Jump to content

Disco Missile

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1424
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Disco Missile

  1. Nuance is probably lost on you guys, but it was pointed out by many at the time how much more stamina our players had last year than opposing teams. We rarely ever got cramps and we never crumpled in the 2nd half like we did under Mack and Charlie (remember the 11 point 4th qtr lead at Kansas?) We went 7-6 because our O line sucked and we had no real playmakers on offense. That was in year one. We're now two games into year two - and one of those had a 90 minute break in the middle - so we don't have enough data to assess year two yet. The USC game will be a good test. As for individual players and results, remember that off-season workouts are all voluntary. Coaches can apply some kinds of pressure but ultimately it's up to players. Some apply themselves. Some don't. It shows in the fall.
  2. Power-cleans for one. Our guys do them now. The S&C program under Mack was nonexistent. Under Charlie it was a joke. And it showed.
  3. This is when you, as an individual, need to have some discernment. Just because you're hearing similar things doesn't mean that both are wrong because one was. Skepticism is healthy. Cynicism isn't. The difference in the S&C program between Mack/Charlie and Herman is night and day.
  4. Those are all of the essential building blocks of a successful program, and those are the good things that Herman does that Mack and Charlie didn't. McKnight's S&C program especially. Unfortunately it all takes time to really sink in and become 'culture'. Herman may not be coaching here in 2 or 3 years, but he will absolutely hand off a roster and culture that is built to win. I know people said that about Strong. But those people were idiots.
  5. Against Tulsa, Sam was a 78% passer (21-27) with 2 TDs and no picks. He also ran for 51 yards and another score, with 4.3 ypc. And for the second game in a row he was never sacked. How much better you think Shane would be ffs? Our problem isn't Sam. It isn't the offense. It's our defensive line and the fact that we are getting dominated up front and giving up way too many rushing yards - and also not getting a pass rush. Teams are running on us and controlling the ball and then QBs have time to pick us apart in passing situations.
  6. Watson and Ingram are both good. So is LJH. Young ain't bad either. Sam and Shane would start for a lot of teams. No standouts on the OL or at TE so far. Hager is good but he needs support. Don't know about any other defenders since our DL is bringing the quality down. The freshmen DBs are good.
  7. Tulsa: Watson - 18-74, 4.1 ypc, 1 rec. 11 yards 1TD Ingram - 10-64, 6.4 ypc, 1 TD, 3 rec. 14 yards Young - 3-41, 13.7 ypc LJH - 2-19, 9.5 ypc Ehlinger - 12-51, 4.3 ypc 1TD Season Average Watson - 30-126, 4.2 ypc Ingram - 16-101, 6.3 ypc Young - 11-68, 6.2 ypc Ehlinger - 19-81, 4.3 ypc
  8. I've been working and haven't been able to update this but here is. A few trends I see emerging, one good and two bad. 1 - Our offense, especially our rushing attack, is immensely better than anything we had last year. 2 - Our rushing defense is bad, and this is a huge problem for a Herman/Beck/Urban style offense. 3 - Penalties are a nagging issue that will cost us close games if we can't control it soon. Final Score: W 28-21 First Downs: Texas – 24 Tulsa - 17 Third Down Conversions Texas – 5/12 Tulsa – 3/14 Total Yards: Texas - 478 Tulsa - 353 Passing: Texas – 21-27, 237 yards, 2 TD/0 Int Tulsa - 13-26, 164 yards, 1/2 Rushing: Texas - 47-241, 5.1 ypc Tulsa - 38-189, 5.0 ypc TOP Texas – 34:29 Tulsa – 25:31 Penalties: Texas – 8-65 Tulsa – 6-45
  9. Because the BMDs are even bigger whiny babies than we are and they have something that gets CDC to pay attention to them.
