Burnt Orange Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Doug Flutie's Hail Mary, And Why College Sports Matter

Postgame React: Baylor

The outcome was: Adequate. A couple things here. For one, if we've learned anything this season, it probably ought to be that you don't take any wins for granted. That's nothing to hang on your wall, but it's worth stating. More than that, though, we're not really in a position to be worrying excessively about style points. For now, the goals should be to win games while building the foundation for the 2008 team. In that light, today's outcome was just fine.

The Offensive MVP was: Team. Colt McCoy, Vondrell McGee, and Jermichael Finley each made a case for this award, but all had critical mistakes making it hard to single them out as game ball winners. The 'Horns came close to having the kind of offensive day against Baylor we would expect, but ultimately made far too many costly mistakes to secure a decisive result. Colt was at times both brilliant and lousy. McGee was a refreshing burst of downhill running and an untimely fumbler. Greg Davis had me both pumping my fist and shaking my head. It was that kind of game - a microcosm of the 2007 season, really.

The Defensive MVP was: Marcus Griffin. This should really be a 'team' award as well, which we'll get to, but we haven't spent much time noting how solid Griffin has been this year. You know, Marcus has been overshadowed by his brother not just at Texas, but more or less his whole life. And last year? He was a problem in coverage on too many occasions. When the Texas coaches raved about how ready this young man was to be for this defense what his brother had been, I was skeptical, and though he's not quite the same playmaking athlete that Michael is, he's better than he gets credit for around these parts. His steady play isn't going to win Texas much this season, but it's going to earn him a good look at the combines and a solid chance to be a first day NFL draftee. I'm happy for him in general, and I'm happy for him today - two interceptions, including a return for a touchdown. Well played, kid.

As for the team - you know, there's a lot to like about the Texas defense right now. Truthfully, the guy who's struggling the most on defense is Duane Akina. I'll get into this more in a post this week, but we seem to be witnessing an almost comical swing in the pendulum from Gene "Stand Pat" Chizik to Duane "Overkill" Akina. It is worth noting that he's in his first year of playcalling, so we'll leave some room for learning, but really... the adjustments need to come sooner rather than later. The blitzing schemes are bordering on ridiculous.

The offensive Offensive Player Of The Week was: Jamaal Charles. This is going to be controversial, but... I think Texas should thoughtfully consider moving Charles to wide receiver/multi-task/Percy Harvin machine. It's a bit unfair to Charles, as I think he could be a successful tailback in a lot of offensive systems across college football. Unfortunately, the only question that really matters is: how successful can he be at Texas? I mean, that's where he plays. For better or worse.

Believe me, I'm a big, big fan of this guy as a player. I think he's special in a way that Texas fans may never see. Not Heisman Trophy special - as we pipe dreamed when he played alongside Vince - but certainly a special, difference-making player. The thing is, though: we're now in a Colt McCoy offense, and JC isn't the right tailback to complement him. It's hardly his fault, but he is what he is, just as Colt is who Colt is and Greg Davis is who Greg Davis is. But, given all that? Let's figure out what to do with the guy. He's not wildly effective in this particular scheme.

That point might have been hammered home especially hard today in Waco, where Charles wasn't able to get going forward, was effectively used in the passing game, and wound up taking a sideshow to Vondrell McGee, who showed fans what a north-south running game could look like for this team. Again, this isn't an easy question, and given what we know about this staff, it's a probably just an academic debate, but it's one we're gonna have on the site this coming week.

The offensive Defensive Player Of The Week was: Erick Jackson. Among the things I can get a little preachy about is the idea that players who haven't been good enough to start through three or four years in the program are extremely unlikely to be good starters in their final year(s). In programs as deep with talent as Texas, the starters show enough to take the field no later than their junior seasons. If a player doesn't, and he suddenly finds himself a starter as a true or fifth-year senior? It's far more likely to indicate a weakness or lack of depth on the team, rather than a leap forward in ability from the player. There are certainly exceptions, but it works as a general rule.

So it is with Erick Jackson, who hasn't made a memorable play all season for the 'Horns. I don't want to pile on a guy who is, by all accounts (like Robert Killebrew), an exemplary young man and positive influence on the team, but if we're just talking football, he's less than adequate. Though he does reasonably well in run support, the pass coverage is woeful. It's time to see more Ishie Oduegwu, as we did today. (He looked alright out there, didn't he?)

John Chiles Watch: 5 carries, 18 yards. 0-1 passing. I like that Greg Davis is making a conscious effort to use the youngster in the first half, when the game is still unfolding in its natural state. I'm less convinced that using the second team offense, in its entirety, for one series and one series only, is the right way to get the most out of the idea. This is another complex topic that can't be covered in this blurb, so we'll save it for a post of its own as well. (Note, BONers: I'm on fall break from school this upcoming week and, with both time and a wealth of interesting topics to talk about, will be extraordinarly active on the site. Should be fun.)

Performance-wise, it's clear that Chiles has a positive effect on the running game based on the threat  he possesses to keep the ball. It's also clear that Colt McCoy is a far superior quarterback than Chiles at this point in their careers. The interesting question is twofold: 1) how to prep Chiles for full-time duty should McCoy get hurt, and 2) how best to use Chiles in a complementary role if McCoy's good to go. We'll talk about that.

Today, Chiles did a solid job leading the second unit on a drive into field goal range, and though it didn't end in points, he showed - without doing anything exceptional - why he can be effective. Once again, we gave him no real throwing opportunities - his one pass play came on a third down and seven, with Davis asking him to roll left and throw to a receiver heading out to the sideline. Peyton Manning misses that throw more often than not.

