Postgame React: For Fourth Time in Five Years, Texas Beats OU
The outcome was: glorious. It was neither beautiful nor decisive, but when Texas beats Oklahoma for the second straight year -- and fourth time in the last five -- there is much glory. Heaping mounds of football bullion for the good and just. And for the wicked... nothing. Just another painful loss to contemplate on the long drive back to hell.
What's that? Quit your sniffling and speak up. Something about an injury? Yeah, them's the breaks. Hey, I'd toss you a violin for you to play your sad song, but Earl Thomas would intercept it... I'd toss you a box of kleenex, but you'd fumble it.
One last question: Does it feel really awkward throwing the "Horns down" throughout a game you know you're going to lose? Or are you more like, "Hey, Ohio State loses all their big games, too, and they always act like neanderthals, so it's fine, whatever, anything goes."? Cause I was thinking it was maybe that, but then I thought, well no, maybe OU fans wouldn't make that comparison because while the Buckeyes lose their other big games, they do beat Michigan. So yeah, just curious about your thinking on that and if you feel awkward or stupid or what the deal is. kthanksbye.
Game breakdown after the jump. Be sure also to read Scipio Tex's outstanding Post-Mortem which has now been posted at Barking Carnival.
The Offensive MVP was: Earl Thomas (7 tackles, 2 tackles for loss [-21], 1 forced fumble, 1 interception). What, you thought an offensive player was gonna win it? Okay, okay, there's plenty of space to pick on the offense below; how about a salute to Fozzy Whittaker and Marquise Goodwin for their outstanding efforts this afternoon?
For his part, Whittaker was terrific for most of the game, and if you take away that godforsaken speed option on which he lost 8 yards upon being tackled the second he received the pitch, his final rushing numbers were solid: 17 carries for 79 yards (5.2 ypc). Throw in a few key receptions and a mostly solid job with blocking duties and he's got himself a starting job for as long as he stays healthy. Fozzy's not a miracle maker, but he gives the rushing attack some real bite. You can easily imagine him picking up 100-150 yards a game in a well-coordinated offense.
As for Goodwin, it's saying something that his 36 receiving yards were a team best, but I don't have to tell you how important those yards were to Texas' second half victory. The bottom line is pretty simple: John Chiles cannot get any separation from his defender and Goodwin can. Considering how desperate this offense is for another receiver or three, if Goodwin's not starting next Saturday night in Columbia, we're even more lost as a staff than we appeared to be throughout much of this game.
The offensive Offensive LVP was: Greg Davis. More than a few fans have been saying, "Hey, the offense was good enough in the second half to win it" and/or that "OU really deserves credit for stepping up to put the clamp down today." Neither sentiment does much for me.
The offense did improve the second half, but when you pick up just 99 yards on 39 plays in the opening half, how could you not? The Longhorn's first half drives:
| Start | Plays | Yards | Result |
| UT 40 | 3 | 20 | Fumble |
| UT 22 | 3 | 9 | Punt |
| UT 28 | 3 | -3 | Punt |
| UT 28 | 4 | 3 | Punt |
| UT 24 | 6 | 26 | Punt |
| OU 49 | 3 | -4 | Punt |
| UT 24 | 4 | 2 | Punt |
| OU 18 | 4 | -6 | Field Goal |
| OU 42 | 5 | 42 | Fumble |
| UT 40 | 4 | 10 | Half |
That's a special level of incompetence right there, so let's look more closely at the primary culprit for each failed drive.
Drive 1: Adam Ulatoski. Colt fumbles the ball after being blindsided by Auston English, who rockets to the quarterback untouched on a missed assignment.
Drive 2: Greg Davis. After rushing for 6 and 3 yards on first and second down, Davis lines up in an empty set on 3rd and 1 and McCoy incompletes a short pass to a blanketed Shipley.
Drive 3: Kyle Hix. Texas' right tackle holds on first down (a 10-yard rush by McCoy), putting Texas in 1st and 20. After Texas finds itself in 2nd and 20 following a ruling that Malcolm Williams was out of bounds, the drive is doomed.
Drive 4: Greg Davis. On first down, Davis calls a speed option that we never run (loss of 8), while the second and third down passes go to Greg Smith and John Chiles. Too many negatives to list here.
Drive 5: Greg Davis. Texas picks up a first down on an 8 yard run by Fozzy Whittaker in which he deftly finds the cutback lane. Davis promptly passes twice more, picking up another first down on a pass interference penalty, setting up 1st and 10 at the OU 35. Time to run? No. Time for a no-gain bubble screen to Shipley, an incompletion, and a 15-yard sack to McCoy.
Drive 6: Greg Davis. On first and 10 from the OU 49, Texas throws a slant to John Chiles. I do not have to tell you that Chiles had not achieved separation from his receiver, that he was blanketed, or that the pass was incomplete. Colt's second down pass to Kirkendoll is a terrible throw under pressure. David Snow false starts us into 3rd and 15 and the drive is over.
Drive 7: All. McCoy rushes for 12 yards to pick up a first down, DJ Monroe false starts Texas into a 2nd and 16, and the Longhorns' 3rd and 9 attempt is a 4-yard pass to Kirkendoll.
Drive 8: Davis and McCoy. Deon Beasley forces a fumble giving Texas 1st and 10 at the OU 18. 1st and 10: rinky-dink pass to Shipley for 4. 2nd and 6: Chris Hall false start. 2nd and 11: Incomplete pass to Greg Smith. 3rd and 11: Timeout Texas. 3rd and 11: Delay of game Texas. 3rd and 16: Incomplete pass to Shipley. Wow.
Drive 9: McCoy. After a nice 3rd and 10 conversion on a pass back to Greg Smith slipping out against the grain, Texas rushes for 3 yards with Fozzy, then all but scores on a McCoy keep that he fumbles on the 4 trying to do too much.
Drive 10: Mack Brown. Texas gets the ball at its own 40 with 24 seconds left and picks up 17 yards on two passes to Whittaker to give Texas 3rd and 5 from the OU 43 with a couple seconds remaining. Why not try a 60 yard field goal here? We're trailing 6-3 in a game that's going to come down to field goals, Hunter Lawrence kicks with tremendous lift (making a block unlikely), and each of his kicks on the day looked like they had the distance to challenge 60 yards.
All told, you have enough people (players and coaches alike) bed-wetting all at once to achieve such stunning ineptitude, but the modest second half improvements only serve to illuminate why so much of the first half blame must be assigned to Greg Davis. The two second half adjustments that proved fruitful were (1) replacing John Chiles with Marquise Goodwin and (2) a stronger commitment to rushing the football.
On the first point, the move was almost too little and, crucially, too late. The coaching staff had five games to watch John Chiles as a primary receiver and the results were not in any way ambiguous: Chiles was modestly effective in open space and wholly unable to get open on his own. Recall, for example, the failed 3rd and 6 from last week against Colorado: Colt's pass was lousy, but Chiles' slant route failed to generate any separation, either. Even had the pass been on target, the Buffalo defender was in position to break up the pass.
On the second point, while penalties put Texas in numerous long 1st and 2nd down positions, if you take away McCoy scrambles, sacks, and that horrible speed option play, Texas picked up 75 yards on its 10 first half carries. That success tells us several related things: First, Davis wouldn't have been conceding a punt by trying at times to rush his way through obvious "passing situations." Second, Texas' passing game has proven not to be at all well-suited to succeed when the defense knows Texas is going to pass. And third, by passing in every passing situation, Davis made defending Texas' passing game even easier than it already is. (And if you really wanted to pile on, you might point out that Davis' play calling only exacerbated the illness plaguing the offensive line throughout the first half; had Texas not set things up on a tee for OU's pass rush and pass defense, they might not have presented such a problem for the 'Horns offensive line.)
Not only do those two halftime adjustments explain why the first half struggles fall primarily on his shoulders, but we find in the supposedly redeeming second half the third and final nail for Greg Davis' coffin. Even the silver linings from the improvements were obfuscated by Davis' demonstrated lack of comprehension about his players and how to use them. Back to the drive-by-drive look, this time in the second half:
Drive 1 (own 33): Texas rushes Fozzy for 23 yards and a first down, completes the subsequent pass to Shipley for 9 yards, and picks up another first on 2nd and 1 with a 7-yard rush from Whittaker that moves Texas to the OU 28. For the first time all game, I'm hopeful about the offense, but on 1st and 10, Davis ignores everything that just happened and calls a screen pass to Chiles, which was comfortably defended in any case but winds up netting just a single yard because of Chiles' slow acceleration and his awkward, inexplicable cut inside where OU's defenders are concentrated. On 2nd and 9, Davis calls for a stretch run to the right side, but not with Fozzy Whittaker, who's shown the ability to make the requisite cutbacks for the runs to succeed but with a first carry of the game for Vondrell McGee, who fails to see the cutback lane and simply rumbles harmlessly into the pile of blockers and defenders. On 3rd and 9, McCoy takes the snap and, without making any reads at all, throws in the direction of... John Chiles. I do not have to tell you that he has failed to separate from his receiver or that the pass was incomplete. Texas settles for a field goal.
Drive 2 (own 23): Marquise Goodwin replaces John Chiles and McCoy, after two 1-yard runs to Whittaker, converts 3rd and 8 with a slant to the speedy freshman, whose quickness allows him to receives the ball separated from his defender. Texas then picks up 6 yards on a nice check-down read by McCoy (finding Cody Johnson for 6 yards) and another first down on a 14-yard scamper by Johnson, who displays quick feet and good vision in planting and cutting upfield through a big hole. 1st and 10 at the OU 44, we're in business, and I dare to get my hopes up. Surely Davis can't miss the efficacy of the successful plays in the early going of the second half and will keep at it, right? Wrong. Before I can even finish jotting down the note, Musburger is cooing about the Wild Horn. I refuse to believe it until I see it with my own eyes: Chiles is at quarterback, McCoy is at receiver, and I groan to my father, "Here comes the reverse pass. If we avoid a turnover or sack, it'll be a miracle." Texas is fortunate to dodge both. On 2nd and 10, Davis calls for another pass and McCoy makes a terrible throw under pressure, and on 3rd and 10 Texas is fortunate to keep the drive alive with a pass interference on a deep pass to Buckner. After Whittaker gets Texas down to the OU 14 with rushes of 9 and 6 yards, McCoy punches in the score with a great pass on another separation-creating slant route by Goodwin.
Drive 3 (own 33): McCoy misses Goodwin on 1st and 10, picks up 9 over the middle to Shipley on second down, and then fails to convert on 3rd and 1 when Ryan Reynolds makes a terrific play on Whittaker before he can get to the LOS. Other than wondering whether Cody Johnson would have been the better choice at tailback, there's nothing inherently discouraging about the play call.
