Red Raider Gridiron | Defensive Line Depth Charting and Discussing Injuries, Coaching and Talent
by Seth C on Feb 13, 2012 5:39 AM CST
in Texas Tech Football 2012
Email
Print
THOMSEN BEING WATCHED | The subject line actually sounds creepy, but head coach Tommy Tuberville was at the The Big Country Celebrity Ultimate Hunt in Abilene on Friday night and had this to say about new offensive line coach Chris Thomsen, who was the former head coach at Abilene Christian. Per the Abilene Reporter-News:
"Chris was on our watchlist the last few years," Tuberville said. "Finally the opportunity came up, but unfortunately he had left and gone to Arizona State.
"He wanted to come home. He's a West Texas guy and he loves it out here."
And:
"He'll do a great job with our football program and be a great recruiter and a good ambassador for West Texas," Tuberville said. "He knows a lot of high school guys, so it's a perfect fit for him and me.
"He had a very good recruiting month for Arizona State in Texas. We didn't recruit against him (for specific players), but he got a couple for Arizona State from the Dallas area. He's going to be a huge help by name recognition, the high school coaches knowing who he is."
INJURIES, COACHING AND TALENT | The topic of injuries has come up a couple of times the last couple of days, the question being to what effect did the injuries on this team in particular late in the season where Texas Tech suffered some of their worst losses. And of course, the topic of injuries isn't being discussed in a vacuum, but rather, this is a question of injuries and coaching and I still think that talent should be part of the equation, but I think I'm in the minority here. I think last year's 5-7 mark is a combination of all three things, poor coaching, what seems like a bunch of injuries and young or not very good talent on the field.
The LAJ's Don Williams has in the title of his article that says that there were 24 long-term injuries. These are just the players mentioned in the article:
RB Eric Stephens (knee), RB DeAndre Washington (knee), WR Alex Torres (knee), CB Happiness Osunde (knee), S Chris Yeakey (knee), S/LB Terrance Bullitt (shoulder), CB Shawn Corker (shoulder), S Desmond Martin (knee), LB Zach Winbush (broken foot), WR Darrin Moore (ankle, knee), IR Aaron Fisher (knee), IR Austin Zouzalik (concussion), S/LB Pete Robertson (shoulder), S Tre Porter (concussion), and C Tony Morales (shoulder).
I know there were others, like DE Leon Mackey, who missed 4 games, and C Justin Keown, who I don't think missed any games, but that still seems like an inordinate amount. I don't know how to quantify how important a player like Stephens is to a team, but I think it's safe to say that he was most likely the best player on the offensive side of the ball last year, with runner-ups being WR Eric Ward and QB Seth Doege with apologies to the entire offensive line.
I'd also say that the coaching regressed as well otherwise there wouldn't be a turnover of just about the entire defensive staff, save Robert Prunty. The offensive side of the ball regressed, but overall didn't perform at near the level that the defense performed. There is no doubt in my mind that the coaching could have been better in all facets of the game.
And I know that I tend to be dismissed when I argue that I just didn't think that last year's team had all that much talent and I've made a connection between how the NFL isn't knocking down the door to draft any of the seniors in 2011 other than Baron Batch and that no player has been invited to the 2012 draft. And before anyone brings up what Texas A&M did or didn't do with all of their top recruiting talent, that's irrelevant to this argument. If you want to discuss the success and failure of TAMU, then that's a separate discussion about the Aggies and you can have that all day long with Beergut. I don't want to have talented players that aren't developed either, but that's not the discussion right now.
And for me, this isn't a discussion about which players have caught on with other teams (i.e. Bront Bird), it's about what the NFL views as being part of the talent pool.
More after the jump.
For the second straight year, the NFL has not invited any Texas Tech senior to the NFL combine. I honestly can't remember what it was in 2010, but I'd bet that OL Brandon Carter and CB Jamar Wall were the players invited. In 2009, you most likely saw S Darcel McBath, DE Brandon Williams, OL Louis Vasquez, WR Michal Crabtree and QB Graham Harrell. The NFL Cobmine is not an exclusive invite list and it's intended to get as many players that they think have pro-potential as possible. It's not a guarantee either way and Batch is a prime example, but to not have even one player invited. And the NFL doesn't just invite players from winning teams, and there is the thought that Tuberville may not have developed some of these players further. I'll definitely consider this to be a very real possibility.
All I'd ask is that you open your mind to the thought that these past two teams, despite having the same number of star ratings and things like that, may not have been as talented as prior teams. Merely asking that you just entertain it as a possibility.
DEFENSIVE LINE DEPTH-CHART | LAJ's Don Williams has your depth chart for the defensive line. Prunty is quoted quite often through this. As an aside, on the offensive previews Williams quoted OC Neal Brown, but I do know that DC Art Kaufman's father passed away during the week of National Signing Day and would guess that a lot of these quotes came from NSD, which is why you probably won't see any comments from Kaufman. In any event, Prunty says that Texas Tech has to get to the opposing quarterback:
"We’ve got to rush the passer," he said. "We’ve got to get to the quarterback. We’ve got to create some havoc. I went back and watched film, and we were one second away from at least 10 or 12 (sacks)."
As far as specific players, DT Donte Phillips appears to have put on about 15 pounds, which is good, but probably still not enough and newcomer DE/DT Lee Adams is up to 272, but expect him to be at about 285 by the fall:
"We figured after he got here — working out and with the proper diet — Lee will be 285 by the time the season starts," Prunty said. "He was one of those guys in between being a defensive end and a defensive tackle, but you could see with the weight he was putting on he was headed toward being a defensive tackle."
You can check out Williams' thoughts on where he thinks players are on the depth chart by going to the link###
78 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Barr
not being on on the spring roster is not good. Feel bad for the guy if he is having to hang it up because of injuries.
Well, looking at the spring depth chart on the DLine, we still only have one senior.
One Sr., five Jr., three So., and three Fr., so half of the DL is still made up of underclassmen. I think this is part of the reason why the NFL has not come calling the past two years. Tommy has not had the numbers, and throw in all the injuries, and the pool of available players for the NFL at Tech has been like the South Texas Drought.
I am thinking the drought is almost over, so that means the drought at Tech is almost over. I am officially blaming the last two seasons on poor coaching and the South Texas drought. What else could it have been.
"Oh, yeah. We don't even talk about Bowls much. We're so far away from being a team right now that can have a chance to compete in a Bowl." HC Tommy Tuberville.
Well Btech,
That almost sounds optimistic! What is going on here? :)
"Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips."
I could argue how we got here though.
"Oh, yeah. We don't even talk about Bowls much. We're so far away from being a team right now that can have a chance to compete in a Bowl." HC Tommy Tuberville.
Talent
I agree 100%. We tend to forget just how good the 2008 team was in terms of NFL caliber talent. Yet this has become the bar. While it would be nice to have that level of talent year in and year out, I’m not sure it is realistic. And without that level of talent, that level of success is difficult to sustain. A number of guys have not panned out as well as we had hoped.
