-
Posts
3666 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by Doc Daneeka
-
-
Just now, longhornmatt said:
Mitchell should have done a lot more on that play, but I’m not sure why we’re running out of a tight formation with WRs in the game on 4 and 1. Having players in the game who are poor blockers, and not lining them up wide enough to take their defender out of the play, but still leaving just enough gap for their defender to get inside leverage on them, is pretty much the worst formation possible for a short yardage run. There is a reason most jumbo formations don’t have slot WRs as part of the plan.
It’s not like someone needed to stone the guy coming off the edge to allow the play to work, though. If either Helm or Mitchell just acts as a speed bump, it’s first and 10.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:
Within the constraints imposed by the color and the school abbreviation as the logo, that’s a solid look. It’s a shame a decent Cowboy logo never took hold on the helmets, but the the straightforward pants and numbers along with the decent stripes and orange facemask make this a good look for them, imo.
-
1 minute ago, Nicole44 said:
Sorry I type fast bc was dealing with a time constraint. I’m not going to say I was misunderstood and I get what you and other posters have said requiring me. I do not believe a HC can be successful calling plays and winning elite signature games and CFP type stuff. I’d feel better if he were UP in the booth if he wants to call plays. That’s me. I’d be ecstatic if he hired a young up and coming wizard on OC and handled the HC thing. I see problems in game and again just my opinion with the two talented RBs we had last year we should have had a better record or at least 2 more wins. My opinion. If Sark wants to do both sit in the booth so he can see everything. I don’t think my opinion is out of line with what other criticisms of Sark have been. As far as Quinn I think yes, many things can be tweaked, but can Sark play to QE’s stengths right now?
I’d prefer that Sarkisian either get someone basically to run the sideline as game day head coach or, less optimally, get an OC. His strength is his offensive approach, imo, and handing that off doesn’t seem like a net win.
An offense is going to have a hard time operating full time like it’s constrained by the end line as in red zone offense. The defense needs to be attacked at all three levels, sideline to sideline, imo. Even if the offense can operate super efficiently up to the intermediate level, the inability to stretch the defense will ultimately undo it. The question isn’t getting by without the deep ball, it’s how to give Ewers a better chance to make those connections. I feel like something along the line of posts and post corners or something that doesn’t have the sideline as a constraint would work better, but if I knew WTF would work, I’d be cashing my fat checks and prepping my team for its game this weekend.
2 minutes ago, crash_davis said:I'm not sure if Sark tweaked anything.
Fair enough. Sarkisian is a liar on top of being incompetent, then.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:
He can’t be both HC/OC (basically it’s like Andy Reid and a handful of others) plus he cannot work with what he has on hand. He needs to have his team built perfectly. If he watches the tape from Rice he will see what he needs to do to play to QE’s strengths and will scheme around it. The problem is Sark is incredibly stubborn and stubborn people even if moderately successful tend to do the same thing over and over expecting different results. Maybe in practice it looks different but we’ve seen what happens when the pocket collapses. We see what happens when Sark gets locked into his game plan and squats like he’s popping a hernia out his asshole and can’t make adjustments. We have seen it. Hopefully he won’t be the impediment Saturday.
He/they tweaked at halftime and Texas scored three straight TDs coming out from halftime. Or no?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, gmr548 said:
What, pray tell, gives you the impression this plan will survive any contact with reality whatsoever?The myriad examples of teams repeatedly gashing Alabama for 7-8 running yards a pop on first down, obviously.
-
Just now, statsman said:
Yormark’s comment that “you speak to your crowd and you have fun”
Lots of sports are fun. Lots of sports, amateur and professional, have commissioners. This is the only case in memory where a commissioner rooted for a team against another in his conference.
If it’s ok, because he was just having fun, why are the ISU players held out for gambling? Weren’t they just having fun?Remember all the times he had fun in support of Texas?
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Wilcox Cummingtonite said:
RPO/misdirection.
See the “O” part there implies a pass is possible. We apparently don’t want to risk an incompletion on first down. That takes away the “P” and the “O.”
-
1
-
-
Just now, gofuckyourself said:
One word:
Fumblerooski.
Great. Hopefully Saban doesn’t have anyone reading this board.
-
34 minutes ago, horn4life said:
There is one thing that will help Ewers and the team. Run the damn Ball!!!!!
Tossing incompletes on first down, whether they are bombs or 5 yard drops, puts the team behind the chains. Run the damn ball effectively and all of a sudden you get a few looks at 2nd and 2-3.
I agree. Running the ball effectively is much better than incompletions on first down. With that established, what’s the approach for running effectively on first down against good teams who know you’re going to run on first down so that you don’t get behind the chains with an incompletion?
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:
If we do beat Bama I can see a low scoring defensive type struggle. All Quinn needs to do is protect the ball which he did fairly well against Rice. Since we are throwing around stats and QBR and 49-0 (which will always be glorious even if OU was shell shocked and replaced their players with holograms—-a win is a win especially over the land thieves) and how well Quinn played v Bama before he was injured. But the rest of the season was an inconsistent mess for the most part looking at his play. I mean again a win is a win and we thumped Kansas but look at Quinn’s stats below. Maybe he wasn’t ready/healed enough or whatever from his injury. Maybe who cares because Bijan did his thing but…a win is a win and we thumped them running and didn’t really need to throw but when he did throw
Yeah. Protect the ball. Don’t give Alabama short fields or defensive scores. Make them earn every yard and point against Texas’ defense. If you can’t hit the long ball — please, hit the damned long ball — at least spot the intermediate throws so your guys can run after the catch. And protect the ball.
I don’t think the game will be especially close. Guessing 10+ one way or the other. Ideally, Texas controls Milroe on the ground and eats him up in the passing game and comes out ready to get to 3-0 against Tech-killer Wyoming.
