Post Game Thoughts / Write Ups Go Here
by KWashburn on Sep 6, 2010 10:38 AM CDT
Email
PrintAlright, I'll admit that I've seen way worse openers out of Tech before. Waaaaay worse. It really wasn't that bad of an opener to begin with. I've compiled a list of thoughts and curse words for us to mull over. I'd like to NOT compare Tuberville to Leach at this point. I realize Leach wouldn't have let off the gas and kept his foot on their collective throats, but that doesn't seem to be Tuberville's style.
Special Teams - First of all, we all need to thank our lucky stars that we have Ben McRoy. If it wasn't for his ability to move his legs at a light speed pace, this game could have turned out way differently. Not only was he pushed off by the return man, he caught back up and made the play. That resulted in our defense making a much needed stop. All in all, the special teams unit needs a lot of work. Coverage was terrible and there wasn't a lot of tackling going on that I could see / hear.
Offense - I feel like Potts looked a lot more relaxed and confident in the pocket. His ability to march the team forward seemed more apparent than the 2009 season. Deer in the headlights look wasn't there yesterday, thank you Tom Cruise. A majority of the passes thrown could have used a little more touch. Some of them were catchable and some weren't. The receiving corp was missing a few playmakers yesterday. Torres was out and Lewis missed a little bit of the game for some reason I'm not aware of. There were quite a few dropped passes that should have been caught. It seems we are full of possesion receivers but nobody is able to get YAC. That's kind of important in this offense, in the grand scheme of things. O-Line is suspect to say the least. I miss Reed and Vasquez even more now than ever, but they're not here. Chris Olsen at RT doesn't seem like it was the best idea at this point. I feel like he was getting bull rushed more often than not and having a hard time getting infront of the defender and throwin an arm bar out there hoping for the best. As a fan, I'd like to know why Terry McDaniel was pulled from LT and put in as a reserve. The running game could have been opened up more had the O-Line opened up a few lanes. Lot's of our running plays where made after the fact, trying to find a lane and making a few yards after contact. That's workable with SMU, not workable against the likes of Texas, OU, and A&M. I give the offense a B+ for our first outing.
Defense - The Draw. If we as a fanbase learned anything last year, it was that the draw is our worst enemy. That seems to be the case still. Brain Duncan and Sam Fehoko made a case to be a significant threat to the opposing offense. Duncan's first quick step is obvious to me know. Wherever he lined up, he seemed to get significant penetration and his hand placement was pretty damn good. Fehoko is no slouch either. He made a few good plays and provided quite a bit of pressure. In the trenches we did well as far as closing the gap and collapsing the pocket. The problem was getting dececnt penetration on the QB. While we had their front 5 occupied, we never seemed to send in the dogs to rip things apart. Secondary - still bend don't break. Man to man coverage makes me want to quit drinking completely. While we had quite a few good plays in the secondary, we gave up some big ones too. I don't think that will last long. The defense looked salty for the most part. Sans draw.