Vondrell McGee Watch: 10 carries, 57 yards, 1 TD. Well... Jamaal Charles probably should be glad that McGee coughed up the football in this game, because if he hadn't, the Texas coaching staff would have a hard time thinking and talking about anything other than how much more effective McGee was than the current starter. In the first half, Texas misappropriated McGee with a couple plays that stretched him out horizontally. But over the rest of the game, McGee was used in ways where he can shine - straightforward, quick-hitting run plays to gaps, where McGee could square his shoulders, plant his drive foot, and get moving toward that line of scrimmage. He goes from zero to in-your-face in no time at all, he's low to the ground, hard to tackle with just arms, and always pushing forward. When you don't have an offensive line that can create and hold running lanes for a patient runner to maneuver artfully, you need a guy like McGee who can just plow it where it's open.

He does that, and does it damn well. Moreover, he's not just a plower like Ogbonnaya, and he's not a guy who needs space, like Charles. To get back to a more fundamental point: ideally, you look at your team and say, "We are who we are" and go with what best suits you. It's worth asking if McGee needs 15-20 touches a game, with Charles being utilized in ways that better utilize his strengths.

Everything discussed thus far is related, too. Colt McCoy's biggest problem right now is that our offense is too dependent on him. Given that, making tough decisions that would improve Texas' running game would have widespread effects on every part of the Texas offense. And I don't believe for a second that Charles couldn't be a great player in a different way on this team. How willing are we to be creative and bold? Is it worth exploring on the field? It's definitely worth talking about at BON.

Nebraska Fear Factor: 1 out of 10   (5) is the baseline. (-1) for Nebraska's players have quit on their coach. (-1) for yeah, we can't just ding one point for that. (-1) for Texas is in the post-Oklahoma phase of the season, where the staff is infintely more willing to go with what works over what they want to work. (+1) for this Texas team hasn't shown much ability to put things together for meaningful stretches of time. (-1) for seriously, the situation in Nebraska is messed up. (-1) for Texas has more to prove than they do to lose.

Heading into next week I feel: Excited. You know those five stages of grief? If I were a betting man, I'd wager you've gone through 'em all with me this year:

Denial: Sure, we've been less than impressive against this weak non-conference slate, but we can kick off the conference right with a revenge win against Kansas State at home.

Anger: Ohmygod we just got beat down by Kansas State like a Democrat in Mississippi. And it happened at home.

Bargaining: Nonetheless? A win over those evil barfbags from Norman would put things right back on track, yes? I mean, let's be real - everyone's losing this year. The whole thing's wide open, and we'll be in fine shape if we just get this win. C'mon guys - get that win. I'll never doubt you again if...

Depression: Okay, that was a fuc-ing pipe dream. This team is in the toilet, and so am I. I'm not even sure I should give Mack Brown and Texas the benefit of the doubt for the rest of this year. Or any year. This is just too sad to handle.

Acceptance: Now that the initial sting of defeat has started to fade, I can look at what we are this year - solid but nothing special - be okay with seeing progress on the field (at whatever pace), and start to think excitedly about how many of the best players on the football field for Texas right now will be here for 2008. Hey - this rebuilding toward next year thing could be interesting! Maybe even a little bit fun! And hell, we might even win out in the process. I'm okay with all this. Really, I am.

And that's kind of where I am right now. I'm okay with this team, warts and all. We're not anything memorable, but we're like a young baseball team that's out of the playoff race and starting to break in those exciting prospects who can be the foundation for a pennant-winner in the next year or two. Well, that's interesting for us analytical fans. It's something to observe and try to project, and it gives us that one thing we sports fans can't live without: hope.

And that's that, friends. Texas moves to 6-2 on the season, 2-2 in Big 12 play. The big goals of this team remain out of reach, but as we distance ourselves from the painful losses that knocked us out of the playoff chase in the first place, it's easier to turn our attention toward and become excited about the future.

That ain't such a bad thing. It's easy to forget when you're bottoming out, but the page always turns, and it's good to be having fun with this again. We invest a lot of ourselves in these games, but man, let's try never to forget: this stuff should be fun.

Y'all have a great night.

--PB--

0 recs  |  Comment 69 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

couldn't agree more

about JC - way too much dancing for the offense that we have this year.  He needs to learn a 2 yard gain is ok sometimes if that's all that's there, and much better than a 20 yard sideways run resulting a loss of 1.  After watching the UK-UF game later in the day, I too was thinking about how effective he would be if we lined him up anywhere and everywhere and allowed him to use his good hands and speed in space.

by SaintBevo on Oct 20, 2007 10:00 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

McCoy

I don't know how it looked on tv, but at the stadium Colt just didn't look good.  He had nearly 300 yards and he completed a high percentage of his passes, but he seems to be making it harder on himself than he needs to.  He had a receiver open on basically ever play and he had time to get it to them without moving around much on nearly every play, but he leaves the pocket so quickly and he locks on to his receivers so early.  On the pass to Charles he had Shipley open in the seam.  Nate Jones was repeatedly open deep, as was Finley.  It would have almost been justified for them to stop running their routes unless they were the primary receiver.  

by Bob LaBlog on Oct 20, 2007 10:04 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

windy.

I think alot of colt's throws were off because of the wind, it was gusting at about 25 mph all game long.

that int he threw at Finley looked like a result of the ball getting caught up in the wind and dying on him.

My adopted son Sergio Kindle does not sleep; he waits.

by mvplonghorns on Oct 20, 2007 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think it was the wind

The Finley interception should have sailed if anything because it was with the wind.  That was a case of having his back open and he decided to force it to Finley.  If Colt is going to force it, that's the guy he should be trying to get it to, so I don't entirely blame him for that one.  

He could have had Nate Jones deep on almost any play, but he only went to him short or intermediate.  He had Finley open deep a few times too.  From in the stadium he just looked unsure of either himself or the offense.  Either way that's not a good thing for a young quarterback.  