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, 52-80 said:
Is a 3pt basketball shot at a lower completion rate better than 2pt basket a higher rate? (we know, we know, E.V.)
Whether you think such a measure has value is a subject judgement. The measurement is the measurement, and let the people have it. By the way, they track WR YAC too.
Which is why you’ll see I wrote, “I happen to think…” not “It is a fact that…”
And, yeah, if we’re going to talk about EV, a good short pass that maximizes the play looks a lot better than a poor longer one that minimizes it.
-
Just now, Rimbo said:
Stop it! STOP IT! Stop hoping for OU to win games! ANY games!
what the hell is wrong with you people
I specifically said I wasn’t, though.
-
I can’t affirmatively wish for it, but a Texas vs. OU championship game — maybe through some other teams’ ineligibility or something — would be nice farewell to the conference and it’s been a while since Texas beat OU twice in one season.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Porterhouse said:
Yeah I understood his initial point, or so I thought, after rereading. But it was clear preseason he was anti-PK and at this point it’s funny watching him dig his heels in. People see what they want to see, and I have a totally different view of ‘22.
If the point is solely, Sark will need a scapegoat if we produce similar season results then ok. I’ll disagree, and say no he’ll look for offensive help, but to go back and display revisionist history isn’t worth responding to.
I get that coaches want scapegoats to save themselves. If I’m in charge and a struggling coach’s proposed solution is to can the guy with a borderline top ten defense, I’m going to suggest that that’s not an acceptable solution.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Tex Long said:
Bama loss, yes, I say was on the D.JFC, why didn’t someone tell me I was dealing with someone with blunt head trauma.
-
5
-
-
5 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:
The wife has been adamant all last year and in the Rice game this year that since he got injured last year he’s played scared. Sure looks that way.
Wasn’t OU after he got hurt?
-
5 minutes ago, Tex Long said:
Sorry, you seem to be opining that the D was not dog shit last year. Three of the four season losses were on the D. Is that not dog shit, or at least owl shit?
I’m not opining it. I’m stating it as fact.
DFEI rankings [for] Texas:
'22: 11th
No, that’s not dog shit.
You calling TCU or Alabama a loss due to the defense?
-
3
-
-
Just now, Tex Long said:
Late to the show, you are. Read the original statement, it's conditional, not absolute.
Would you be content with owl shit instead of dog shit?
“Again” implies a repeat which implies an absolute occurrence in the past.
-
1 minute ago, Tex Long said:
Some of your co-surlys apparently believe that the D was great last year and can only be better. That seems to coincide with the notion of all losses being caused solely by Sark and his O. Or not.
You said “dog shit again” so that’s a pretty disingenuous reframing of the discussion.
-
Just now, Tex Long said:
You've answered your own question. Now you need a statistic that differentiates between "crappy" and "spot-on". Let's see it.
No, the question was for you. If you want to see passing yardage differentiated between pre- and post-catch yardage, you must think that distinction is somehow valuable when, as you just implied, it really doesn’t speak to the value of the QB’s throw at all.
I happen to believe that a QB whose throws better support YAC — think Montana and Young — are more valuable whether the play was a 15 yard pass and 40 yard run or not. The distinction isn’t an inherently valuable one.
-
3 minutes ago, Tex Long said:
Is 0/15 better or worse than 15/0? Is a short toss better or worse than a handoff?
An on-target pass which maximizes the play’s potential is a better pass than an off-target one which limits it.
Whether a short toss is better or worse than a handoff depends on how the two are executed. The one Ewers threw on the first 4th down was worse. The one he threw on the first TD was better.
Now, if your view and your preferred stat arrangement: Would a spot-on swing pass caught at the line of scrimmage and run for 15 yards be better, worse, or the same as a crappy out pass for 15 yards that required the receiver to stop and be tackled at the spot rather than complete the YAC that was available?
-
16 minutes ago, Tex Long said:
I'd like to see passing yards split into pass yards and run yards. We had a TD that went in the books as a 37-yard pass, which would be more like -3 passing and +40 running.
Would a spot-on swing pass caught at the line of scrimmage and run for 15 yards be better, worse, or the same as a crappy out pass for 15 yards that required the receiver to stop and be tackled at the spot rather than complete the YAC that was available?
-
Just now, Tex Long said:
You're good with "pretty strong" defense, are you? That would explain some things.
You didn’t answer the question. Of course.
You’ve already been shown where Texas’ defense ranked last season. But, sure, curl up in a ball and moan about what might happen, but hasn’t happened to one of his experienced defenses yet. Maybe it will make you feel better.
-
3 minutes ago, Tex Long said:
Gettin
I can't tell whether you're trolling, or that calling you a fucking dumbass was actually too light. The original statement which has had you foaming at the mouth began with the words "Depending on performance" which I think almost every other surly reader understood to be fairly similar to "If the D looks like warmed-over dog shit again and we continue to struggle because PK and his intrepid band of would-be first-rounders are unable to get off the field on 3rd downs..."
Were that performance to ensue this season, and be a leading factor to the 8-5 (or worse), Sark absolutely would want to dump PK, and rightly so.
Frankly, I don't expect that to happen, but it is not in fact guaranteed so.
Where are you getting “dog shit again” or “we continue to struggle…”?
The defense has been pretty strong, though imperfect like every other one, since year one. Which DC whose guys have never had a bad day would you be looking to bring in?
-
1
-
Someone fucked up a block, we can’t figure out who
in Football
Posted
That’s not how speed bumps work, though. I’m not privy to what the call was or should have been, so I’m not saying who should’ve had the block. I’m just saying it didn’t need to be a jumbo package to work.