Connect with your Facebook Account

• Contact

Football Articles

55

Texas/Rice Football Review

Posted by Scipio Tex on September 23rd, 2008 under Football

DVR is an amazing thing. Watching the game without live action unladen by emotion, you always see a different contest. You realize how much of football really is the little things. The twin gifts of rewind and dispassion.

So obviously we beat the carbs out of Rice. Like our two previous non-conference routs, there is danger in extrapolating too much from this, but we all learned a little to make us better and that’s the whole point of scheduling Rice and the third act of any mixed race adoption sitcom from the 80’s.

First, the Owls. They had three guys that distinguish them from hapless Rice teams of yore. Chase Clement is yet another nifty, height-challenged, preppy elite suburb program QB from Texas who was ignored by big name college programs. He revels in demonstrating that in the spread offense a guy with an accurate arm, a 4.5 40 time, and a good head on his shoulders can be a major irritant even when surrounded by guys with 1400 SATs. The state of Texas now spawns preppy spread warriors like salmon. Give him real weapons across the board and he’s Todd Reesing, Chase Daniel, etc. WR Jarrett Dillard consistently used all of our corners as his personal tampon. He was the best WR on the field and I say that with full respect to the ruthless efficiency of Shipley and Cosby. Everyone knows Dillard has great hands and runs great routes – what they don’t mention is his superior toughness, body control, and the fact that he runs a 40 in pads the same as in shorts. He’s also smart as hell. There is a future for this guy in the League. He disgraces people. James Casey, despite a bad drop, is a great athlete and legit threat at TE. Unfortunately, we could use him. That’s all Rice has. It should get them to .500.

Defensively, Muschamp is playing it right. Our youth and inexperience dictates safety deep and the heavy use of extra DB personnel. Chykie has turned the corner at corner. He’s going to be very good. Beasley is regressing and needs to toughen up. Aaron Williams is now fixture at dime and must have played 30 snaps. He will be elite. Tactically, our constant concession of short routes may be frustrating, but we’ve faced three competent passing offenses in succession and we’re giving up very few big plays down the field — witness a 6.2 yards per attempt cumulative average.

Most of the Big 12 offenses would prefer to score from 50 yards out (OU, OSU excepted). Give them 2nd and goal on your 5 yard line and they’re moderately out of sorts — lofting fades and hoping a QB draw out of an empty set can sneak in. We have a nice, active front four and though we have only one upper classman with traditional linebacker skills (Muckelroy), we’re playing with some real passion and pride in the red zone. We are a Bend-But-Don’t-Break-Defense. After the Mackovic years, hearing those words is like gargling with turpentine, but realize that there are passive and aggressive forms of that philosophy.

I know that every fan deep down in places inaccessible by proctoscope wants to be the ‘85 Bears or ‘83 Texas on defense, but that world is over. The fact is, USC is a Bend-But-Don’t-Break-Defense. Watch ‘em. They just have better athletes doing it. Bend-But-Don’t-Break doesn’t mean passive. In fact, it’s effectiveness is premised on the notion that you’re knocking the shit out of people and causing turnovers if the offense doesn’t self-destruct along the way. The ‘86 Giants believed in that philosophy and no one called them pussies. Unfortunately, our problem is the whole causing turnovers and knocking people out thing – see our DB’s. Too bad Duane Akina decided to take a three year recruiting vacation during our BCS runs. Not that I hold it against him or anything. How was he supposed to know that Ross and Huff didn’t have nine years of eligibility?

I digress. Muschamp’s ability to make halftime adjustments is impressive. We’ve given up 7 second half points in three games. This game also revealed something that could prove to be a very important learning point for us down the road and it’s very much not Bend-But-Don’t- Break: our front four’s depth and athleticism is such that we can force sacks and batted balls if we’ll trust our corners to man up and extend routes. Not every snap. We don’t have the personnel to do that. But often enough to inflict a negative play and fuck up someone’s series. Why did we get so many sacks in the 2nd half and limit Rice to around 100 yards of offense? We manned up across the board and sat on all of the short routes. We also told our pass rushers to ignore gap control and get the passer in any way they desired.

The result? Clement’s running and passing lanes collapsed, we disrupted the entire Owl offense, and our corners held up long enough to force Clement to hold onto the ball and let our rush get there. With Lamarr Houston back at DT, Kindle a de facto starting DE, and Orakpo learning that there are other pass rush techniques beyond bull rush, we’re a hell of a lot more athletic on the DL than we thought. I think Muschamp noticed and will be turning those hounds loose again. As Sting once said, “If you love your DL, set them free.”