There was an article over on BC a while back about how Texas had gotten lazy in recruiting, relying on others to evaluate players. It is really hard to look at a highlight reel put together over the course of a season and predict how a guy will play on every snap. It is even more difficult to tell what kind of person he is and whether he has what it takes from a character and mentality standpoint to pass his classes, not get in to trouble, and not be a plague in the locker room. Most of us have seen very few if any of the guys Tech signs play football, and we have met even fewer of them. The attrition numbers that you posted the other day are telling. The attrition i snot the result of guys not being able to play football, generally speaking. It doesn’t take many misses at a key position before you have a hole in the team. We should remember this when counter stars and expecting to win 10 games a year.
Well, anyone "expecting" to win 10 games a year will be
sorely disappointed. That’s not really a fair expectation of Tech football presently because historically it’s a non-starter.
People seem to have overstated how good we were in the last decade. We were decent…we averaged slightly more than 8 wins a year. We had decent coaches, decent talent, and decent results. But we were far, far from outstanding or championship caliber.
We had a stellar team in 2008. It was awesome for 10 weeks. But it goes to show that good coaching will only take you so far in college football. You need high caliber players coached by high caliber coaches to really make a run. One without the other is a recipe for 7 wins. Ask Florida…or Texas…
11/12/11...66-6...I once was blind, but now I see.
by Tech92 on Feb 13, 2012 7:14 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
However; only one team a year gets to win a NC.
And I can easily name 20 storied programs that are ahead of us. In my opinion, anything less than 8 wins a year at Tech is a disappointment. Anytime we win more than nine games a year it is a bonus.
I am okay with one 10 win season in a decade, and I am okay with one less than 8 win season in a decade. But, I am not satisfied with 12 wins in two season. That is unaccetable at Tech under the worst of circumstances.
This year has to be 8 wins or start over.
"Oh, yeah. We don't even talk about Bowls much. We're so far away from being a team right now that can have a chance to compete in a Bowl." HC Tommy Tuberville.
We're on the same page
I think that Seth’s notes above regarding NFL caliber talent on the team for the past 2 seasons says a lot in this regard. 2010-2011 were going to be tough no matter what.
You guys are right on target here, that 9-4 team returning pretty much everybody had no chance to compete in the Big 12. It was only by the sheer genius of Tuberville that we were able to go 8-5 in 2010.
"If only the good die young, I might live forever" Max Stalling
by FriscoRaider on Feb 13, 2012 6:26 PM CST up reply actions
I don’t think it means everything, but I think it means something. You can choose to ignore it, that’s fine, but it’s still true that most likely, there will only be 1 player drafted in the NFL for the past 2 years, maybe 2.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I think part of that is that Tuberville was primarily interested in “his” players. I think as Tuberville players start graduating, more effort will be exerted in getting those guys noticed. Of course that is assuming that Tuberville lasts 4 years.
"If only the good die young, I might live forever" Max Stalling
by FriscoRaider on Feb 13, 2012 8:23 PM CST up reply actions
Okay, if you just don’t want to believe that there may have been some terrible players, then that’s fine. That’s your call. If you think that Tuberville has an agenda for his guys, then I don’t know what to say. There’s talent, but the truth is that the NFL doesn’t think much of the talent for the past two years.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I don’t know why I typed “terrible”, Freudian slip I guess, but you could add in “not so talented players”.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I still just don't agree with the lack of talent theory...
For the most part, the NFL has never thought much of our talent (at least since the beginning of the Leach era)…
Sure, there have been a few players drafted here and there.. a few invited to the combine… but they have always been few and far between…
Many of our best players were ignored or barely noticed by the NFL…
Most of the players you mentioned (Carter, Wall, McBath, Williams & Vasquez) were not highly regarded recruits coming out of high school…
So, either Leach could see something that no one else sees and had a good/unique eye for talent… or he and his staff were able to coach them up and develop them into something… even at that, they were generally considered marginal to the NFL…
So what happened? Leach lost his good/unique eye for talent? Or some guys got run off or couldn’t make the adjustments being required or didn’t get developed to their potential?
My point is maybe we didn’t have that much talent on the team for the past 2 years… but it was roughly what it has been over the past 12 years with the lone exception of 2008… I don’t believe the results we have seen the past 2 years are because of a significant change in talent… I believe they are the result of other changes…
"Transition is hard." - TT
by Houston Raider on Feb 14, 2012 10:53 AM CST up reply actions
Very true, look at Graham Harrell, the NFL didn’t have much interest in him. Stephen McGee was drafted in the 3rd round. Is there anyone that would make an argument that McGee is more talented than Graham Harrell? The NFL draft is all about fitting the profile of being a player and much less about being a football player.
"If only the good die young, I might live forever" Max Stalling
by FriscoRaider on Feb 14, 2012 11:28 AM CST up reply actions
I’m not saying its the only cause, lack of talent, but I am saying that it might be a contributing cause. I mentioned above that some of this very well may be the problem of Tuberville not developing players, but there were a lot of seniors that played last year and this year and they’re just not getting looks from the NFL who tends to overlook technique if they have the measurables to play on an NFL roster.
Sometimes the recruiting sites get it right and sometimes they don’t, but I don’t think that we should be surprised or think it is a coincidence to see that on that 2008 team, there are a handful of players that were drafted or are in the NFL (McBatch, Wall, Carter, Williams, Vasquez, Harrell, Crabtree) and that was the most talented team in quite some time for TTU.
The fact that the NFL isn’t sniffing at the talent at TTU could be attributed to Leach not getting it right on some players (again, take a look at the 2008 class), but that happens sometimes. Recruiting is an imperfect science a lot of the times. I think if Leach were here now, I’d be giving him a pass given his track record, but from what I can tell, the most talented teams have some talented players.
To reiterate, I’m not saying that the idea of that there may be a lack of talent is the only cause for the poor showing in 2011, but I am saying that it seems a contributing factor, to go along with an awful coaching performance on the defensive side of the ball and what seems like a lot of injuries, although I’m still working on a post for later in the offseason to really detail the injury situation (the cfbstats is note entirely accurate on games missed).
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
When you compare "were drafted or are in the NFL " to players invited to the combine, you are comparing apples to oranges. That skews your argument and makes it sounds as if your purpose is to make excuses for the coaching staff. I assume that is not your intent and why I quibble with the theme.
"If only the good die young, I might live forever" Max Stalling
by FriscoRaider on Feb 14, 2012 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
The fact that you aren’t even willing to consider that there may be a lack of talent skews your argument as well. I have said repeatedly that the coaching on defense was a disaster last year and the offensive coaching wasn’t great.
I’m trying to be open to the possibility that there may not be the talent on the team that there were there. If you don’t even want to entertain the idea, then that’s your prerogative. If you want to say that I’ve giving the current staff some excuses, that’s also your prerogative, but the fact remains that in the past 2 years, only 1 player from Texas Tech has been invited to the NFL combine, Whitlock.