I believe Acid Reign from the Auburn blog stated that Tuberville teams are always shaky on their first outing. I was curious if this was true. It damn sure is. Starting at Auburn during his innagural season in 1999
Appalachian St. vs. Auburn, September 4, 1999 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
Appalachian St. 0 12 3 0 15
Auburn 7 0 8 7 22
Probably not what you wanted to read but it's the truth. Auburn went on to finish the season with a 5 - 6 Record. If you would like to read about the game go to http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/1999-2000/au01.html
Wyoming vs. Auburn, August 31, 2000 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
Wyoming 7 0 0 14 21
Auburn 14 7 7 7 35
Again, a sketchy start against a "inferior" oppenent. No offense to Wyoming. Auburn would go on to finish the season with a 9 - 4 Record and a loss to Michigan in the Cirus Bowl. If you would like to read about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2000-2001/au01.html
Ball St. vs. Auburn, September 1, 2001 @ Auburn Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
Ball St. 0 0 0 0 0
Auburn 10 14 3 3 30
Not a terrible game, but then again, I don't know how good Ball St. was back then. Auburn would go on to finish with a 7 - 5 Record and a loss to North Carolina in the Peach Bowl. If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2001-2002/au01.html
Auburn vs. USC, September 2, 2002 @ Los Angeles, California
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
Auburn 7 7 0 3 17
USC 7 7 3 7 24
As a Tech fan, I view this as one hell of a season opener. Auburn would go on to finish the season with a 9 - 4 Record and a win against Penn St. in the Capital One Bowl. If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2002-2003/au01.html
USC vs. Auburn, August 30, 2003 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
USC 10 0 6 7 23
Auburn 0 0 0 0 0
Not the best home and home series I've read about. But, Auburn did go on to finish the season with a 8 - 5 record and a win against Wisconsin in the Music City Bowl. If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2003-2004/au01.html
UL Monroe vs. Auburn, September 4, 2004 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
ULM 0 0 0 0 0
Auburn 10 17 14 0 31
Anybody know where Monroe, LA is? That's what I thought. This game kinda butts heads with our theory of shaky openers. If you read the box score, Monroe didn't play that bad of a game yet they couldn't convert in the Red Zone. Auburn would go on to finish the season with a 13 - 0 Record, a SEC Championship, and a win over Virginia Tech in the Sugar Bowl. If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2004-2005/au01.html
Georgia Tech vs. Auburn, September 3, 2005 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
Georgia Tech 10 7 0 6 23
Auburn 0 14 0 0 14
After a stellar performance the year before and sending many players to the NFL draft, Auburn still produced a decent season. Auburn would go on to finish with a 9 - 3 Record and a loss to Wisconsin in the Capital One Bowl. If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2005-2006/au01.html
Washington St. vs. Auburn, September 2, 2006 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
Washington St. 7 0 7 0 14
Auburn 6 13 7 14 40
Almost 300 yards rushing........ That's like us with over 400 yards passing. They seemed to establish the run game later on. If Tech ever has 300 yards rushing there better be about 900 yards passing too. That's ridiculous. Anyway, Auburn would go on to finish the season with an 11 - 2 Record and a win over Nebraska in the Cotton Bowl. (I hate that bowl, with all due respect.) Note Will "Boom Motherf***er" Muschamp was cutting his teeth at this time with Auburn as their defensive coordinator. The base defense at this time was 4 - 3 Cover 2. Sound familiar? If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2006-2007/au01.html
Kansas St. vs. Auburn, September 1, 2007 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
Kansas St. 3 0 10 0 13
Auburn 0 6 3 14 23
I'm starting to hate the idea of field goals. There seems to be a trend with them and Coach Tuberville. Except for our game against SMU. Too soon? Auburn would go on to finish the season with a 9 - 4 Record and a win against Clemson in the Chick-Fil-A Bowl. If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2007-2008/au01.html
UL Monroe vs. Auburn, August 30, 2008 @ Auburn, Alabama
Score by Quarters 1 2 3 4
------------------------- --------------
ULM 0 0 0 0 0
Auburn 14 3 10 7 34
Again, ULM came up with a big goose egg against Auburn. Note that there were 321 rushing yards and 85 passing yards. Whiskey. Tango. Foxtro. Over? That sounds like a backwards Tech game. Aside from the stellar performance in Auburn's first game of the season, the rest of the year wasn't too bueno. Auburn would finish 5 - 7 that year and Tuberville resigned as Head Coach. If you would like to read more about this game, please visit http://auburntigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2008-2009/au01.html
If you follow the score by quarters, my theory doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If you read the game progression it does. I read through a few other games as the season moved on and noticed that Tuberville's team got suprisingly better between Game 1 and Game 2. I'm willing to bet that's the case here. Our coaches haven't been able to evaluate our players in our new scheme at game speed. I'm sure there will be many changes come saturday against UNM. Probably starting with our secondary and blitz packages.
Thoughts?
Wreck Em Tech
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Double-T Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Double-T Nation's writers or editors.
67 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Who Cares?
Who cares what an Auburn fan says about Tubbs’ slow start at Auburn? Who cares about what happened 5 years ago?
Tech won, and we should all be thankful, but no one should comfortable about where our team is now. Yes, it was their first game, but Potts was inconsistent, the receivers had slippery fingers, there was none of the typical YAC that Tech has been so good at, the O-line could not open up any holes for the running game, the D was absent on all delayed draws, and Tubbs slammed the brakes on a successful passing offense just when it got going.