By the way, would it shock you to know that we’re 21st in the NCAA in sacks? We’re in the top fifth of teams at getting to the QB. Doesn’t feel that way does it? When the whole point of the spread is to get the ball out of your QB’s hands in 1-2 seconds, sacks aren’t easy to come by. Batted balls are the new sack. There are college fans the nation over bitching about their team’s lack of pressure on the QB. Fine. As long as it distracts us from the financial markets.

Getting away from scheme, the Defensive MVP was Lamarr Houston. It really took watching the replay to appreciate how much he wrecked the Rice offense. He’s a great DT and exactly what we should be doing at the position – at least when paired with an elite run stopper like Miller. Acho continues to be our best pure pass rusher. I’d like to see more than 15 snaps from him.

Watching Rashad Bobino caused me physical pain. His pursuit angles, his lateral movement, I have to stop. But he does bench 450! Muschamp has basically conceded that his primary value is stunting up the middle on passing downs to prevent a double team on Houston or Miller.

On offense, Colt is the shiznit. That was just stellar QB play and I know that it’s Rice, but some of those throws would have been impressive without defensive backs on the field. His legs continue to provide lipstick to the pig our running game. If any of you cite that we’re averaging 204 yards per game as some sort of retort to that, I will come through your screen like The Candy Man and throttle you. Shipley and Cosby define steadiness, Greg Davis called a number of crossing routes and nice wrinkles in the passing game, and Chris O continues to be the only 4.6 dude in college football where his first twenty yards are a 3.0 and his last twenty are a 1.5. Perhaps I exaggerate, but he is a long strider. I like old Chris. We need to turn him into an H-Back pronto. If I see another person suggest Dan Buckner to TE, I’m going to murder death kill someone.

Speaking of homicide, let’s talk about the running game. Poor Vondrell should be running I-back for Nebraska circa 1988. I will disagree with dedfischer on his reading of Vondrell in this game. Every negative play Vondrell had was a result of a missed block on a DL. Untouched. Every time he had reasonable blocking, he got decent yardage – he even made some people miss on his nifty nine yarder and when we were backed up on our goalline. He also singlehandedly prevented a safety when he powered through an unblocked Rice DL. Every week our running game – particulary our zone plays – are blocked like absolute dogshit in the first half and then corrected in the second half after we bench a couple of OL for series or two. Then suddenly Cody Johnson is a folk hero.

Cody Johnson earned a number of oohs and ahhs primarily because he ran with discernible vision, conjures a dim associative memory of Ricky Williams, and showed…above averageness!? We need a healthy Fozzy Whitaker stat, but most of all we need a real running game. The scheme is the thing. We’ve never really run the ball effectively without a major running threat at QB using the zone read and the incredibly sophisticated concept of blocking down on defenders rather than reach blocking and though it’s tempting to utilize Colt in this way, if I’m OU or Missouri I’ll concede the pawn of 10 yard runs to Colt in order to take the queen of free hits on him by Nic Harris and William Moore. The minute he gets injured, we’re a 7-5 football team. The Cluster Flux package presents intriguing possibilities, but there are two major impediments:

1. It would actually require us to use it and commit to it. It’s not a one play “look.” It needs to have counter options, throwback passes, double option, a lead play. It can’t be the Tony Jeffery reverse. See Miami Dolphins vs. New England.

2. John Chiles is the least elusive, easiest-to-tackle really fast guy I’ve seen since Reggie McNeal. When people compare his athleticism to Percy Harvin, I know they’re going to immediately lobby for Montre Webber to play TE for us. Dude is talented. I’m just not sure where that talent is best served.

Shipley & Cosby were tremendous. Obviously, we’re all interested to see how they do against upgraded competition, but I’m seeing a paucity of lockdown corners in the Big 12. How about you? Maybe good enough is all we need. Blaine Irby is a major loss. I pray football isn’t over for him altogether. We’ve lost a major piece that we need against the better teams.

David Snow continues to play at a really high level for a freshman. I’m just totally impressed. Chris Hall is really physically weak. He needs to hit the weight room and the stadium steps and remake his body. This will be a problem when Gerald McCoy drives him three yards into our backfield on every play in Dallas. Presumably, we’ll then blame that on our RBs.

I still see a 5-3 or 6-2 Big 12 record.