  10. E Rod and Kerstetter should be pretty good inside. Cosmi at RT I guess.
  11. Ehlinger for his career has 13 TDs and 9 INTs in 314 pass attempts. His overall pass efficiency rating is 123. Buechele has 28 TDs and 15 INTs in 604 pass attempts. His rating is 132.8. Buechele definitely has a slight edge. But the big difference is in the rushing stats and sacks under the respective starters. Ehlinger has 150 more rush yards on 30 fewer attempts, and double the YPC. As for sacks, it took me a bit of effort but I went game by game 2016-present and got these stats: Ehlinger got sacked 12 times in 7 starts, or 1.7 sacks per start. Buechele got sacked 48 times in 17 starts, or 2.8 sacks per start. The sacks were usually drive enders. While that really didn't set the two apart, I noticed that in the Gilbert/Mattox system Buechele rarely got sacked playing middle-of-the-road teams, however there were some games where he was sacked many times. For example: 4 sacks vs. Kansas in 2016 4 sacks vs. TCU in 2016 5 sacks vs. Maryland in 2017 7 sacks vs. TCU in 2017 Sam has simply never been put on his back that many times. Looking at the overall package, Shane gives us a better passing option and Sam is more of a dual-threat. Take your pick between more sacks given up (usually in passing situations) or more interceptions thrown.
  12. I have never seen - and hope to never see again - the abomination that was our 2017 offensive line.
  13. Statistically, TD/INT ratios get better with each season for college QBs. Shane has played one game as a true soph. He's going to make mistakes and throw untimely INTs. Honestly I blame the coaches. A) we shouldn't have been in that situation. B) on 3rd and 10 in a 4-down situation with time to play, Sam didn't understand he didn't have to win the game with each throw. And C) The best playmakers were not in the game.
  14. I was biased against Strong from the get-go. I mentioned it on the other site, but I have a cousin that coaches a state champ HS team in Kentucky and I asked him his thoughts on Strong while he was at Louisville. To my shock he had nothing good to say. I know some other coaches in KY and TX and the ones that knew anything about him said similar things. When Strong came and got a chilly reception from Texas HS coaches, Shaggy unloaded on the 'entitled' 'bitchy' 'needy' HS coaches running down a good man. But I knew some good men/coaches that didn't like him and also didn't think he was any good. But online message boards aren't known for moderation. There was also the charge of racism Strong leveled against UF when they passed him over. That was pretty crappy. Also, the word was that he recruited Bridgewater to play for him at UL after Shannon was fired at Miami to play for a black coach. That was just the initial phase. Then Strong took a mediocre team and made them worse. We were lucky to make the Texas bowl, and got our asses kicked. Charlie was a terrible gameday coach, was awful at making adjustments on the fly, had zero control of his players, and every game he just scowled and paced the sidelines. His pressers showed that he had no idea what was happening on the field - he messed up names, didn't know who was playing when - it was a shambles, and it lasted for 3 years. Yet people supported him and many were heartbroken when he lost at Kansas all but ending what looked like a certain bowl eligible season. With Tom I knew nothing about him. Clean slate. People from Houston thought he was a lunatic and had strong opinions about him, but there were three qualities I saw in him that I liked: his perfectionism, his attention to detail, and his work ethic. The coaches I asked about him didn't know him personally but said he was energetic and acknowledged the amount of hype around him. Even coaches aren't immune from that type of stuff in their own profession. I gave him a pass year one. He made some mistakes. The offense was anemic. But we did make a bowl game and pulled off an upset win. The Maryland game was a waste. I put most of it on Tom. We were unprepared, played tight, didn't stick with what worked, and let Maryland play to all of their strengths. That doesn't give me a lot of hope for the future. But based on his record so far and the qualities I believed I saw in him at first I am willing to give him some more rope. But if year two doesn't get better quickly, and if Tom can't provide better answers than he did after the game, he's a dud.
  15. Sam got sacked once in 39 attempts. Watch that video and honestly assess how many times Shane would have been sacked. I say about 6 times. Shane is a career 62% passer. Sam is 57%. I wouldn't trade more sacks for a +5% completion rate.
