Big 12 Conference Rankings - Take Two

by Seth C on May 15, 2008 9:28 PM CDT in Football

This morning's post caused a little bit of controversy and Mocking the Draft's Matt Miller responded to some of my and your questions regarding the Big 12 Conference rankings. I loves me some discussion, so here we go. I thought it would be a great way to kick off a weekend (do I know how to party, or what?) and ask you how you would rank them. Let's take the offensive unit rankings first and go from there. I'll start. Leave your rankings in the comments section:

Backfield
1. Oklahoma
2. Missouri
3. Texas
Rational: OU is perhaps the most balanced scoring team in the Big 12, and there's a lot of talented running backs in their stable (Murray and Brown). Missouri has shown that they are an offensive force to be reckoned with. Daniel and Jimmy Jackson are talented (we should know). I'm not convinced that McCoy will return to his freshman success, but there are a lot of talented runners who were waiting behind Charles. Besides, who else are you going to put at this spot? There aren't a lot of options and I don't think that the Aggies will turn it around that quickly, especially behind a very young offensive line.
Receivers
1. Texas Tech
2. Missouri
3. Kansas
Rational: I think Texas Tech deserves the top spot just because of Mr. Crabtree, but including Morris, T. Walker, Britton, etc., there's just a lot of talent. I was close to putting Missouri at the top spot because Maclin supremely gifted as well, plus Missouri has Coffman as a completely different threat. I was also pretty torn with this 3rd spot, but went with Kansas because they've got a pretty good QB and they return quite a bit of their receiving corp (Fields, Briscoe, and Meier).
Offensive Line
1. Oklahoma
2. Texas Tech
3. Texas
Rational: OU returns a ton of talented players and they do it every year. For a team that passes as much as Tech Tech, they only gave up 18 sacks for the year and would imagine that Potts gave up a few of those in mop-up duty. Texas was awfully young last year on the O-line and that means they are a year better.
Overall Offense
1. Oklahoma
2. Missouri
3. Texas Tech
Rational: First, although Kansas was outstanding offensively last year (1st in the conference in scoring), I need for them to do it one more year before I believe. It's not fair, but it's my rankings. Again, OU is balanced with 34 rushing TD's and 39 passing TD's, that's some pretty good football. Missouri was just a step behind Texas Tech last year, but I thought Missouri was more consistent. I struggled putting Texas Tech 3rd, but until those hiccup games stop, this is where they need to be.

Have at it.

0 recs | Comment 14 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yeah

Those all look good and fair to me.

Now, to distract from the current conversation: the new layout comes tomorrow?

by ayleein on May 15, 2008 10:34 PM CDT 0 recs

Next Friday

Sorry to disappoint. We're almost there.

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on May 15, 2008 10:55 PM CDT up 0 recs

Here goes:

Backfield:

Oklahoma
Mizzou
Tech

I don't think there is any doubt that OU has the most talented backfield in the Big 12. Bradford is a great QB and they have talented RB's galore. Mizzou has Daniel (who is probably the conferences best QB) and some other good RB's even with the loss of Temple. Tech gets the #3 spot because of Graham Harrell. Tech doesn't have a great RB (yet) and doesn't even attempt to run the ball much, but due to the fact that Harrell is so good, they get the #3 spot. If the category was running backs....Tech might be in the lower half of the conference.

Recievers:

Tech
Texas
Mizzou

Tech is the obvious choice here. Crabtree was leaps and bounds better than the 2nd best WR in the country last year. He returns as well as 2 of the 3 other starters from a year ago. Detron Lewis steps in for Amendola, and this may even be an upgrade. The fact is, Tech has a 2-deep that is absolutely incredible. Some of the 2nd string players on this squad would start for most teams in the Big 12. Texas gets spot #2 becuase they reload with more talent than anyone in the nation year in and year out. They may have lost Sweed and Pittman, but they have 4 and 5 star kids waiting for their chance to step in and play. Texas gets #2 based on their talent levels. Mizzou gets #3 because they have Coffman and Maclin. Although I am not too impressed with Maclin as a receiver (as opposed to a returner), he is a playmaker and a great football player.

Offensive Line:

Tech
Oklahoma
Texas

Tech returns every starter from last year that only gave up 18 sacks all year. As much as Tech throws the football, that is freaking impressive. Tech returns some very talented players who will have a chance to play in the NFL after this year. Oklahoma is stacked with talent on the offensive line, and they are probably actually a tie with Tech for first (except that I am a little Tech biased). Texas gets #3 because they also have tons of talent. Texas continually puts their OL in the NFL and their current squad will be no different.

Overall Offense:

Oklahoma
Tech
Mizzou

Oklahoma is #1, because they are so balanced. They don't have a great passing game, but their impressive running game more than makes up for it. Tech is #2. If Tech could run the ball even a little bit, they would be my #1 choice. I look for Tech to place a little more emphasis on the running game this season. Lets be honest though, Tech's passing game is incredible and there are few teams in the nation that could actually "stop" the offense. Mizzou gets #3. Chase Daniel is a great leader, and Mizzou has turned into a very impressive offensive power. They have playmakers and are getting very talented. Mizzou runs the spread how I want Tech to start running it.....with a competent running game.

liquidsmoke

by liquidsmoke on May 15, 2008 11:00 PM CDT 0 recs

We're pretty

close on most of this. BTW, I'm still amazed how much better the South is than the North and I'm still questioning myself as to why I didn't include Kansas in the overall offense category. If they do it again this year, I'm a believer (7th in 2006 and 10th in 2005).