That goalline pitch to McGee was the perfect combination of bad play-calling and bad execution.

By the way, your son was the most fun player to watch out there.  As my dad said, Sergio sure is gutsy (when he was standing feet from a live ball on a punt, shortly after the "late" hit).

by Bob LaBlog on Oct 21, 2007 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I thought he looked near awful

I don't understand the mention for Offensive MVP. I saw only the second half, but he did very little that I would consider good during the time I was watching.

He still has happy feet, and that is not a small problem. He also depends on his dump off WAAAAY too much. He seems to look around for a second, panic, and dump it off to the short receiver.

Remember how Vince would give a half-hearted look down field and then take off running, and you knew he wasn't really considering throwing the ball down field? That is how Colt looks in the pocket. He gives a phony look down field and then dumps to the closest receiver for a 2 yard gain, or takes off scrambling.

And on the rare occasion he does throw the ball down field, we are offered a glimpse into the reasons for why he is so gun-shy. His arm is...lets say...lacking. He either one-hops the 15-yard route or misses badly on the deeper ball.

Worst yet, he seems to be getting progressively worse at managing the team between snaps. He just doesn't look comfortable out there. As always, I blame Greg Davis (I'm not kidding). That man is poison to any young Quarterback who buys into his philosophy.

Colt's got talent, I suspect he just needs to play by instinct, and forget everything GD has ever told him.

by BrooklynHorn on Oct 20, 2007 10:31 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

absolutely

Exactly what I would have said.  Colt does not have what it takes to QB for Texas.  His arm is anemic at best.  

And as to the main post, I do not think Texas is looking to the future and trying to build the 2008 team. Sticking with Colt is proof positive of that.  There is nothing to win this season, and if Colt is still going to be th QB of choice, there will be nothing to win next season.  

by Texas Our Texas on Oct 20, 2007 11:29 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What in the last 10 years of GD

has led you to believe this?

That man is poison to any young Quarterback who buys into his philosophy.

I understand hating GD for a lot of things, but I think he has done a pretty impressive job of grooming QBs.

by Wells on Oct 21, 2007 12:37 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

to my memory

Applewhite, Simms, Mock, and McCoy have all suffered from similar on-field problems at times. The problems that overlap the most are not talent-related, rather they appear to be mental.

Each one has had difficulty distributing the ball to his best options, and has had to settle for underneath passing. Each one has had game management issues, causing pre-snap penalties, and confusion during plays. Each one has had difficulty sustaining offensive momentum from a drive to drive basis or from a game to game basis despite tons of talent and tools around him. Etc. Etc.

In short, during games (and even during individual plays) I could see all those guys thinking too much. They would make a mistake, and instead of getting particularly mad, they appeared to be going through their teachings and thinking, "damn, no, I should have done this, Coach Davis said I should have done this, I'll get it next time." (side note: next time they would make a different, but equally bad mistake).

You could see that they were buying into what Davis had taught them, and they all underachieved because of it.

There is an obvious correlation to be drawn between Vince Young being the only UT quarterback not to underachieve for much of his career, and Vince Young being the only UT quarterback who basically said "I'm going to do whatever the hell I want once the ball is snapped."

Most notably, it didn't appear that VY was constantly thinking about what he'd been told before and during every play, he instead played by means of instinct.

I can see Colt trying too hard to stick to a gameplan. He trusts the coaches, which is ultimately his downfall. Before the snap, he thinks through what changes he might make or what progressions he might go through during the play, based on what he was taught in the gameplan. The problem is that the gameplan sucks, and once the ball is snapped, nothing works out the way GD said it would, and Colt just kicks himself thinking "what am I doing wrong?" He's not doing anything wrong, except that he trusts Greg Davis.

I feel like this has been the somewhat obvious dynamic that has characterized every non-VY Texas quarterback during GD's tenure.

I'm curious as to how you can possibly believe that he does well at grooming qb's?

by BrooklynHorn on Oct 21, 2007 1:11 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Seriously?

"Each one has had difficulty distributing the ball to his best options, and has had to settle for underneath passing. Each one has had game management issues, causing pre-snap penalties, and confusion during plays. Each one has had difficulty sustaining offensive momentum from a drive to drive basis or from a game to game basis despite tons of talent and tools around him. Etc. Etc."

Quick, name me a QB in the history of football to which this paragraph would not at least somewhat relate. Major seemed to do alright, Chris Simms clearly did not have an unlimited ceiling and brought some of his own problems to the plate. Remember VY 7 games into his sophomore year? I can't get over how some people see the finished product that was VY and give Greg Davis no credit for it. VY didn't just magically improve into a smarter player and better passer his junior year, he was coached into it. Sure they took the leash off and let him run free, but if they had done that his freshman and sophomore years he may have crashed and burned a la Reggie McNeal. Colt is 7 games into his sophomore year, QBs take time to develop and there really is no evidence that Colt's downfall will be that he trusts his coaches.

by 40AS on Oct 21, 2007 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Come on

Your argument is that all quarterbacks have these problems? That's really the card you want to play?

Yes every QB has had bits of these problems at times (Do you think I'm a moron, I do watch a lot of college football, you know). But my point was that these problems are not occasional, they completely CHARACTERIZE UT qb's over the past 9 years. It has been the norm, not the exception.

All of our QB's have looked frustrated throughout their careers. In fact, the word frustrating is the first thing that comes to mind when thinking about watching the Texas offense throughout this entire era.

That begins with the quarterback. Do you disagree that in an ideal reality, the QB is supposed to be an on-field extension of the Offensive Coordinator? I certainly think that he is, and that is likely the cause of the perpetually frustrated UT QB.