All of the players mentioned above were invited to the combine. I don’t know if this is official, but the sites linked below seem reliable. In 2009, McBath, Vasquez, B. Williams, Crabtree and Harrell all were invited, while in 2010, Carter and Wall were. That’s 5 players in the 2009 draft and 2 in the 2010 draft that were invited to the combine. That’s more than 1 (Whitlock in 2011) and more than 0 (2012).
http://www.steelersdepot.com/2009/02/2009-nfl-combine-results/
http://www.steelersdepot.com/2010/02/2010-nfl-combine-results/
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Of the guys you list, 2 weren’t drafted at all and a couple more were taken in the sixth round or later. Some of the talent issues that you discuss may be caused by attrition (grades, personal issues, coaching, etc..) and some by injury, but in the big scheme of things I think we have had enough talent to at least be competitive in the Big 12.
"If only the good die young, I might live forever" Max Stalling
by FriscoRaider on Feb 14, 2012 4:11 PM CST up reply actions
It’s funny, you tell me that I’m doing an apples and oranges comparison because I’m not using combine players, then I show you that I am using combine players for comparison purposes and you completely ignore that. You should have told me what you were going to write to dismiss my comment so that I didn’t take the time to look it up and be considered irrelevant by your comment.
Okay, nevermind. There is no correlation between college teams with winning programs and NFL talent. I’m completely wrong and never should have brought up the subject as a mere possibility.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
you forgot the sarc font
"If only the good die young, I might live forever" Max Stalling
by FriscoRaider on Feb 14, 2012 4:27 PM CST up reply actions
I think there is a correlation between college teams with winning programs and NFL talent...
We used to not comform to that correlation… Now we do…
Seriously, how is a guy like Scott Smith (whom some think could wind up on an NFL roster) going to get a sniff by anyone in the NFL during a year like we had last year?
Did anyone stick around and watch him in the OSU game? Texas? Baylor? Our bowl game?
Of course there may have been other more likely games that an NFL scout would see (OU), but his chances were not very good… and with the whole thing around him falling apart, he couldn’t or didn’t stand out as being worthy of notice..
That’s a pretty different story than someone on a 9 – 5 ranked team that is playing in a bowl game… In a general sense, I think marginal players will get a better chance on a winning, ranked team that plays in a bowl versus a mess of a losing team that does not play in a bowl.. (Note: I’m talking about marginal from an NFL perspective)
So we used to get a few guys invited… now we don’t…
"Transition is hard." - TT
by Houston Raider on Feb 14, 2012 11:02 PM CST up reply actions
What about the correlation between TTU’s best team (5 seniors go to the combine) and worst in recent years (0 seniors go to the combine)?
How in the world does the NFL find Timothy Benford or Jeremy Jones or Rishaw Johnson any of these players? I’ve got a list of 300 players, some on good teams and some on bad teams. You know as well as I do, scouts are different than fans. They are paid to watch games and find talent, even on shitty teams.
I hope you and Frisco remember this conversation when you just can’t believe that someone would defend or believe a certain way despite staring some facts directly in your face.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I'm not quite sure what your last statement is completely about... (obviously)
And I’m not really trying to argue… just trying to express why I see things a little differently than you seem to… (not completely certain how you see them.. guessing that you’e basicly saying part of our problem last year was we didn’t have much talent on the team…)
Yes, there is a correlation between our best team and worst team and how many players went to the combine… the 2008 team was obviously more talented than the 2011 team… I think everyone acknowledges that…
But was the 2009 team more talented than the 2011 team because 2 guys were invited to the combine? Would Carter and Wall have been invited to the combine if they were playing on the team last season? Would Scott Smith or Lonnie Edwards have been invited to the combine if they were seniors playing on the 2009 team?
Was the 2010 team less talented than the 2009 team? How did it become less talented?
Yes, NFL talent scouts are paid to find talent… but they miss a lot.. especially on the margins… and I think we have almost always been playing with guys on the margins for the past 12 years (2008 being the recognized exception)…
I agree that we didn’t have great talent on the team last year… but I think it was comparable to the talent we have had for many of the past 12 years.. It’s the kind of talent we have won 7 or 8 or possibly even 9 games with… It doesn’t explain a 5 -7 season in which the team played as poorly as some of the games last year… I’m afraid the talent question just becomes a distraction and an excuse.. What were our most critical problems?
Having said all of this, I would note that the 2011 recruiting class was clearly the best one we have had in over 12 years… the 2012 was class not quite as good, but still better than we have had over those years… so the talent question should begin to fade out of the picture in a year or two…
"Transition is hard." - TT
by Houston Raider on Feb 15, 2012 8:50 AM CST up reply actions
The seniors on the 2010 and 2011 classes may have been, according to the recruiting services, to be on par with what he did before, but if we can assume that the combine is intended to cast a wide net of potential prospects as players and for two straight years those players are not invited to the NFL combine (I don’t think that any other players that transferred or left the team are included on the list) may tell us that Leach may have missed on identifying talent. You say that the NFL miss and so do college coaches, and it wouldn’t surprise me that if in 3 years when I can do a retrospective look at Tuberville’s classes, I’ll be writing the same thing. From looking at combine invites, Leach was freaking on his game for the 2009 draft class and had some incredible forethought with some of the players that eventually were drafted or made it to the NFL. I think that’s a fair statement. I think it’s also fair to say that Leach may have missed in identifying talent, which may have contributed to the poor season in 2011. You say that the talent is on par with what was normally here, but the NFL doesn’t normally discriminate between bad teams and good teams. If you want to try to pinpoint why this team isn’t talented, I think that Leach may have missed on some talent, that Leach took a lot of gambles in the 2008 recruiting class, which was overall abysmal, I think that a lot of players left some time after Tuberville was hired (I think a good chunk of it was Tuberville in the 2009 class), etc.
All I’ve ever said was that the fact that 1 player from about 35 to 38 seniors not being invited to the NFL combine might be an indication that this team wasn’t as talented as we would like to think. I’m not at all dismissing the fact that the coaching was horrific on defense for the past two years, the special teams was horrific for Tuberville’s first year and the injury situation contributing in part to the 2011 season.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I don't think NFL combine invites give an accurate picture of the "talent level" of many Tech teams...
And I do think team success affects the picture…
True, the NFL is looking for talent anywhere and everywhere… but I think it’s easier to find a guy on the margins when his team is playing well and the team is successful.. (the guy on the successful team gets more positive exposure and gets more benefit of the doubt —> gets the last few slots on the margins)..
Jamar Wall gets that break after 2009… Lonnie Edwards doesn’t after 2011… Other than 2008, the numbers are just too small to be very meaningful…
Why didn’t Baron Batch get invited to the combine after 2010? He was drafted… He was talented enough to be drafted, but not talented enough to be invited to the combine.. If he had been invited, then that would have been two from the 2010 team… now all of the sudden the 2010 team is as “talented” as the 2009 team… Is that reasonable and accurate?
