stewart escaped from a group of Longhorn tacklers and reversed field, nearly breaking free for a big gain, except that Acho used his speed to get a hand on Stewart's foot, just enough to get him down for an 11-yard loss.
Time for replacements. James Kirkendoll had a poor game Saturday. He was terrible in the blocking game, picking up a penalty for holding that shouldn't have been called, but resulted from him whiffing on a block, dropped a pass, and cost the Longhorns a touchdown because he went the wrong direction on an option route. At the flanker position, John Chiles has not shown an ability to make plays besides in the screen game. Over at Barking Carnival Trips Right EyesofTX was even more critical in his recap:
I have never witnessed so much pouting, loafing and general cluelessness from a set of WRs than I saw last night. I'm not going call anyone out by name, but a couple of guys whose numbers correspond to the name of a popular chain of convenience stores need to pull their heads out of their asses pretty quick, of their lack of effort is going to cost this team down the road. And seriously, a physical freak like Malcolm Williams can't get on the field for more than a handful of plays when the guys ahead of him are pulling this kind of nonsense? What are the criteria for determining who plays and who doesn't on this team? They're obviously not performance based.
Even after re-watching the game looking for specific instances to support his claim, I'm not sure that I saw the same thing. The bottom line, however, is that the performance between the whistles was not good enough. Whatever problems he may have catching the football, Malcolm Williams can block and would help the running game in the WildHorn or on any other outside running plays.
Marquise Goodwin may also receive more playing time in an attempt to feature his incredible speed more prominently -- he's listed as the co-starter at the sub-B position this week, although he probably won't have much more success blocking there than Kirkendoll. Something to watch though is that Chiles is now listed as the co-starter at that position, while Kirkendoll has moved out to flanker. It could be for blocking purposes, but it might be that the Longhorns are trying to get Kirkendoll more time at the position that he played for most of last season and at which he might feel more comfortable. Beyond those thoughts, it's hard to see how the changes will impact what happens at the Cotton Bowl this weekend, but it is safe to say the coaches weren't happy with what they saw on Saturday from the two receiver positions other than Shipley.
Tracking: the WildHorn. After spending an inordinate amount of time last week hyper-analyzing the formation, it's only fitting that I talk about it some more this week. Most fans are frustrated with the formation and probably about ready to ditch it after two weeks of poor results with it and Trips Right Eyes surely fits into that category:
The Wild Horn, or as we will refer to it from here on out in the GBU for no apparent reason, the Crazy Ivan. We continue to just throw away downs on this thing, and the only apparent reason for doing this is to placate #7. Isn't it kind of time to quit worrying about placating #7, given that his insistence upon keeping the ball each and every time this play is run robs it of any smidgen of hope of distracting or fooling the opposing defense? This play is worthless, it is a waste of downs and energy. It destroys whatever continuity this offense has managed to accumulate, and every time #7 keeps the ball and fails to produce any yardage, he goes into a sulk for several plays afterwards. Stop the damn insanity, please.
Yes, the performance has been disappointing, but Trips Eyes misses several key points in his "hard-hitting" and "in-depth" analysis. The main point above is that the WildHorn is an attempt to "placate" Chiles and that he always keeps the ball. While I can't speak to what happens behind the schemes, I personally can't see him sulking and he has made the correct read on each counter read play -- the problem is that defenses are intentionally taking away the outside to keep Chies inside where they have more defenders to deal with him.
On the only counter read play run against Colorado, the defensive end went hard upfield and another defender scraped behind him to make it an easy read for Chiles. No selfishness on that play and it didn't work because Adam Ulatoski failed to come up into the hole to block the linebacker who eventually made the play while Charlie Tanner did his falling-down act on the play. It may have been an attempt to block someone -- the BON investigative team is now looking into it. So far, the two pulling linemen have not been successful getting blocks after pulling, so the power play makes so much more sense.
Besides the obvious lack of success, the most disappointing aspect of the WildHorn is that the only new wrinkle this week was the WildHorn version of the aforementioned power play. Yes, it's a play that they need to run, but there are several problems with it, One, there's no compliment to the play -- the outside run Dan Lee calls the stealer. Two, if the Longhorns want a lead blocker, take out McCoy, whose chief concern is running out of bounds as quickly as possible on the WildHorn plays and put in another blocker like Antwan Cobb or my personal choice, Barrett Matthews, a kid who has a big-time nasty streak in the blocking game. Two, the play needs motion to make it is as effective as it can be. With that being said, the benefit of the power play is that the pulling player actually heads into the hole to ostensibly block a defender, rather than falling down on the perimeter and generally being of little use.
