Jump to content

Bill Lumbergh

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    2453
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Bill Lumbergh

  1. Based on some of what has been going around on other threads, my guess would be a combination of inferring from alignment (we have tells and claim not to care because we should impose our will anyway) and a simplified scheme allowing their talented guys to quickly read and react. Kenneth Murray was running straight to the ball on every snap where I paid attention to him. I didn't see that he was already lined up where it was going, but he was able to quickly read the play and get to where it was going. If he played on our defense, we would probably be asking him to fake pressure and then drop back to cover Duverney on every snap. It's amazing what superior athletes can do in a simple scheme that let's them read and react instead of trying to process 15 variables and do things they're not naturally good at doing.
  2. I work in this industry. Blame dumb ad buyers and publishers. No one wins when experiences are disruptive and piss users off. It makes the user dislike the publisher and the advertiser at the same time. Unfortunately too many advertisers are really bad at measuring the quality of what they're buying, so they keep paying for eyeballs and ignoring the fact that their ad was served beside 20 others on a page that took so long to load that most users bail before ever seeing the page content (much less considering their ad). Most online advertising isn't bought by targeting publishers directly, so your ads end up all over the place and you have to know how to spot this stuff in your data and do the work to weed this type of shit out since you really don't want to be buying it. What's surprising to me is that publishers aren't smart enough to see that this short term cash grab is going to kill their business. I also refuse to visit sites or close videos when they have absurdly intrusive ad experiences. I hope most people do and I hope the businesses that refuse to change these practices go under. It feels like flashing, music playing, full screen banner ad takeovers of the 90s again, which is something publishers purposefully pulled back on in favor of better user experiences. Why they're testing the waters of how annoying they can be before users start jumping ship again is beyond me. Publishers, give users good experiences and place ads minimally beside those experiences unobtrusively. Advertisers, target your audiences well and make compelling creative that grabs the attention of your well targeted audiences even when ads are placed unobtrusively. This shit should not be that hard, but instead of doing it right it feels like we're in a race to the bottom.
  3. I liked this one, too, but I cried when his high school offense executed a tunnel screen better than I've ever seen a Texas offense run it.
  4. I heard he's considering redshirting. Or whatever the machine version of redshirting is.
  5. This was my thought. Maybe next season, try to ask the question preseason what you can do really well with the players you have over the next 12 games. That seems like a decent time to evaluate such a question, rather than waiting until after you've pissed away half the season doing things you can't do very well.
  6. Translation: we weren't getting it done by mixing in crazy/exotic blitzes with our base scheme and needed to simplify. This week we're ONLY repping the exotic blitzes. Todd promises me that simplifying will help.
  7. Timing makes me wonder if this has been decided for a while and terms are agreed to with the replacement. That's the only reason I could see for announcing right now vs earlier or later.
  8. Maybe prior to tcu. I'd be shocked if you see that now. This is a team who physically dominated and out schemed ou. We may win, but anyone thinking we'll dominate has seriously not been paying attention.
  9. My oldest turns four tomorrow. Are you telling me it gets better? (Yes, we had the same with threes)
  10. "The city of Austin announced that the issue has been resolved, since they've placed an impenetrable barrier around the site which will cause great injury if anyone attempts to go through it..."
  11. So if elite schools miss on enough of their actual targets, they'll eventually get around to considering this guy, and that's your rationale for defending his ranking?
  12. I think you're agreeing with my point. It was a better move for Harsin because Mack was withering. OCs under Meyer and Saban aren't leaving for Arkansas State. Strange as it sounds, at one point Mack would have been considered a coach in their league, with two national championship appearances in five years. The fact that Harsin made the jump was a clear indicator of where Mack's program was trending, and that's why he couldn't attract elite coordinators anymore.
  13. Muschamp was well respected, and while he left for Florida HC which is an understandable decision, I have no doubt he shared his experiences under Mack with other assistants. Harsin was also well respected and left his OC role at Texas for HC at Arkansas State. That's a fine program and all, but you don't leave OC at Texas for that role unless you really don't believe in where things are going and you want out. You start getting guys like those two jumping ship and talking to buddies, during the years where Mack seemed to be checked out and clearly was trending down, not shocking top coordinators weren't jumping at the chance to coach under him.