Maybe Leach missed on some talent… But I think if he had been coaching those years, the missing would have resulted in an 8 or 9 win season instead of a 10 or 11 win season…
I hope you don’t think I’m trying to be obtuse… I think we just see this differently… it’s good discussion from my perspective…
"Transition is hard." - TT
by Houston Raider on Feb 15, 2012 11:10 AM CST up reply actions
Well, you’re asking a lot of questions that are impossible for me or anyone to answer unless that person is in charge of inviting players to the NFL combine. You’re also dealing with hypotheticals about if Leach were still coaching. Again, that’s impossible to answer. All I can tell you are the facts, which is that in the past 2 years 1 player has been invited to the NFL combine. I think that tells us a little about the talent level. You want to dismiss the 2008 NFL draft numbers and I don’t, I think they’re relevant, just as I think the 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 numbers are relevant. I think it’s all relevant.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
The questions are an effort to test the meaningfulness of the data...
The hypotheticals about Leach are just my own personal opinions about the topic.. and yes… impossible to prove… but, based on the data of his performance over the years, not completely without merit in my opinion…
I’m not dismissing 2008… I am agreeing that was obviously our most talented team… and conforms to your theory… I am questioning the validity of the theory as an accurate measure for all of the other years… (just because the theory is accurate for one data point, does not mean it holds for all of the others)
Let’s propose a similar, but slightly different theory: The talent level on the team is reflected by how many players are drafted into the NFL…
All of the same NFL talent scouting/evaluation assumptions should apply…
Based on this theory, since the beginning of the Leach era:
2008 was our most talented team (4 players drafted)
2004 & 2006 were our 2nd/3rd most talented teams (3 players drafted)
2002 & 2003 were our next most talented teams (2 players drafted)
2000, 2001, 2005, 2009 & 2010 were the next most talented (1 drafted)
2007 was our least talented team since 2000 (0 players drafted)
2011 is TBD
If 1 player is drafted this year, the 2011 talent level will be the same as 5 other seasons since 2000 (BTW, by this theory, the talent level for the 2010 season is currently equal to that of 4 other seasons since 2000)..
If 0 players are drafted this year, 2011 will join the 2007 team as our two least talented teams over the past 12 years…
How does that theory sound?
"Transition is hard." - TT
by Houston Raider on Feb 15, 2012 12:17 PM CST up reply actions
I'd edit that and say
he is focused on having the players play his system. Leach got players he found suitable for his system. This isn’t simply a difference between being pass happy and then wanting to run more, it’s a philosophy of football that may be different on various levels of play, whether they be minute or broad.
Shawn Johnson... she's a nice lady
Poor Coaching Decisions and a Lot of Injuries
Those two things were the great big reasons for the bad year on the field. Then, the high rate if injuries resulted in inexperienced and lesser talented players being relied upon to eek out wins. The recipe for disaster. Reduce the injuries and we keep the experience and talent on the field, and the inexperienced and lesser talented on the sidelines, or seeing limited duty. The coaching experience has taken a huge uptick with the changes made on the defensive side so I anticipate that, if the injuries subside, we will see a much improved defense in 2012. The onlt offensive coaching change was on the line. How that affects the team will be seen as the season progresses. With the influx of more juco talent than usual, we can only hope the whole team gets a needed shot of adrenalin in the arm. The main thing we all will be most concerned with, though, is the performance of the head coach. Tuberville must show he is what we thought he was when he was hired. Period.
TTpilk
"Never, never, never give up." Winston Churchill
by TTpilk645 on Feb 13, 2012 7:25 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Seth I agree with your assessment and would add one more thing....
some of the teams we used to beat (especially in Lubbock) have improved…namely Okla State, Iowa State, TAMU…add Baylor to the list and not only are we not as good…the other guys have gotten better. Looking ahead, swapping Missouri and TAMU for WVA and TCU is no bargain either. So we better get good in a hurry. Otherwise 5-7 (or worse) will become the norm.
"When you are right no one remembers, when you are wrong no one forgets."
I disagree with you. The Big 12 has always been tough.
We lost two programs in Nebraska and Colorado. Leach had recent success with Nebraska, but until we beat The Buffs in Boulder two years ago, Colorado was a loss almost every year we played them. Kansas and Baylor just switched roles, and we switched roles with Copy Cat State. OSU looks down the schedule and they look at us and Kansas and pencil in a W.
We were not very good the past two years, and our record indicates that. Whether its talent, coaching, injuries, the South Texas Drought, Old School paying his dues, I don’t know, but the competitin level only seems better because we are not very good right now.
"Oh, yeah. We don't even talk about Bowls much. We're so far away from being a team right now that can have a chance to compete in a Bowl." HC Tommy Tuberville.
I don’t have the players in front of me right now, but Baylor, Oklahoma St. and Missouri all had some nice players invited to the NFL combine last year and this year. Again, this isn’t an absolute, but it is at the very least an indication.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I guess we could look at how many seniors each team had available for the invite;
and we also changed coaches in the middle of the road. I wonder how much that comes into play. I don’t even blame this on Tommy, but I would suspect that some connections are lost in the transition. And, we just had a lot of injuries and problems the last two years.
But having said all of this, I found this article on Rivals, and it is really interesting. In the Super Bowl, The New York Football Giants, and the Patriots had 10 players on their rosters since 2002 that had no star rating, and 12 were two star players. I think the bottom line is, if you have talent, then the NFL will find you.
http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1327387
"Oh, yeah. We don't even talk about Bowls much. We're so far away from being a team right now that can have a chance to compete in a Bowl." HC Tommy Tuberville.
There were about 19 seniors this year ( http://www.cfbstats.com/2011/team/700/roster.html ) and 19 last year ( http://www.cfbstats.com/2010/team/700/roster.html ).
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
And these aren’t official numbers, just me quickly counting for the word “SR”. Meant to be estimates more than anything else and I don’t know who was a walk-on or who was scholarship and that should be taken into account as well. I just don’t have time right now. Gotta go to work.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
I can’t go through the entire list right now ( http://www.nfl.com/combine/story/09000d5d826d89dd/article/players-invited-to-the-2012-nfl-scouting-combine ), but Missouri has 3 this year, Iowa St. has 2, Oklahoma St. has 6, and Baylor has 4. And this is not the combine list (that’s tough to find) for 2011 ( http://www.nfl.com/draft/2011/tracker#dt-tabs:dt-by-college/dt-by-conference-input:big12 ) but this is a list of players drafted from the 2011 draft and prospects. I think Whitlock was invited to the combine, so I could be wrong about my statement above, but Baylor had 4 players drafted, OSU had 1 player drafted and 4 as prospects, Missouri had 3 players drafted and 1 prospect.
I know that this rubs people the wrong way and the NFL combine is not the only tool to measure if a player is good, but it’s at least an indication. I just want people to be open to the idea that there may not have been as much talent on this team, some of which is the responsibility of Tuberville (Graves, Wade, Hamilton and Fehoko).
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Based on all the measureables at our disposal, I agree with you that this team lacked talent.
However; I think we have learned that it is much harder when you change systems and coaches than we want to admit. The West Virginia stories are not the norm. And you could argue that Dana was already in place for a recruiting season and spring football, and at the time they had the same Head Coach.