Drive 4 (OU 45): After McCoy misses Whittaker on a pass in the flat (arguably his fault, though he blames Whittaker), Texas picks up 9 on a McCoy draw, and a first down on a McCoy sneak. Texas then picks up another first down when Johnson picks up 9 yards on 1st and 2 yards on 2nd, setting up 1st and 10 at the OU 25. Greg Smith false starts us into 1st and 15, a diving Marquise Goodwin picks up 11 to set up 2nd and 4, and the Horns face 3rd and 5 after Fozzy loses a yard. Texas fails to convert when McCoy completes a 3-yard pass to James Kirkendoll, who was running... wait for it... a 3-yard route. Watching the replay, there appears no reason Texas could not have completed the exact same pass with... wait for it... a 5-yard route. Texas settles for a field goal to regain the lead, 16-13.
Drive 5 (OU 49): The drive is derailed on first down by a needless chop block by Chris Hall.
Drive 6 (OU 20): At this point, the second half grade for Davis is a high C or low B, defined by some meaningful improvements hampered by a few ominous mistakes. If at this point Texas hammers in a touchdown on good play calling for a 23-13 lead, Davis likely earns a B for the second half, and even if they meekly settle for a field goal to go up by 6, he comfortably retains a passing grade so long as the defense keeps OU out of the end zone. On 1st and 10, Whittaker rushes for 3.5 yards, on 2nd down Whittaker rushes for 5, and Texas faces 3rd down and a yard or two from just outside the Oklahoma 10 yard line. We pause momentarily for a trip down memory lane:
Pasadena, California. It's 4th and 2 and the game comes down to this. If USC picks up a first down, the Trojans can run out the clock and celebrate a second national title. Leinart is under center, White is the tailback, and Reggie Bush is line up... no, wait a second. I misspoke, folks: Bush is not on the field. Leinart is about to take the snap and Michael Huff is creeping up closer and closer to the line. Everyone in the stadium knows where this ball is going.
Dallas, Texas. It's 3rd and short from the OU 12 and McCoy is in the shotgun. Buckner is upright on the line as the flex tight end, Whittaker is your tailback next to McCoy and.... no, wait a second. I misspoke folks. Whittaker is split out as a receiver. Texas is in an empty set, five-wide. Everyone in the stadium knows where this ball is going.
Including, obviously, Brandon Jackson.
Let's momentarily set aside that most of you, like me, were likely terrified knowing there was a 95% chance Texas was going to throw a slant to Goodwin. There is first the gift to the OU defense of the formation itself -- an empty set, with five receivers split wide. The call for Venables could not have been easier: "Reynolds spies the QB draw, everyone else greedily sit on the quick underneath pass."
The play Texas actually ran was, of course, the worst case scenario: not a QB draw, not an attempt to slip Buckner into the back of the end zone, not a fade to Malcolm Williams in the corner... a quick slant to the hot hand, Goodwin. There was some debate about whether or not Goodwin's route was precisely run (my read was that it was a poor throw by McCoy), but it is, in the end, beside the point. Greg Davis rolled the dice with the one outcome Texas could not afford to have happen and if Jackson pauses long enough to get a block on McCoy, he's gone all the way for 6 points.
In light of all this, I fail to see how there can be anything other than disappoint about, and condemnation of, Greg Davis' performance on Saturday. Not only was his actual game plan and actual play calling a disaster, but the manner in which it unfolded betrayed his fundamental misunderstanding of his own roster of players, generally; his quarterback's strengths and weaknesses, in particular; the Sooners' defensive roster; and a feasible path to even modest success.
That he did not blaze the Sooners for 30 or more points is not the concern; it was the way that he bumbled through 40 passes at 3.2 yards per attempt and 6.0 yards per completion that give his critics an armory of weapons with which to blast him. The final box score shows Texas with 40 pass attempts and 40 rush attempts, but a proper accounting of the plays -- setting aside the 4 sacks and several scrambles -- reveals a mere 29 genuine attempts to rush the football. In the first half, Texas picked up 66 yards on 11 rushes (or 75 on 10 if you dismiss the speed option); in the second half, Texas rushed for 98 yards on 18 attempts.
Greg Davis both misunderstands his personnel and has demonstrated a failure to strategically adapt thus far in 2009. Colt McCoy is a better quarterback than he was as a sophomore, but his limitations are at this point, I think, unassailably established. He is not good enough -- either as a passer or a runner -- to beat defenses all on his own. He is a very good quarterback, with helpful feet and useful accuracy, but he must be a complementary component of a larger strategic vision. He cannot be the centerpiece. He is not, as some hoped after last year, as good as Vince Young in his own way.
Notwithstanding all of the above, are there any silver linings to be found? There might be, but if and only if Greg Davis and Mack Brown digest that last lesson about McCoy. While both coaches understandably admire Texas' senior signal caller for who he is as a person, a competitor, and an achiever, to the extent they believe the offense should and must be centered on his doing it all -- as he did in 2008 -- the Longhorns will not evolve offensively beyond their limitations. If, however, they do (and skeptics are right to point to a complete lack of evidence that they have or will), then the offensive bright spots the past few weeks illuminate the path forward to improvement:
- Get serious about the wide receiver personnel. John Chiles is second team material because he cannot achieve separation from defenders; Marquise Goodwin is a huge improvement because he can. Malcolm Williams caught one 11-yard pass in the first half, and was a questionable review call away from another. After that, he was ignored. Texas can continue to ignore him at its own peril. Shipley is a great player, but cannot and will not succeed against good defenses without help, both in the running game and from the usage of other weapons in the passing game.
- Get serious about running the football. Odd as it is to say, I think this might be a better running team than a passing one. Our scheme, approach, and play calling haven't allowed it to be, but it can be with a genuine recalibration of the approach and play calling. Johnson and Whittaker are a perfectly nice thunder-and-lightning pair, and the offensive line has been blocking quite a few of our rush plays with considerable effectiveness, as evidenced by the results Saturday against the single defense of competence on the schedule.
- Bolster the pass with the run. Sorry, Mack and Greg, but the book has been written on how to defend the Colt McCoy short passing game. No surprise, perhaps, that Oklahoma succeeded in doing so, but when Colorado and Wyoming do the same, the game is up. A good offensive coach would commit this offense to running the football until defenses were forced to adjust the way they defend the Longhorns. At that point, there is opportunity to put to efficient use Colt McCoy's many demonstrated strengths. He has value as a component of a rushing attack and, against a defense forced to key in on stopping said rush attack, demonstrated ability as a passer -- short, medium, and long. Given single coverage against his receivers, and linebackers/safeties cleared away by responsibilities to stopping Texas' rush, McCoy can thrive. Big, gaudy numbers, even, as guys like Shipley, Goodwin, Buckner, and Williams had the freedom to make (and score on) big plays.
The Defensive MVP was: Earl Thomas, Keenan Robinson, Lamarr Houston, and Sergio Kindle. The other tragedy of the offense's performance (I know, hard to believe after all the above that the list isn't yet exhausted) was the manner in which it diverted so much of Musberger and Herbstreit's attention away from the defensive dominance of the Texas defense. Texas' offensive ineptitude was attributed solely to Oklahoma's defense, a side effect of which was to diminish the impressiveness of the even better defense being played by Texas. The difference, of course, is that Kevin Wilson is a good offensive coach; Greg Davis is not.
In any case, OU picked up 120 yards and all 13 of their points on exactly three poor plays by the Texas defense, and had Texas made clean tackles on two of them -- the 65-yard screen to Murray and 35-yard sideline pass to Broyles -- OU loses 80 of those yards and scores just 3 (maybe 6) points on the afternoon. The list of Longhorns who played well on Saturday is a long one, but Thomas, Houston and Kindle were absolutely dominant. I mention the tragedy of the diverted attention from our defense, because on any other day Earl Thomas is the lead story of the football game. As it was, he unjustly had to share the encomium with Brent Venables.
For their part, if any evidence was needed to support the dominance of Kindle and Houston, just consider the fact that in a tight, low-scoring game, 53 of Kevin Wilson's 71 called plays were passes. Frankly, anyone who thinks Sam Bradford's continued presence would have made any difference wasn't watching closely. That Bradford left with an injury was unfortunate to those of us who admire him, but it was anything but surprising. Texas was dominating OU up front from the get-go, and had Blake Gideon made a point blank tackle of Murray on OU's opening drive, Bradford would have departed the game 2-of-6 for 27 -- instead of 77 -- yards. Either way, Oklahoma's offense was in for a long afternoon thanks to the chaos being created by Texas' front four, led especially by Houston and Kindle.
And finally, on a day when Rod Muckelroy was absent injured for chunks of the game, Keenan Robinson deserves special mention for rebounding from his Colorado performance to have his best game as a Longhorn. His angles to the ball carrier in run support were improved, but it was his effort taking away from Kevin Wilson OU's tight ends and backs that were especially noteworthy. A complete performance from the sophomore linebacker.
The offensive Defensive LVP was: N/A. There were a smattering of tackling mistakes and early miscues defending the screen, but Texas doesn't win this game if the unit is any less brilliant overall. We wondered last week whether Texas' defense was so good that it could beat a good team on a day when neither the offense nor kick return game give the team much of anything. The answer is yes.
On the Milk Carton: Dan Buckner (0 catches). No need to rehash the problems on offense all over again, but it's worth highlighting Buckner's goose egg as example of just how easy it has become to key in on our passing attack.
Garrett Gilbert watch: N/A. Whether or not the coaches' hyper-belief in Colt McCoy allows Texas to evolve mid-season into a successful pass-off-the-run offense, I suspect we'll see its efficacy a year from now when the coaches "protect" their young quarterback by doing precisely what they need to be doing now. I further suspect that he will thrive enormously.
Missouri Fear Factor: 3 out of 10. (5) is the baseline. +1 for the failure of our coaches to grasp what a McCoy-led offense needs to look like; +1 for the failure to maximize value from the receiving corps; +1 for McCoy himself hoisting onto his shoulders too much responsibility for the offense's success; -1 for the bright spots in the running game; -1 for the Goodwin > Chiles second half; +2 for Sean Witherspoon and Missouri stalling enough first half runs to send Davis into full "MUST PASS" mode; +1 for the possibility of panic being magnified on the road; -5 for Will Muschamp and this defense.
Heading into next week I feel: Demanding. How Mack Brown and Greg Davis approach, plan for, and call the Missouri game on offense will tell us a lot about whether Texas is going to try the high-wire act of getting to 12-0 on the back of its defense alone. There is time yet for the offense to improve to "above average" -- certainly to the point that the team wins the rest of its regular season games by double-digits.