The other problem is the complete lack of commitment to the play. Greg Davis told color guy Todd Blackledge that the Longhorns want to use the formation 6-7 times a day. Seriously? Was he just lying or does he really intend to do that? Actually doing it has been a complete failure. Through three games, the Longhorns have only used the formation nine times, far short of Davis' supposed desires. In the Wildcat series, some plays won't work at times, but there is always an easy solution -- take what the defense is giving you. Having already missed the window of opportunity for installing the Wildcat series, its extremely unlikely that it will happen and after two failed plays against Oklahoma, the coaches will probably abandon it without every really committing to it. Probably without ever having Chiles throw a pass. And the running game will continue to struggle. And people will wonder about solutions. And it will end up being a wasted opportunity by the coaching staff.
After the Q package, is it any surprise that the WildHorn has been approached in a completely clueless manner with no understanding of what makes the Wildcat work? The answer to that would be a resounding no.
Now let me go bang my head against the wall for 10 straight minutes so I can feel better.
It's 8:45 in Austin and the good news is that at least OU still sucks.
0 recs |
96 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Fozzie at WR
Can someone please explain why Fozzie got all those snaps at WR?
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
by Caradoc on Oct 13, 2009 9:20 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Empty set
When the Longorns go to their empty set, they always have a running back split out. I guess so the defense can’t adjust personnel based on seeing five wide receivers trot out onto the field.
by GhostofBigRoy on Oct 13, 2009 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My hope upon hope
Is that the Wild Horn doesn’t show its head in Dallas.
Watching Miami last night was almost like watching football for the first time. Their execution, and talent level at the key positions for the Wildcat was a thing to behold. And inside I wept that we think we can do the same.
If the wild horn shows up, you may hear my scream of hate from the pluckers on 183, or wherever I end up watching the game, all the way in Dallas.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 13, 2009 9:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I hope the UT coaches watch the game
Miami runs the wild cat like its suppose to ran.
by Longhorns84 on Oct 13, 2009 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thought the same thing
But let’s be fair to UT’s coaches — Ricky Williams and Ronnie Brown could make a lot of formations and play-calls look good.
by edsp on Oct 13, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figured L84 was talking about the OUsucks-Miamiblows game, not the Dolphins, but I didn’t really remember a whole lot of wildcat in that game.
Regardless, I think the best incarnation of the wildcat I ever saw was when Darren McFadden was the man in Fayetteville.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just FYI
EyesOfTX writes the GBU over at Barking Carnival. TripsRight primarily handles the basketball coverage.
I’m about done with the WildHorn. We’ve got a QB that can complete 32 of 39 passes, and that includes a few drops. And his name isn’t John Chiles.
by jc25 on Oct 13, 2009 9:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Who's name isn't Chiles?
The QB, or the guy who drops the passes? ;)
by notsofst on Oct 13, 2009 9:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As Ive argued before
When your best player is your QB (arguable I guess with Shipley in the mix), why would you not want your offense to go through his hands?
There have been wonderfully great offenses both here, and in the rest of the world and history that have not had to employ some trick package. I don’t know why we think we have to with this group of players, and especially this QB.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 13, 2009 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly! go with the percentages
Not just the best but proof of being the best with 3 years experience and a crazy win percentage as a starter.
Why go with the 2nd string when the 1st can play and is one of the best in the country? The advantage this offense has is the leader, never, never, never change till injury, graduation or the game is so out of reach.
by Xerxes on Oct 13, 2009 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the block quote, Trips Right says:
And seriously, a physical freak like Malcolm Williams can’t get on the field for more than a handful of plays when the guys ahead of him are pulling this kind of nonsense?
I seriously question this question. Malcolm Williams’ performance hasn’t been very good at all on offense. It certainly hasn’t been any better than Kirkendoll’s, Buckner’s, or Goodwin’s. I really think people need to stop looking at what a “physical freak” the kid is and realize that he’s just not playing the wide receiver position very well right now. He might in the future, but all in all, he’s a prime example of the Maddenism that athletes don’t play football, football players play football.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 9:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Eh, I'm kind of on the same page with Trips on this one
Not necessarily because I see Williams as a great receiver, he’s not, but he’s the best blocking receiver UT has. Without him blocking for the Chiles screens, they’re seemingly doomed from the outset.