It will really be interesting to see how Dana does in year two. I hope we can spoil some of his success.
"Oh, yeah. We don't even talk about Bowls much. We're so far away from being a team right now that can have a chance to compete in a Bowl." HC Tommy Tuberville.
I think it is difficult to change coaches in the best of circumstances.
And that is part of our malady, especially on defense. The more I think about Glasgow the more that I believe that he was toxic..Graves, Wade, Hamilton, Fehoko and whom else left early.
So you add the talent level to the coaching stuff and then you get a bunch of guys injured—some of whom are playing here and there and some of whom are simply gone, taking all of their accumulated coaching with them, the guys filling in are trying to play catch up on reps and experience…and the result is really ugly NCAA stat rankings.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
Maybe so
but he had spent 10 years at TCU and they were quite ready to take him back after his Tech experience. That doesn’t seem to jive with the toxic coach comments.
"If only the good die young, I might live forever" Max Stalling
by FriscoRaider on Feb 13, 2012 3:02 PM CST up reply actions
Perhaps
“One man’s meat is another man’s poison.”
Agree... that's too long of a record of success to put all the blame on him...
It must at least be a combination of other things as well…
What were those other things?
To me, ultimate responsibility still rests with Tubs…
He’s supposed to be some kind of defensive guy… that’s the key missing element he was going to bring to Tech..
I’m not saying he can’t or won’t eventually be successful.. I hope to goodness he will…
But thus far, I’ve been sorely disappointed…
"Transition is hard." - TT
by Houston Raider on Feb 14, 2012 10:26 AM CST up reply actions
I am willing to venture that there is not a soul associated with the program that is not disappointed.
LOL, we all just expect an HC to make miracles from his HC spot.
When it doesn’t happen, yes, there is no doubt who is accountable and ultimately responsible, but it not the same as who is finally culpable. When I worked as an engineer, if I made certain errors it could have resulted in the death and injury of many…it would not have fallen on me however, it would have fallen on my leadership more so and the company. My leadership could not have influenced the outcome, I knew more about what was being done than they did.
I really hope that I am not looking like someone to blame, that is not my way, I would like to understand what happened in some level of detail that makes sense. That is kind of why I come to sites like this and read, muse (and hopefully at times admuse), and comment.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
I don't know if it jives not, nor do I really know if he did do the things that I read.
He certainly seemed not to react professionally at the point where he lost it with his HC.
He was hired from TCU and that HC and he clearly were a nice match. After essentially no success at TTU as a DC, he is now back as an assistant coach…there is a difference in the work environment and the role.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
I was just one big cluster last year.
Bad D coaching, talent not being up to speed, depth, injuries, youth. That is a recipe for disaster in my book. Then add to that the debacle and fall out with fans on the Leach issue. I hope we alumni can give Tubs more time because I think he is the guy for the job, but on the other hand he has to show us something this year….
On the side: Loved watching the emotion that BCG showed on the post game interview with TTUMB first win.
"Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips."
Combine Invites
I think the NFL scouts got it right unfortunately. I didn’t see one player come off this squad that even looked remotely like and NFL candidate. Smith had potential but he blew it by misssing a whole season.
In 2-3 years this team will have plenty of guys being eyed by the NFL IMO.
The upcoming season has to produce 8 wins or better. I think if Tuberville barely makes 7 he is in trouble and rightfully so.
"You've got to find your inner pirate" - Mike Leach
Hmm
Are we re-writing history to make it less painful? Hope not.
This is something of a departure from the same discussions we had a few months ago, even if we didn’t entirely get it all nailed down. I never expected this tired discussion to come back with such a different flavor – especially this early.
I am still weighting the issues as I did earlier, and while I don’t discount the variety of problems, I know what the largest chunk of it is for me.
We didn’t have national championship talent, but we sure did have talent to go better than 5-7.
And we should have had the coach to do it too but we have yet to see it. Friends and relatives from around the country are surprised to learn that the mighty Tubs is here and can’t comprehend the lack of success.
We also hear plenty about the injuries, too: I wanted to touch on that in light of the present and future.
Notice that there are no news reports claiming victory over the injury bugs and identifying the causes, and laying out all they have done to correct it. They would make a LOT of noise about it if they had the chance, but we haven’t seen much news there besides a bit of run of the mill, mild S&C hype stuff that comes naturally, and that concerns me.
We might see things just as bad this year, even if the rest of the team/coach gets it together somewhat. Now, I understand that there are intangibles to injuries, but if 100% of the injuries are a 100% mystery, then why not put my faith in unicorns?
On the bright side:
I do expect a 10-20% improvement in coaching this year though – Just based on the new staff and Tubs making an effort to look serious about it in recent months. This will also increase the focus on talent and injuries in 2012, rightly or wrongly.
Not sure what can be done about joint injuries
And concussions which were the most damaging. Tendons around the joints can be strengthened, but for example the hit in Stephens would not have been helped by this. Another factor is the number of seasons a player goes through a D1 S&C program. The number of injuries to players like Washington, Morales, Moore and others are another example of how youth hurts. I’m not sure what history is being revised, I missed the previous conversation. A 5&7 finish seems easy enought to explain: Bad defensive coaching, bad leadership by some assistants in the locker room, unusual injuries to key players, lack of talented depth post injury, and a first year QB who struggled with adversity. All of these challenges culminating in one season was surprising, and complicated a an already divisive coaching change……but the outcome of those factors should not be surprising. What is surprising is that we still were a few plays away from 8 wins (A&M, Mizz, Kstate). Unfortunately Tuberville cannot afford bad luck sling with everything else. I think we have about the same team for 2012, and catch a couple if breaks, get to 8 wins.
"Dress good, yu'll play good. Play good, yu'll get paid good." -Deion Sanders
by TTUMAR on Feb 13, 2012 9:35 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Here's what I have uncovered so far about joint injuries ...
1) If the muscle is stronger than the tendon or ligament supporting it there is a really good chance at some point that ligament or tendon will become damaged (from a strain to a snap) because the torque from the muscle on the tendon or ligament will be too great to handle.
2) Tendons and ligaments take longer to strengthen than muscles.
3) A few schools have installed sand pits for strength and conditioning for their athletic programs because working in the sand is a very effective way of strengthening those tendons and ligaments. (There are other methods to strengthen tendons and ligaments as well) Tubs removed the sand pit from the former staff.
Why does this matter? Tubs believes in core and lower body strength. Reports last year indicate the Walker was killing these guys in the gym to increase their core and lower body strength. If the quads, calves, and hams are being strengthened at a greater rate than the tendons and ligaments, the ACL. MCL, and others have a greater chance of being injured when players make sharp cuts or accelerate too quickly.
Taking out the concussions and Stephens direct hit on the knee, there seems to be an abnormally high number of joint injuries since Tubs new direction in strength and conditioning. Correlation? Shouldn’t rule it out just yet.
by Arizona Raider on Feb 13, 2012 10:01 AM CST up reply actions
That's good info, my neighbor is a S&C prof at Tech, I will bounce your stuff off of him.