If, however, the offense comes out and tries the same offensive strategy against Missouri or, equally damning, abandons any early attempts at improvement at the first sign of distress, we're in for a long, frightening ride trying to get to Pasadena... where, should we even get there, a defense as fast, explosive, and vicious as our own will be waiting.
True, wins are all that matter for this team from here to the Big 12 title game. But if we do, how we win, especially over the next two weeks at Missouri and at Oklahoma State, will tell Texas fans how they should feel about the chances for the season to end in glory.
2 recs |
140 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Great Post PB
Thanks for using the word “glorious” and reminding Horns fans to give credit to the unbelievable efforts of Texas – even though much of the effort was frustrated.
I truly believe this team is so talented that if things could come together – we would be an elite Championship team. However, I am pretty close to giving up on the offense . Fortunately, D and Special teams still good enough to get us to MNC game.
by realmccoy on Oct 18, 2009 5:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
There is much to criticize about the failure to evolve our offense thus far in 2009, but no mistake about it — the win was glorious, important, and deeply gratifying.
Hook ’em
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
to stop our offense, ALL their d coordinator had to do was say this:
"Double cover Shipley, he’s got hands. Don’t worry about anyone else — the other receivers don’t run routes and aren’t explosive. Two times a game DJ Monroe will come in — spy him with a safety because he’s getting the ball. When Cody Johnson comes in run-blitz. When Tre Newton comes in look for a short pass to him. Ends — hold your gaps and we’ll stop that stretch zone play. Linebackers — you’ll have nothing to do but blitz, so enjoy it. Corners — jump that horizontal pass he’ll throw five times, one of them will go for 6. Safeties play shallow and give run support because they leave their best receivers on the bench and don’t throw deep. Everyone watch Colt’s eyes as he always throws where he first looks"
"We'll be baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!"
by greenspointexas on Oct 19, 2009 1:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great write up!
Quick question: Do you think there are many letters from Alumni, that are well wrote such as the posts on this site that find there way to Greg Davis or Mack Brown? I am assuming attacking Greg Davis in a letter would not work but, something that is well thought out and makes complete sense strategy wise, would he pick it up, read it and implement it?
I find it hard to believe that he actually thinks his play calling is having any success this season and would hope he would be open to other options.
Probably just wishful thinking. I just hate to see the Horns struggling offensively when we have the personnel to blow out teams consistently.
by Longhorn in MO on Oct 18, 2009 5:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
We'll see
Hard to imagine any public campaign could provide the catalyst for adjustments. I do think it safe to say the coaches are aware that the offense is struggling; I think the critical question is whether they’re able to divorce themselves from their idea that Colt McCoy can do it all. He brilliantly did in 2008, but defenses have adjusted. Will we?
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
And thanks for the kind words
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Commentary and honest discussion
I’m jumping on a previous PB post from year’s gone by . . . Mach has made a commitment and said, we’re going with the best and demand the best. There’s some private talks occurring, I’m sure, and I have confidence in the “management” of the team to readily address what is now obvious. I think we’ve gone vanilla until OU. The cards are now on the table and, unfortunately, we’re needing some help from the river. Fortunately, we’ve got some mighty smart people that DO make adjustments. . . let’s hope they realize that the time is now.
by unknownidiot on Oct 18, 2009 10:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
greatness!
Wonderful read, great job PB
Get off your knees Greg, you're blowin' the game.
by kriess on Oct 18, 2009 5:22 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Loved it!
Thanks for putting down your thoughts. Really liked your take.
I was from the camp that GD was holding stuff back which I think he did. I think this is smart and needed but not sure the couple of misdirection plays need to be hidden. That needs to be part of the offense, you need to dig a little deeper. The one great call I thought was the Colt draw for the last first down before the penalty, perfect.
I’m really not liking this Colt for Heisman non stop. Not sure we need to blame a receiver (both Mack and Colt) for an interception. Not sure we needed to stress the flu again (both Mack and Colt). I really am starting to wonder if those plays that “Colt noticed”, the Buckner touchdown vs Tech and the play against Colorado are part of this campaign. If it happens that’s great for Texas and for Colt but this trying so hard to make it happens goes against everything that Mack and Colt are about.
by pfc on Oct 18, 2009 5:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agree
Thanks for the kind words, and I’m with you on being concerned about the Colt-centricness of our approach being a part of the problem. We can and should change that, and in so doing, let him actually succeed. Not sure our coaches see that yet.
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great write-up
Watching the game, I felt like even I could determine what Davis was going to call at any given time. And I’m no great shakes at playcalling. In any case, OU was practically begging UT to go over the middle…and I believe we tried that somewhere between zero and one times. Dan Buckner could have had an absolutely enormous game, given the right routes. Heck, even moving Shipley in the flex spot would have been viable. Or going deep to Malcolm when the safeties were playing 8 yards deep. Or…jeez, I can’t even talk about it.
On the plus side, I have full confidence that our defense and ST can at least keep us in any game against any opponent, save maybe Alabama, even with our offense performing at negative 27% efficiency.
by jc25 on Oct 18, 2009 5:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
For sure
Thanks, and alongside the glory of beating OU, the other beautiful takeaway from the game was the ruthlessness of the D.
On special teams, our kick coverage is getting sloppy, but the rest is gold. I probably was remiss in not giving a game ball to Hunter Lawrence, who was nails.
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Completely agree about Hunter Lawrence
It’s easier to make 45 yd field goals when you’re up by 30 at home against UTEP, but to step in during a time of offensive futility and frustration and uncertainty, and to step in there cool, calm, and collected and knock down three field goals (especially the 1st half ones) against the heated rival in the most heated game of the year in a heated environment. Big huevos on Hunter, and nothing short of GREAT to have such a reliable kicker
by trueorangeblood on Oct 19, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right on the money
Loved the analysis of the offense and the changes that we need to make. I get fired up picturing fozzy and cj in the backfield, with goodwin, buckner, and williams supporting the pass game. Please, God, let this happen, and we will go 14-0!
by Orangetower87 on Oct 18, 2009 5:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
I certainly agree that there are weapons to succeed offensively. Just need a more robust approach.
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't even know where to start, PB
Since I never keep it short, this time I will. Your first-half breakdown of UT’s possessions is something you NEVER get from the alleged experts and insiders on TV and in the print business. It’s football made simple. It tells the story with facts, not KB’s unfunny verbal stabs. It gets the focus off the QB and receivers and rushers, which seems to be the extent of the football knowledge of most of the self-styled experts.
Great breakdown. My view on Greg Davis’ performance is somewhat different than yours. Lotsa time for that later on. Thanks again.
by edsp on Oct 18, 2009 5:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Ed
Look forward to your take on GD and crew.
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you Peter
We see the same flaws in Greg Davis as an offensive coordinator but you elucidated far more eloquently than I could at the moment. It is difficult for me to analyze the current offensive scheme without reflexive swearing.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Oct 18, 2009 5:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
24 hours
Thanks, LH. I had to take 24 hours to celebrate the delight that is beating OU before I could sit down to be critical.
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have to ask - what happened to OU's defense in the 2nd half?
The 2nd half saw a lot less movement on OU’s side, a tactic that was working incredibly well to put our o-line on its heels (as well as make a ton of errors) and to rattle Colt. In the 2nd half, they seemed to play much more traditional defense schemes which I thought was a detriment to the their effectiveness.
Who cares, because we won, but not sure what Venables was thinking in his half-time ‘adjustment’.
I’ve been having a hell of a lot more fun watching this defense wreak havoc than I have watching any offensive drive. That will continue for the rest of the season and I’ll watch the offense peripherally to see if they ever figure it out.
by TXinDC on Oct 18, 2009 5:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I have a few disagreements
I know I’m probably going to get lambasted for trying to protect Greg Davis, but I just can’t place as much blame on him as you have. Players have to execute.
Drive 2 – you place the blame on Greg Davis for running a pass play after two successful run plays. If the play works, it’s labeled a good change of pace. If Davis runs a run play and it fails, it’s labeled ‘ole predictable Davis doing the same things over and over. If I remember that third down play correctly, Texas sent at least four receivers into the pattern and Colt stared down Shipley for his entire route. I already deleted my recording of the game, but I would assume there was someone more open than Shipley was on that play. In any case Colt might’ve scrambled for the one yard needed for the first down.
Drive 4 – you blamed this drive on Davis for the speed option play. I hear all the time on this site people pleading for offensive imagination. Well, Davis saved a play for this game (I know the speed option is not exactly ground breaking stuff) and it didn’t work. If the right side of the line blocks anyone on that play, then maybe the play has some chance for success. Again, I’m not trying to attack you Peter, as I really do like to read your stuff. I’m just saying that players need to be held responsible for their execution of the plays that are called. So the play on first down fails and now we are in an obvious passing situation. Davis could run the ball on second down, but if that fails he’s labeled a conservative (insert expletive or other adjective here) offensive coordinator. So he chooses to pass. Unfortunately Davis cannot create separation from the DBs from the press box. Someone other than Shipley is going to have to present a target for McCoy. That, and the offensive line has got to hold up for a second longer.
I could go further, but I hope I’ve made my point. I don’t even pretend to know how hard it is to be an offensive coordinator. Every fan thinks they would make a great one, but if it was so easy, there would be a lot more of them succeeding. Who would you rather have at OC? Urban Meyer? Boy did his offense look great yesterday. Mike Leach? Hah. Mark Mangino? Yumm. Mike Gundy? At least he’s a man. What??? You don’t want any of those? Well all of those offenses are in the top 11 in scoring offense. I had to stretch to 11 because Florida is there.
Question: Does Davis make in-game personnel decisions or is that left up to assistants? I was of the impression that Applewhite makes those decisions for RBs and Kennedy for the WRs. If that’s the case then you can’t blame Vondrell being in the game on Davis. That would have to be put on Applewhite. It’s okay, Applewhite does make mistakes.
I’m with you on all the way on Chiles. John has tremendous straight-line speed. He does not have good side-to-side quickness. I cannot remember him being able to juke a single defender with his quickness. Let the long-jumper play.
Anyways, thanks for the post. I love this site, and love what you guys put out.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 6:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the comment
Obviously, we disagree pretty sharply, but I appreciate the counterpoints and alternate interpretation. My word certainly isn’t gospel.
The main thing I’d point to is the similar ineptitude against the subpar defenses of Wyoming and Colorado. If you don’t harbor systemic concerns after that, we’re just not gonna see eye to eye on this one.
Players do need to execute, but even that falls in part on the coaching staff. We can quibble about the degree to which that’s the case, but in concert with the systemic issues, I’m more than a little displeased with Davis. Bear in mind, too, that I’ve never been one to shriek loudest about Davis’ shortcomings; I’ve given him credit for his successes, but in evolving this offense now that defenses have adjusted to the Colt short passing game, he gets a failing grade.