Article Tags:

, ,

More from this Barker


Share This

  • StumbleUpon

55 Responses

  1. flamingmonkeyass said:

    September 23rd, 2008 at 10:42 pm

    I know it was against Rice and all, but that 12 play goalline stand I think may have just given our defense the swagger they needed. There was a noticable diferrence in their effectiveness after that moment. It’s like they’re starting to believe.

  2. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 12:40 am

    Can’t see where the third loss will come from, assuming we get our running game in order. We are a better team this year, than we were last, but, yes, without that, we have a very good shot at 5-3 once again. But assuming that Fozzy is just a bright star waiting in the wings to shine, where on earth are those three losses going to come from. Aside from OU, the Horns should be heavily favored in every other game. And Mizzou? They just had some trouble finishing off Buffalo at home. Mizzou has a lousy D with no running game. Once they get in the red zone against an athletic D, how often are they going to be able to push it through. Kansas? Just apply the above to them as well, except they just suck even more in every respect.

    I say max two losses in conference this year. And if it not because Texas is so good, then it is cause the rest of the league is just so slow poke average, certainly at least on D. Besides, one of strengths of this Texas team and Colt, in particular, is going to be consistency, and, while this team may not be spectacular, I suspect they will offset that with consistently good performances, game in and game out, probably to a greater degree than teams of the past. There is something to be said about a team that performs week in and week out and does not beat itself. Refer to Kansas of last year to see how much can be accomplished by such a team and they had half the talent that we do. As long as Texas plays at an above average level week in and week out, just how many teams in the B12 could be beat us, if we do not beat ourselves? I do not see any at all, aside from OU.

  3. bracket said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 3:14 am

    I have not read the post but I had to let you guys know that Mike Leach is offering dating advice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxBsXzvENpo. found on espn.

  4. bat said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 3:50 am

    I don’t think McGee is it. He runs hard, but has absolutely no vision. He averaged three yards a pop against Rice. A hobbled Rice. All of the other backs give us something. Cody Johnson is a stronger back with better vision if you just want to move the pile. He’ll get the 4 yard runs when that’s all that is available, and he’ll have a lot of 5-15 yarders. Fozzy has better vision to go with his quicks. Ogbonashchexca has better hands out of the backfield and is a solid blocker so he’s got big play potential in the passing game.

    On another note, Brown teams will win at least 10 games. That sounds about right for this team.

    I do think we have an outside shot at knocking Bradford out of the game. He’s going to get hit.

  5. dedfischer said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 4:11 am

    Did you see Chris Hall trying to pull and block a LB on that sweep to Chiles for about 20? I think it was in the 2nd quarter.

  6. Nordberg said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 4:51 am

    “Batted balls are the new sack.”

    I’m pretty sure you can get banned on Hornfans.com for saying that.

  7. SlickStreet said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 4:53 am

    Great read again, Scip’.

    I admit to being a bit disappointed thus far with Vondrell, despite blocking issues. Then again, perhaps that’s exactly why he looks less effective–backs tend to appear so when they have little or no room to roam.

    Still, it seems to me our best shot at a good running game (didn’t say ‘great’) is utilizing more and more of Cody and, sheesh if he’s healthy, Fozzy.

    Like you, I’m very concerned having to rely anything more than moderately on Colt. He’s a much better runner than most ever imagined, but that’s a risky world to live in.

  8. Vasherized said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 5:05 am

    steven,

    I actually preferred your pithy collegiate social satire.

    There is something to be said about a team that performs week in and week out and does not beat itself.

    Unfortunately that team isn’t Texas. We beat ourselves regularly against OU with turnovers, poor scheme, conservative playcalling, and halfhearted execution. And we’ve also gotten our asses kicked a few times regardless of what we tried to do. The times we’ve won have been playing fast and loose with VY and in a similar fashion with Colt and Charles against a depleted OU team the next year.

    As long as Texas plays at an above average level week in and week out, just how many teams in the B12 could be beat us, if we do not beat ourselves?

    How about four? OU, Missouri, Tech, Kansas. 3/4 on the road against Top 12 teams. Above average won’t cut it.

  9. blon said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 5:37 am

    By the way, would it shock you to know that we’re 21st in the NCAA in sacks? We’re in the top fifth of teams at getting to the QB…

    We are? Wow. You’re right, it doesn’t seem that way at all.