"Dress good, yu'll play good. Play good, yu'll get paid good." -Deion Sanders
That is good info but it does not make sense to apply it solely to one program.
There are years of history of strength and training according to the same philosophy that is followed by our head coach.
Is Joe Walker’s program so unique ? Did he learn this all by himself ?
I do not see a correlation because if I was doing an analysis I would not work off of generalizations but look at each injury one by one, I saw enough of them myself when they happened to know that Stephens’ knee was not the only one that was the result of an awkward turn of a limb. I did not see anyone just running along or cutting and have a limb give way because a muscle overpowered a tendon or ligament. Maybe someone else did we can see some data validating the way the injuries occurred.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
I am not denying that there are different philosophies
and methods when it comes to S&C, but when I read reports of change in philosophy and the aggressiveness of how the staff was going about it, a red flag went up.
Then the injuries started racking up, I started to do some research to see if there was any correlation. Unfortunately, I don’t know where to go to find player by player causes of injury, but when I read 24 players sustained injuries severe enough for surgery and long-term rehab, my gut tells me there is more than just awkward hits. Could be bad technique or being at the wrong place and the wrong time. Even at that, 24 severe injuries is a ton. If anyone knows how to track down how each player was injured, I would be happy spreadsheet and analyze them.
Thanks for your eyewitness recollection of the season. Living in the desert, I didn’t have the opportunity to watch as much of the season as I would have liked.
by Arizona Raider on Feb 13, 2012 10:10 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with this
but when I read reports of change in philosophy and the aggressiveness of how the staff was going about it, a red flag went up.
JIminy, it makes sense to look at the conditioning program and how the players are pushed to play. I find it interesting and have value for the information you presented, I just find it too much of a leap without some validation from actual injury to cause. So I look to a methodology for determining cause of injury at a detailed one by one analysis before I can make a value statement.
Aridzone !!! LOL ! When I was a youngster I was an avid reader of Mad Magazine, just my kind of humor at times. They did a piece in which they renamed each state of the union…Aridzone was the perfect name.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
Talent
I have a hard time accepting that we have a talent issue (especially on offense). Also I think Scott Smith will be on an NFL team in the fall FWIW.
By position:
QB: From what we saw last year, Doege had as much poise and talent as any signal caller we have had at Tech over the last 12 years. If I had to rank our starting QBs, my subjective view is that Doege would finish as follows:
Tech QBs since 2000
Harrell
Kingsbury
Symons
Cumbie/ Doege
Potts
Hodges (Hodges was one of my favorites for the record)
That’s an illustrious group, and that’s about where I see Doege right now: a typical Tech QB.
OL: I think if you look at last year’s starting OL, with the exception of the 2007/08 group, I think we again have similar talent levels to what we’ve had over the past 20 years or so.
- Okafor, Edwards, Keown, Gallington, Waddle are representative of the types of squads we’ve had in the past. One NFL draftee every couple of years or so:
Tech O-linemen selected to the NFL since 2000
2004: Loper, Gandy
2006: Ramirez
2008: Vasquez
2009: Carter
Edwards had a decorated college career and Waddle is projected to have NFL potential. Over the past 12 years, we have had many successful offensive linemen, but only a handful of O-linemen made it to the NFL.
RB: I think Stephens fits the hold of a typical Texas Tech running back over the past 12 years: Highly productive college player with borderline NFL talent.
He is a similar player to Henderson, Batch Woods and Williams. Small, quick, great hands, excellent blocker. His backup, Crawford, was a warrior of player, but lacked similar talent.
Washington shows early potential to be as successful as previous backs.
WR: Now, let’s look at WR production through the years (all stats courtesy of cfbstats.com):
Tech WR Production since 2007
2011: 409 receptions, 4125 yards
2010: 406 receptions, 4146 yards
2009: 448 receptions, 5028 yards
2008: 465 receptions, 5371 yards
2007: 544 receptions, 6114 yards
The 2010 and 2011 receiving numbers are down partly because under Brown we run significantly more than we have in previous years:
Tech Rushing Production since 2007
2011: 391 rushing attempts, 1502 yards
2010: 437 rushing attempts, 1837 yards
2009: 319 rushing attempts, 1092 yards
2008: 317 rushing attempts, 1532 yards
2007: 246 rushing attempts, 771 yards
Our total productivity, however, is down significantly since the change in offensive philosophies.
Tech Total Offense since 2007
2011: 5647 yards; 470.6 per game
2010: 5883 yards; 460.2 per game
2009: 6120 yards; 470.8 per game
2008: 6903 yards; 531.0 per game
2007: 6885 yards; 529.6 per game
Note the greater than 1,000 yard difference between teams in 2007 & 2008 and 2010 & 2011. We did not have an injury problem in 2010 and yet the results were similar to the output in 2011.
We did have injuries to key players in 2009 (Potts, Sticks) and 2011 (Stephens).
Tech Average Yards per Offensive Play since 2007
2011: 5.7
2010: 5.7
2009: 6.2
2008: 7.1
2007: 6.8
You can draw your own conclusions here.
Offensive Scoring
As we know yards are not everything, so let’s look at the statistic that matters most, offensive scoring:
Tech Total (and per game Average) Scoring since 2007
2011: 406 points (33.8 points per game)
2010: 430 points (33.1 points per game)
2009: 481 points (37.0 points per game)
2008: 569 points (43.8 points per game)
2007: 532 points (40.8 points per game)
If you assume that our 2007 and 2009 offenses are more typical of the talent we’ve fielded since 2000, that would mean a typical Tech offense would average 515 points per year (38.9 points per game) . We can can see that the 2010 and 2011 numbers are 5.7 points per 5.1 points points fewer than that more average figure.
Our offensive production has fallen from peak to trough by 163 points over that period or 10 points a game.
I think the difference between 1,000 yards per season and between 5 to 10 points per game between “typical Tech talent” years shows that there is more going on than talent or even injuries.
But that’s just my opinion.
"This time it's different."
Perhaps the reason you look past the injuries
Is because you look past the injuries. How is it useful to look at rushing and receiving stats for 2010 and 2011 when you top 3 rushers and receivers were injured and couldn’t contribute to those stats?
If Crabtree misses half of 2008 what do our passing stats look? Our number one receiver in 2009, misses most of 2010 (Torres), where do you account for that? Your 2010 & and 2011 totals represent back ups. What you also gloss over is the offensive production began its sharpest drop in 2009, under a different staff. Take away Broyles, Stills, and Murray from OU last year. Add a first year Landry Jones, what does their offense look like? Your top down analysis (total production)is only useful if you take the time to determine why the numbers resulted that way. I think starting with coaching is lazy, but if you want to go that route, start in 2009 when your data shows the problem first began.
"Dress good, yu'll play good. Play good, yu'll get paid good." -Deion Sanders
by TTUMAR on Feb 13, 2012 9:50 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
it's a talent issue.....
We lack it at the head coaching position.