Sure something is probably lost in a receiving capacity, but in the offense as it’s currently constituted Williams’ blocks are huge – see any attempt to block by Kirkendoll.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Oct 13, 2009 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is no excuse
for a WR screen being run w/o Mal Williams being lined up on that side. None. Let Kirkendoll fall down somewhere else.
by ctex80 on Oct 13, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If that’s the case, then there’s a definite tipoff to the defense that a screen is (a) going to happen and (b) going to a certain side.
I’d rather have Buckner.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is another reason why Williams should be in alot more
If that’s the case, then there’s a definite tipoff to the defense that a screen is (a) going to happen and (b) going to a certain side.
I can’t imagine his drops would be any more common than Kirk’s, and he provides more in other phases of the game, mainly blocking and big play ability.
by Horncasting on Oct 13, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d argue neither of those guys contributes much as a receiver. If Williams’ only major contribution is as a blocker, great, keep him as a backup. Run sets with Chiles, Buckner, Shipley, and Goodwin.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd argue
Williams hasn’t been given a chance to contribute much as a receiver, and in the rare instance when he was given the chance last year, he shined with 3 plays that rank right up there with anything done by any player on the team. Add to that, the fact he beat an NFL quality corner in the Fiesta Bowl and only missed scoring a long touchdown due to a bad throw by Colt.
Chiles hasn’t exactly lit the world on fire and has had his drops as well. Goodwin is a complete unknown as a receiver. Neither does the little things the coaches claim to covet and reward with playing time as well as Williams does. We’ve seen nothing on the field to show that Kirk, Chiles, Goodwin or any of the recievers besides Shipley and Buckner deserve any more playing time than Williams.
by Horncasting on Oct 13, 2009 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mack said at the press conference yesterday...
that they have to find a way to get Malcolm Williams the ball more.
Ummm, that would probably be possible if he was on the field more to begin with! He is listed as Shipley’s backup at the X position, and I firmly believe we will see Shipley out of the slot a lot more in the OU game like last year to give Colt a quick target near the middle of the field. So I’m hoping that means we do see Malcolm out wide and playing much more on saturday.
by silky51 on Oct 13, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s been given a number of chances, and while he has a few big plays to his name, he’s been Braylon Edwards-like in his tendency to fail to make the routine plays.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
but none of us have seen enough of him to draw that comparison. Kirk and Chiles have both also failed to make the routine plays this year (Kirk in just about every game) but both are still starting, and outside of a nice RAC by Kirk against Wyo and a couple of screens by Chiles, neither have a big play as a receiver to their name.
Williams has been given nowhere near the number of chances that Chiles and Kirk have been.
by Horncasting on Oct 13, 2009 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kirkendoll clearly has more plays to his name, when covering last year and this one, than Williams, and Chiles has had fewer opportunities in that same span by virtue of his position last year.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree With You - At Least He Provides a Great Vertical threat as evidenced @ TT
by realmccoy on Oct 13, 2009 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
overlooked...
He has clearly been open the times he has been in.
Prepare to bash me, Colt doesn’t look to anyone other than Shipley (and last year, Cosby) unless he starts to scramble. He is a good enough quarterback but he hasn’t ever had a deep game. We all blamed Sweed’s injury but really, when has he done anything other than lock onto his favorite(and physically superior) receivers? Even GD alluded in the game film that a stretch play was called but Colt threw an short pass. I certainly don’t know this but will speculate that he gets upset at dropped passes for the wrong reasons. His a very good QB but he has the same limitations that he always has had.
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs -- ask yourself what makes you come alive, and then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive."
-- Harold Thurman
by thanos on Oct 13, 2009 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you on the short passes
not so much on locking in on Cosby last year. It will be interesting to see how the passing game is altered/modified to fit Gilbert in the next three years. If we continue to see short passes with him, then we can’t blame Colt for lack of deep balls. Garrett can throw that 15-20 yard post and beyond really well as well as those deep outs that NFL scouts drool over, so I am really hoping for a more of vertical passing attack next year.
by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 13, 2009 10:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Quan Cosby was physically superior? What about Nate Jones, Brandon Collins, and Jordan Shipley? Is it your contention that all these guys were physically superior to guys like Malcolm Williams, JerMichael Finley, etc.?