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll liken it to this
Nebraska ran the option. Everyone knew they were going to run the option. Nebraska’s success or failure depended solely upon proper execution of the plays by the players. Some years it worked awesome (‘96-’97), others it got coaches fired, but the system works if executed properly. Now we run the short passing attack. It’s somewhat predictable, but it has proven to work. Davis does need to develop some change-ups to the current defense of his system, but I believe the success of the plays falls on the players. We are basically running the same offense from a year ago, but with out safety net Quan, and myriad other reasons, we have not had the same success. Even in 2007 we lost to OU because of turnovers, not the ineffectiveness of the offensive scheme.
OU has a good defense. They have played much better competition than Texas has up to this point and they still are only allowing like 8 points a game. If Texas would’ve had the scheme of a power run SEC football team, I doubt we would’ve scored many more points if the execution and penalties remained the same.
About the Wyoming/Colorado games – there was horrible execution of the plays. Against Wyoming, McCoy threw passes over his receivers heads all day. All that was written was how our O-line was going to lean on their small D-line and pound the rock. Well our O-line played aweful in the first half, made some half-time adjustments, and then bang our running backs started to find some holes.
Colorado can be explained by some looking ahead, not being mentally prepared for a game they thought was going to be a cake-walk. I know that’s not really a good explanation, but that’s what ESPN will tell you, and if it’s good enough for ESPN, then it’s good enough for me. I’m kidding.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let me sum up with this
I’m NOT trying to say that Greg Davis is absolved of any blame in our offensive output yesterday. I am simply trying to state that more of the blame should be shifted to players. Some years in the Greg Davis offense we’ve looked unstoppable. Some years have not gone so well. What has been the variable? Players and their ability to run the plays that GD calls.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 7:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Overly simplistic view
While I have neither the time nor the inclination to debate the nuances of the blame game (GD vs players) I will say this – the players can only execute what the coaches call.
What PB is arguing, I believe, is that there is a better use of our personnel available to Davis, yet he continues to try to ram a square peg into a round hole.
Obviously, if you execute every play exactly as it is drawn up your offense would rack up 80+ points and 800+ yards every game. That is just not realistic nor a strategy that will produce consistent positive results, especially against similarly talented teams.
Instead of a gameplan that requires perfect execution in order to achieve success, why not try an approach that more naturally lends itself to your players’ abilities, strenghts and inclinations?
"It's not that the Irish are cynical. It's rather that they have a wonderful lack of respect for everything and everybody."
-- Brendan Behan --
by Zeno of Citium on Oct 18, 2009 7:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think Colt McCoy and a plethora of quick receivers constitute a square peg to the short passing game’s round hole. Quite the opposite, in fact.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 18, 2009 7:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Once it has been effectively schemed for and neutralized by opposing DC’s (see OU, Wyoming, Colorado – to a lesser extent Tech) and you continue to fail to adapt, what would you call that?
"It's not that the Irish are cynical. It's rather that they have a wonderful lack of respect for everything and everybody."
-- Brendan Behan --
by Zeno of Citium on Oct 18, 2009 7:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I call that a completely different issue. That’s not a matter of matching the scheme to the players, or players to the scheme, but rather constant innovation. Care to throw some ideas for innovation out there?
The truth is that every offensive scheme faces stretches when it’s less effective than usual. Is that any reason to scrap an offense that’s still one of the most potent in the entire nation? I’d call that an enormous knee-jerk reaction, to be honest.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 18, 2009 7:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps you are misreading (or reading into) my comments. My reply was to the post about our offensive shortcomings being mainly a byproduct of poor execution by the players on the field.
In fact, the example given was that of Nebraska’s option offense in the 90’s.
My point is that if you keep calling the same plays with the same personnel in the same situations and continue to have little success, in my view, that is mainly a coaching issue and not an execution issue.
I certainly never suggested “scrapping our offense” and I think PB mentioned many different innovations, variations and complementary offensive components that could alleviate our shortcomings. I could restate them for you, or you could re-read the post yourself.
"It's not that the Irish are cynical. It's rather that they have a wonderful lack of respect for everything and everybody."
-- Brendan Behan --
by Zeno of Citium on Oct 18, 2009 7:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So do you think
that the option will never be effective again in college football? I think with the right recruited personnel it would still work fine. It just never will be run again by a serious BCS offense because recruits want to go to a place that’s going to send them to the NFL along with lots of other reasons.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 8:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
I am arguing the opposite (I think). The option could be effective, but if after 6 games your option attack isn’t producing, do you keep running the option or look at a different use of your personnel (or even a situational use of the option)?
I am saying that if something doesn’t work once or twice, it is execution. Over multiple games, then it is coaching/playcalling.
"It's not that the Irish are cynical. It's rather that they have a wonderful lack of respect for everything and everybody."
-- Brendan Behan --
by Zeno of Citium on Oct 18, 2009 8:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the thing is
that the plays were working in the second half against a really strong OU defense. And I’m not just calling OU’s defense strong to back up my claim. Statistically they are a stout defense. Texas just continued to shoot itself in the foot with foolish penalties and turnovers. Once the execution cleaned up, the offense worked fine. It cannot, however, overcome foolish mistakes. There is going to have to be a constant tweaking to continue to stay one step ahead of what defenses are trying to do to stop the offense. At the beginning of ’08 no one could figure out how to stop what we were doing. Now, defenses are getting better at containing our offense and letting our guys make the mistakes to kill our drives. The offense will work with a little tweaking by Davis and a lot better execution by the players.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 8:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not expecting every play to go for a touchdown
but I do expect that if we run two slants to the backside receivers that Colt would throw to the one who was open and that the line would block long enough for him to make the proper read so we could gain the 4 yards needed for a first down.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 7:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I would, and do, expect Colt to make the proper read and an accurate throw. When he doesn’t, that is an execution issue.
When he either misreads or misfires consistently, then it becomes a coaching issue. Not that we don’t run the slant again, but maybe with different personnel, different situation, different plays prior to the slant to set it up, move the pocket — something.
I am not absolving the players of all blame either, just as you are not with GD. I just think that as we have seen over 6 games, for whatever reason, our offense has been marginalized and hoping for better execution of the same plays is fools gold…IMHO.
"It's not that the Irish are cynical. It's rather that they have a wonderful lack of respect for everything and everybody."
-- Brendan Behan --
by Zeno of Citium on Oct 18, 2009 8:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The speed option play
Was an idiotic play. If you had watch Miami against OU, or if you have watched OU for the last oh 30 years you know that wide does not work. Miami and Texas yesterday had success by running at them or with misdirection.
There is no defending this offense. As PB pointed out, Colorado exposed their tendencies. Colorado! Unless or until this changes I am convinced we drop a game in the next two. And there is no need.
If you see Chiles and Kirkendoll remember you are now playing 2 less capable receivers. And if McGee starts or pushes back into the mix just pray this is a 1983 defense without a Georgia.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 18, 2009 7:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fozzy
ran outside on several run plays with success. They were well executed and thus they were magnificent play calls. If they would’ve been stopped in the backfield because of bad line blocking or a poor choice of running holes by Fozzy then it would’ve been deemed a bad call by the masses.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
aaron's comments
Aaron,
Think you made some excellent points.
Particularly when comparing us to other offenses in the “elite” level of play.
I wonder what the feel is if we don’t see colt fumble on the 2 (damn that end of the field is cursed, almost the exact same spot of JC’s fumble which cost us the ‘07 game, not far from VY’s fumble in ’04 which cost us that game) and the INT what the take is if we finish beating OU 23 (assume 1 TD/1FG) 13.
Granted, coulda/woulda/shoulda but blaming GD for drive killing penalties and turnovers is a fool’s errand, sorry.
Oh yeah, Big U didn’t blow the block on English unless he totally blew his assignment (which I would seriously doubt).
We didn’t look as good as we should have but give OU a tad bit of credit and seriously, Wyoming nor CU games have any place in this discussion.
by echeese on Oct 19, 2009 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Solid.
Thanks.
That is all.
No, wait, one more thing — we already know that Muschamp is our future HC. Given what we saw this weekend, that’s something to be happy about. The future is bright. OU can’t say the same.
by godelmetric on Oct 18, 2009 6:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ok again
I questioned out loud several times yesterday what ID this offense had. Meaning what are we trying to accomplish? It resembles a grab bag of nonsense to me.
I personally have felt Chiles starting and even playing is pay back for the position change. Plus if you watch him on the sidelines, even if it is just his body language he seems to pout. There is no way he should be starting. At all.
Kirkendoll my word. The penalty alone with the standard set for Williams should have been you sit. But lo and behold, here he comes as if nothing has happened.
I lobbied for Fozzy and agree that Johnson and Fozzy offer a potentially potent tandem. If, big if, used correctly. I worry that McGee and Newton (who could evolve into a third down back as was hoped for and the beginning of the season) will jump back in as to not hurt anyone’s feeling.
Malcom Williams is a receiver. He runs routes and the slant at Tech last year proved you better tackle him. John Chiles is not. He needs to sit. Fozzy/Johnson, Williams, Shipley, Buckner, Goddwin. Think about it with more then 3 yard outs involved.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 18, 2009 6:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Williams
and even if he doesn’t always get seperation he’s so big he can shield the defender and/or go up for the ball. Neither of which Chiles can do.
by Horncasting on Oct 18, 2009 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The good news:
We wondered last week whether Texas’ defense was so good that it could beat a good team on a day when neither the offense nor kick return game give the team much of anything. The answer is yes.
That means that we have the rest of the season to get the offense to a point at which we it can contribute enough against a good defense that we can beat a great team. And we can do that while likely winning the rest of our games. The only question is whether the offense will progress to that point. That’s on Greg Davis and Mack Brown. Are they content fielding a team that can get to the national championship game, or do they want to also be a team that can win it? It seems from his public statements that Mack at least understands the difference, so that’s step 1. Step 2 — actually making improvements — is the tough one.
by billyzane on Oct 18, 2009 7:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
PB - A very stoic and poignant read.
I have been voicing concerns about the offense to friends since Wyoming. Nothing has changed my mind yet and frankly I am a bit concerned about going to Stillwater. I think we handle Mizzou next week without too much trepidation. But Stillwater on Halloween has an eerie ring to it. Thoughts?
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
by Mulliganville on Oct 18, 2009 7:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Watch who plays Saturday
If we ran side by side with Colorado at home into the 4th quarter, Missouri can win.
Fozzy brings hope in the running game which by and large is a joke. He does have the tools to go the distance if when beginning his sideways journey.
by thirtyand0 on Oct 18, 2009 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tx/ou
I haven’t seen the replay, but when I saw the first drove at the game, it looked like the unblocked Auston English should have been blocked by Greg Smith, not Ulatoski. Greg Smith went ahead and went upfield. What did you see?