    Getting to Bradford is going to be very, very tough. OU’s O-line is GOOD. And no, I do not want to knock him (or any other player) out of the game. I just would like to see our D put some pressure on him to force turnovers and interceptions.

  10. Horncasting said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 5:45 am

    Add OSU to that list. I’m not sure how anyone can look at the last 5 games against them and think they are a gimme.

    CU on the road will not be easy either.

  11. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:18 am

    How about four? OU, Missouri, Tech, Kansas. 3/4 on the road against Top 12 teams. Above average won’t cut it.

    Sure, any team can beat any other team on a given Saturday. Are you sure that your pessimism is not more a matter of you noticing the big fat wart on your own nose, while ignoring all the other warts which everyone else around you is covered with? Sure, this Texas team has flaws and limitations, but you don’t think all those other teams you have mentioned also do not have their own issues to iron out? And I would add that their issues are probably more serious, less correctable, and more urgent than our own. So while we may not be happy about our own warts, we should be very thankful that others have it worse than us. If Texas does not beat itself, I do not see those other teams beating Texas, not unless they get more than a few lucky bounces go their way.

    Each team each year has a character of its own, and I believe that this particular team, with Colt leading it, will be one which does not tend to beat itself. And yes, I also agree that this hasn’t always been the case with Texas teams in the past, but I believe this one is different, in that respect. The excellence of execution is just glaring on the offensive side of the ball. A true strength. And on the defensive side, it seems that our front 7 have also made strides from a year ago.

  12. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:23 am

    Oh by the way guys, sorry to disappoint you all, but I am all through with sluts. Shoot me and hang me up by my balls, if that word ever slips from my stuttering lips again on this site. After all that god damn bullshat writing I did yesterday, I am officially all slutted out. I think it’s going to take me at least a good year or so to recover my taste for the term and the idea.

  13. HenryJames said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:26 am

    I think it’s been a long time since you’ve had a taste for any girls.

  14. Dr. Raymond Stantz said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:37 am

    steven, you ignorant slut.

  15. Bartoncreek said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:39 am

    We won’t be heavily favored in all our games. I’m guessing:
    -7 vs. CU+/- 3 points based on game vs. FSU
    +6 vs. OU
    -2 vs. Mizzou
    -3 vs. KU
    -3 vs. Tech

    5 games we are favored by less than a TD possibly.

  16. Bartoncreek said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:44 am

    You sound cautiously optimistic to me, Scip. That is kind of how I feel. 10-2 would be a great season for us.

  17. Gene Claude said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:50 am

    Steven, your take on Mizzou’s rushing prowess is about as current as a Big 10 offensive set.

    Mizzou is averaging about 191 yards rushing a game, 10 less than Texas, but on about 9 fewer carries a game. At any point in the last year that a team has tried to play straight cover 2 or cover 3, we’ve rushed for two bills or more. Washington is the best RB I’ve seen at Mizzou in almost two decades. This is fairly obviously the best offensive line we’ve fielded in the Pinkel era. We can run.

    I’m sure you watched the Buffalo game, right? Or did you just read some pithy espn headline written by someone else who didn’t watch the game? Mizzou did not struggle at all to put Buffalo away. Mizzou fumbled 3 times in Bull teritory and gave up a kickoff return for a touchdown. Those breakdowns suck, but they are one off events, and have no predictive use. Mizzou outgained Buffalo 590 to 286. Mizzou gave up 1.4 yard per rush. IN short, Mizzou beat the snot out of Buffalo but for a couple flukes.

    I’m not one of those Mizzou fans that takes for granted that we can walk into Austin and get a win. But anyone making claims from either side that a particular outcome is likely is absurd. Especially when your comments make it abundantly clear that your knowledge of Mizzou is based on a hurried perusal of the day’s headlines while taking a grumper.

  18. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:50 am

    Yea, I’ve always been sort of picky and finicky eater, ever since I was a kid. Never liked the taste or the after taste, although I have tried an assortment of different flavors and varieties in my time. But then I have never been into sushi either. Each to his own I suppose. Anyway, I’m vegetarian. I don’t eat meat like some of you other folks around here.

  19. Gene Claude said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 7:06 am

    The MU v. UT line is heavily dependant on MU’s showing against NU and OSU and UT’s showing against OU. I can see anything from UT -5 to MU -7. If OU beats you handily, we’ll be favored, unless, of course, we lose to NU or OSU.