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no, i gave zero context
superior to the majority of the competition. last year he had to 2 clear safety valves and alternated between the two. this year, he clearly looks to Shipley first, second, and maybe Buckner third.
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs -- ask yourself what makes you come alive, and then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive."
-- Harold Thurman
by thanos on Oct 13, 2009 10:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or they were his first two reads
And therefore he got the ball to them the most.
Heres a tip as well, he still had at the very least 140 passes that were completed to other players last year, which accounted for at least 42% of his passes.
Is that so out of whack?
Bradford last year threw 51% of his passes outside his top two receivers.
Chase Daniel 45%
Zac Robinson 34%
Todd Reesing 41%
Tebow 49%
Max Hall 40%
Its not. Stop making mountains out of mole hills. He does rely on Shipley too much, but this isnt some systemic problem that everyone should have seen coming last year.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 14, 2009 8:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for redirecting me. i didn't realize having a different perspective amounted to making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Shipley and Buckner have 76 completions through five games (This year). Colt has completed 135 passes. I don’t recall Shipley or Buckner catching a pass from Gilbert. 76/135 = 56% through five games.
Sure people could have seen it as he has had a tendency to lock on. Look at his body of work. First two years he stared down his receivers. His amazing accuracy and superior talent has allowed him to be successful in spite of this. this is the first year he would not have at least two known commodities. Jeez..I’m not crucifying him, just sharing a perspective.
"Don't ask yourself what the world needs -- ask yourself what makes you come alive, and then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive."
-- Harold Thurman
by thanos on Oct 15, 2009 1:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Chiles
Runs an actual pass route, then I may accept the Williams is just too inconsistent from drones who chose to parrot one another.
The production at Tech and against Missouri last year warrant consideration over anything Chiles or Kirkendoll have done or do not do and seem to get a pass on.
Williams did get a block in the back on Shipley’s long punt return, but the guy goes all out on special teams.
I for one am unclear what the reasoning is for completly destroying the last shred of his confidence when he has proven that he does have ability as a receiver.
I am of the opinion that Chiles is being rewarded for a position change because a receiver he most certainly is not. with he and Kirkendoll in the game it limits the ability of the WR corps IMO.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 13, 2009 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They haven't shown that they're willing to commit to the WildHorn through a whole set of downs
So I don’t know how you expect opposing defenses to take it seriously. If you don’t trust a formation to take you for 10 yards, how good is it going to treat you?
It’s always switching to the WildHorn to run 1 play, and then back to something else. Let the guys run a whole package with it.
Of course, with OU looming, it’s too late for that.
by notsofst on Oct 13, 2009 9:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If they did it for a complete set of downs, basically it wouldn’t be wildhorn/wildcat, but rather just a substitution of the QB.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he's asking for a "wildhorn" series, instead of a mere play
Of course, since our wildhorn is just a QB substitution rather than a switch to a single wing with a motion back, I guess you’re both right.
A primary reason the wildcat is successful is because it is a fully encapsulated offensive series that allows the offense to adjust to defensive adjustments. The reason the wildhorn fails miserably is because it is contains about three, increasingly predictable, plays without a hint of misdirection for the defense. I’m still kind of shocked at the predictability of the wildhorn considering Chiles is the erstwhile backup QB.
Here’s David Lee explaining how multiple plays interact in a wildcat series, before he started making the dolphins look good.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Oct 13, 2009 10:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that's really what I was trying to get at
A primary reason the wildcat is successful is because it is a fully encapsulated offensive series that allows the offense to adjust to defensive adjustments.
This is what the wildhorn should be, and if it’s not, then take it away.
by notsofst on Oct 13, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A quick question for you guys...
I thought about this after watching the CU game. Has UT even attempted 1 pass out of the Wild Horn yet? Tried a single reverse? Done a running play more creative than a dive or counter?
I really am starting to think that Texas has been going with their Vanilla sets 5 games deep into the season.
JD’s like, "you want some fucking pitching? Here’s all the pitching you can stand. Now choke on it, bitches!"- RCCook
by laxtonto on Oct 13, 2009 10:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
that may be the case
But wouldn’t you want to practice it in a game situation? I’m not sure I really buy into this, “They’re saving it for OU” mentality.