Vince was not Vince because of GD. GD went out and learned how to call plays for a QB that does his own thing. If GD had designed an offense for VY, and forced VY to do exactly what he wanted him to on every play, we'd still be searching for our great savior [imagine how upset GD probably would get up there in his booth when Vince would abandon a play and take off...and then we'd score, and I can imagine GD still grouchy and curmudgeony and fuming that the QB didn't do what he told him to, so no, I will not give GD any credit for Vince]. Colt, Chance, Chris, etc. didn't have the kind of independent personality that Vince does, instead they put their faith in their coach and tried to do exactly what he said, and all of them failed to come close to meeting their potential. A good offensive coordinator is able to coach his QB to something close to his potential.

Jeez! Do I really have to keep explaining this stuff. Is it really not self-evident. You do watch the games, right?

"Colt is 7 games into his Sophomore year"

But he's 20 games into his career. A generation ago, that probably was just about all a career entailed - about 22 games. So why am I to believe that Colt's backward progress will undo itself?

People wonder why Colt was better as a Freshman, worse as a Sophomore. It seems a pretty substantial correlation that Colt was better when he was "green"  and didn't know the offense and was making plays with his talent; he has become progressively worse the more he has learned the playbook and the more he's bought into what GD expected of him.

This not only makes perfect sense, it is exactly what I would have expected. Again, I have been watching these coaches for 9 years, now.

Think about it for just a second, how many times has GD said I need to "simplify the offense" for my QB. I'd bet you can pull up that exact quote in reference to every QB he's ever coached. Is it really the QB's who just can't grasp and utilize his brilliant schemes, each and every one of those QB's? Or is it maybe a problem with the OC?

It's amazing to me that after all these years, this constant source of flowing evidence, that we'd still ever need to argue about this. I could have written this paragraph 5 years ago. Will I still have to write it 5 years from now. Man oh Man.

by BrooklynHorn on Oct 21, 2007 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Mind-Reading?

There is much not to like about GD, but it is not fair to criticize him because you think you know what players are thinking.  Furthermore, Applewhite was extremely successful at UT for his level of talent.  Finally much of th Simms & Applewhite difficulties were due to a QB controversy that should be blamed on Brown, if anyone.

"Only angry people win football games." --DKR

by OBdoc on Oct 21, 2007 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes and no

I agree that Colt looked off - and especially in the first half. He wasn't very accurate, nor sure of himself. With that said, he is our offense at this point, and even though he wasn't anything great yesterday, he was the bulk of our offense, good and bad.

The category sort of implies he was better than that, so I understand your disagreement.

--PB--

by Peter Bean on Oct 21, 2007 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

McCoy & GD: Who to Blame

I am not entirely happy about GD.  I especially hate his love for the bubble pass or WR screens or whatever they are called, which go for 4 yards if they "work" and a 4 yard loss if they don't.  However, how can you blame McCoy's "happy feet," short-hopping passes, or wildly missing the deep throws on GD?  And how do you know McCoy is not playing by instinct when he leaves the pocket too soon, depends on the dump too much, fixates on one reciever, etc.  GD was there last year when McCoy performed so well, but McCoy hasn't been the same since the KS injury last year.  Whether its physical or psychological, it is within Colt, not GD.

"Only angry people win football games." --DKR

by OBdoc on Oct 21, 2007 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Charles Not the One?

I'm not sure I understand that analasys.  Jamaal was out of control his freshman year in the same offense.  This offense was desingned for as a Zone Read.  "Read" implies that the quarterback has to read the defense and perhaps even keep the ball sometimes (like Vince).  The play is a slow developing one...designed that way on purpose.  It holds the defens in place so that they don't over-pursue.  If they over-pursue in the wrong direction then it is the QB's choice of whether to keep the ball or hand it off which makes it work.  When Colt hands the ball off EVERY time there is no guess work to be done by the defense.  They know exactly where the play is headed.  

This is the same offense Jamaal and Selvin ran when they won the championship and Jamaal was an Freshman All-American.  It is the offense that is inadequate.  It was built for a Vince like QB (or John Chiles).  

Coaches should be able to adapt their scheme and play calling to their players.  Jamaal's ineffectiveness is Davis' fault...not his!

by utnewby on Oct 20, 2007 10:29 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

I agree...

I think you may have a very valid point... and I also think that Jamaal needs to make up his mind that he is going to run north and south, and not dance around looking for more than what is there.  Some of his best runs this year have come when he decided to just "run" the ball and not dance around.

I think he is a great weapon, just needs some tweaking to get him the right situations and he needs the mindset that he is going to just "go forward", not sideways.

I loved that wheel route today too.  We need to use him as speedy deep threat as well at times.  

1 Peter 2:17

by HornsFan87 on Oct 20, 2007 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

we dont run the zone read

unless chiles is in the game.

a handoff while the qb is in the shotgun does not automatically mean it's a zone read.

by the other Andrew on Oct 21, 2007 1:51 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i'm definitely with you

on the "re-adjust the goals for the season" line.  i never thought this year was special, but I thought we had a good shot at the conference title.  but with the back-to-back losses we need to go back into 2003 mode: winning as many games as we possibly can and preparing for the next two years, when things line up a lot better, personnel-wise, just as they did in '04 and '05.

by billyzane on Oct 20, 2007 11:02 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Charles for offensive offensive player

I agree with that analysis, except for the designation of Charles for offensive offensive player. I've sharply criticized Charles when he's performed poorly, so I don't consider myself blindly loyal to him. But I'll stand up for him tonight because I think he deserves it.

Charles had a good game in which he made progress in overcoming his early season weaknesses and displayed additional talent we haven't often seen. Most significantly, he held on to the ball, while his understudy lost it twice. He also fought hard through defenders on several drives--a notable improvement for a player prone to collapse upon first contact. After getting so much criticism for the tipped pass in the Oklahoma game, Charles stepped up with a huge reception for 30+ yards, which set us up to score on the very next play. From what I saw, his only weakness in this game was his 2.9 ypc; I concede that's an unimpressive mark on a crucial stat, but when considered in context, I don't think it's so bad to deserve the offensive offensive player distinction.