This is a 3 ring circus up in here......
by oldschoolraider on Feb 13, 2012 9:57 AM CST via iPhone app up reply actions 1 recs
Leach's worst year of coaching
in my opinion. But he scratched out 9 wins in the midst of a soap opera. There was never a game where it appeared the players quit, and you could tell that there was tension. I think that constant tension that came from the head coach is what kept that team together enough to win 9.
I went to the Nebraska game at Lincoln, and Leach bascially had Pelini wetting his pants the whole game. He was playing to not let Tech kill him….not to win. This was my favorite Tech games I have attended, and I look back thinking that the defense this year was very underrate and the offense a bit overrated.
Overall, one of his worst coaching years….but 9 wins sound pretty damn good compared to that turd last year.
This is a 3 ring circus up in here......
by oldschoolraider on Feb 13, 2012 10:57 AM CST up reply actions
defensive touchdown turned the tide in that Nebraska game...
How many defensive touchdowns did we have in 2011…like none maybe? Do you think a defensive touchdown against aggy, KSU or Mizzou in 2011 would have made a a difference in those games? We need playmakers on defense, period. The dip in offensive production in the new regime can be credited to conservative playcalling with the lead in the games we actually led. Offense is not the problem at TTU…am I being captain obvious?
ihsv
"It was impossible to get a conversation going. Everybody was talking too much" - Yogi Berra
Ha....
You are spot effing on…Howards return of that fumble was the biggest WTF moment I have ever been in a stadium for. Great story that game was that Nebraska fans have balloons that they hold on to until they score…..we convinced the fans in our section to let them go after getting a first down in the 2nd qtr. We then proceeded to own that Touchdown club area and I have too many great stories about my 9 buddies and my in laws that live there. Best roadtrip ever, we actually had really good tex mex in Lincoln.
I do feel that our offense it not terribly off the trajectory from our best days. There are some real clunker calls of draw on 3rd down and some decisions by the HC to punt in some situations where I think needs to be a mindset in some situations once you pass midfield you act as if you have 4 downs to get each first down. But overall, I want to see more Brown and less Tubs on offense. I also think we have good position coaches on O.
Random thought-Ben Runkle would have been a bad ass coach.
This is a 3 ring circus up in here......
by oldschoolraider on Feb 13, 2012 1:03 PM CST up reply actions
Damn, I can still visualize that return for TD;
It was ever as good as Crabtree game winnner agasint UT. This one went donw as one my top ten memories. Those were the days. The only bad thing that came out of that game was Stick’s ankel injury.
"Oh, yeah. We don't even talk about Bowls much. We're so far away from being a team right now that can have a chance to compete in a Bowl." HC Tommy Tuberville.
that and an epic
scene at Misty’s steakhouse across from the stadium Friday night. Unbelievable
This is a 3 ring circus up in here......
by oldschoolraider on Feb 13, 2012 3:19 PM CST up reply actions
Colonel Runkle was shot in the jaw but did not die...badass for sure
"It was impossible to get a conversation going. Everybody was talking too much" - Yogi Berra
Vaild good points.
"Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips."
by westtxscrub on Feb 13, 2012 10:38 AM CST up reply actions
Look at the injuries square in the face. . . :D
To clarify on injuries to the WR
(I love how a data driven post is deemed ‘lazy’ as opposed to just plain ol’ ‘knowledge’ . . :-)
TTUMAR you know I mean this as respectfully as I am able!!
I think I establish ‘injury equivalence’ between 2009 and 2011 by noting injuries to Potts/Sticks and Stephens. (This is a highly favorable equivalence, because the QB is a much more critical function to the Tech offense than the RB, but I am erring in favor of being even-handed).
Let’s go to games missed by WRs by season (stats supplied by CFBstats)
2011:
Ward: 0
Torres: 1
Moore: 3
James: 1
Games missed by key receivers: 5 out of 60 starts. Moore, a player who has shown the ability to perform at a high level against lower level defenses, was not full-strength for 2 additional games (OU, ISU).
Torres was injured part way through game 11 against Mizzou, and only missed the BU game, a game where our offense played well. Torres’ injury did not impact the previous 10 games.
2010
Leong: 0
Lewis: 0
Torres: 2
Zouzalik: 1
Swindell: 0
Total games missed by key receivers: 3 out of 65 starts
2009
Lewis: 0
Torres: 0
Swindell: 1
Leong: 0
Zouzalik: 0
Total games missed by key receivers: 1 out of 65 starts
2008
Crabtree: 0
Lewis: 0
Morris: 0
Britton: 0
Swindell: 0
Total games missed by key receivers: 0 out of 65 starts. Crabtree, one of the top receivers in the history of college football, was not at full strength for 2-3 games.
2007
Crabtree: 0
Amendola: 0
Morris: 0
Britton: 0
Walker: 0
Total games missed by key receivers: 0 out of 65 starts
I don’t think CFBstats.com is 100% accurate in the way that it show games missed, but I think it’s ‘treats’ games missed the same way.
It is clear that key WR’s in 2011 missed more games (5) than in previous years (0 to 3 games missed).
If you think Moore’s inability to fully contribute to the the offense because of injury resulted in our destruction at the hands of UT, OSU and ISU, you are also entitled to that view.
Now let’s get to some more numbers. Let’s look at Tech receiving yards with Moore/Stephens and without Moore/Stephen:
In all 12 games, Texas Tech averaged 34.1 receptions and 345.4 receiving yards per game.
In the 9 games in which Moore played, TTU averaged 36.6 receptions and 338.1 receiving ypg (more receptions, but less yards than the team’s overall average).
In the 4 games Moore did not play (I include Nevada because he went down so early in the game), Tech averaged 35.5 receptions and 360 yards per game (one fewer reception but 22 more yards than when Moore actually played).
In the 2 games Moore played hurt (ISU and OU), Tech averaged 26.0 receptions and 288 ypg, but this figure is misleading. Tech had 34 receptions and a near season best 452 receiving yards against OU. That production fell to 18 receptions and a near season worst 191 receiving yards against ISU.
In the one game where neither Moore nor Stephens played (Kansas State), the WR’s had their second most productive game of the season catching 43 passes for 461 yards.
All Games 34.1 345.4
Games w/ Moore 36.6 338.1
Games w/o Moore 35.5 360.0
Games w/ Injured Moore 26.0 288.3
Games w/Stephens 34.0 355.6
Games w/o Stephens 34.1 338.1
Games w/o Stephens/Moore 43 461.0
This data seems to downplay the impact of Moore’s 3 game absence due to injury on the WR’s and the offense’s performance over the course of the season.
If we apply the same approach to the loss of Stephens’, we can see that his loss WAS dramatic.
In the five games Stephens played, the Tech offense average 36.8 rushes per game and 169 rushing ypg.
In the seven games Stephens missed, Tech’s rushing production fell to 29.6 rushes per game and 94 rushing ypg.
Of course in Stephens’ production occurred against Tech’s 3 easiest opponents and Tech was playing catch up football (well, at least they were actually trying in a couple of games) for much of the latter part of the season, but the drop off was notable just the same.
My takeaway when I look very closely at the numbers is that on offense, Stephens’ loss was significant. The injuries to Moore, Torres, Edwards and other role players had a far less significant impact than the headline injury figure indicates.