It’s possible I guess.
by notsofst on Oct 13, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s actually not just possible, but likely. Keep some things hidden for the real test. If you test-drive stuff in games, and OUsucks sees how it works and how UT hopes to contextually incorporate it into the gameplan, that takes away the majority of the strategic advantage of the different look. And hasn’t UT rolled out new stuff each RRS since the 12-0 disaster?
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know, have they?
I can’t recall any instances.
I also have trouble buying the “saving it for OU” line.
Disciplina Praesidium Civitatis.
by zamm on Oct 13, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
New wrinkles for OU
In 2007, the Longhorns almost pulled off the upset by running more stuff for J-Mike, including a throwback screen. Last season, the Longhorns broke out the flex tight end position for Shipley.
by GhostofBigRoy on Oct 13, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
We have to be saving something for OU.
"Football's so important in Texas. On the West Coast, it's a social. On the East Coast, it's a culture. Here, it's a religion."
-- Major Applewhite
by Sunkist on Oct 13, 2009 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If they've been saving packages for OU
then they’ve intentionally taken risks that aren’t necessarily worth the return. We struggled enough against both Tech and Colorado to have lost those games.
I suppose I’ll believe it when I see it. Historically, this argument was thrown around every September (about 7 years in a row, in fact): “we’ll see downfield passes in Dallas,” or “Benson will finally play in Dallas, they’re just saving him,” and it never turned out to be true. When we got to Dallas, we’d see the same predictable, stagnant offense. Even with our victories in 05 and 06, his gameplan was relatively conservative, its just that our talent advantage finally overcame a Sooner team that was experiencing a lull.
However, 07 and 08 were a bit different. I would argue that 08 is the first time that we beat OU when they were up rather than down, and we did it with a more aggressive gameplan.
So which GD will show up? His general track record over the past decade doesn’t inspire a lot of optimism.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 13, 2009 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the past four RRS games (Vince’s junior season through last season) have shown a new trend in the offensive approach. The team keeps it vanilla until Dallas, and then unleashes whatever it can. It seems to work pretty well, except when there’s a distinct disadvantage or things just plain fall OUsucks’ way (2007).
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Revisionist history
the 06 gameplan was certainly not aggressive. I don’t know if you were yet aware of BON at the time, but I distinctly remember PB putting up an uncharacteristic and angry halftime posting about how GD’s gameplan was “small-testicled.” I remember because I thought it an odd choice of wording.
We won the game in the end (sort of like last week against Colorado), but lets not revise what really happened. GD didn’t change his approach to the RRR until 07.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 13, 2009 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The first half was incredibly conservative.
Mack told Greg to open it up in the second half and that’s when McCoy starting throwing deep to Limas.
by billyzane on Oct 13, 2009 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I remember that bit as well
I’m hoping that was the decisive turning point. Perhaps that finally pushed GD into his approaches for 07 and 08.
But, and for some reason I’m going to quote Vanilla Sky here, “when you’ve been through what I’ve been through, you don’t invite happiness back in without a full body search.”
I still don’t trust the man.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 13, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve always been curious about how inside some of these explanations of the inner workings are. Did Mack or someone come out and say that he told Davis to open it up? I ask because it’s the kind of statement I see often, but there’s no more corroboration for that than for someone who could have come out and said that Mack set the throttle as conservative to start, and Davis (or Rucker, or Colt, or someone else) appealed to him to open it up. Really, how do we know?
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, no one knows, I guess.
The story that came from the Texas camp (as reported by the newspapers) was that Greg and Mack discussed it at halftime and decided to loosen the reins on Colt. That’s all we know for sure, considering those two would have to be on any decision to open up the offense and the offense was definitely opened up after the half. I can’t remember for sure whether they specifically said that Mack told Greg to open it up or not.
But the general consensus among people relatively in the know is that Mack is the conservative one and that Greg delivers to him exactly what he wants. I personally have no idea if that’s true. But that’s the generally-held belief and I tend to believe it.
by billyzane on Oct 13, 2009 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is why it puzzles me that so many demonize Davis for his conservative ways instead of criticizing Mack. It’s like calling for the firing of all the GM assembly line guys instead of the company leaders who mismanaged strategy and policy.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
Not everyone knows about that Mack/Greg dynamic (assuming it’s true), but everyone thinks they’d make an excellent offensive coordinator because they’ve played Madden a lot, or some other asinine reason.