I realize this analysis isn't entirely fair. You're making one sort of relative judgment--Charles vs. the other offensive players in this game--while I'm making another one--Charles here vs. Charles in other games. But Charles still did enough things well (held on to the ball, made a clutch catch) vis-a-vis other players in today's game that I think the offensive offensive player distinction is a bit unfair to him.

Otherwise, I agree with the analysis, including the suggestion to use Charles as a receiver more often.

by mikey 4 on Oct 20, 2007 11:23 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Fair point

Charles didn't do anything wrong, per se. He just didn't couldn't get anything going.

Again, I hardly blame him for this.

--PB--

by Peter Bean on Oct 21, 2007 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Vondrell Mcgee

I'm liking this kid every day more and more. He's more of a true running-back prospect than JC is.  Don't get me wrong, I love Jamaal Charles but his strengths; speed and elusiveness, are being misused by GD. I honestly wouldn't have a problem giving McGee 25 carries a game while using Charles in a hybrid, Percy Harvin/Trindon Holliday role.

My adopted son Sergio Kindle does not sleep; he waits.

by mvplonghorns on Oct 20, 2007 11:28 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

I still wonder why we

are "rebuilding".  We have had the recruiting classes, momentum, and talent to be successful yet we are not.  This lands squarely on the coaches.  I am amazed how we justify or qualify that this is a rebuilding year.  That's crazy.  The coaches refusal to play the best players consistently has us in this position.  It is also the coaches inability to have an offense and defense that is successful at leveraging its talent.  This is all coaching.  That, and an over belief in Colt's ability.  That being said, I do believe that Colt would be good enough under the right leadership.  I actually beileve it is time for Mack to go.  He is stubborn or unwillingly to see what is obvious and take appropriate action.  Who is running this team?  

The only reason I think we should keep him is who would be better that is available?      

by thanos on Oct 21, 2007 1:23 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

"Rebuilding year"

is usually just a euphemism for "disappointing year." But we hardly want to start parading that term around. So please stop ruining our unhealthy rationalization.

by BrooklynHorn on Oct 21, 2007 1:26 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fumble?

The way it looked to me, the pitchout was way off line. Why is everyone faulting McGee for not handling it? (And why has no one pointed out that McGee actually blocks, unlike a certain other RB of ours?)

by Caradoc on Oct 21, 2007 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

you suck
i use to have respect for this website, but now im done. i just realized that you guys are so fucking spoiled by the national championship, that you accept noting less than perfection. jc has one awful game and a couple of fumbling problems and all the sudden he isnt a good enough back for texas? you forget that he averages 5.3 a carry and has 8 tds. you forget that he was our only decent offense through the first 3 games. you forget that colt mccoy played 2a ball in texas (not the best competition). you forget that the only reason we ever came close to a national title was because of inVINCEable. im tired of this. im a texas fan, hardcore since i can remember, but i am getting tired of this spoiled bullshit about players that arnt playing perfect. yall drive me crazy, listening to you makes me less of a texas fan every single week. you complain about every single little problem. you guys are fucking pathetic. stop complaining and making excuses, we suck this year, deal with it. greg davis is doing the best with what he has. stop trying to come up with bull shit reasons why we are losing like "Texas should thoughtfully consider moving Charles to wide receiver/multi-task/Percy Harvin machine" the problem is WE SUCK. thats it. end o story. we are  ( actually you are, not me) the most spoiled bitches ever. after this season, watching yall bitch and moan, i would rather be an oklahoma fan  than a 40 acres fan. stop disgracing the longhorn tradition. we had a god in human form in 05 so stop complaing about our team. PB is an idiot. boomer sooner from now on,

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:14 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

"greg davis is doing the best with what he has"

this is the most offensive, absurd part of this whole rant. All the other stuff I'm ok with. But you went too far with that one.

by BrooklynHorn on Oct 21, 2007 1:22 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dude..

First of all, if you decide "boomer sooner from now on", you really aren't much of a so-called "hardcore" Texas fan.  

Secondly, we've always expected the best from our players.  Anything less than the best is a disappointment.  If we played up to potential every game and lost a few, I don't think you'd see as much negativity here at BON.  However, if you've been watching the games at ALL, you'd realize that we haven't been playing up to par.  I don't understand how you can proclaim to be such a loyal fan, admit we suck, and then ostracize the rest of us for voicing our criticism.  

I really just hope you're drunk and not making much sense.

My boo is Hunter Lawrence. That's right, I took a kicker. Another great example of why you shouldn't wait until you get home to read BON.

by chief on Oct 21, 2007 1:23 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wholeheartedly agree with chief

What the fuck kind of fair weather fan are you, Olemissreb451?

"the problem is WE SUCK. thats it. end o story."

Dude, if you want to think like that, then what the fuck is the point of even watching the games, following the season, reading the blogs. Let's figure what we're doing right and what we're doing wrong. If it's right - keep it. If it's wrong - fix it. We are offering criticism, the constructive kind. PB has been doing an absolutely outstanding job of analyzing offense, defense, and special teams, finding weakness as well as strength. Those are the kinds of things we discuss on this board. If you aspire to the kind of bullshit, ranting "we suck" philosophy, go somewhere else.

"boomer sooner from now on"?

Good fucking riddance.

Hook 'em Horns

by LonghornWSO on Oct 21, 2007 1:32 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

You are doing exactly what you accuse

everyone else of doing.  You just take the approach of excusing everything.  Other than insults, what did you say in your "rant"?  

by thanos on Oct 21, 2007 1:27 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I hope you were bombed

Because I'm not sure what to say to you. If that's your interpretation of my take on the team, we're beyond having a reasonable discussion about Texas football.