  20. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 7:23 am

    Your assessment of my knowledge of Mizzou football would be correct. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it is wrong. Also, however you struggle, it is still technically struggling against Buffalo. One way or another, it does not reflect too positively on your team.

    If you guys have that runner, then more power to you all. He will certainly be a needed and welcome addition to your team. It will just make your team that much more formidable. But even if this is the case, you all still have a shatty D. Illinois managed to put up 40 on you all, while they only managed 20 against ULL last week. Admittedly, it was the first game of the season and I will give you that. I will also give you that the Mizzou D is probably not as bad as they have seemed. From my limited view of them, they, unlike most B12 teams, seem to have the athletes required to field a decent D. It is just a matter of doing so. Pinkel has been doing a nice job of recruiting up there.

    I guess the main point of my uneducated and uninformed view is that Mizzou hasn’t really done anything to be considered a legitmate contender or to deserve their elevated ranking, aside from looking all world style-wise against lousy teams. In the last four years, who of any significance has Mizzou beaten for them to deserve all the press and hype they have been getting? Now you could say that for most B12 teams, since we as a conference just do not play anyone of significance too often, but still it is a valid point against Mizzou.

    Now if Mizzou rolls up here to Austin and beats our Longhorn asses, then I will change my tune and promptly eat my words. But until then, I think it is reasonable to doubt how Mizzou would perform against a truly elite team.

    Also, if those are going to be the actual lines for the future horn games, then I am going to quit playing the lottery and my other get rich schemes and throw all my Kapital on the Horns. I, for one, have faith in Mack and GD against a set of lines like that. Maybe it’s all fool’s gold, but it would be hard even to fool a fool with lines like that.

  21. Scipio Tex said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 7:31 am

    Yeah, I’m not really suggesting Vondrell is the answer. Whatever that is. I’m saying he is fielding some pretty shitty questions.

    There was quite a long time period when Texas fans turned on Cedric Benson. He’s not making anything happen. Too hesitant. What happened to Cedric? Our OL sucked ass. It didn’t get much more complicated than that. We started running adult running schemes, upgraded the OL, and put Vince in the backfield and suddenly he’s a badass again and no one will admit to their prior perceptions.

    The value of watching a game on DVR or Tivo is that you can take lazy perceptions and put them to the test of reality. And if a playside DL is left unblocked, I don’t expect much from my back except not to fumble when he gets lit up.

    dedfischer:

    I did see that play. I just shook my head. There was another where we ran a counter and our playside guard and tackle destroyed both of their guys blocking down, the backside guys got their kick outs, and the field opened up like Kansas prairie…except Hall gets so manhandled by the Rice DT that he ends up facing our running back as he comes through the hole. You can just see Vondrell looking at him like – why are you tackling me?

  22. Scipio Tex said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 7:34 am

    steven:

    Something about you reminds me of Tom Wilkinson’s character in Michael Clayton.

  23. HenryJames said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 7:55 am

    Something about him reminds me of the character Kent in Real Genius.

  24. Vasherized said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:04 am

    He reminds me of some students I briefly knew in Plan II before jumping ship for more anonymous studies.

    But if there is anybody still out there with clear braces and a yellow turtleneck, it’s Steve-O.

  25. beowulf said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:06 am

    Colt has been injured a number in his first 2 years, but if memory serves, all of them, with the exception of the QB sneak vs KSU, happened when he was attempting to pass the ball.

    Has he ever been injured in a run or scramble downfield? Maybe he has.

    Like it or not he needs to be a force in our run game this year. He’s actually a better runner than Chiles is for some reason.

  26. Scipio Tex said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:25 am

    Chiles isn’t that elusive and doesn’t break tackles.

  27. Nordberg said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:25 am

    Remember when Jevan Snead was the mobile one?

  28. Mister Mike said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:33 am

    I’m sure this will come as no surprise to Horn fans (after watching the majority of the Texas games on the tube) but Greg Davis baffles the shit out of me. At times for a series or two his play-calling ranges from above average to even great (see: Shipley, Jordan – Double move) and then it’s like he randomly thumbs to a page in the ol’ playbook, drops a pencil on the page and says “Yep. That one there looks good” (see: designing run plays to your offense’s strengths)

    My question: do you anticipate an “upgrade” to the OC position next year, or will Mack continue to clap his hands, shout “Let’s go!” and “Good job!” and then promptly extend a raise to Davis?

    Maybe I’m just…ignorant as all hell about this, but the Horns could cherry pick anyone they want, but yet they stick with Davis? I guess maybe I don’t get it.

