Jump to content

SL Xpress

Full Members
  • Posts

    4815
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by SL Xpress

  1. As far as how this team looks, I feel like Nebraska is so much better than everyone else on paper. But I thought that last year and Penn State took the championship from them. It would be somewhat hilarious to me if Nebraska makes it to the championship game again only to lose. Always the bridesmaid title is already being attached to them. This year could cement it. I'm also still unreasonably upset we didn't win the SEC last year. That team was underachieving. I don't know all the reasons, but they never got in sync. I don't think bringing in Carlsen was the right decision, even though she's definitely talented. A better pure setter than Swindle. But the dynamics were off on that team all year. I didn't feel like Skinner was able to live up to her potential either, but I don't have any legitimate speculation why that was. Just an unfulfilling team for me to follow in some ways. And that's okay. We became spoiled. Anyway, I'd like to win the SEC. This year is the first year for a tournament, which I've never wanted. But it's there, so I hope we win it. Then let's see what they can do in the NCAA tournament. Long ways to go, with an exciting non con slate ahead. I can hardly wait until tomorrow night. Should be a good one!
  2. I've always felt like Elliott likes to serve conservatively early in the season. When we've had our best serving performances in the tournament the last few years, it wasn't until the last couple of games and then into the opening two rounds of the tournament that I felt he had the players let it rip. That could be a whole lot of bollocks. I don't have any data to back that up. It's just been my thought in watching the team. Everyone remembers the championship run where our serves were downright nasty. I'll never forget that Nebraska win. Man, I get so much joy just thinking about that match. But even the year before when we won the championship the serves were filthy come tournament time. It's interesting to me we don't have Lauenstein on a dedicated serving pattern. I know she's not back row material, especially with the studs we have back there. I don't know exactly who she would replace. I also don't know how all aspects of her game compare to how she was at Nebraska. But she was an outstanding server when she was in Lincoln. From a serving perspective she should be able to improve the team a great deal from behind the line. But I'm not at practices or anything, so I don't pretend to know what I'm talking about.
  3. " "Rape and pillage. Rape and pillage. No no. That's not a command. Sit down. It's just that I don't quite understand why it is that pillage should take the curse off rape, because it does, doesn't it? 'The Vikings raped and pillaged their way through the north' sounds a lot merrier than a gang of Norwegian Sailors suspected of a series of rapes in the Sunderland area. Add pillage to rape and suddenly it has a certain air of knockabout fun! But pillage is bad enough by itself. It's theft, looting and arson. Being pillaged would be an awful thing to happen to anyone. What it definitely isn't is a spoonful of sugar to help the rape go down."
  4. Service errors are way overrated as a statistic. I'm not saying they're unimportant. They are important. But what is more important is the effectiveness of serves. Otherwise players would be back there serving underhanded. For some servers, they might as well be. But because it's measured that's what everyone focuses on. I wish there was a stat for each player that showed the percentage of serves their team scores on. That's way more important than aces, which is also overrated as a stat. Obviously scoring a point is often as much about the rotation a player is in as it is the effectiveness of their serve, but it would still be way more useful than aces and errors, especially as a ratio. That's a dumb measurement of the effectiveness of a server, their aces to error ratio on serves. There is a great site I went on that explained the analytics in terms of getting an advantage on one exchange and being able to capitalize on it, even if it wasn't during the very next exchange. It's similar to any net sport. You put the opposition in a disadvantageous situation where their response back over the net is relatively weak, it puts your team in a good spot to make a forceful shot, which may again get returned, but in a weak way such that your team is again able to make a commanding kill shot. The odds to get the point are in your team's favor with each exchange, even if the first hit over the net didn't score. None of that is measured in the aces/errors statistic. That said, there are times I've seen Stanford service error themselves out of a match, so again, I'm not saying it's unimportant. Just over emphasized by the announcers and fans. We see the opposite true on the Texas side sometimes. Not with serves, but with kill shots. Elliott puts a big emphasis on limiting errors, and sometimes IMO it causes our players to choose to tip the ball over rather than letting it rip. But it's hard to argue with the overall results. It can be frustrating to watch as a fan at times.
  5. No, I'd agree. One is a way bigger deal than the other. It was a me thing. I kept getting frustrated with his dropped passes. That team didn't drop that many passes, and too often, it felt like Blue was the culprit. Fondren and Main reminded me that Blue had 1000 yards from scrimmage last year, along with the 14 TDs. In my mind it wasn't that much. I was wrong.
  6. He could end up being Priest Holmes in the NFL. Holmes was a TD machine even with Shon Mitchell and Ricky Williams getting the bulk of the carries. But he simply wasn't used that much. It's hard to miss Blue when he played so little. I don't mean to shit on him. But he was mostly a very fast running back watching from the sidelines. And when he was out there he would regularly drop passes and fumble the ball. Not every time, but often enough for me to feel like he was going to do it again the next time he got the ball.