--PB--

by Peter Bean on Oct 21, 2007 10:58 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

stupid

i just think it is stupid that you guys keep coming up with excuses for losing. we got out coached in the k state game, and we got out played in ou. we only bee BAYLOR by 21. thats pathetic. and how dare you not call me a loyal texas fan, i sat through every minute of every single( and yes i mean sat through as in on the 30 yard line in the stands)game in 97 when i was only 10 years old (if you recall we went 4-7) and i cheered us on every minute of every game. lets face it just because someone is highly recruited out of highschool,  doesnt mean they will make it in college. aka victor ike and sneezy beltran. so maybe i AM right about greg davis doing the best with what he has. he cant do every thing, the players on the ones who have to make the plays on the feild, not him

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:34 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

How can you be a "loyal texas fan"

if your handle is OleMissReb451

You're sending mixed signals, at best.

by BrooklynHorn on Oct 21, 2007 1:41 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

So maybe you aren't a fair weather fan but

do you understand what you are watching?  To believe that GD has no responsibility in our struggles is asinine at best.  To PB's point, it is a collection of different things but you would be an un-educated fan if you believe that Texas is realizing its potential and the coaches have no part in that.  

BTW, I am happy to know that Greg Davis reads BON.  :-)

by thanos on Oct 21, 2007 1:42 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Excuses?

To me, making excuses for losing means claiming your team is better tan everyone else and blaming outside forces for a loss (e.g., the weather was bad, the other team cheated, the refs were crooked, the other team soaked their field so we would slip down, we don't have the money others schools have, etc?).  I don't see that here.  Yes, we have high standards.  What's wrong with that?  And if we play poorly, whether we win or lose, we debate possible causes and potential solutions.  And if think OU fans are any more tolerant of losing than we are, read their blogs next time they lose.

"Only angry people win football games." --DKR

by OBdoc on Oct 21, 2007 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

by the way

the point is, i would love to see us get better, but lets face it usc was the more talented over all team in that championship game we just had god on our team, aka vinceanity. by the way i sat through all 60 minutes of the 66-3 raping by ucla in 100 degree heat, dont call me a fairweather fan

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:38 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

"Fairweather" isn't the adjective I'd use

"Uneducated" is more like it.

I admit that Vince was a HUGE part of our NC success, but you're fooling yourself and disrespecting the fans and the program to say that Vince is the ONLY reason we won.  Our defense was a major part of that victory.  If they didn't make key stops and force turnovers, we wouldn't have been in the position for Vince to run it in on 4th and goal.

I'd also like to comment on your "i just think it is stupid that you guys keep coming up with excuses for losing. we got out coached in the k state game, and we got out played in ou. we only bee BAYLOR by 21." statement.

We all come up with excuses (read: reasons) for our failures.  In fact, isn't that EXACTLY what you're doing by saying we were outcoached and outplayed?

You act like Peter picks some arbitrary reason for our loses and all of us readers agree with it.  Sir, that is certainly not the case.  In fact, I disagree with Peter a lot, and I've certainly had my issue with Wells.  We're Texas, man.  We want to win, and when we don't, we get frustrated.  However, we're man enough (and intelligent enough) to dissect our failures and determine what needs to be corrected.  I don't really understand your problem with that.

My boo is Hunter Lawrence. That's right, I took a kicker. Another great example of why you shouldn't wait until you get home to read BON.

by chief on Oct 21, 2007 1:45 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i said

that you guys should just accept us not being the most talented team on the feild every week, and i am saying that you guys are spoiled and make up to many excuses. deal with the fact that we are not the best team on the deild every week and stop complaing about what evryone else can do to make us better. honestly, do you think you guys could get on the feild and do any better? no you cant so shut the fuck up and let them play, let greg do his job and shut up and see what happends.

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:42 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

i didnt get in

to texas because i wasnt in the top 10 percent of my class so i went to ole miss,m my second choice

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:43 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

honestly

if you guys could come up with a better game plan for any team we play, i would wax your balls. leave greg alone, you guys are all being very stupid

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:47 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

hmmm

telling us that we are BEING stupid instead of that we ARE stupid  +1

Saying that you would "wax our balls"  - 7

by BrooklynHorn on Oct 21, 2007 1:50 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

but

what makes you guys thin you have the expertise to disect every part of the game? none of you ahve ever coach at the college level? the gact is yall are stupid fans who think you know everything but you dont. i dont think i know every thing either, but that i do know is that you guys dont know shit compared to greg davis, so shut up and leave it alon

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:50 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

We eat, breathe, and shit Texas football

I'm not a coach, and I don't know anyone who is.  But you know what I am?  A die-hard fan. I think that gives me the right to have an opinion.

I also think you're forgetting the most important aspect of this:  BON is a BLOG.  This is an open internet discussion forum for like-minded people.  If someone wants to blame Greg Davis, let them, as long as they have a valid reason.  

My boo is Hunter Lawrence. That's right, I took a kicker. Another great example of why you shouldn't wait until you get home to read BON.

by chief on Oct 21, 2007 1:56 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

This guy

reminds me of the crying aggie fan video.

by Wells on Oct 21, 2007 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

yes

i am drunk but that soesnt change the fact that im right... and you all know it

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:57 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

If by "right"...

you mean "an asshole", "a dickhead", "a moron", or "an idiot", then, yes, we all know it.

Hook 'em Horns

by LonghornWSO on Oct 21, 2007 11:03 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i dont

have a problem with people blaming greg davis, i have a problem with people thinking they know better, or thinking they could have dont better than him

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 1:58 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I'm done at this point.