  29. Dude said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:34 am

    “Chiles isn’t that elusive and doesn’t break tackles.”

    Then move him to QB. Oh, wait.

  30. Horncasting said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 9:05 am

    Scipio – We started running adult running schemes, upgraded the OL, and put Vince in the backfield and suddenly he’s a badass again and no one will admit to their prior perceptions.

    I’d argue that only one of those is correct. The change in Benson’s production from Simms/Mock at QB to Vince at QB was night and day.

  31. dick said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 9:08 am

    get in line mister mike. that question is sooo year 2000.

    I don’t get it, Chiles looked unbelievably elusive, fast and strong in his high school clips and many thought him to be #1 athlete in the country. I don’t see any of that, regardless of position. I also see him gone after this year. I’m ok with Sherrod backing up Colt for a year and then GG.

  32. dedfischer said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 9:09 am

    I had to rewind that sweep play a couple of times and laugh. Also, saw the noseguard handling Hall the time you’re talking about and a couple of other times unless he received the combo help. That made rub my hands together thinking about Colby Whitlock matching up with him.

  33. Kafka said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 9:42 am

    Scipio:

    Great writeup as usual.

    Muschamp is obviously correct when he uses a nickel or dime versus a passing attack. What is amazing is that UT was so reluctant to do so in years past.

    Muschamp’s multiple approach to D (i.e. minimizing predictability) keeps the opposition O off balance. Great idea to throw in some man to man to confuse the O but the good teams will abuse us if we do a steady diet of man to man. It would be cool to aggressively hit receivers at the LOS and then be able to sink into a zone. Don’t know if it will actually work but I do know that you absolutely have to disrupt the rhythm of receivers and the timing of patterns.

    Nice mention of DB recruiting, what the hell happened there (for multiple years!?!)?

    The approach of manning up in the secondary and turning the rushers loose all the time is fine if the other team has to pass but is fraught with peril if they can run or pass.

    Taking your word that Bobino is so bad, is Norton any better? I have done very little video study of the horns this year and really appreciate your analysis.

    I guess what I still wonder about Colt is how is he going to react to extreme blitzing pressure.

    Regarding Colt’s running, clearly he is bigger, stronger, less likely to fumble/get hurt when running than last year. His vision, sense of timing when to cut, and decision making when running are awesome. I don’t like running the QB zone read run with Colt but I think running the sprint draw off of Colt’s rollouts would work extremely well. Or running reverses off of colt’s rollouts would work great. The great thing about Colt running off the rollout action is that he can get out of bounds (maybe no hit on Colt) or throw the ball (probably no hit on Colt) so there is less risk of colt getting injured. Also, Colt is a more serious threat when he rolls out than when he is running the QB zone read so the TB (or WO on a reverse) has more running room.

    I would love to see the following play with Chiles at QB and Colt lined up to the left of the QB in the slot as a WO (or maybe just as a halfback a few yards from the QB):
    Chiles rolls out to the left with Colt going to the right behind chiles. Chiles has the option of running with the ball or pitching the ball to Colt who can then rollout to the right and pass on the run (or take it down and run it).

    The advantages of the play is that if the D is conservative and waits to see if Colt is going to get the pitch before reacting to Chiles’ running, Chiles should be able to run for a nice gain (i.e. usually the D assumes that Chiles is going to run the ball and totally sells out to stop the Chiles’ run). If the D immediately reacts to Chiles, then Colt gets to pass to receivers who get to cut opposite of the general flow of the D. Colt will have have a better throwing angles than he normally does when he rollsout (because he will be farther left when he starts his roll out).

    I will have a much better idea about how good this team is after they have played Arkansas and Colorado.

    I am impressed with Chiles’ size, speed, and ability to cut.

    Chris O seems much quicker this year than last year. It might be easier for Cody (than Chris O) to block a rushing DE since Cody outweighs Chris O by about 40 pounds (assuming the H back has to frequently block DEs).

    I haven’t given up on Vondrell. Mack claimed that Vondrell runs a 4.3 40. He seems quick enough to me but I don’t know about 4.3 quick.

    Obviously Fozzy may be more talented than Vondrell but I wonder if he might stay healthier at halfback or slot. That would also put another explosive runner on the field for the horns (doing wonderful things for both the short passing game and the running game).

    Does Burnette look much better than Hall?