  7. I think the bottom line is that we had expectations we'd be a dominant juggernaut out of the gate. Or at least struggle less than we are. Because we are struggling, people are giving up on the idea that we might become one. And maybe they're right. I don't know. One thing I believe every fan can get behind is that we have to improve from where we are right now. I see people focus on the performance of the wide receivers, and I'm just not seeing the same thing. The guy taking the snaps from center has to get right for them to be able to perform up to their potential. At the same time, I've been watching a lot of college football these past two weeks, and I see a lot of teams having issues. I just don't feel the same kind of doom and gloom I see a lot of people expressing.
  8. Are we saying Brooks was a burner? Benson wasn't exactly a burner. I want someone who can consistently get us ahead of the chains and make first downs. That's an NFL quality running back as far as I'm concerned. ' Blue wasn't utilized enough for me to truly miss him. Same with Keilan Robinson. There are a lot of players I wish were on this roster. Blue and Robinson don't exactly leap to the forefront. No offense to those guys. Heck, Niblett is the burner you guys seem to be yearning for. The problem is I haven't seen him be able to use his speed productively since he got here. He is pretty quick about waving his teammates away from punts. I'll give him that. I'm being a little purposefully obtuse here. As fans we want to see players who can take it to the house anywhere on the field, and we feel like we're lacking that, with the apparent exception of Livingstone. I do believe Wingo is that type of player. I feel like Baxter can pick up big chunks if the opportunity is there. Heck, I believe Manning can produce long runs. IMO we have a quarterback who needs the game to slow down a little bit, and he needs to experience a little more consistent success. An easy prescription but a much harder thing to apply. With a quarterback who second guesses himself, is late seeing receivers break open, and then isn't consistent with what the ball is going to do when it leaves his hands, the fastest receivers in the world aren't going to matter. As far as running back, I don't have the same concerns about a big play threat that others do. I want someone who can consistently pick up 4+ yards, make positive yardage even when the blocking breaks down, and when everything breaks right can get 10 to 20 yards if not more. That's what I feel like we had in Brooks. I feel like Baxter can give us the same kind of element. That's a national championship caliber running attack, IMO. I guess I'm just higher on Baxter and what I'm seeing than other people are.
  9. I like what I see out of Baxter. What are the complaints about him, exactly? He's coming off a serious knee injury, which he wasn't even expected to be getting as many carries as he has been. If he was in situation where he was carrying the ball 20 to 25 times a game I think we'd be pleased with the result. I didn't think of Jamaal Charles or Jonathon Brooks as being as special as they ended up being, but they showed early promise. Bijan was Bijan from the moment he stepped on campus, so I got nothing there. I wish he had played on better teams.
  10. I'm just wondering what it would take for Gibson to earn snaps in a critical moment with this staff when he lost time last year for fumbling, and after an entire offseason his first series carrying the ball fumbles it again. You don't necessarily want to write any human being off, but the things we do - or don't do - matter. I just see transfer portal candidate written all over him. Which is not to try to convince you of my point of view. I feel like your's is the right way to think in all kinds of ways. I'm just not sure I feel like it meshes with reality.
  11. When you say we "fizzled" basically it means we lost, and nothing else matters. We had a chance against both Washington and Ohio State late in the game. I wouldn't say that was fizzling. A couple of plays here and there and we win both of those. We didn't, and I understand that's important. But it's not like we played like complete crap. The other team simply played better. It happens. I'd argue something similar happened against Ohio State. Both teams need to improve from their season opener. Ohio State hardly looked like a finished product. But they had a couple of plays go their way and Texas failed to execute on a couple of plays on their end, and that was the difference in the game. In the second game we likely could have just run it down their throats and dominated the game, but it was a glorified exhibition to help work on things. Lots of rotations. Lots of players coming in. A chance for the OL to gel more. And most of all, a chance for Manning to get further down the line in his development - which proved to be a bit of a mixed bag. I know everyone has their opinion on the Ewers/Manning dichotomy, and I'm certainly among them. My feeling with Ewers is that he was a finished product for the most part. What you saw is what you got. I had my frustrations, but I also had quite a bit of gratitude around what he did well. It's my opinion his strengths were constantly taken for granted by people who wanted him to be more than what he was. With Manning, my hope and expectation is there's an upside he hasn't found yet. That's pretty common for a first year starter. But maybe that's not the case? I don't know. Maybe what we have in Manning is a bad mechanics quarterback who is completely unreliable in terms of whether he's going to dot his receivers with incredible throws or he's going to skip the ball to them or completely overthrow them. I understand there are other aspects of the team that need improvement, but Manning is going to be a critical piece for the rest of the season, just like any quarterback would be. Without any insider knowledge, it felt like Sarkisian wanted Manning to stay in the pocket, go through his progressions, and use the game to get more comfortable and confident with more game time reps. Mission accomplished? I don't know. That's not how I feel after that game. I also feel like you can't exactly flip a switch. If utilizing Manning's legs as a bigger part of the offense - not just designed runs but taking off when the opportunity is there - is important, then you should probably do that, rather than waiting for the opportune moment. But we'll see. Look, either Manning improves this year and becomes more consistent and more effective, and this team has a chance to go deep in the playoffs and win the whole thing, or he doesn't, and we're potentially looking at a 9-3 season or worse. Which would be something of a disaster from my point of view. But Manning needs to improve. That's all there is to it. Not that other aspects of the team don't need improvement as well, but I'm not sure how much the rest of it matters if he doesn't get right, while there's a lot of other deficiencies that can be overcome if Manning starts balling out on a consistent basis. I guess my main issue is that the flaws we're seeing in his mechanics when he's throwing his wtf passes seems so fundamental, my question becomes, why is that even there after all the years of high level coaching he's received, and why should I have the expectation it's going to miraculously improve this season? I guess there's a thought if he becomes more of a dual threat - which he obviously has the potential of being - that will ameliorate some of my other concerns. Possibly.