Unless there is drastic improvement – from the players and coaching staff, we’ll be lucky to win 6 games this year.
It was a win, but a dreadful win!
I believe about 2,098 versions of this reply by MM were posted after the UND game last season…and after Baylor…and after Houston…and if you want a good laugh, go over to Crimson and Cream Machine and read over their in-game thread. Wow. They melted down, worse than we did.
This team will be just fine. We weren’t picked by anyone outside of DTN to win more than 8-9 games, and that’s very likely what we’ll get. I know some people here thought 10-12 wins was within reach, but with so much inexperience on defense and the offensive line, that’s just not a realistic target.
For the first game out of the gate, against a bowl team from nine months ago, I think this was okay. I think Tech lost a ton of focus the second they went up 35-14. Was everyone freaking out at that point? No. And this team can do that again, and hold the lead. Remember, Tuberville is still figuring out the character of his players in real-game situations. I am guessing he and the staff was none too pleased with the let down at that point. He’s got to have a chance to get a sense for what drives the guys in game situations, both good and bad. That comes with time and more games.
I’m not making excuses for some of the sloppy play, but I also think credit needs to be given with some heads up defense on the INTs and some really sweet drives to close the first half and open the second. We weren’t a machine out there, but we weren’t a disaster either. And for the first time in a long time, penalties by Tech didn’t extend drives and/or kill drives with regularity.
There WERE some bright spots…enough to win.
Easy with the sunshine pumping.
You don’t have to care about it, I just thought it would be something interesting to look into. By trending all the games, hell, between the first and second games of the season, there was significant improvement in all aspects of the game. Tubbs, while at Auburn, did a good job coaching the team between Saturdays.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
It always cracks me up, these pessimists...
I agree that this is interesting Kwash.
But let me get back to the pessimists… So if you say basically “We weren’t all that bad. We need to get better, but there were some good things. Some things were bad, but other things were better than we thought. We need to improve”
The pessimist replies, “Hold on a minute there sunshine! There were a few good things, but if we play like that all year, we’ll be 6-6! (as if anyone is saying we should play like the first game with a new coach all year). We better get our s*!t together or we will be the suckasses of the Big 12! Sure, there were some good things, and everything wasn’t bad, but we need to get better!”
Like someone said earlier (I think it was Tech92) these same folks say the same junk at the beginning of every year, as if because the team hasn’t peaked in the first week of September with a new scheme, a new coach, a new system, etc. that we are bound for the bottom of the Big12. Double-sheesh.
I was basically watching a different game then some of these people. I had read all the press reports trashing Tech and basically saying that this was a rebuilding year and that Tech had lost too many important parts. I had read all the head-scratching and prognosticating about how it was impossible to know how Tech would do. So I wasn’t expecting a blowout – nor was I expecting us to click on all cylinders out of the gate. I figured we’d win, and maybe by a lot, but probably by a touchdown or two. I hoped to see some good stops and turnovers on defense, and I hoped Potts wouldn’t throw 3 pick-sixes and get his cranium stoved in.
I was pretty happy.
Disclaimer: There were some good things and some bad things. We need to improve. Some things were weak. If we play like this all year, we’ll all grow mold in our crotches and we’ll need to be deloused and our houses will likely cave in. But other than that, things looked pretty good to me.
Antiswarm OUT
So in effect, the pessimist gets pissed off at anyone saying things are going to be alright, then says the same thing “there were some good things and some bad things and we need to get better”.
My message to all pessimists (oh, and their opinions are valuable…eyeroll) if you find anyone anywhere saying that Tech is exactly where they need to be, they’ve peaked, and they are going to kick everyone’s ass this year playing exactly like they played against SMU, please feel free to excoriate them. However, I haven’t read anyone saying that at all. Sheesh.
... never punt
...
I dunno man I think you are being a bit over critical with the 6 wins prediction… Our D was waaay better than past years D, we gave up one TRUE drive for a TD, the rest of the time we were stout, I mean we had 3 picks, a fumble rec, and 5 sacks… I think those are some pretty good Defensive aspects to look at, we haven’t been that active on D since the Spike days.