That’s not to absolve Davis of all responsibility for offensive troubles. On a micro level, problems are often his doing. But on a macro level, they seem to have a lot to do with Mack.
by billyzane on Oct 13, 2009 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I definitely agree that there are problems. No question about that. It just bugs me how readily the armchair quarterbacks resort to wringing their hands and harumphing about Davis, yet (other than HornChamps, who is remarkably consistent) don’t say much of anything about Mack Brown. Mack’s won me over, and the fact is that he’s been wildly successful at UT, the first guy to really do so consistently since DKR himself. I think he and the guy he trusts with the offense deserve a little deference. Mack doesn’t blindly stick with a guy who doesn’t deliver the results he wants, as was apparent in the Akina “demotion” and MacDuff’s departure.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Davis and Brown
I wrote a “”http://www.burntorangenation.com/2008/8/29/603889/whither-the-offense" >manifesto" about this as one of my first posts — according to Chip Brown, Mack is the more conservative of the two.
by GhostofBigRoy on Oct 14, 2009 5:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know for sure
However, if someone can provide evidence of this, I’ll gladly use it to comfort myself
by notsofst on Oct 13, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is that out of the spread
there are a standard progression of the complexity of the various plays. Teams tend to use more and more complex plays when their predecessors get shut down or at least slowed.
Texas really hasn’t shown that. That means either the plays are not there, which is unlikely because they were used last year, or the team is holding them in reserve.
JD’s like, "you want some fucking pitching? Here’s all the pitching you can stand. Now choke on it, bitches!"- RCCook
by laxtonto on Oct 13, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Possible?
Those who subscribe to the “we’re saving it” belief are naive at best.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 13, 2009 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The answer you seek is yes.
At least to your first two questions. There was a reverse pass (by McCoy) against someone. Can’t think of the team now but it was highlighted in one of the WildHorn evaluation pieces that GoBR has been doing.
But I do think that there’s more coming from the WildHorn. I’ll call a John Chiles zone-read pass to Malcolm Williams on a skinny post a la Cosby in the Fiesta Bowl. Write that down.
by gwh65 on Oct 13, 2009 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
why doesn't texas have a man running in motion like ricky does with the dolphins?
it’s not the wildcat at all, you’re just lining chiles back there with monroe and telling the defense we’re running a zone read. at least the motion man adds an extra dimension that the defense has to react to.
3/19/2009 - Dogus Balbay Made a Three-Pointer. Never Forget.
by burrito on Oct 13, 2009 10:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
agree
Texas needs more motion on every play, not just the wildhorn.
by Longhorns84 on Oct 13, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have 3 slow developing run plays up the middle
I can’t stop yawning when I read about our run game. And in the Wildcat Colt immediately runs out of bounds and Chiles runs up the middle. WOW. I hope we don’t think the OU game is the time to start trying all kinds of cute gimmicks, but clearly we need some creativity and versatility.
by Wrangler86 on Oct 13, 2009 10:45 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
we need to simplify the blocking scheme
this line just isn’t quick enough to do what they’re being asked to do. They certainly can’t adjust to stunts. It would be comical if it wasn’t so damn depressing.
Disciplina Praesidium Civitatis.
by zamm on Oct 13, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ou gameplan
I think Texas will have a great gameplan and we’ll see things we haven’t seen all year. I hope they run some screens to slow down the blitzing and run more plays in motion.
by Longhorns84 on Oct 13, 2009 10:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
We are 5-0 heading into the RRS and number 2 in the country
(I choose the poll I want to choose) and we have won our games handily with a vanilla offense. I am pretty confident going into the RRS and expect to see more than we have seen since the preseason is over now. I love the confidence shown by Mack and expect that he has something he is hiding. I can’t wait.
It helps that my dad (an OU alum) is visiting this week. Should be a great victory! Strong Defense wins championships and our offense is pretty damn good too.
Hookem
by Ohio Horn on Oct 13, 2009 11:06 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
How did your father let you become a horn
if he went to OU?
by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 13, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He wanted his son to get an education. nt
Get off your knees Greg, you're blowin' the game.
by kriess on Oct 13, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Just saying
cause if that were my son there be no way in hades I would let him go to OU.
by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 13, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
#3....
if you include the laughable AP pole
by Ryan2907 on Oct 13, 2009 3:57 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Laughable?