This guy has already admitted he's intoxicated, and has started to contradict himself.  Someone else take over.

My boo is Hunter Lawrence. That's right, I took a kicker. Another great example of why you shouldn't wait until you get home to read BON.

by chief on Oct 21, 2007 1:59 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

im not contradicting myself

you guys just cant think of anything else to say

by Olemissreb451 on Oct 21, 2007 2:05 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Note to JC

When you shredded OU as a freshman you did it by the following method: "See the hole, hit the hole".

You saved your dancing for the open field.

I totally agree with the post about Erick Jackson.  I think Aaron Ross was really the only exception to the idea that a four-year backup could start as a senior.

by DreadedOne on Oct 21, 2007 11:02 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

"See the hole"

I dont think JC is seeing the hole, which is why he stretches his plays all the way to the sideline.  Maybe the hole's not there or maybe he's hoping a bigger hole will be further east so he keeps running.  

I guess thats why zone blocking doesnt work for JC.  It puts the decision on where to run on him.

by the other Andrew on Oct 21, 2007 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed.

Our line seldom makes big holes, although Oggy's run for a TD shows that they can. You gotta hit a crease and hope it develops as you stick your body in there.

It's been my experience some backs can do that and some can't see it or feel it. And, regardless, the back can't wait long for the hole to develop.

by whills on Oct 21, 2007 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Akina noted that Ishi has done well in practice

and that's why he was in the Baylor game (via AA-S today); Jackson was not injured. That's a good sign the log jam has broken and different considerations are in play.

I know it had been expressed here that the Baylor and NU games could serve as a training and testing time for new players. Looks like the coaches are taking that to heart.

by whills on Oct 21, 2007 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

I also saw a lot of my boy and his cohorts.  That means less KBD.  I don't care if KBD are the "starters" as long as the good kids keep getting the PT.  Baylor basically scored 3 points of their own merit, and I think that was, in part, due to the break in the "logjam" on playing the better players.

Growing up, I only fed Jared Norton paper. That's why he eats plays.

by Horn Brain on Oct 21, 2007 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nebraska fear factor? Make it a 10.

Guys, Baylor just gave us a game for two and a half quarters.  Yes, we are in the post OU phase of the season where we have traditionally turned it on offensively, but I saw a whole lot of the Central Florida and K-State Horns playing yesterday.  We need to approach every opponent with maximum fear factor, especially a Nebraska team desperate for a win, with nothing to lose.

If we were one or two plays from losing to Arkansas State and Central Florida, we better take Nebraska seriously.

by the1austin on Oct 21, 2007 12:36 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

I don't think it should be a 10..

But we are playing a much better team than Baylor.  Up until the Kansas State game, I was never worried much about home games, because we win most of those.. but after that debacle, I'd place my personal fear factor at around a 6.

My boo is Hunter Lawrence. That's right, I took a kicker. Another great example of why you shouldn't wait until you get home to read BON.

by chief on Oct 21, 2007 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

but seriously though

nebraska has totally quit on callahan.  completely quit.  if it was the same team without the word "nebraska" on their shirts, you wouldn't be concerned at all.

nebraska has more talent than baylor, undoubtedly, but at this point in the season, i'd say they're not really a better team.

by billyzane on Oct 21, 2007 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

My fear is that they start playing for themselves

Sometimes this happens; relatively rare but it happens.

Basically, breaking their will early with several scores insures they return to form. Going for the home run is justified in such situations, as opposed to attempting to physically overwhelming them with the long-term game. The Horns have had a problem physically overwhelming anyone at this point, but they can go toe-to-toe (witness OU).

Basically, I have some fear, say a 4, and think we should observe the Acco Creep Feed motto: Never give a sucker an even break.

In this case, I think that is especially true.

by whills on Oct 21, 2007 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

All but the last 6 minutes

I agree with you that Nebraska should not be taken lightly, not only because of who they are but because we struggled against the likes of Ark State, Central Florida, and TCU (who is apparently not as good as orignially thought).  I do disagree a little about Baylor.  They gave us a game for alot more than 2 and one-half quarters.  the Horns did not put the game away until the last 6 minutes or so.

"Only angry people win football games." --DKR

by OBdoc on Oct 21, 2007 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

On JC

I agree with much of your analysis, PB. I do think the Horns play down to the competition, sometimes even below, and didn't take BU as seriously as they could.

And in particularly with this statement:

It's hardly his [JC's] fault, but he is what he is, just as Colt is who Colt is and Greg Davis is who Greg Davis is. But, given all that? Let's figure out what to do with the guy. He's not wildly effective in this particular scheme.

When Sweed went down, I immediately said there is a need to stretch the field as a tactical tool and JC was best suited to that. For JC, the need has been to get him in space, hit him on the run and let him do what he does best.

Coming into this season, two of the Horns' pressing needs on offense were to develop the short running ability and make the long passing game a serious threat. The best we can say at this point that there has been some progress, but both are still being developed. There have been limiting factors, of course, including the inexperienced O-line, Colt's decisions, Sweed's and other injuries and the performance of the RBs, particularly JC's penchant for E-W runs.

I personally think these issues are not resolved but we can see some daylight; McGee does add the N-S threat and Oggy can play. The receivers are fine, but need to be hit in stride more. JC could be a deep threat which should pull both a CB and safety if we can get him the ball a couple of times, and with that, would become a tactical weapon to influence coverage and match-ups. And, no, he wouldn't replace the regular receivers, nor should he. He's needs his own role.

Colt's running is justified and he does well enough in traffic. Most every spread offense features the QB frustrating the D by running to the open space and that's what I see him doing now, especially early in the game. He's the uncovered guy. This is a must-do part of his role and it was missing early in the season. It must be part of the attack scheme to keep the middle honest. With McGee developing, the Horns should be more successful in working the accordion when they're in spread formation, something they haven't particularly done well in big games. This is a definite improvement in my mind, but still not perfected by a long shot.