  14. Direct TV now has LHN on the service. Sling and YouTube tv do not. If it's not on your streaming service, logging on and streaming on the ESPN app will not work. This is the first year I've had no cable during the season, I researched and tested all of these options.
  15. Parker is DC at Iowa --> Kirk Ferentz hired him there --> Kirk Ferentz hired Greg Davis as his OC, with the benefit of years of tape from his time at Texas --> I do not trust Kirk Ferentz judgement in coordinator hires --> I do not want Phil Parker.
  16. I believe when this was set in motion, our last game was the sugar bowl. Maybe it could have been stopped before it went through, but the optics on that are pretty bad from a recruiting standpoint if it was already in motion and gets stopped. Worse than the optics of what we're putting on the field currently? Not sure.
  17. I think you have to give him at minimum another year. One thing that sucks about the business of college football coaching, there's such a small sample by which you judge success and so many variables that influence it that making quick decisions is really difficult. Combine that with how much is riding on those decisions, particularly the cost of delaying one that needs to be made, and you can get in a bad place really quickly. Herman showed enough last year to give you reason to believe. He's shown enough this year to give you reason to doubt. What does that mean for next? All you can really look for are leading indicators of success or failure, starting with staff and recruiting. If he won't fix staff this off-season or makes questionable hires, my hope is pretty much shot. If he can't convince recruits to stick around through some turbulence and coaching changes, the changes may not matter. His margin for error managing both is very small right now, which is why he's paid so much to do it. He needs to earn it with decisions and execution over the next six months or he'll be dead man walking here.
  18. There is a strange undercurrent in the criticism of Herman and staff where Charlie supporters seem to think this staff failing is in any way related to how horrible Strong was. I can't follow the logic at all, but I have seen quite a few posts over the last two weeks criticising Herman while also feeling the need to reference how hard we all were on Strong for no apparent reason. Charlie Strong was terrible here at nearly every part of his job and deserved to be fired. Herman may also be awful (certainly appears to be right now) and may also deserve to be fired. He has shown more signs of life in his three years than Charlie ever did, which might buy him a year longer than Strong was given to prove his case, but few people around here are currently arguing he'll be the guy to get it done. Why anyone on this board is referencing how hard we all were on Charlie, who deserved every bit of criticism he received, as we also fairly criticize Herman for his underperformance it's baffling. If the new girl you were excited to date turns out to be bat shit crazy, it doesn't make the last girl you dated any less bat shit crazy than you already knew she was. It certainly doesn't mean you should feel any better about dating either of them. Probably it just means you should change your vetting process... Edit to add: I know I referenced Strong in my original post here and that's why he came up in this thread. Talking less about Snacks specific reply here and more about something I've observed in quite a few threads since Kansas.
  19. There's a lot to feel pessimistic about right now without bringing in lotushorn fan fiction. Patterson regularly beat Charlie Strong coached teams by 21...in the first half. But this team he beat by 10 is one of the worst coached he's ever faced? That actually doesn't look so good for him. Not a chance he said that. We do still suck, though, so if he had it wouldn't have been that wrong. Doesn't change our reality either way.
  20. Random observations: 1) going back to last year, our offense at times looks extremely efficient and well prepared, and at others completely out of sorts with no creativity at all (the run it for no gain or throw a deep prayer offense we've seen show up in a few games now). We know Tom and Tim have both been credited as play callers at different points in time, and we know they have very different track records as play callers. I wonder if this is related? I could certainty see Tom spending less time with the offensive game plan while the defense and special teams have been imploding. Then again, if he's investing time trying to help fix those things, you sure can't tell from the results. 2) Herman's extension that just went through isn't popular here for obvious reasons, but should help if he's hiring assistants this off-season. Pretty hard to convince anyone worth a damn to come join a coach with a downward trend in year three of a four year contract.
  21. If someone paid our coaches to bomb the season, with the one condition that they not make it too obvious they're doing so, they would have called to say the act has gone a bit overboard at this point. It's hard to imagine any part of our team looking worse than it does right now.
×
×
  • Create New...