The AP poll is much more credible than the coaches.
by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 13, 2009 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not anymore...
not that it really matters because one or both teams above Texas in the AP will lose atleast one game. You win and the score wasn’t that close and drop? Texas won by the same margin last year with CU.
by Ryan2907 on Oct 14, 2009 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The home crowd
I may have missed this in earlier discussions, but what is up with the Texas home crowd? As the announcers noted on Saturday, the crowd just shows up SO jaded and worthless until it really matters (say, when your overwhelmingly-favorited team is behind going into the 2nd half). It’s like the crowd that shows up won a coin flip between going to the game, and going to a movie – but in their mind, they know exactly how either form of entertainment is supposed to end, with the good guys winning, so they don’t put anything into it.
The UTEP game was same the same shit, different color. “Phew, that one is put away by the 3rd quarter, let’s get back to our air conditioned trucks and homes because boy, it sure was hot and we wouldn’t wanna sit out there any longer because it’s not like we LIVE IN TEXAS AND SHOULD BE USED TO THE HEAT BY NOW.”
Maybe it just irks me more because I’ve never been to a home game and relish the opportunity to go and cheer for my team and make a difference. But from all the reports I’ve read, 101,000 fans should make a helluva more difficult atmosphere, yet it doesn’t happen.
by TXinDC on Oct 13, 2009 12:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well known problem
I agree with you 100%. I have been to every home game this year from pregame to “Eyes of Texas” and the crowd has put off my high school son so much he is wanting to attend an Aggie game to see if they are this lame. People get mad if you stand for kickoffs and 3rd/4th downs. It is ridiculous. I yell when we are on defense and kids look around at me with a “you’re hurting my ears” expression while their Dad’s sitting on his A thinking about who knows what.
I cannot imagine that if Jordan Hicks was on the sideline Saturday night, that the atmosphere was very impressive to him when comparing to the Horseshoe.
by bevoluble on Oct 13, 2009 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been looking for anything about whether he actually made it or not. I know he might not have been impressed by some of the struggles, but the good news is that the defensive performance was pretty exciting.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Home crowd.. 'bout the same as always
I’ve been going to Texas games for over a decade and the crowd is almost always pretty mellow.. Of course 90% of the home games are against heavily overmatched underdogs that you know are going to get blown out. So to some degree its to be expected. The few good games we do get at home are usually matched with an excited, rowdy crowd. Better games = better crowd. Thats just the way Texas fans are.. same with the basketball games..
by oljoey on Oct 13, 2009 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thank goodness someone else said this
agree with u all the way
"We'll be baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!"
by greenspointexas on Oct 13, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you get to go
go to evening game that will be a game,I been to some games but the best home game I’ve been too in which VY led us back from being down 35-7 at half to OSU and won 56-35.No one was looking at me weird when I was standing and yelling because everyone else was too.One of the loudest things I’ve heard .went to work the next day sounding like I smoked a whole carton of cigs.
by cpabis on Oct 13, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've got to draw exception on the UTEP game
The kid next to me was so hot, he threw up.
I’m glad you’re used to the heat and all, but it was hot as balls out there and people were popping in and out of the first aid stations in the stadium because they’re selling water for 4 dollars a bottle cash only.
There’s plenty of people cheering at those games, you should really attend one.
Of course, it depends on your section, because if you sit with the Alums who are popping out 2k-15k donations each year to get 30-40 yard line seats…. They may not be yelling on every down, but they’re sure as hell doing their part for the team.
by notsofst on Oct 13, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Wide Receivers
First time poster here…is anyone else bothered by the reports of pouting by Kirk and Chiles? Attitudes like that smack of entitlement…and ultra talented teams that feel entitled to play/win don’t seem to possess that mental edge that wins championships (see USC the past 4 years).
My favorite thing about last year’s overachieving season was that a true sense of “team” pervaded the roster, a “we’ve got to prove to the world that we can play,” with people deflecting personal attention and focusing on whatever it took to make the team better. Players with a sense of entitlement don’t give it that extra 10% to fight for every yard or throw that ridiculous block that Cosby did on Lendy Holmes last year. That could spell trouble, especially in a Red River Shootout where the team that wants it the most will likely be the one that pulls out the victory.
by West Coast Longhorn on Oct 13, 2009 1:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That’s true. Brandon Collins was one of those undersized guys with no sense of entitlement, and I really think Colt’s missing him right about now. I think that much of the time that Colt spends staring down Shipley is time that he’d normally split between Shipley and Collins, but since the timer to look from Shipley to Collins is absent, he spends almost twice as much time on Shipley as usual. Then he finds Williams or Kirkendoll, either of whom will probably drop it.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm also perceiving some
prima donna-isms on the offensive side of the ball. It’s as though they proved it all last year and expect things handed to them this year, especially with all the preseason hype. They need to get over themselves quickly.