Last, I'm comfortable with Colt. He's thrown 44 TDs (tying VY) and over 4,000 yards. He may be replaced at some point but he's going to be the starter the rest of the year because no one else has the experience or judgment to challenge him at this time. Next spring will be interesting, though.

by whills on Oct 21, 2007 1:00 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

jc isn't a very good receiver

he's fine; he makes good plays now and then. he also deflects passes up in the air for defenders to intercept and he drops balls way more than he should.  and that's with linebackers guarding him out of the backfield.  how would he do against a real cover corner?

by billyzane on Oct 21, 2007 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

The point is to run him deep

and throw at him. If he catches a couple, great. The point of the strategy is to run off the corners and force the safety to help. That clears half the field and leaves 1-on-1 coverage on the others, with a certain mismatch somewhere.

The question you're really asking is can he develop into that role and improve his skills if there is targeted practice for just that?  

JC is never going to be an NFL RB; he wouldn't last a quarter of a season if he should make the field. His only chance is as a WR with incredible speed. All those hybrid backs become Wes Welkers or WR in the pros, if they make it at all. Most will not survive going over the middle.

So, in this sense, he would be our hybrid, stretching the field occasionally, adding deception to the backfield and ultimately being more of a tactical weapon unless he upgrades his receiving skills.

Remember, his best races in track wasn't the 100M but the 110M and 300-M hurdles, long tough races with precise timing and, in the 300s, real endurance and dedication. He was the best in the nation at those in HS. I suspect he'll go pro in track, not NFL anyway.

So, at this point I suspect he is in transition about his future and must make up his mind if different options are presented to him and he wants to excel.  

by whills on Oct 21, 2007 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What I don't get is..

If Charles and McGee are both terrific players. Wouldn't it be optimal to find a way to use both on the field at once?

The only way to accommodate this is the switch Charles to a Percy Harvin type role (which I think he is best suited for) and let Mcgee get about 20-25 carries per game.

McGee runs with the type of slashing quickness and power that we haven't seen at Texas in a while.

My adopted son Sergio Kindle does not sleep; he waits.

by mvplonghorns on Oct 21, 2007 1:04 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

See post above

That's what we're approaching here. You just can't throw away someone with 10.15 speed. You must use that weapon to enhance your attack.

I agree that McGee's style of running certainly suits what the Horns' needs.

by whills on Oct 21, 2007 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Enjoy your break PB

We'll be looking forward to the additional posts although I'd hardly say BON is starved for regular updates.

I do think the QB issue is a particularly important one and couldn't possibly get too much attention.  Whatever deficiencies Colt may have I certainly think he has at least comprable and probably superior talent to the Heupel and Whites of this world.  We all reacall the heights to which they led the acquisitors of real property by illicit means up north.  It is however crucial to determine how best to maximize his talents and also, as you write, to determine what to do to get the most out of Chiles.

marshalld

by duras on Oct 21, 2007 2:54 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

We need a Colt thread/diary/article

When PB did a "Good Colt"/"Bad Colt" post during the Baylor game, it made me ponder something.
Before the injury last year Colt played great against every team - tOSU included.  His games after the injury?
aTm - bad, bad game
Iowa - excellent game
Arkie St - bad game
TCU - started really bad, got a little better
UCF - mediocre: not good, not bad, but perplexing all the same
Rice - great game (although it WAS Rice)
KSU - Bad bad bad bad
Okie- Good, almost great
ISU - I didn't watch this one personally, but stats indicate he was really good
Baylor- Bad game against a bad opponent.

Colt is now the Rex Grossman of college football.  Great one game, horrible the next.  Neither the offense nor the O-coordinator have changed.  I know the Oline is not as good, but I cant buy the idea that they are so bad that Colt cant eviscerate Baylor and Arkie St.  

Colt had 6 touchdowns against Baylor last year, so how is it he only manages 1 this year to go along with 2 picks?  

My hypothesis is that the neck injury has permanently ended Colt's awesomeness.  Maybe it was the physical damage done, maybe it was the mental damage it did, maybe it was a combination.  He is done.  It's time to go with Harris or Chiles

by DogTown on Oct 22, 2007 10:11 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Burnt Orange Nation, a blog dedicated to University of Texas athletics. Get BON updates via Twitter.
Start posting about the Longhorns »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Bevo_small
Aggie Week: Let's hear your favorite Aggie joke.
T1_1018_coltheisman_small
Texas vs UC Irvine Gameflow (+/- stats included)
Horns_small
Thanks to our Men & Women in the Armed Forces

Recent FanPosts

Small
Big 12 Championship Tickets [Open Thread]
Small
Longhorn Volleyball Fans..
Elephantlogoorange_small
Texas: Thanks.
Buddy_tower_48x48_small
Is aTm aware that Thanksgiving is two days away?
Images_small
Do not wish VY to be a Texan
Vandammeband_small
A Quick Look at Pitt
Chris_hookem_small
Thoughts After My Last Game at DKR (as a student)
Brandedbevo1024x768_small
Texas-Iowa Game Preview
Small
Colt McCoy Selected as 2009 O'Brien Finalist!
Clock_tower_small
Mystery Recruit?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS


Site Editors

Pb6_small Peter Bean

Dark_pumpkin_small awiggo

Menbooger_small GhostofBigRoy

Contributing Authors

Jersey_front_small 54b

Zombie_profilepic_small Horn Brain

Gse_multipart20834_small 40AS

Pigeons_small billyzane

Small whills

Brandedbevo1024x768_small dimecoverage

Rosebowl_small txtwstr7

Small TheElusiveShadow

Me_small burnt in ny

Official Partner of CBS Sports