Solid post as usual.
by whoopspat on Oct 18, 2009 7:21 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Might be right
I haven’t looked at the replay since yesterday; others are pointing out that English unblocked might have been an issue with the protection call from the sidelines.
You ain't hurt.
by Peter Bean on Oct 18, 2009 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Announcers made that point (TE at fault, not OT)
I watched the replay, and my view was like theirs. Line was surging to the right, which took Ulatoski away from English. The TE was the only alternative. Have no idea, of course, what the TE is supposed to do on that play.
One thing was obvious: Good as our defense was, OU’s was more aggressive pre-snap. Maybe that shouldn’t upset a veteran line, but it did (missed assignments, panic false-start penalties). The right play-calling would have taken away some of OU’s aggressiveness — and the first series in the third quarter seemed to have that effect.
Why was OU less capable on defense the second half? Some better play-calling, much better execution, fatigue (Sooners seldom substitute on defense).
by edsp on Oct 18, 2009 7:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm, but it seems crazy that the pre-snap aggressive ENTIRELY disappeared in the 2nd half
It’s not like one or two plays stopped it – if I remember correctly, they just stopped doing it, period, at the the start of the 3rd.
by TXinDC on Oct 18, 2009 9:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A happy thought for you to consider
Consider the possibility that Colt McCoy is the modern day Craig Krenzel.
by Kwix on Oct 18, 2009 7:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Craig Krenzel
couldn’t hit the side of a barn, until it was 4th and 36 and he would somehow find the magic to complete a 37 yard pass play into double coverage. 2002 Ohio State is by far the worst BCS Champion ever.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 8:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
gotta go with 07 LSU
02 Ohio State WAS undefeated and they defeated a very strong Miami team, regardless of what you think about the phantom interference call.
by acho81 on Oct 18, 2009 8:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. 2007 LSU had no business in that game, let alone winning it.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 19, 2009 9:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Krenzel, sure, or maybe Tee Martin. Or Ken Dorsey. I really wouldn’t be all that picky, as long as UT were to win the national title. Ceteris paribus, of course I’d love for Colt to come out and finish up the season with all-world numbers and dominating performances. I actually consider it highly unlikely that he won’t return to 2008 form at some point, and just click from there.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 19, 2009 9:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
TX/OU
Not questioning what you wrote because it seems to make perfect sense, but I believe Mack and Greg are the winningest coaches in NCAA FB or FBS (whatever its called) since Mack got here. That includes having more wins than even USC who recruits more 5 stars than most other top teams combined and plays in a weaker conference. How can it be so easy to identify and point out what they do wrong? That is, you think it is easy to draw it up in theory, but in practice quite a bit harder. Obviously, this offense is extremely frustrating to watch, but Greg was also the author of probably the funnest offense to watch – last years. Don’t we have pretty much the same players – less Cosby of course! Your thoughts?
by rajman on Oct 18, 2009 7:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Defenses figured it out
Disciplina Praesidium Civitatis.
by zamm on Oct 18, 2009 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last years offense
was predicated on the notion that our QB could complete passes at a rate better than any QB in the history of college football. Quite simply it was not attainable. The fact that it was successful an entire year is incredibly fortunate.
One of the other sites (Rock M nation maybe) did an article earlier this year about how our 3rd and long success rate was off the charts good last year and that there is not way it was sustainable. Well we are now seeing a regression to the mean.
by Horncasting on Oct 18, 2009 8:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bingo...well said
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
by Mulliganville on Oct 18, 2009 8:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think GD showed a lot of looks that were new, trying to get around OU's D
Now the cats are out of the bag, hopefully GD can approach the offensive game plan with a little more honesty than before the OU game.
I think the OU game can be a catalyst for change in the longhorn’s offense.
At least, I hope it can. We’ll know a little more after Mizzou.
by notsofst on Oct 18, 2009 7:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Questions
I enjoy getting the takes from you guys that know football and rewatch the games… A couple questions (of course at your pleasure):
What happened with Buckner? I read somewhere that OU was dropping a DL back to take away the middle did he not adjust? I got to say from where I was sitting Colt was running for his life and that effected it. (Agreed that GD should have ran these misdirections until they adjusted)
Muckelroy, why such a quiet game?
I read that Gerald McCoy was dominant, but I couldn’t differential which OU lineman was in chasing Colt… What was your take on him? If G. McCoy is a 100 what do you give Houston?
by pfc on Oct 18, 2009 7:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I have seen this play before
and it ends badly.
This season is unfolding like the 1983 undefeated season. Texas posted big, easy wins (see Rice, Arkansas, and OU), and tough, hard fought wins (see Houston, Baylor, and SMU).
The defense was vintage Akers but the offense never found an identity as Akers could not settle on a quarterback. The offense played well enough to win and the defense was particularly dominant.
It fell a part in the fourth quarter of the Cotton Bowl with a mishandled punt return. Starting quarterback Rick McIver was particularly ineffective.
That night, Miami upset Nebraska in the Orange Bowl. Had Texas won the game, the Longhorns would have been mythical national champs.
Unless Greg Davis understands that we need a running game that sets up a passing game, this season could end like the ’83 campaign. The offensive unit has the athletes, but it lacks the identity. This team is not a high octane passing machine like last year.
Our offense works when we establish the run.
by milevin on Oct 18, 2009 8:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree
and never thought this regime would ever have this particular problem. For all his shortcomings, GD has been able to field some of the most potent offenses in UT history. The offensive stagnation is so reminiscent of those Akers teams it’s scary. I must say I did not foresee this degree of inability to put points (1st downs, even) on the board.
Disciplina Praesidium Civitatis.
by zamm on Oct 18, 2009 8:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure about an '83 championship
Had Texas won the game, the Longhorns would have been mythical national champs.
I’ve never been sold on this. I’m convinced that Miami came out as fired up as a college team could possibly be that night, given the highly unexpected events of the day leading to a highly unexpected shot at an MNC that evening.* The Hurricanes shot out of the gates for a 17-0 first quarter lead before Nebraska rallied and turned the game into one of the best two college games of my lifetime. (The other one having been played just over 46 months ago in California.)
I tend to believe that, had Texas won the Cotton Bowl, Miami would not have been as sky high as they were, and Nebraska would have won.
- For a recent pro equivalent, remember what the Eagles did to the Cowboys last year in the last year after an improbable string of events in the early games unexpectedly opened the door to an Eagles playoff bid with a win over Dallas.
Formerly kjm017
by Hopkins Horn on Oct 18, 2009 8:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1983
Texas was two different teams that year: (i) with Edwin (ii) after Edwin.
by DaveBecker on Oct 18, 2009 10:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Questions and comments
First of all PB, great work. You really outdid yourself with this one.
After the first play of the game (misdirection cut-back run by Fozzy) I thought to myself, great we are getting good Davis for this game. Who knows what might have been if EBS or Ulitoski pick up English on that drive.
We have run that speed option a number ot times this year. I believe it worked for decent gain on one of the first couple of games (with McGee as the RB), and it has gone for a loss every time since. Like the Wildhorn, we’d be better off if the play had been a miserable failure early in the season.
For all the well deserved criticism of Chiles, Kirkendoll has been no better for the last few weeks, and that personal foul was beyond idiotic. Yet he’s back on at the start of the next drive. Williams continues to bust his ass on special teams and continues to sit behind guys that are contributing nothing.
Speaking of WR’s, wouldn’t Goodwin’s skill set more closely match what we want out of Kirkendoll’s position, while William’s match Chiles?
Bucker didn’t have any catches, but caused a pass interference that I believe led to the only score. I also believe that was the longest “pass” play by the offense the entire game.
Running game showed some promising flashes. I liked the formation where Monroe comes in motion in front of Colt and then either Monroe on Whittaker get the ball (or McCoy keeps it. Isn’t this basically the Wildcat formation/play, just being run correctly?
by Horncasting on Oct 18, 2009 8:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good read, with a mild counter-point
I count myself generally being a GD defender, given that I have never been an OC and that two of our last four teams have featured two of the most prolific offenses in NCAA history. Too many fans around these parts forget that and are often unwilling to allow GD to at least share in some of the credit for the amazing offensive successes we have had in recent years. Too often, if we succeed on offense, it’s a credit to the players, and if we fail, the OC alone is to blame.
That being said, I certainly appreciate well-reasoned criticism of his play-calling such as this. I do often find myself just as frustrated as many around here. It’s just that the Pavlovian instinct of many Horn fans to call for GD’s ouster after any offensive play that doesn’t go for at least 20 yards is comically absurd. For anyone who doesn’t participate in game threads, go pick one and see for yourself the hysterics which often follow any offensive play which doesn’t yield substantial yardage.
Formerly kjm017
by Hopkins Horn on Oct 18, 2009 8:51 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I will add
that it is nice to have reasonable arguments with people and have them not resort to name calling and character bashing. I think that’s the best thing about BON. We can all have our opinions and still act like civilized human beings.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 18, 2009 9:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Not only that
But we get on others when they result to immature replies. It’s nice and one of the things I really like and respect about BON.
by seth78 on Oct 18, 2009 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for another great one PB
1st half Offense: Did any of our quick screens work? OU may have found something to key on for those plays. If i’m not mistaken a few other plays OU seamed to have shifted or adjusted to create no gains or negative yards. Was ther someone behind our grassy knolls at practice? Switzy?
2nd Half: The plays seamed more vanilla, and balls out up the middle. I especially liked CJ being stoppped for a 4 yd gain then added another 5-6 YAC with a horns up push.
I was frustated by lack of rhythm in the 1st half but give a little props to GD for a change up at least by my perception.
Stoops suffers from homo un-erectus. That's where his wang is hugeified not by a woman, but by a man.
by Ese-De-SA on Oct 18, 2009 9:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Awesome summary...
I have to draw a focus on three first half drives that nearly drove me insane. Drives 5 & 8 as outlined by PB so well are THE reason there is so much GD Haturade going around the Burnt Orange Nation. When he takes a nice two or three plays and goes back the safety of the ‘bubble screen’ that just won’t work against a really top notch Defense i want to scream.