"This time it's different."
by LondonRaider on Feb 13, 2012 1:09 PM CST up reply actions
Torres actually missed two games if you consider that he got hurt the first drive of the Missouri game. That game was so close that having either him or stephens healthy that game would have been the difference maker. But i strongly believe that the offense was put in bad situations because the defense was so horribly bad.
Also
2007 passing stats were padded by the fact that we had a poor running game, IIRC. That was the year Crawford was the only RB.
this reply was menat for the 1st post.
Crabtree-Harrell combination years were 2007 and 2008. In 2007, Michael Crabtree scored 22 touchdowns. IN 2008, be scored 19.
To be fair, in 2010, Leong had 19 TDs, but no one else in double figures. 2007 had Woods with 10 TDs. 2008 had Woods with 14 TDs and Morris with 12.
In 2006, Tech had 4803 Passing Yards and 1019 Rushing yards. Both worse than 2009. In 2006 Tech scored 408 points for an average of 34 points per game.
2007 and 2008 skew the statistics.
I agree with your points on the numbers
I used CFBstats.com because their databases are great. Unfortunately, they don’t go back beyond 2007.
I wasn’t trying to really compare 2008. I thought 2009 and 2007 were more representative of typical Tech year.
If you throw in the 2006 numbers, those numbers are closer to what we have at least since 2003/04.
The purpose of supplying these numbers is not to compare the various years, but to assess the impact of the injuries and talent. – the argument being that the injuries and talent were not significantly different between the team we have today and the teams we had in previous seasons.
You raise a good point in earlier posts about the 2007 season when we also struggled with injuries at the RB position which forced us to play an untested Crawford at the time. Despite those injuries, we still managed to eke out a 9-4 record which included a tough loss to Mizzou and a disappointing performance against Colorado.
Seth talks about impact players in his other post: Crabtree, VY, RGIII, Luck and Blackmon. Those players no doubt are special and are often the difference between being an 8-5 or 9-4 team versus being a Top 10 team.
Here’s to getting back to 8 wins.
"This time it's different."
by LondonRaider on Feb 14, 2012 6:59 AM CST up reply actions
Great data, London.
Here is my take on the wr talent.
The year Crabtree graduated, his replacement should have been Franks. Franks was in the program he was groomed and he was physically big enough especially compared to his HS size. I saw Franks play in HS, he was a very good all round athlete. Well, we found Torres and Torres took the job permanently.
2007 receivers: James*, Amie, Franks, Hawk, Leong*, Lewis, Swindall. * = gray shirt.
This group looked good on paper but as a group they did not do well. Lewis was the only real contributing scholly, Leong as a gray shirt out player the rest.
The data presented shows about 1 yard per reception less the last two years compared to the earlier 3, I cannot make anything out of that one way or the other…and that may not be the indicator we need…scoring is significantly down.
Just going by what I saw on the field, clutch plays not made, drops rather that receptions, this kind of data that is not recorded continues to lead me to believe that we have been hurting at receiver since about 2009.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
I'm surprised
That nobady has mentioned a recurring theme for the past 2 years. So I will.
After two years of Tubby’s “leadership”, this team still does not have an identity. You never have to guess the identity of a Mike Leach team, or a Les Miles team, or a Nick Saban team, or a Gary Patterson team. This is where I see the biggest disconnect with recruiting and “talent”. Coaches that foster a team identity (and stick with it) know what kinds of players and talent they are looking for. They are willing to go after a lower-rated player because they know that player will “fit”. And the end result is the team improves more with a 2 or 3-star player that fits than a 4 or 5 star player that doesn’t.
So will Tubs change that this year? Will he finally reveal to the “huddled masses” what the identity of this football team is or will become?
"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt."
by candyroll on Feb 13, 2012 12:36 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
RE: The Combine
I believe there are well over 300 players invited to the combine each year. There are roughly 230-245 players picked in each draft, depending on the number of compensatory picks teams are awarded (there are 224 regular picks through seven rounds). So there will be close to 80-90 players at the combine who won’t get drafted.
It’s still better to be invited than not, but every year they miss on guys who become impact players in their career. That says nothing about Tech not having players invited – the impression is clear that NFL types don’t hold out a lot of hope for any of the draft eligible players from TTU this year.
But the reality is we’ve never had more than six guys drafted in any one year (1956 – 6, 1965 – 5, 1969 – 5, 1978 – 5, 1980 – 5). And only once since 1990 have more than three gone in a draft year (2009). We just don’t groom a ton of NFL players, drafted or free agents (same could be said for schools like Mizzou and WVU, though). And even fewer players who make an impact in the NFL.
11/12/11...66-6...I once was blind, but now I see.
Whatever the talent, I think we were good enough to go better than 5 wins.
We played a very good Oklahoma team on their field and did something that had not been done by a TTU program…ever.
Then the following week, essentially the same group of players could not play football…I think there are some coaches who contributed to that in a very direct manner…and they are no longer on staff.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
by TallMike on Feb 13, 2012 1:04 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I would agree that we should have won more than 5 games. There were lots of contributing factors, coaching included. However, a “bad loss” is not foreign to us as Tech fans (e.g. loss to Iowa State). However, regardless of head coach, I am not sure we put together more than 7-8 wins in 2011with our roster. Better than 5 to be sure. But not elite and not 2007-2008 level success.
Injuries - Coaching - Talent
First, this was such a great post – thanks Seth. And the discussion very interesting, entertaining and enlightening – I’m sorry I missed out on the discussion and posting this so late.
INJURIES – is it bad luck or the result of bad coaching and conditioning. I’m more of a cause and effect sort of guy, so I’m going with the Coaching.
COACHING TURNOVER – Tubs is replacing five assistants. I do agree with the philosophy that “you always change a losing game” – but it still doesn’t inspire much confidence.
TALENT – I think it is significant that Tubs is relying more on JUCO transfers in his 2012 class. These players come in more developed and can weather the coaching dynamics.
There is an interesting preview of TT’s 2012 at Yahoo’s rivals.com. Here is the concluding paragraph talking about the injuries, coaching and talent:
Texas Tech’s top priority this spring is to stay healthy. The Red Raiders were decimated by injuries last season, and 10 players – six of whom started at least once in 2011 – will miss all or most of the spring while rehabbing. There also will be a lot of new faces on the practice field; Tuberville had to replace five assistants, including two in the past week. There also are seven early-enrollee JC transfers. Tech’s success this fall largely will be determined by how well those transfers perform, especially those on defense. The Red Raiders gambled a bit by going so JUCO-heavy with their 2012 class – seven already are on campus, and two more will arrive in the fall – and if that gamble doesn’t pay off, Tech again may find itself at home during bowl season.
Wazzu prone
Notice that we are starting 2012 with INJURIES !!!
10 players – six of whom started at least once in 2011 – will miss all or most of the spring while rehabbing.
Wazzu prone
by Nm RaiDer FAn on Feb 17, 2012 10:52 AM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Double-T Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