    Blocking down on defenders is much easier than reach blocking but having an excellent blocking FB or H back really helps down blocking. That may be a bridge too far for Mack/GD. I would love to see Cody at FB or H back.

  34. Robert Joseph & James Henry said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 10:05 am

    “Nice mention of DB recruiting, what the hell happened there (for multiple years!?!)?”

    Well, for starters, bitches deserve to be kicked.

  35. Horncasting said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 10:07 am

    Nice mention of DB recruiting, what the hell happened there (for multiple years!?!)?

    2005 was really he only bad year from a recruiting perspective. 2003 was the T. Brown/Mi. Griffen/A. Ross/E. Jackson/R. Palmer class. Marcus Griffen also was a walk on as part of that class. That was a great DB class.

    2004 we signed 3 4-stars and 1-3-star, but the DB class ended up poor due to a number of issues.
    Palmer – still with the team. The 3-star.
    Kelson – injuries, etc. to RB forced an bad decision to move him to RB and waste an entire year. Then moved around between LB and S with our DC revolving door.
    Tatum – transfered. Fairly high ranked player.
    Taylor – widely considered to be a DB recruit. Moved to offense as a necessity, which turned into the right move, but his commitment took us out of the running for Walker who ended up at OU.

    2005 we failed to land a true CB. Got Ishie (4-star) to change his commitment late in the recruiting process. No real impact so far.

    2006 we went back to having very good DB hauls, but again the class has taken a hit after signing day. The class included D. Beasley/Ch. Brown/R. Joseph/J. Henry.

  36. Gene Claude said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 10:26 am

    Steven:

    Some fair points. Illinois did put up a bundle of points on us, and our secondary (partially minus our all american free safety) hasn’t been stellar. Although, most of those yards were earned by opponents who were down 21+ points.

    We struggled against Buffalo at times. However, if you want to use past results as a predictor for what will happen in the future (and that is what you are trying to do), you need to determine what caused the past results and if those things are useful for predicting the future. I believe that there is very little predictive worth in three different receivers fumbling deep in an opponent’s territory. So the underlying struggle does little to predict future struggle. And, the ability to outgain your opponent 2:1 is very predictive of future success.

    This whole “who have you beat” thing is the last bastion of the former elite team’s fans. I guess I would say we beat two BCS teams last year on neutral fields. But, of course, you’ll respond that those teams (KU and Illinois) weren’t actually any good. So where does that leave us? You invited me to point out victories from 4 years ago, but those are completely irrelevant to the quality of this team.

    This approach (and it always comes from the fans of a somewhat down traditional power…you’ll be glad to know every other Hustker fan makes this argument about Mizzou) is one big stinky logical fallacy. I’ll summarize: Until you win a national championship, we uppity traditional powerhouse fans won’t believe that you can win a national championship. Um, OK. Very helpful.

    Mizzou returned a bevy of starters from a team that dominated all non-Sooner opponents last year, including top defensive lineman, top linebackers, all american safety, freshman all american corner, all american receiver, all conference tight end and all american quarterback. This isn’t some sort of undeserved ranking. If anything, the traditional powers often are the recipients of undeserved rankings; perennial underdogs like Mizzou have to actually perform to earn lofty rankings.

  37. Kafka said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 10:29 am

    Joseph and Henry: “bitches need to be kicked”. LOL funny!

    Horncasting:
    Great summary. I did not realize that Ramonce Taylor hurt our DB recruiting. It paid off, though. He was great in 2005.

  38. Gene Claude said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 10:36 am

    Steven, another thing you’ll find interesting. The Missouri defense (that sucks, right?) and the Texas defense (that has been better than expected, right?) have given up exactly the same amount of yards per play. The only real difference in the two defenses is that Missouri’s defense has faced 10 more plays per game. In other words, the major difference between the two defenses is pace of play. Missouri’s defense has given up more yards because it has been on the field more.

    People constantly forget that college statistics are context dependent. Missouri’s defensive statistics are always going to look worse than most other teams because we will always be in the bottom 20 in total number of defensive plays.

  39. AugieBall said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 6:04 pm

    Part of defensive plays per game is getting the opposing offense off the field. I understand that a spread offense will use less clock and thus tax its defense more, but there are a lot of spread offenses these days.

  40. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:36 pm

    As far as Chiles “the great athletes who is easily tackled” is concerned, my take on all that is that he probably just ain’t all that good. Now we Hornfans could be a bit biased in all this, since VY and his exploits came right before Chiles and all of that is still fresh in our minds, but, still, Chiles is sort of like Erin Andrews, f*ckable but nothing to write home about, in a metaphorical sort of way, definitely not in the literal sense.