I’ve seen nothing of the sort from the D.
Disciplina Praesidium Civitatis.
by zamm on Oct 13, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Drones tell us
Williams is inconsistent. Yet what he did against Tech and Missouri last year from a WR ability perspective are light years beyond Chiles and Kirkendoll.
I think there is a double standard on performance. Kirkendoll had 3 such efforts that seem to get Williams in the dog house. Chiles? Runs no pass routes, is no threat to go deep, and actually I am starting to think is being rewarded for changing positions.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 13, 2009 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think more drones talk about what a physical freak Williams is than about how inconsistent he is.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 8:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For what it's worth
I’d like to see somebody (preferrably Williams) run some deeper routes. Perhaps a deep threat would ease some of the congestion in doinkland for YAC that was lacking in the CU game. Also, if memory serves, ou has trouble with the wheel route—a good use for Fozzy out of the backfield. Real screens would be nice, but I won’t get carried away.
by zissou on Oct 13, 2009 6:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s likely that deep routes will in fact be a component of this Saturday’s contest, and that Williams will figure heavily into that component.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 8:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
More likely
Drones forget what Williams actually did in two huge games last season and parrot what they hear versus what they see.
Physical gifts have been weighted heavily in Chile’s favor during his stint at Texas versus accomplishments on the field.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 13, 2009 8:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You listen to way too much Jime Rome
with all this “drone” stuff.
by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 13, 2009 9:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Never in my life
Have I listened to Jim Rome. Not once.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 14, 2009 3:51 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I listen to a lot of Rome
And he rarely if ever uses the word drone.
Its too close to his word for the masses, Clone.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 14, 2009 8:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think anyone forgets those things. I think the problem is that many can’t get past those few moments and look at his lack of other contributions on offense. He’s a great special-teamer at this point, but an afterthought at receiver for the time being.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 13, 2009 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Compared with Chile's
Contributions he could have his number retired.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 14, 2009 3:52 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Really? I mean, last year he had some plays on offense, and Chiles really didn’t, because Chiles was stuck in for mop-up time and was employed solely to run out the clock, not to get yards or score points. But your statement is odd, I think, so I’d like you to guess which one of these stat lines is Chiles’, and which is Williams’:
(a) 20rec., 176yds. (27 long), 2TD, 7 carries for 29yds.
(b) 7rec. 73yds. (16 long) 0TD
by burntorangehorn on Oct 14, 2009 7:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you have the thrown to stats handy? Or yards after contact?
Based on those stats Williams is getting >10 yd/catch and Chiles <9 yds/catch which is even skewed by his (longer than M. Williams) long of 27. JC’s rushing stats actually aren’t very good considering he’s had a long of 34. Since his long run and 3 yd loss against TT, he’s had 5 carries for a total of 0 yards.
I think thrown to stats would be more indicative of who is more effective. A lot of complaints are based on Williams being open but not thrown to. For the UTEP game I think he was thrown to ~4 times and caught it 3 times. Other than that I don’t remember.
Last year against TT M. Williams had 4 catches for (44, 10, 37 (TD), 91 (TD)). That’s the most receptions he’s had in a game. I’m not assigning blame for that to him, Colt, or the coaches. I’m just stating it.
by ajax77777 on Oct 14, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At some point
Dont you have to write off the Tech game as the anomaly?
Does anyone expect Miles Austin to become a premiere receiver in the NFL or put up another 200+ yard game anytime soon?
With Malcolm’s contributions on special teams, and his obvious blocking skill, there has to be something seriously wrong with his game for the coaches to not be putting him on the field more. But I forget, no one trusts the coaches.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 14, 2009 8:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Way Too Harsh on Chiles
From what I see, his struggles seem to be much more related to learning the nuances of a new postion, not sulking, entitlement, or laziness.
Colt is a precision QB and he really values “comfort” with his WRs – making it more difficult for Chiles to break in.
by realmccoy on Oct 13, 2009 8:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 






