But I agree on the slippery fingers and pots inconsistencies these things need to improve, and will I think
by Vassago77379 on Sep 6, 2010 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions
Just what if, and I know this is crazy, but what if it’s Brown calling those plays and not Tuberville? Does your opinion of Tuberville change?
Telling me that no one should be comfortable with yesterday’s win doesn’t sit right with me. Are there things to work on? Sure, but dreadful seems like an awfully pessimistic adjective. And there were some pretty good YAC from C. Douglas, but when SMU drops 7 or 8 into coverage, you’re not going to get a bunch of YAC.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Tubbs is the coach!
Of course Brown was calling the plays – he’s the O-coordinator. But this is Tubbs’ team!
SMU was not dropping 7 or 8 guys back consistently, though when they did we never threw underneath. Tech has never really been a good deep passing team, they throw dinks and dunks for 3 – 7 yards and turn a short pass into a 25 yard gain because of YAC.
Yesterday, we got the dinks and dunks, but not the YAC. Why, because Tech seemed committed to the run. SMU stayed home, and was there for the tackle. It would have been nice to run a few delayed draws when only 3 men rushed, but we tried a power game that did not work.
Tell me yesterday’s D was better than the D at Nebraska last year. It wasn’t. Tell me yesterday’s offense was better than our bowl game last year. It wasn’t.
Tubbs has the talent and the players to continue with an exciting and prolific O. Stick to it! I’m all for an improved D.
All I’m saying is I’d rather have last year’s team ready to face Texas in game 3 than this year’s team. And anyone who thinks otherwise has drunk too much of the Tubbs kool-aid!
We were at our best on nthe drive before the 1st half ended. That was vintage Tech. Tubbs went to great lengths to distance his “brand” from that.
I guess
if you want to cherry pick the best performances (Nebraska on defense and the bowl game on offense) then there’s no way I can argue with you. I thought the defense was pretty good and limited SMU, a team that averaged 280 yards passing to 218 and a completion percentage of 55%. That’s pretty good, but if you don’t want to acknowledge that, that’s okay. I did see SMU rush 4 90% of the time. Maybe I need to go back and watch the tape. The run blocking wasn’t good, and I’ve acknowledged that, but it’s as if you saw nothing positive from the game. I just can’t live that way.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I'm a realist!
Yes, we won, that’s good – that’s positive! But please tell me you’re not satisfied! Please tell me the founder of Double T Nation – Where pirates, gamblers and others of ill repute are welcome – is so soft that no matter what Tech does it’s good.
This was not the way Leach played football. This was the way Tubbs played football, and while we won, it lacked excitement, it lacked energy, and it lacked the Tech trademark.
Tech, for the first time in 10 years, looked pedestrian. It looked like 100 other NCAA teams, but certainly it did not look like the Tech team we called “ours”!
It’s early, and I’m being very critical, but except for 2 possessions, this is not the team I am used to watching.
Can’t we agree on that???
I don't think I'm soft, but I do think I'm trying to be fair.
But if you think I’m being soft for trying to point out that there were positives and negatives then so be it. I’d be willing to guess that this team has looked pedestrian in 10 years with Leach at the helm. There hasn’t been an undefeated season at Texas Tech so no coach has been perfect. Leach had his stinkers:
http://www.doubletnation.com/2008/7/28/579586/bad-losses
I just think that it’s not truthful to say that Leach didn’t have his bad games too.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
The uniforms tell it all!
I agree – Leach had many poor games, and often times, as we all know, he’d go for it on 4th when we all knew it was a critical mistake.
My concern is that we have placed a governor on our offensive machine, and it has been slowed. Under Leach, Tech could score from any where on the field. With Tubbs, i am uncertain if we can do that. We passed for 53 plays and ran for 31 plays, yet barely got 70+ yards rushing.
I want Tubbs to rev this machine up like a NASCAR race, and allow the game and team to determine what we should run offensively.
Under Tubbs at his first home game, we wore red shirts and white pants – a far cry from the Pirate gear. I liked us better as “bad boys”.
It’s way to early to tell, but we may all have to re-learn our O!!!
