Wednesday Morning Notes

by Seth C on Jun 27, 2007 5:45 AM CDT

If anyone in the DFW area has a tugboat I can borrow so I pull my house back on its foundation I'd appreciate it.

Texas Tech Football

Graham Harrell named to the preseason watch list for the Maxwell Award, announced by Maxwell Football Club yesterday and think this is well deserved by Graham.

I know of few things that get me riled up more when Graham isn't mentioned among some of the top quarterbacks in the nation and I think Graham gets overlooked in the conference as an excellent quarterback because of the number and quality quarterbacks in the conference (McCoy, McGee, Daniels, etc.). However, I can't help but feel somewhat slighted when he isn't considered by the mainstream media as one of the best quarterbacks in the conference. That's not to say that those other quarterbacks mentioned are worthy players, but I still can't help but think that Harrell had an outstanding season last year despite a couple of bad games. In fact I was talking to one of my UT-friends the week before last and casually asked him how many interceptions he thought Harrell had last year. His guess was, at the very least, 20 because of the number of attempts and quickly reminded my friend that Harrell only had 11 interceptions all of last year. And that's with 150 more attempts than Daniels and 300 more attempts than McCoy and McGee. That's just staggering. I know, I know, the pundits will say it's the system, but despite the system 38 touchdowns with only 11 interceptions is impressive, no matter how you cut it.

Rivals.com's Steve Megargee takes a look at some of the "new rivals" on the collegiate gridiron, or rather teams where new rivals have emerged. As we've been saying here at DTN (I use the "we" in the collective sense) that Texas Tech and Texas A&M makes the cut:

3. Texas A&M vs. Texas Tech

This Big 12 South matchup is one of the more intense - though overlooked - rivalries. Everyone knows the Aggies hate Texas, but their disdain for Texas Tech is just as intense. In some ways, it might be even more bitter. A&M seems to have a grudging respect for the Longhorns, but just resentment for Tech. A couple of years ago, a paragraph in the A&M media guide (uncorrected version) referred to the Red Raiders as "classless clowns." The Red Raiders have equal contempt for the Aggies. After a 12-0 victory in 2001 in Lubbock - a game in which the Red Raiders were favored - Tech fans tore down the goal posts and shoved them into the A&M cheering section. Coach Mike Leach has even referred to Texas A&M "playing army," which was an obvious taunt at A&M's Corps of Cadets. Overall, A&M leads the all-time series 34-30-1, but the Red Raiders have an 8-3 advantage in Big 12 play. The Red Raiders have also won the last six meetings played in Lubbock.

I couldn't have said it any better myself. I know the Aggies loathe the idea that Tech seems to have their number, but just mix in a win (By the way, we're not the only ones who think this - you have to read the whole post, but scroll to the bottom for the gold).

SB Nation friend, Corn Nation has a book review up that might picque the interest of some of DTN's readers or just high school football fans in general. I'll let Mr. Corn explain:

'Pigskin Pulpit' is a historical look at Texas high school football coaches from the origin of the sport in the 1890's to modern day. It tells the story of Texas high school football by relating the the coaches and their methods within the context of their time. Author Ty Cashion interviewed over eighty coaches for the book - some of which have passed on since it's original hardcover publication in 1998.

That sounds like a heck of a book.

Please welcome new SB Nation blog Clone Chronicles covering the Iowa State Cyclones. CC is the former, CrossCyed and is an excellent blog. Welcome to the network.

Texas Tech Baseball

The Williams and Hyatt Show Blog kindly linked to DTN last week and they've got some Texas Tech baseball coaching news:

BEAVERS UP IN ARMS (OK, NOT REALLY)

Oregon St. fans aren't too thrilled with the prospect that pitching coach Dan Spencer might be on the move to Texas Tech. Can you blame them? Look what the man's done there in Corvallis the past few years from a talent identification and development standpoint. I feel for the fan of the Beaver. You'd think they could at least have 24 hours to enjoy their back-to-back feat without worrying about losing a key component to their program. That said, that's what happens when you have success. Folks want to duplicate it and copy it and it's the ultimate compliment to a program to have other schools come after your guy.

If in fact Texas Tech is able to land Spencer, it'll be full-circle for him, having been given a "vacation" at one point in his Tech career by Larry Hays, now getting a chance to work with him. By all accounts, Spencer is much more like Hays now, than he was about 20-years ago, proving that discipline and a Coach's willingness to use it can pay dividends not just in the present for a program, but in the distant future for its players.

As for the other assistant position coach's spot, that could be filled as early as this week as well for the Red Raiders. Both new coaches will have to discard a lot of orange if things work out the way Larry Hays is hoping. At the end of the day, Tech will have a completely new staff, with all new assigned duties other than Larry. Tech fans that wanted a big shake-up are getting it.

Certainly interesting news on the coaching front. Stay tuned for more details.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

system

Isn't every offense a "system"? Look at Nebraska when they just shoved the ball down everyone's throat. Yeah they ran the ball every play and yeah they had 1000+ yard rushers. Texas did the same thing when they had Benson and Ricky. They both got around 30 carries a game. I wonder why they had great rushing stats. I think we get dissed because we are Texas Tech not because of the system. It is just an excuse for the ESPN announcers not to be bias. Even Herbstreets beloved Buckeyes have a system. Its is to play defense, only it doesn't work against SEC teams. Hopefully Tech will show the sports authorities that it is better than the "system".

by ST04 on Jun 27, 2007 9:27 AM CDT reply actions

Graham Harrell

could do a lot for our longterm QB recruiting if he gets the national attention that some of our other quarterbacks deserved for what they did.

by Red Blooded @ Double-T Nation on Jun 27, 2007 3:17 PM CDT reply actions

Does Tech

hinder itself in future years (I know, it's speculative) by getting only 1 year from their quarterback? Is this enough time from our beloved QB to get the notoriety needed for this type of future recognition?