I also tend to think that in drive 9 Colt was robbed and it wasn’t a fumble, in fact I saw the same thing happen in the NFL today in the Saints/Giants game and the play was called down by contact because the ball was ‘controlled’ while cradled up against his shoulder pad. Although it’s certainly no guarantee we would have punched it in for 7 if we had that would have put a big dagger in OU before the half and we’d have probably pulled away from them alot earlier in the 2nd.
by longhornJ on Oct 18, 2009 9:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Greg Davis
I was sitting next to the Press Box at the game yesterday and I actually contemplated climbing up and throwing Greg Davis through the window. Is that bad? Would not have done it but he pretty much ruined the game for me!
by Dawnpatrol on Oct 18, 2009 9:59 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Wow, he ruined the game for you? We did win, remember...
by TXinDC on Oct 18, 2009 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Winning isn't everything
Its difficult to point to a timid, perplexed looking group of kids who’ve been entirely misguided by their coaches, and then exude pride in your University. Not that I’m not proud to be a Longhorn, its not that at all. Its just that these coaches don’t represent the qualities we purport to value (competence, confidence, self-truth), nor do they instill them in our players. In that sense, he ruined yesterday for me too. Not to mention a potentially good football game.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 18, 2009 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
these coaches don’t represent the qualities we purport to value (competence, confidence, self-truth)
Good lord man, what in the world are you talking about? Exaggerate much?
Formerly kjm017
by Hopkins Horn on Oct 18, 2009 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I simply mean
that these coaches often field a team that it is difficult to be proud of. I understand entirely that everyone who reads that statement is going to misinterpret it, so I shall attempt, in advance, to deflect any baseless criticisms.
First, I speak nothing of wins or losses, as I am criticising the coaches after a win, and have occasionally applauded them after losses.
And as individual players, Texas fields some of the best talent and best men in college football. But our offensive coaching staff exudes a conservative, play-not-to-lose attitude, that permeates the team as a whole, and this often leads to players not fulfilling their potentials, and a lot of confusion, frustration, and blame-assigning regarding the players on game day. I watched it during the Applewhite era (revisionists don’t remember, but that offense was stagnant just as often as not), during the Simms era, during the Mock era, and throughout much of the McCoy era. In each of those eras, players looked frustrated, and they look unfocused. Its the kind of frustration that stems either from being held back by the authorities in whom you put your trust (that is, being set up to fail by a parental figure you trust), or from being confused and unprepared.
I routinely see other programs in which players sell out entirely for their coaches, play balls-out for 60 minutes with passion and belief. And even in defeat, those fans and alumni can point to the field and declare absolute pride in the way their schools were represented that day. But its never that easy with this coaching staff. While we win more often than those other schools, many of our games emit the pungent stench of fear and unpreparedness, somewhere during which our talent-advantage overcomes all other factors. And in those cases, its difficult for me to say the team is well-representing our University, even in victory.
Again, this is on the coaches. The players are simply doing their bests to carry out the schemes and attitudes they’ve been taught.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 19, 2009 12:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
disagree
talk to fan bases of any major program and you will find countless people who never think the offense is high powered enough or defense doesn’t hit hard enough.
Why hate on “play not lose” when you didn’t lose?
by BMG on Oct 19, 2009 12:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am so sick of hearing this
It simply isn’t true.
All fanbases have naysayers. But I watch a disgusting amount of college football, and rarely if ever see a program that can trace every offensive inconsistency, deductively and evidently, to one single man, who is repeatedly given contract extensions. Most programs eventually get rid of coaches who under-perform. And I have yet to see a coordinator do less with his available talent than Greg Davis.
Its like saying after your child stabs his sister to death that “all siblings fight.”
And, to answer your second point, as I said before, it isn’t all about winning.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 19, 2009 12:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
last I checked
you play to win the game. Period.
by BMG on Oct 19, 2009 8:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All fanbases have naysayers. But I watch a disgusting amount of college football, and rarely if ever see a program that can trace every offensive inconsistency, deductively and evidently, to one single man, who is repeatedly given contract extensions.
This also isn’t the case with Davis.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 19, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thatnks for the explanation . . .
. . . but here’s what I don’t get:
While we win more often than those other schools, many of our games emit the pungent stench of fear and unpreparedness, somewhere during which our talent-advantage overcomes all other factors. And in those cases, its difficult for me to say the team is well-representing our University, even in victory.
(Emphasis is mine.)
Do you know how many teams have won more games than the Horns this decade? Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the answer might be only two — OU and Boise State — and we’re within a game or two of each of those programs if I’m doing my math right.
Teams we’ve won more games than this decade: Florida, LSU, USC, Ohio State, Miami, and, um everyone else.
Now I will freely admit to anyone on this board that I have never played a down of organized football in my life. I’ve watched my whole life and have a good feel for what’s going on, but I’ve never played, so if someone wants to get into a discussion based on specific Xs and Os, I’m not going there. I’ll leave that discussion to someone more expert than I. So I have to go based on the results I see. And it is incomprehensible to me that a team could be as consistently excellent as ours over a significant period of time and for coaching not to have at least a small, small part to do with it. If the coaching is that awful, the only possible explanation is that we are consistently miles and miles ahead of every single other school in the country when it comes to recruiting and just hope for the best — and get damn lucky in doing so — by just throwing the players out onto the field as unprepared as possible.
And that just makes no sense at all.
Formerly kjm017
by Hopkins Horn on Oct 19, 2009 12:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again
not concerned just with winning.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 19, 2009 12:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, I really would really like to never watch a football game with you.
by TXinDC on Oct 19, 2009 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
So if Texas, say, wins by overtly cheating, or takes several cheap shots throughout the game, that would be fine by you, so long as they win? Come on, there are other things to value about football, and you know it. .
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 19, 2009 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
cognitive dissonance
obviously no one wants to win by cheating, that’s definitely not in the scope of what I or anyone here would deem acceptable.
So we didn’t win by whatever magical number you thought would have been appropriate. Somehow because of that the Longhorns are unbecoming of the school they represent? And furthermore, the cause of that can all be tied back to one Greg Davis and his philosophy? Look at the result of the game – a 16-13 victory over your biggest rival, in what was expected to be the biggest game of your season. albeit ugly, It was clean (no cheating). Look again at the stack of results and stats over the past 11 years. How can you rationalize your point of view with all the facts? are you suffering from cognitive dissonance?
To say that a conservative approach permeates the team and somehow leads to a lack of results is baseless and cannot be supported by facts. The facts are that Mack is the winningest coach in college football during his tenure at Texas. His offenses have been prolific, and he recruits solid (though not always top) players. He’ll take a 4 star with good character over a 5 star turd brain. Mack is 20-4 in games decided by less than 5 points. Bob Stoops would kill for that record in tight games. The streak of 10 win seasons cannot be debated. The offensive numbers can’t be argued, and the record in big games is solid. The biggest blemish on his career thus far is that he failed to make it to a “big game” up to 2005. But it wasn’t for lack of trying — the Sooners were just better then. We’re better now.
by BMG on Oct 19, 2009 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, seriously man.
For the thrid time. I’m not concerned with winning.
So we didn’t win by whatever magical number you thought would have been appropriate
Mack is the winningest coach in college football during his tenure at Texas
I have said repeatedly, I would rather be able to point to the field and say that I’m proud of the way my University is being represented than to win regardless of honorability of performance (even if that means losing occassionaly). Is your mind so one-tracked that you can’t even read MY sentiments without thniking only of winning?
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 21, 2009 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
..and
what I meant by self-truth is not to be in denial or to be delusional, which this team often is. This is another attitude the coaches exude.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 19, 2009 12:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you make a great point
About the fact that Mack Brown and Greg Davis are so much in “awe” of Colt that they don’t realize he does not have to do everything.
Great write up, if only some of the coaches read this we would not have anything to worry about.
"I don't ever miss free throws. I'm like 100-percent from the free throw line. I just don't think about missing and if you think about missing you're going to miss. I just take my time and know I'm going to make it and I do," McClellan said.
by blazzinken on Oct 18, 2009 10:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Worried about mizzou?
NO. however we may be looking ahead to OSU and perhaps missouri will play a quarterback who isn’t lame.
by Ohio Horn on Oct 18, 2009 10:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Great article PB.
I spread 90% of the blame between Davis and and Oline. I’m glad we finally started using pre-snap motion. Fozzy is great in that look, but I think it would be effective with any of our RBs. I’m also glad Colt started running. Problem is, GD didn’t do it enough, and he didn’t do it in situations it was needed the most (5 wide on 3rd and 2?!). Crazy Cow and and 5 wide on 3rd and short need to go.
The O-line. Has anyone figured out how many off sides they had? How many holds? How many whiffs on blocks? Colt was getting destroyed. The O-line was probably OU’s MVP on defense. They killed more drives than anyone else.
by UT_BKC on Oct 18, 2009 10:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
the illusion of magnanimity
1) I don’t think I’ve ever watched a game that a team has technically won (as in, the team accumulating more points before the clock expires technically wins), but having done nothing at all to have WON the game. At what moment did Texas win? There was no such defining moment. My framing of this debacle was that Texas gave the game away 10 times, but OU gave it away 11.
2) Delude yourself all you want, this was not a hard-fought, defensive classic. This was two extremely inept teams making a mockery of a rivalry. That is to say, both teams had chickenshit coaching and poor execution. Think about this: how poorly must Texas have performed to have faced an imploding OU squad that turned the ball over 5 times (mostly unforced), had several dropped passes, and played a generally mediocre game with their back-up QB, in addition to the fact that Texas seems to have fallen on the beneficial side of the officiating (most of the questionable calls went our way), and still to have barely pulled the game out by the skin of our teeth? Dear god. The offensive coaches’ approach to this game was similar to their approach to the 5 consecutive losses earlier this decade, and were Oklahoma to have fielded a better team, there is no doubt in my mind another OU blowout was there for the taking.
3) That was maybe the worst game I’ve ever watched from a coaching standpoint. On both sides. I recorded the game, should a classic have occurred, but deleted it immediately, as even in “victory,” it isn’t worth watching again. Ever.
4) And yes, Greg Davis is mostly responsible. I keep reading all this nonsense about how Mack is the conservative one (which he certainly is), and that he is to blame for the stagnancy, but Mack doesn’t call the plays. Even from a debilitatingly conservative playbook, spawned from a sluggishly conservative philosophy, unpredictable plays can still be called. Somehow, GD has the perfect knack for calling the exact opposite play from what he should call (even from within a conservative framework) in nearly every situation. He is and always has been the problem. PB’s highlighting of the 3rd and 2 late in the game is a fine example. If you’re going to run the most predictable play possible in that situation (and OU had been sitting on those routes all day), then don’t line up in a no-back set removing all doubt. Everyone in the stadium knew where that ball was going.
More baffling to me than GD’s blatant and perpetual incompetence is the proliferation of GD defenders that seem immovable in his defense, despite his constant attempts to prove them wrong, which is ultimately why he is still the offensive coordinator for the University of Texas (fishing buddies and good-ole boys be damned). Were there a consensus throughout the community that he is incorrect for the job, then he’d be gone by now, but as more and more alumni decide that the illusion of magnanimity is more significant than the evidence of actuality, he remains.
by BrooklynHorn on Oct 18, 2009 10:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree
with the assessment of the offense. Just a pretty good offense this year (say 80% of last year’s production) with this defense would lead to huge wins.