We Are Doomed
We are doomed to a team in the Tuberville tub . You guys can candy coat it all you want, we all saw how slow and disconnected the offense was. Tubs is disconnected. The offense pattern is pass two time run one, or run two times pass one. That’s how tubbs has been his whole coaching , well admin career . This is why we are doomed. This offense is so boring ! Poor Potts looks like a Pitbull on a chain looking to see if M. Vick gonna beat him with a chain for moving to quick. Thanks Hance ,regents (who hated the real coach) . I can’t wait til trial time, hope they all get what is due to them and coach Leach gets his money.
Quite the judgement from our first game.
As far as your run:pass ratio, there aren’t too many patterns you can get into, except for maybe kicking the ball. Have a little faith.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
Nice work KWash, and I found a new SAT question
Leong is to Potts, as Shipley is to:
a) McCoy
b) Guitar
c) Lyle Long
d) Footbaw
Potts and Leong work well together. It’s almost as if the other receivers are surprised if they get a ball thrown their way. Maybe that’s why they kept dropping them.
It’s only the first game. We still win 9 or 10 this year.
"No bullfights. No gambling. No donkeys. No vanilla extracts. No piñatas. None of that stuff. Straight football. No switchblades."
- Mike Leach
by San Antonio Red Raider on Sep 6, 2010 11:00 AM CDT reply actions
I agree.
and I went with b) guitar. Ha!
I’m willing to bet TTUMAR’s liver that we have stellar improvement by Saturday against UNM.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
Improvement..
I am guessing that stellar improvement is not hard to predict considering that Oregon nearly hung a 100 on UNM…..
How does this outing make you feel about the UT game?
See Kansas St. and Aggie 2009.
Then follow with Tech and Aggie 2009.
Why is everybody kicking me in the balls this morning?
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
No Ball Kicking..
I am just a little worried…I have gotten onver my “sky is falling” feeling. I see the positives in some areas, but I am little concerned at the offensive play calling… and the lack of speed on D except for the secondary, the D line looked average at best and except for Duncan our LB’s looked lost….
I am no expert so I am just throwing this out for discussion…..
Bront Bird confused me a lot. I had no idea what he was doing, but assumed that HE did. I may have been wrong : )
Play calling wasn’t all that unusual to me. The fourth down not withstanding. We threw it more than I expected, to be honest. And if not for some drops, this could have been a very different day for some of us.
I expected more from Whitlock, but maybe he was supposed to just stand and occupy a lineman to let Bird or some other LB through. Who knows.
Whitlock was occupied everydown with at least 2 linemen.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
Then someone else step up....
Use that national championship brain to beat a line double teaming your best lineman
"It's fun to do bad things"- Latarian
by oldschoolraider on Sep 6, 2010 11:35 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
If two guys are occupied on Whitlock
there has to be an opportunity for someone else. Or does one gap responsibility work otherwise.
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
Not entirely sure.
When SMU’s OLine was occupied, we had 6-7 dropped back in man to man coverage. There was nobody to shoot in and kill QB Tequila.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
I surely do not understand football
thanks for the help.
In theory, I like theory, with a double team, there is a gap more open no ? If we are dropping back, all we can do is look at it.
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
Or occupy the gap.
After 28 years I’m learing the “real” terminology instead of pointing and grunting.
I usually wait for somebody smart to do a write up and just agree with what they say.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
OHHHHH
that kind of “occupy the gap”…who knew?
by Damien Franco on Sep 8, 2010 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions
The also depends on if we're rushing 3 or 4.
As much as it pains me to admit it, Beergut has a great write up on the 3-4. God forbid I link to it.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
Beergut is wise,
Boorish, but wise.
"Winning isn't everything"... Bob Knight
by raider realist on Sep 6, 2010 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Bird's game is a puzzle !
I don’t know either, I saw him basically standing still watching at times…and can’t get that out of my thinking…I fear a bias is coming on
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
Drops
Are you talking about drops from SMU’s defense or our offense? The 1st quarter could have been a disaster if the SMU defense could catch. I counted 3 potential INT’s.
I had a similar thought yesterday
but looking over some of the questions today, I wonder who made those calls for those plays?
Potts was looking for Leong first on a number of plays….he clearly was feeling more confident going to him…perhaps because he was getting better separation and perhaps because he was actually catching the football.