  12. I would be very concerned about the depth chart if I was Jordan Washington or Spencer Shannon. I know those guys are ideal as inline TEs, but both Townsend and Watson look really good as true freshmen.
  13. I guess I was surprised people didn't understand the joke. So I took it to a ridiculous degree, and that was taken seriously as well. I'm on a thread commenting on Parker Livingstone, so I care about the topic. I don't think I'm nearly as obsessed with it as others. I post on here for entertainment, and right now the course of this conversation is entertaining to me. I guess this reply to you is evidence of my asperger's and my strange unhealthy obsession with your comments as well, but it's hard to have conversations with people if that's the first accusation that rolls off people's tongues (fingers) when replying back and forth. It's a forum. I figure the whole point is to be posting and replying to things. Don't you?
  14. I guess I'd just say for anyone who thought Ewers was a poor quarterback, that's an asinine take. He was terrific in the short and intermediate passing game. He was highly accurate. He consistently hit players in stride so they could maximize yards after the catch. He was piss poor on deep balls. He often did not have a good feel for when the pocket was breaking down. It felt like he was often scared of taking a hit. But he often played through injury, and he had 3 classic performances against Alabama in Tuscaloosa, Michigan in Ann Arbor, and Arizona State in the Peach Bowl, including his signature play on 4th and 13. No one should put Ewers in the same breath as all time greats, but he firmly belongs in the category right below that. I'm glad he was a Longhorn, that's for sure.
  15. Really? I see an elite defense that is designed to give up the short passing game in favor of stopping big plays. That's the defense we've had the entire time Sarkisian has been here. I see an offense that is predicated on quarterback play, with a quarterback who is big time risk/reward, much more so than Ewers ever was. I feel like we knew that going into the season. At least I did, and I thought it was blatantly obvious and everyone knew the score. What I will admit is while intellectually I knew the offense was going to be more risk/reward, I did not have my expectations in alignment for what that would actually mean in practical terms. It is hard on my heart to watch Manning not look so good one moment and then spectacular the next. He's not great in the short passing game right now. He misses wildly on some of his throws in ways I did not expect to happen with such frequency. He does not take off running as much as I thought he would - or should, frankly. I feel like Baxter is a huge missing piece for what was available on the roster last year. I feel like the offensive line is a work in progress, but I feel good about where they are right now. I like where we are. I do not agree with the folks taking a dim view of this team. We'll see how it all plays out, but I feel good about the rest of the season.
  16. The players like it, so that's more important than what I think. But I'm with you. I think it's stupid. Overreacting?
  17. It wasn't even a serious comment. You're getting your panties in a wad over a throwaway statement meant to be somewhat ludicrous. Ewers couldn't make a deep throw to save his life so it wouldn't have mattered anyway.
  18. We should examine this comparison further. I think the argument over who is the better talent and the better NFL prospect between Adonai Mitchell and Parker Livingstone deserves serious consideration. I'm glad you started this line of inquiry. What I will say, is there are very good receivers that have played at Texas that could be used as a comparison. I also feel like my number one thought regarding Livingstone is that Ryan Wingo needs more touches than he's getting.
  19. The whole conversation is absurd. Red Five does not literally think Livingstone is faster than Mitchell. But here we are because you and others are demonstrating an admirable lack of sarcasm detection.
  20. Jesse Palmer reads Surly Horns.
  21. Maybe not over the first 10 yards, but they've done radar gun tests over 100 yards and Livingstone was significantly faster. Livingstone was also considerably faster in the ultramarathon they competed in together. Red Five is too nice of a poster to cite his sources and make you look bad. I'll say this. If I was in a tribe that depended on the two of them to hunt gazelles for survival, I'm taking Livingstone's speed over Mitchell's speed. Better able to chase down the stragglers.
  22. It might be Livingstone. I'm saying that's not ideal if he is. Moore/Wingo are #1/#2. Moore is out right now, so that changes things. Malcolm Williams was the 2nd receiver behind Shipley. That worked out fine. Billy Pittman was Vince Young's #1 target in 2005. Livingstone can do very well at Texas. I'm not rooting against him. I'm just saying there's a different level of talent out there that Livingstone simply doesn't possess, and we can't just fandom him into it. It's still a fun story to follow, for sure. I like the way he plays, and I like what he brings to the team. But if he was the most talented wr on the roster I'd be concerned.
  23. This guy is going to get overrated due to overreaction to his McJagginess. I'm glad he's on the team, but I'm not seeing Jordan Shipley out there. He's a really good WR3, though.
×
×
  • Create New...