Fozzy and Tre look like they truly have the ability to cut and run behind this line, that’s why I fully expect to see a Colorado amount of McGee the next two weeks.
Most people fail to realize that Vince only ultimately succeeded b/c he had the unique ability to turn a huge number of Davis’ bad play calls into good plays with his legs. McCoy has the ability to do this a few times during the game, but not enough to overcome the playcalling we’ve seen the last couple of weeks purely on his own.
Your prescriptions might do the offense a huge amount of good. I’m worried though, from what I’ve seen of these coaches they only change after a loss to OU, not after a win (though two years ago they changed after a second consecutive loss to ATM, but McGee shows some on the offensive side are still in the play the older guys no matter what not the best talent mind set).
by tdwalsh on Oct 18, 2009 11:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
reaction from a different perspective
PB, although its been said already countless times — great post.
I do have to say however that I’m not feeling so down about this offense or GD for that matter. Playcalling is playcalling, and its easy sometimes to get caught up in hindsight 20/20 when you question each playcalling decision. I think if we take a step back we should be a bit more excited about the potential of this offense.
Mike Tyson said everyone’s got a game plan until you get hit, and to me the offense got hit early and often. OU brought all sorts of blitzes and they had their shifts timed precisely to our snaps. I didn’t watch the game on television, but if the announcers were raving about Venables it was well deserved. Not only was that unit prepared, it was vastly improved from last year particularly in the secondary. In addition Venables schemed away the middle of the field by gambling that Colt’s pre-snap reads would take his eyes to the perimeter of the field for minimal gains. Of course, it helped that his D line dominated our o-line in pass rushing situations. The OU defense deserves a ton of credit, ultimately our unit was better — but that unit will win a few games for them down the stretch too.
Now back to the game plan. It wasn’t pretty for sure, but think about where we were last Monday. Your two primary tailbacks are hurt and likely will not play. Fozzy’s PT has been limited, and Cody is still trying to shed some extra LBs. On top of that, the o-line is having trouble opening up holes, and the WRs have a case of the “tips”. We can talk all day about how good we were last year on offense or how good we ought to be on paper – but the reality is that our offense has depended over the first 5 games on a defense that kept points off the board, created field position advantages, and caused turnovers. Not to mention a special teams unit that scored 5 TDs in 5 games. The game plan should have been run to set up the pass and rely on your defense. But with the two top RBs out what do you do? Throw in a wrinkle. Lo and behold DJ goes in motion, Fozzy’s in the backfield, and McCoy is in the gun. Not one, not two, but three running options on a basic zone read. Who knows if this was drawn up last spring, this summer, or last week. It worked enough to give us some nice gains from Fozzy and McCoy. Not to mention, I’d argue it gave cut back lanes some bite. In addition, I saw Fozzy and Cody read holes as well or better than Tre did, and Fozzy set up his blockers on several runs which we haven’t seen a RB do since JC. Certainly these improvements came from practice last week. I’m not saying these plays or adjustments won us the game, I’m simply pointing out that given the trouble we found ourselves in last Monday, GD did make use of the talent at his disposal and got the result we set out for.
I will fault the coaches in part for the mistakes our players made — false starts, Kirkendoll’s unsportsmanlike, unecessary chop blocks, and questionable reads and/or routes — but guys have to execute and keep their heads in the game too.
I’ll take a win however it comes, but I think this one starts to show the identity of this team. We rely on a defense that is arguably the best of Mack’s tenure. Apparently we can run the football because we’ve recruited linemen with quick feet and we’re not afraid to get them moving to edge. Couple that with RBs quick enough to get there, a QB that can scramble for yards up the middle, and bruiser who can provide a change of pace and the offense can be gasp conservative and run to set up the pass. Last year was last year, that offense was lightning in a bottle with Quan, Shipley, and more depth on the o-line. We don’t want style points, because with our SOS they won’t help us . We just gotta win.
by BMG on Oct 18, 2009 11:59 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
GREAT write up
Awesome awesome awesome. Thanks for the break-downs of all the drives. It provides evidence for my “Greg Davis truly sucks” campaign. My dad (an Aggie, groan) thinks that a W is a W and doesn’t understand why the ire for GD, but I’m forwarding him this break down as proof of 1) it’s not just me and 2) see all the mistakes he made in play calling? That’s not just poor execution.
That Wild Horn play should be burned and Chiles should be 2nd string the rest of the year. He’s just not that good, unfortunately, and the Wild Horn is just one of our greatest weaknesses when using him. Why does GD still call that when it’s been demonstrated all year to do nothing but fail?
Thanks, Peter, for the great story.
by Katie McBeast on Oct 19, 2009 12:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Running game, etc
The running scheme for UT sucks (IMHO) but why should GD be the architect of the UT running game (if he is)? GD’s forte is the passing game. Given that the horns’ running back coach is also primarily passing oriented, maybe Mack should get more involved in the running game architecture. At least hire some professional advice.
A lot of the play calls were dubious but shouldn’t Colt be calling audibles to get UT out of bad calls? Isn’t that what a 4 year starting QB does?
Goodwin was very impressive.
Not throwing to Buckner was criminal.
When you throw short passes, there is little time to separate and the timing/throw have to be very precise. If you don ’t look at your short target 1st, bye bye precise timing. Most plays, there was only time for a short pass.
The idea of UT being a run first team this season is not credible.
Did Greg Smith drop any passes? IIRC, he caught a couple for a total of about 20 yards.
by Kafka on Oct 19, 2009 12:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The running scheme for UT sucks (IMHO) but why should GD be the architect of the UT running game (if he is)?
Because he’s the OC? The problems with the running game don’t start with the RBs. Starts with the calls (fortunately we started running some plays that had a chance of succeeding) and the blocking.
by UT_BKC on Oct 19, 2009 1:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Delegation
GD is the OC, QB coach, play caller, and passing game architect. Why not take the running game architect responsibility off his shoulders? The running game architecture has been screwed up for years, why not put somebody else in charge? It is a change that can actually happen.
by Kafka on Oct 19, 2009 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you can’t see that the failures in the running game are due to bad blocking and bad play calling, you are… ignorant.
You’re just here to troll, right?
by UT_BKC on Oct 19, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Troll?
Seems like a gratuitous insult. Please remember that insulting others anonymously is frowned upon by PB on this message board and is always bad form.
The idea of removing the run architect responsibility from GD’s shoulders is focused on what changes can be made in personnel assignments (short of firing GD) to improve offensive efficiency. The UT blocking could improve a lot if changes were made to the UT running schemes. These changes are more likely to happen if GD is not responsible for making them.
by Kafka on Oct 19, 2009 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you are… ignorant.
You’re just here to troll, right?
Hey pot, I have a friend for you to meet.
by vy til i die on Oct 19, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think it important to note that Davis, a QBs coach, and Applewhite, a passing QB with zero RB coaching experience prior to returning to UT, are the architects of the running game. I think it’s very desireable to keep Applewhite in the fold, but I really think UT needs to find a real RBs coach.
You know, I hear Chan Gailey could use a job.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 19, 2009 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He hosts some sort of Sunday evening sports program for the local ABC or CBS affiliate in San Antonio.
"It's not that the Irish are cynical. It's rather that they have a wonderful lack of respect for everything and everybody."
-- Brendan Behan --
by Zeno of Citium on Oct 19, 2009 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
PB Thank You
I agree with almost everything and have to say I REALLY appreciate the time and effort you put into making us all better and more informed fans. THANKYOU.
You can't spell COCKSUCKER without OU.
by nathantx57 on Oct 19, 2009 2:34 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
As much as I HATE everything about Texas....
I can’t say that your trash talking is not well deserved. You beat us. Again. You did what you had to do to leave with the W. Of course, I think the outcome would be much different with a healthy Bradford and Gresham but that obviously doesn’t matter. As much as I hated the FACT that you could hear the cheers from the UT section while Bradford was hurt, I can’t lie and say that I wouldn’t cheer in my mind if McCoy was injured because I would. However, it would be in the mind, not out of the mouth. I like our chances next season, Josh Heupel will develop Landry into a stud like he always does with or QB’s, the receivers will gain experience as will the O-line, etc. You guys will be red at QB, lose some playmakes on defense and offense, etc. Not much else to say other than this loss for me was quite painful despite the offensive obstacles we have become all to familiar with because I feel that KW pissed the game away with running up the middle from the Pistol, no PA, and Franks, Murray, and Modu fumbling the football dang near gave me a heart attack. I look forward to seeing you guys lose sometime down the road, hopefully it will be in the national championship game against Florida so that I can come on this site and experience joy while reading you guys’ posts after a loss. Other than that, I’m looking forward to basketball season with Willie Warren and Tiny Gallon leading our basketball squad and to our football getting over the bowl game slump because this will be the year. Until next time………..BOOMER!
by EnragedOUfan on Oct 19, 2009 3:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Legit post. I was in a packed UT sports bar and found my self embarrassed when I cheered when Bradford went down. It was kind of refreshing to hear all the crickets and have a lot classier people than I am just kind of ignore me.
Maybe I’m getting old but I don’t hate OU anymore. I like Bradford and even appreciated the fact the Stoops congratulated UT and said we were a National Championship caliber team. I will say that I also was ecstatic when OU got thumped last year in the MNC game and seem to love it just as much when we beat them.
I’m feeling great about our chances for the years to come too…
HOOK’EM!!!!
by pfc on Oct 19, 2009 6:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry.
Everyone owes OU a huge apology if any one Texas fan cheered when Bradford got hurt. That is deplorable behavior.
by dimecoverage on Oct 19, 2009 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone?
Why should I apologize to anyone for somebody else’s behavior? I honestly don’t get that, could you explain your reasoning for this collective guilt thing?
by Kafka on Oct 19, 2009 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was apologizing in general terms to the OU fan. It shouldn’t have happened and I doubt anyone on the board would do such a thing.
And, actually yes. If I was at the game and I heard UT fans booing after a player was injured, I would apologize to OU fans sitting around me. We have a collective responsibility to be a better fan base. If you don’t agree, that’s your right.
by dimecoverage on Oct 19, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Collective responsibility
I still don’t get it. Why should I assume responsibility for somebody else’s behavior? The UT fan base is huge, there are guaranteed to be some jerks in that large a group.
I understand how you feel, what I don’t understand is the rationale for those feelings.
by Kafka on Oct 19, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I rejoiced at the hit, but not at the fact that he was seriously injured.