Getting away from my analytic: I really liked Leong’s game yesterday…it was fun seeing him make plays
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
Receiving Corp Balance
It didn’t seem like there was much balance distributing the ball to the receivers against SMU. On the 4th and 10 in the second quarter Detron was wide open but Potts made the decision to throw into tight coverage to Leong. I don’t have stats on the targets but Leong had 11 receptions, almost double that of Detron and Franks who had 6 a piece. I also noticed that Batch was only targeted twice. I don’t recall a game in the last three years where the completion stats have been so lopsided towards one receiver. Even during the Crabtree days. He shared receptions with the evil elf and Edward Britton.
In the past our offense was effective because defenses could not key on any specific player. I believe this was a certain coach’s definition of balance. I was under the impression that the new coaching staff shared that philosophy. Maybe not? Or, this could be a sign that Pott’s mind isn’t working quickly enough and he’s not going through all his progressions. I guess time will tell, but this is certainly something to keep an eye on.
There are quite a few comments missing from this thread already....
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
The stunts we were running in the 4th
Were consistent and didn’t produce pressure.
Smew looked like they figured out how to block it.
"It's fun to do bad things"- Latarian
by oldschoolraider on Sep 6, 2010 11:34 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
Defense
I did expect more pressure at the line. I thought Duncan did his job but Bird and others including Witlock seemed out to lunch all day. I saw Langley pressuring on some downs but I was under the impression we would be blitzing more. I think Willis held off the blitz with SMU’s passing attack which makes some sense but I wish we had done it more. Seemed like the defense was confused and off guard most of the day.
"You've got to find your inner pirate" - Mike Leach
The D line....
I think for the most part was just suppose to collapse the pocket and occupy lineman and space……I can definitely see when done correctly( which to me was about 75%) we keep contain on the QB which we will need down the road……Also I 95% guarantee that The Jeep showed no blitzes on purpose and will do the same next week…ut will have no idea…..Again I just want Potts to be consistant for 4 or 5 drives in a row not 2!!!! Remember we were up 35-14 and at the least we should have scored 2 to 3 TDs in that strech….One difference that The High Plains Drifter will need to understand is that the Southwest/West teams will throw the ball more and he needs to put the pedal to the medal and not let up on the NASCAR…….Wreck’Em Tech
After reading a lot of comments about this game,
I’m starting to think that we didn’t show but about 25% of what Tech is capable of doing on offense and defense. I’m jumping on the train. We don’t show our cards until it’s neccesary. I’m not doubting our coaches anymore. If Tubbs tells me that a canary can pull a freight train, I’m going to chain the two together because I believe he’s right.
Texas better call Kenny Loggins, cause they’re in the DANGER ZONE!!
Wreck Em Tech!!
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
There are no trains or cards in the Air Raid
or on Pirate ships…well maybe cards on the boat.
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
Kenny Loggins?
Didn’t he get run over by a train? being pulled by a canary? Strange…
by Damien Franco on Sep 8, 2010 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I believe he is giving a shout out to his blood relatives
Sisters, brothers, cousins, nieces, nephews, that sort of thing. Or something akin to that.
Right, but I thought he may have been talking to somebody specific......
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
I just wanted to use the "akin" pun
Thanks for setting it up. You’re a regular Dean Martin. Which would make me Jerry Lewis. That’s not good.
Post Game Comment from Tuberville concerning improvement
Q. If you could talk about how you feel going out of this with Texas a couple weeks away, and do you feel team’s ready for it?
COACH TUBERVILLE: We have a lot of work to do. It’s good we have another game on the road before we jump into the Big 12. You know, we’re not a great team right now. We play hard, we work hard, but execution has got to get a lot better.
I’ve heard that it’s been pretty normal in my coaching career of 30 years of watching, you normally get better, much better at any time of the year from your first and second game.
So now we can look at the film and guys will understand what we’re talking about. They look at their effort, look at the little things they did wrong, and we’ll take it one game at a time and just look forward to going to Albuquerque this week and taking on New Mexico.
" Answers --Become Resources."
Without Questions, There are limited Resources...
ONE GAME AT A TIME!!!!
"Winning isn't everything"... Bob Knight
by raider realist on Sep 6, 2010 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions
This:
“I’ve heard that it’s been pretty normal in my coaching career of 30 years of watching, you normally get better, much better at any time of the year from your first and second game.”