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on May 15, 2008 11:28 PM CDT up 0 recs

I think the backfield

is a stretch, I like your overall offense ranking more, though. Arguing that Texas Tech will finish 3rd in offense in the Big 12 next season is really battling history. It would be UNUSUAL if we finished below 1st. We've been doing this every season without question since Kingsbury; Missouri and Oklahoma are great offenses, but we return as many starters as either of those units, led the Big 12 in YPG (and Oklahoma by nearly 100 yards per game) and were 3rd in scoring, behind only Kansas and Oklahoma, and we outgained them substantially. We've led the Big 12 in yards in:

2007
2006
2004
2003
2002

Were 2nd to National Champion Texas in 2005 by... .6 YPG. If you are going by yards, there can be no doubt that Texas Tech is and has been the most productive offense in the Big 12.

Points? Have not fallen below 3rd from 2002-2007.

My homer alarm doesn't go off at all when I claim Texas Tech as the best offense overall heading into 2008, no question whatsoever. I'd make the same claim against the NCAA overall. I'd go to that battle confident that the statistics back up such claims, as well. Tech is, quite simply, the best offense in the NCAA.

Since 2002 nationally in yards per game we were:

2nd
1st (blew away the field)
5th
4th
7th
2nd

The only other school that even comes close is Hawaii, and they had a (relatively) quiet 2004-2005. And they don't play in the Big 12 south, annually facing strong defenses like Texas and OU.

Once more, I repeat, I have zero problem claiming with a straight face, feeling perfectly objective in doing so, that Texas Tech has the number one offense in the country on any given year. When we return 10 starters and the best WR in the country, all our offensive linemen, and Graham Harrell? Give me this offense over Missouri or Oklahoma all day, everyday.

by Red Blooded on May 16, 2008 10:48 AM CDT up 0 recs

I will probably

re-arrange the deck chairs on overall offense and I tend to agree with you, that nationally, the offense is great, but in conference play, TT was the 7th highest scoring team in the Big 12 (behind Missouri, Kansas, K-State, Texas, OSU and OU). I fully admit that my thinking is a little off, because I do tend to agree with you in that nationally Texas Tech has the best offense, but within the realm of the Big 12, I thought Texas Tech had a down year. In 2006 and 2005 Texas Tech was pretty good 3rd and 2nd in the conference respectively.

The difference for me is if we can get more out of the running game, even if it's 20 to 30 yards more a game. That's the difference for me and perhaps the difference than in past years. Last year Texas Tech rushed for a league low 46.9 yards a game rushing (again, all of this is in conference), while in 2006 - 67.9 yards per game and in 2005 - 85.5 yards per game (see links above).

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on May 17, 2008 6:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

Naw...

Tech was the 7th highest scoring team... in the nation last year. 3rd in the Big 12. Source on national ranking, source on Big 12. We had less points overall than Missouri, but they had 14 games to do so, we only had 13. In PPG we were 3rd. Texas, K-State, and OSU all scored fewer points overall, and fewer points per game. Only Kansas and Oklahoma scored more per game and per the entire season.

On the rushing game point, no argument here. Our best year offensively was 2003, and we were averaging over 100 YPG. I miss that. Henderson was averaging 6 YPC, Johnnie Mack was at 7.3.

by Red Blooded on May 17, 2008 9:38 AM CDT up 0 recs

Oh I see...

Counting only conference games...

Yea, that's a good stat about the points, but I'd note we were first in the conference in yards, yards per play, etc.

by Red Blooded on May 17, 2008 5:06 PM CDT up 0 recs

Yes, non-conference

play is great, scoring points, at will. and racking up the yards, but in conference play there was a slight struggle to score points, and link it directly to a consistent running game. If 1 of the 4 RB's show up and get yardage consistently (or all 4 of them) then hands-down, Texas Tech is the best offense in the conference.

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on May 18, 2008 6:10 AM CDT up 0 recs

Where are his comments?

I am trying to find Miller's responses on from all of the e-mails I/we sent him yesterday. Can you post them tomorrow?

by williehop on May 15, 2008 11:09 PM CDT 0 recs

I was

referring to the 2nd link above where he discusses the rankings on Mocking the Draft. I actually don't have any of the emails from him, but I would imagine that he tried to address them in the link above.

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on May 15, 2008 11:25 PM CDT up 0 recs

Those rankings

look pretty good to me. I hope that at the end of the year we can say that Tech's backfield was at least 4th or 5th in the Big 12. Even that kind of production from the backfield would be wonderful for this team! I agree on thinking the Kansas offense is still a little suspect. Let's wait and see how they do when they play 2 or 3 really talented teams right in a row and get beat up a little bit.

by rbiggers on May 16, 2008 8:56 AM CDT 0 recs

I agree

I can't see much wrong with your rankings.

I think that I'd put Texas A&M's backfield over UT's because Goodson and McGee are probably the two most underused talents in college football right now. I don't think the offense is going to be great, but I do think that it will show flashes thanks to the backfield.

I would like to put someone in over UT's offensive line because, while they didn't graduate anyone, they were dreadful last year. But I honestly can't think of another team in the big XII that'll be better. Kansas and Missouri both lost linemen and no other team really had a dominating line to speak of.

by kayakyakr on May 16, 2008 4:56 PM CDT 0 recs

I love Goodson

I think he's just waiting to break-out, but I'm not sold that McGee is going to be able to get it done in the WCO. Until I see how it's going to play out, then I'm not sure they deserve to be in the top 3.

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on May 18, 2008 6:12 AM CDT up 0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

New FanPost All FanPosts

Double-T Nation: An SB Nation Community

Login Bar

Network Bar

Double-T Nation

An unofficial Texas Tech Red Raiders blog