I wanted the kid to get a scare knocked into him, as with Murray. I didn’t want him to possibly end his college career right there.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 19, 2009 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I cheered the hit, then got quiet at the injury
Then started loudly cursing Stoops for having him in there.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 19, 2009 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd have
to have been there to make the call. I’m sure there was a lot of cheering for the sack at first. An upset OU fan might confuse that with cheering b/c of the injury.
At every game I’ve ever been to, including countless in the student section, as soon as everyone realizes someone is injured, it goes silent until the player walks or is helped off at which point a respectful, “glad you’re not dead”, cheer goes up which is also not cheering for the injury. Now it may have taken some time to go from cheering for the sack to realizing he was injured, but I seriously doubt any large number of fans were cheering b/c of the injury.
by tdwalsh on Oct 19, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There were a couple fans happy that Bradford got hurt
Most of us were cheering the hit, cheering the fact that Bradford rolled around like Bomar, but then fell silent when he didn’t get up and clearly started to nurse his shoulder.
by TheElusiveShadow on Oct 19, 2009 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Next year
Who does OU lose this year? Bradford, Gresham, Murray, (Brown?), T. Williams, Simmons, McCoy, Granger. Anyone else for sure leaving or likely to enter the draft early?
by Horncasting on Oct 19, 2009 9:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As things currently look
I’d pick ’bama over the Gators.
by TheElusiveShadow on Oct 19, 2009 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't be such a pussy.
Why can’t I cheer for one of my guys who just made an outstanding play? Do you automatically assume I’m cheering because your guy us injured, because you know full-well that legions of your classless ou cronies would do exactcly that? Is your conscience that guilty?
Bite me. I cheered because we made a play in a rivalry game. I felt bad for Bradford; he seemed like a nice kid who just got screwed by a greedy bastard coach who figures maybe if he runs up the score enough, everyone will forget that he can’t win the big game any more.
Shut the hell up and go back to your double-wide, loser.
Really? Does my signature suck?
by adt2 on Oct 19, 2009 1:03 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Why can’t I cheer for one of my guys who just made an outstanding play? Do you automatically assume I’m cheering because your guy us injured, because you know full-well that legions of your classless ou cronies would do exactcly that? Is your conscience that guilty?
Bite me. I cheered because we made a play in a rivalry game. I felt bad for Bradford; he seemed like a nice kid who just got screwed by a greedy bastard coach who figures maybe if he runs up the score enough, everyone will forget that he can’t win the big game any more.
+1
Shut the hell up and go back to your double-wide, loser.
-1. I too think that some were more than likely cheering that he reinjured his shoulder.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 19, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Demanding
Heading into next week I feel: Demanding. How Mack Brown and Greg Davis approach, plan for, and call the Missouri game on offense will tell us a lot about whether Texas is going to try the high-wire act of getting to 12-0 on the back of its defense alone. There is time yet for the offense to improve to “above average” — certainly to the point that the team wins the rest of its regular season games by double-digits.
I’m with you PB. The last time I felt this level of frustration was after the stunning loss to the Aggies. Mack and/or GD answered with an aggressive, attacking, swaggering game plan that blew Arizona State out of the Holiday Bowl in what we have all agreed was the beginning of an exciting new phase of the Mack Brown era. Let’s just hope it doesn’t take a similarly gut-wrenching loss to Mizzou, OSU, Kansas or god forbid aTm for them to come up with a similar scheme/attitude adjustment. Because this year any loss knocks us out of the National Championship race again – and maybe even the Big XII Championship race.
Still a Blaine Irby fan
by patienthornsfan on Oct 19, 2009 4:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
To give GD credit, he pulled some new offensive looks out this game, with some success.
A LOT went wrong for us in that game, there was a lot of sloppy execution and penalties.
There were 3 fumbles inside OU’s red zone that went their way and ended up costing us between 10-18 points. That’s especially rough when 16 points wins the game.
by notsofst on Oct 19, 2009 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
oc
should mack take over the play calling now?
by Rabid Horn Fan on Oct 19, 2009 6:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Is that a suggestion?
If so, there are two problems. First, we don’t know how much Mack is already doing this. Second, Greg Davis has been Mack’s OC for years. If he had any disagreement with Davis’ play-calling, he would either have replaced him or at least insisted Davis make some changes long before now.
"Only angry people win football games." --DKR
by OBdoc on Oct 19, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Horns down
Remember, the “horns down” gesture just means they are bowing down before our greatness.
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 19, 2009 8:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
A quote here from Scipio on BC
Our Big 12 offensive output:
Texas Tech – 340 yards
CU – 313 yards
OU – 269 yards
This is known as a trend. 307.3 yards per game against Big 12 opponents
Averaging 307.3 yards per game would be enough to place us outside the top 100 offenses in college football.
GD is working with a Heisman runner-up / Most accurate QB in NCAA history. He has a veteran O-Line. He has at least 1 All-American Wide reciever, and some other recievers and playmakers who have world-class speed.
I think I’m starting to get convinced GD is under achieving somewhat this year.
by notsofst on Oct 19, 2009 11:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If you are going to quote Scipio, quote the whole thing.
he critizies people for using games against UTEP/ULM etc and says focus on conference games but you want to compare solely our conference offense vs the entire nation. Ironic.
Is our offense off from last year? No question.
Is Colt playing at his Heisman runner up level? not even close
Top teams vs similar defenses:
Fla 327 vs LSU 13 points
Bama vs Ole Miss (not even a great D) 354 22 points
USC vs (does anyone on their schedule play defense?) UDub: 13 points, 400+ yards
by echeese on Oct 19, 2009 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comparing UT’s in conference performance to other schools performance in their own conferences: UT is currently sitting pretty at 96 out of 117 with three conference games down. Florida is 52 overall. Bama is 59 overall.
Yard per play are a more abysmal 4.2, equal to 107th out of 117 teams based on conference play. Florida is 43 at 5.3 yards per play and Bama is 52 overall good for 5.6 yards per play.
Accounting for the fact UT runs signficantly more plays than either team (Bama 267 plays through 4 games and UF 268 through 4, against UT’s 220 through three), the team is currently ineffective with many more opportunities.
Which part of including UTEP and ULM makes UT’s conference performance look better?
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Oct 19, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Malcolm is now 1st string WR
Kirk is now backing up Ship.
Goodwin is still sharing 1st string with Chiles but is listed first, i.e. will probablyn start at Mizzou.
Vondrell now behind Fozzy, Cody, and Tre.
by Kafka on Oct 19, 2009 11:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The bradford play
Fans were cheering a great corner blitz and sack by Aaron Williams, not the fact that Bradford was injured. Everyone in my section had their horns up and most would agree he’s one of the few we actually respect in the Sooner program.
Great recap PB. Some of the predictions from your podcasts last week are eerie in their accuracy.
by Vasherized on Oct 19, 2009 11:45 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
completely agree
the play was on the far side of the field and it was tough to tell that he was hurt immediately. Obviously fans were happy that we stopped OU on third down but once they realized Bradford was hurt it got silent. No one in my section said anything remote ugly. Everyone felt it was a shame he got hurt and they questioned whether he should have been in there.
by BMG on Oct 19, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couple thoughts
Great writeup.
The difference between this year and last was also Chris O. We had better running game last year. Colt & Chris also seemed to have mindmelds when he scrambled. Chris always was open on 3rd and long on scrambles it seemed. The disappearance of both the ground game & Colt running has allowed teams to squat on our passing routes. We rushed for like 160 yards against OU. WHO SAW THAT COMING??? OU played the pass on every down (exaggerating) and it showed. If Colt holds onto that ball at the 4 yard line we win comfortably.
So all that said, I see two things. #1. STOP BEING SO PREDICTABLE. For example, if we line up in the empty set with Fozzy as a WR… occasionally put him in motion and have him lineup next to colt. RUn it then occasionally. If its 2nd or 3rd down and less than 3 i bet we run it about 90% of the time. People pick up on that crap. #2. KEEP RUNNING COLT! Look at his numbers from this year compared to last year. He was our #1 rusher and most were NOT from called rushes. IF its not open and we can still get 5-6 yards on a busted play then we make a ton more 3rd downs.
One thing that was clear from your analysis also was the penalties. Snow and the rest of our line had many more holds & False starts than normal. We cut down on those and we lengthen more drives.
by Orangechipper on Oct 19, 2009 12:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Great analysis
You point to several critical changes that need to be made. My concern is that Brown in the past has done well making changes after a loss, but often seems comfortable with the status quo after any sort of win, no matter how ugly. You are absolutely right about the UT defense not getting enough credit from the announcers during the game. They may have attributed OU’s lack of offense to the loss of Bradford rather than anything we were doing. I also recall at least twice when OU fumbled and both times the announcer called it a “break for Texas” (as in lucky) rather than acknowledging Texas knocked the ball loose.
"Only angry people win football games." --DKR
by OBdoc on Oct 19, 2009 1:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Point I noticed went unmentioned.
We often hear GD’s critics make the claim that he “pads stats vs weak defenses”.
Think it’s interesting that GD went up against arguably the best (certainly top 5) defense in the land, outgained and scored their season averages and his performance was consided “abysmal” yet his players had 10 penalties (many drive killers) and 3 turnovers (2 in the red zone).
OTOH, Coach Boom was up against a pourous OL , a 2nd string QB and clearly an injured RB.
Wonder if perspective is important to some?
by echeese on Oct 19, 2009 5:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Is there any reason we dont run the Jumbo Goal Line set on 3rd and short?
A quick analogy.
Ive been bowling in leagues off and on for about 12 years now. I have my own ball, two in fact. Over the years Ive gotten better and better with my form, my control, and my muscle memory. However, if I get 9 pins down on the first throw, and the last pin standing is the 7 pin (farthest back, farthest left), I take my spare ball, and I throw it from the right side, at about half the speed of any other throw.
This isnt my normal throw, it doesnt help my muscle memory, but by God, no matter what the lane conditions, that ball reliably grips, and hooks due to its slow speed and moderate spin, and every damn time plows right into the 7 pin. It just works.
Getting back to football, while Ive seen our Jumbo set fail to get a full yard on a play, Im not sure if ever fails twice. And its just about money. In a non-goal-line situation, it should be even better, as the safeties should have to sit back, and the naked bootleg or dump pass are even better options. But to my recollection, we have not run the Jumbo outside of the goal line. Why? While I dont know if Cody would have made the yards that Fozzy left out there, if you put Houston in front of him, I surely like our chances, and even moreso to get it in two tries.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 19, 2009 6:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Run first
After watching the game a second time, I now think that UT could be a good run first team and that it might actually happen.
Probably the biggest problem for the O were all the friggin penalties (unusual for a GD coached team).
It would be cool to see Cody at FB some.
by Kafka on Oct 20, 2009 12:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
