Seriously, is there anyone that doesn’t know this? Except for a few folks around here who maybe never played the game?
I need a Scotch.
... never punt
Yes, it is pretty much the standard answer to a lot of media's questions like
talk about how you feel going out of this with Texas a couple weeks away, and do you feel team’s ready for it?
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
Leach was on Serius Radio Playbook today talking with Bob Stoops...
Really fascinating in general, but to the point of coach/media relations, Stoops is notorious about shutting media questions down. Leach was talking about how laid back Stoops is when he’s not in front of the camera, painted a totally different picture than the one you get in interviews. Just a real “don’t give a shit about answering your questions” philosophy. Which is cool if you got a guy like Leach that can make something interesting out of a question like “do you think your ready for UT”.
Then the conversation got really freakin hilarious when Stoops got Leach telling stories about how he got the big Geronimo poster from some guy named “Meatloaf” in Norman. Had the feeling there was some real funny shit they couldn’t talk about, but it was great hearing the Pirate being his crazy, eclectic self.
"Winning isn't everything"... Bob Knight
by raider realist on Sep 6, 2010 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions
I get the sense that Stoops and Leach are pretty much from the same mold...
especially when it comes to talking with the media…Leach has a bit more imagination, but neither have patience for the dumb or worn question.
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
My thoughts
It wasn’t a terrible first game, but it wasn’t good. Defense looked great I thought. Loved the blitz. Secondary played very well. Bird or whomever has to do a better job containing the draw.
The offense looked pretty bad. We couldn’t run, and with TP as our QB we are in trouble. As you saw, its the same old same old with him having no rhythm and not being able to sustain drives. Unless our run game dramatically improves, our ceiling is pretty low with Potts. I saw nothing to indicate why Potts should be playing over Sticks, unless Sticks is just simply not his old self after surgery.
Special teams was horrible except McRabbit who was awesome on the run down.
Tubs made a few questionable calls. Why are we kicking 45 and 50 yard field goals with our kickers? Why are we not going for it at home on their 35 and then going for it on our own 30? None of that made any sense. And when Tubs didn’t call a time out after the change of possession just before the half, you knew he had no idea what he was doing with a REAL offense. Then he looks up and Brown has us down there ready to score. We got lucky b/c Potts made one of his few good throws to Detron and we scored. We should have had another minute on that drive. I know Tubs thinks we should have just run out the clock, but I’ll take the points.
Not impressed with Tubs. Not impressed with Potts. Not impressed with the run blocking. Defense was much better. Special teams were bad. Running stats would have been MUCH better with Sticks b/c many times the field was wide open for a QB sneak. I don’t want to be pessimistic but no way we win with Potts against UT if we can’t run it better. Not sure what Tubs is thinking.
The stadium looked awesome and I’m loving the atmosphere. Lets just put the right QB in.
by logan5555 on Sep 7, 2010 12:26 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Without getting into detail
I look back on this game as a relief. Got it over with, there was a a lot of new on the field, and to have it come together as well as it did is encouraging. It exposed a lot that needs to be done…I haven’t a way to say that clearer…a whole lot !!
I am looking forward to seeing the rate of improvement over the next two games…win or lose…we are going win next week…geeesh.
women should put pictures of missing husbands on beer cans
Potts the exact same as last year
very similar to last season’s #s: completion % (65.7% ’09 vs 64.2% ’10), Y/A (7.3 ’09 vs 6.8 ’10), and rating (137.1 ’09 vs 146.0 ’10)
Hard to draw many conclusions from one game, but it’s just more of the same.
“The Bears are who we thought they were!”
I just re-watched the Tivo of the game
It looked much better on TV than it did in person. Or maybe sitting in a 74 degree room improves my mood over a triple digit east side seat. Potts looked OK. He does seem to move in slow motion but his passes were mostly on target. The hot & cold passing needs to be worked on. That must be mental. He reels off 14 completions in a row, then misses on 7 of the next 8. This week should help his confidence. The 4th quarter sucked. Something else for the coaches to work on. I like our chances this year if we work out the kinks. There was a lot of good football in the middle of the many muddles.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