  16. No but it's got a unique set of challenges. For example, note the lack of any scandal coming out of Alabama, or LSU, or Florida prior to Urban's departure. Look at how Ohio State and Penn State have weathered their scandals. All of those schools close ranks around issues and their conferences and the political machinery of their states gives them a nice assist. The ACC is mostly the same. The Big 12 eats its own. It dates back to the SWC/Big 8 days and the ugly scandals that rocked the SWC in the 80s and 90s - and the resentment that some schools snitched (UT) and some got away with it (OU) while others were hit hard by sanctions. When the Big 12 formed it brought that distrust and simmering anger with it, and added a bitter Nebraska to the mix. None of the Big 12 schools trust each other and all constantly hawk each other for a whiff of scandal and pounce when they find it. This is exacerbated by the ugly Texas-aggy rivalry - not to mention Baylor, TTU, TCU, Houston - that has spilled over into more than just athletics. While SEC schools unofficially allow paying recruits with benefits and even cash, a Big 12 school that tried it would find no shortage of whistleblowers running to the media. Remember Phil Fulmer and Alabama? Big 12 is all Fulmers and no Alabamas. And this is to say nothing of PEDs. I don't have any hidden evidence or first-hand accounts to produce here. But have you noticed how some schools have monster athletes up and down the roster that can't be explained merely by recruiting? Here's a nifty article about it: http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/8765531/steroids-loom-major-college-football-report-says Combine that with the toxic environment at Texas where even the boosters hate and jockey with each other for power, and you have a maelstrom of disorder that's impossible to master and difficult to deal with. It requires a politician's skill as well as coaching chops. That's probably why Mack did so well. Not to say Texas will never be great again. It's just going to take a coach with some special skills and a little bit of time. If nothing else, I believe Herman will get the roster ready for the next coach. At the moment that is our biggest problem. /lengthy lunch break shitter post/rant
  17. Well then you guys are total fools. Porter was in at RB. Because we needed a veteran. /sarcasm
  18. There's only one coach right now who is a) experienced enough to handle the pressure of a program like Texas, b) had success everywhere he's been including turning around a couple of wrecks, c) young enough to be dynamic and coach for a long time but old enough to be a known quantity. That man is Rich Franklin. I don't recommend him. But there it is.
  19. This was just the football part. There was also Garrido, Barnes, Plonsky, and the Powers/Hall/Cigarroa/BOR debacle.
  20. When the safety gets a tackle assist at the LOS and he wasn't blitzing, you're going too slow. And Vahe got destroyed right there. Cripes.
  21. I think the development is coming. It's not a one year deal and historically when coaches have a quick turn around, it's because there is raw material to work with. Mack left Charlie an unbalanced*, mediocre roster with some talent on the DL and at RB. Charlie left Tom an unbalanced, mediocre roster with some talent at LB and CW55. The turnover has also caused some talented players to punch out early and inhibited buy-in. It's pretty obvious we don't have a lot of team speed. We're doing well at RB and at DB, but beyond that pickings are pretty slim. Here's what I think is our biggest shortcoming: DL. Mack understood the importance of DL recruiting and in all his years we never had a problem with our front 4. Elite talent there covers up a lot of blemishes in the college game. But the last good Mack D lineman left after Charlie's first year and we haven't had an elite D line since. Herman needs to start there. You can't hope for an elite program in college without an elite defensive front.
  22. Because we're slow. Ingram is maybe the only guy on our team with some real playmaking ability. The fact he disappeared after the 2nd Q isn't a recruiting issue, however.
  23. Why the anti-Herman bias, and why the support for Strong even in year 3? The reasons you gave for disliking him could all be applied to Charlie as well, and Charlie had the worst record in Longhorn football history.
  24. You're talking about the Narrative, not specifics. Yes Herman's hype machine crashed and burned once again and it was an embarrassment. But the team improved. It should have been obvious but I gave some examples a few posts above.
×
×
  • Create New...