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on Jun 27, 2007 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions

media bias

Guys, Tech will not get noticed because of media bias in favor of the "beloved 7". To them, if you aren't Notre Dame, OSU, Michigan, UT, Oklahoma, USC, or Florida State, then you're nothing.
It would help a lot if we had QBs that had 3 or more years of play to get noticed, but that's not likely to change under Leach. Tech has to prove that they are worthy of notice every year, and the only way to do this is to consistently crush our Big 12 opponents. That's how OU and UT do it...

by CoachT on Jun 27, 2007 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions

What about Brennan?

Colt Brennan isn't one of the Big 7, but is being mentioned as the best QB's in the nation and the odds on favorite to win the Heisman. Harrell's stats aren't too far off from Brennan's. My guess is that Harrell's year to be noticed is next year. That's when the Heisman push needs to happen.

You're right though, there is an element of needing to win, which Hawaii did last year, in order to get noticed and Leach & Co. have won, but just not dominated.

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on Jun 28, 2007 5:46 AM CDT up reply actions

One win

against a Top 10 UT or OU game in dramatic fashion goes a long way as well. So much of what makes a player "great" according to the people in charge of such things has a lot to do with how they play on national TV in big games. I don't agree with that, but it is what it is. When you are slaying giants you are treated as one.

by Red Blooded @ Double-T Nation on Jun 28, 2007 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions

point taken about Brennan

but, Heisman candidates come from winning teams. I mean 10-0 teams. If Harrell throws the ball all over the place but Tech remains 7-5, then forget any exposure as an elite QB or Heisman candidate. I would like to see Tech get to that point and maybe 2008 will be their year, but until then Tech and Harrell will probably be an afterthought for Heisman.
I do love watching the raiders throw the ball around though...

by CoachT on Jun 28, 2007 6:16 PM CDT up reply actions

Harrell isn't respected as an elite QB b/c....

he isn't an elite QB.

You can't have the games Harrell had against TCU and Missouri, and then turn around and claim to be 'elite'.

I think those of you saying "he's disrespected b/c of the system" are just loking for an excuse. B.J. Symons played in the system, and he was looked at as an elite QB. Harrell simply isn't at that level yet.

If he has a season where he is the reason they win their games, instead of being the reason they lose, and he till doesn't get any national attention, then you'll have a legitimate gripe.

Re: the A&M-Tech football 'rivalry'

I don't think any Aggie fan has a problem saying Tech is an in-state rival. What Tech is not, and what texas is, is an arch rival.
I remember reading on Raider Power once where a Tech fan said moving the A&M-Tech game to Dallas would be a good thing, b/c it would 'show the nation this rivalry is the equivalent of Michigan-Ohio State'. Uhhhhhhh, no.
A&M-Tech is no bigger a rivalry than if A&M played SMU every year, or TCU every year, or any other in-state school every year.
I think it is amusing that people are trying to say this is some new rivalry, when the fact remains that once we string together two wins in a row over you, you'll become an afterthought, just like Baylor.
(BTW, not sure why you thought this Baylor law student's comment was so amusing; Baylor & A&M actually do have some history in football, but it has little to do with the overall record equivalency claims that poster made.)

by Beergut on Jun 28, 2007 5:36 PM CDT reply actions

Okay

Harrell had, statistically, a pretty good season. Did he throw 52 touchdown? No, but he was damn good, real good. He should be recognized for that. That's all I'm saying.
Right, we've already forgotten about the Ags, those 2 wins in a row makes Aggie no better than Baylor.
Sorry for trying to have a sense of humor. I will try to limit all posts to nothing fun or remotely amusing.

You have to not take everything I write so seriously or nit-pick, it really brings down the discussion. I realize your an Aggie fan, but I think you've really got to pick your fights at a Texas Tech website.

I admit it, I'm biased in favor of Tech and I'm a pretty rational guy and I know that some of my thoughts aren't always be justified because I'm a fan.

Go Raiders . . .

by Seth C on Jun 28, 2007 6:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Ok.

I think it is amusing that people are trying to say this is some new rivalry, when the fact remains that once we string together two wins in a row over you, you'll become an afterthought, just like Baylor.

So we're an "afterthought" at some unidentifiable point in the future. Based on recent history, it doesn't appear at all clear that Texas A&M is going to string together two wins against us anytime soon, so you'll have plenty of time to prepare for looking past us.

I suggest starting small. Say, "once we beat you in Lubbock" or, better yet "once we beat you..."

by Red Blooded @ Double-T Nation on Jun 28, 2007 8:06 PM CDT up reply actions

recent history is misleading

You've beaten us under Fran; that isn't exactly an accomplishment. Hell, Baylor can claim that.

by Beergut on Jun 29, 2007 8:24 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm just giving my opinion

I honestly think many Tech fans view the A&M game much differently than the vast majority of Aggie fans do.
It is very similar to Arkansas and texas, imo. If you ask an Arkansas fan, they'll tell you texas is a rival. They get STOKED for games against texas. If you ask a texas fan, they'll tell you Arkansas was a rival back in the '60s, but not any more. texas fans are well-aware that Arkansas' players and fanbase get a lot more motivated to play them than they do to play Arkansas. For Arkansas, it is a rivalry game. For texas, it is another game on the schedule.
With A&M and Tech, it is the same situation, with A&M reacting to Tech like texas does Arkansas (although A&M and Tech weren't playing games with national championship implications in the '60s).

by Beergut on Jun 29, 2007 8:18 PM CDT reply actions