    Chiles, to me, has excellent intial speed and acceleration, but both seem to tail off way too quick and, I suspect, that is one of the reasons for that sensation of disappointment we get when we see him run. That initial, big play inspiring burst of his gives us hope and makes us sit by the edge of our seats in anticipation, but then all of sudden it seems as if he is going in slow mo or has hit a sudden patch of quick sand in the turf and he slows down unexpectedly and gets caught by some no name defensive player, who happens to go to a wannabe ivy league school and probably makes good grades and who initially looked as if he had no chance in hell to make that God damn play.

    And of course all this sudden build up of anticipation and then sudden deflation leads us being left with a sense of disappointment, kind of like the feeling you get when eating slanty eyed Chink food -you eat your fill and then 20 minutes later you can’t tell if you have eaten anything at all. That is the kind of long-lasting disappointment we are left with, whenever it seems Chiles runs. And that sensation just gets worse and worse, the more times he runs and runs, cause the same damn thing just keeps happening over and over again. It gets to the point where you just want to close your damn eyes whenever you see him on the field and he makes a threatening gesture to move.

    On top of all that, Chiles also seems to go down as easy as the Titanic, cause he lacks balance when he is running at speed. It’s as if he knows that he is slowing down, as well, and in a effort to keep from doing so, he goes all anal on us and tries really, really hard to eek out that little extra speed that he believes will get him over that hump or past that corner. But in the effort to this, Chiles ends up running like and looking like some sort of midget man with pigmy short legs trying to keep pace with a Kenyan marathoner. With those itty bitty legs of his churning and burning so fast, his feet barely touch the damn ground, and as a result, even just a stiff breeze or the equivalent thereof can knock him on his ass.

    All that and the thought that Ketch makes six figures by pumping a guy like this as the numero uno recruit in Texas, while dissing players like R. Griffin, just makes me want to puke and go old school Al-Qaeda on his lily white, good for nothing ass.

  41. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 9:46 pm

    He reminds me of some students I briefly knew in Plan II before jumping ship for more anonymous studies.

    But if there is anybody still out there with clear braces and a yellow turtleneck, it’s Steve-O.

    Well, I may have clear braces and yellow turlenecks, but, at least, I am not some punk (no offense intended), spoiled brat who had all the advantages in life given to him, yet still found, much to his dismay, that he could keep pace with his more genetically gifted couterparts at the instition known as UT, and so ended up in what he felt was the next best scenario. As stereotypical slacker who is not all that slack or carefree, and who is obsessed with convincing himself that he chose this lot, instead of having it foisted upon him by circumstance and his own general limitations and failures. And with a good supply of incoherent and all over the board scepticism and negativism to ease the transition from being a pampered mama’s boy to being an adult college student with a mediocre outlook and less than attractive future ahead of him.

  42. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 9:52 pm

    Something about him reminds me of the character Kent in Real Genius.

    Something tells me there is a very good chance that you, sir, have a problem with authority and you also have no problem in showing it, unfortunately, much to your own detriment. A habit you will have a difficult time overcoming, if you ever do.

  43. steven said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 10:20 pm

    Also Gene Claude, if anyone around here is wearing yellow turtlenecks, I would suppose it would be you, especially considering you are from the North. Now all that prejudice you talked about may just be “one big logical fallacy” in theory or in terms of a detached logical game, but from a practical perspective and here in the real world, there is a valid reason why so many feel the way that they do with regard to that issue. It is because college football in general is an inherently unequal playing field, with each institution having their own set of near permanent long-term strengths and weakness with respect to their programs. There is a predetermined pecking order in college football. Programs in college football generally are what they are and they tend to stay that way, with the only change usually being the turnover due to graduation. In other words, programs typically get the players they have always gotten, the same quality and the same quantity, unless their is some unique situation going on at a program. So sure, a more innovative and effective scheme could make such a program more competitve, but folks from the more traditional powers will also always assume that such programs will not have the same overall outright talent level as they do themselves. And there is some real world validity for their point, I believe. Mizzou is better than they usually are, mainly, because they got lucky with a 2nd rate QB recruit. He turned out better than anyone anticipated or projected and Mizzou has been the beneficiary of this windfall. But it is natural for people to also assume that the traditional limitions and weaknesses with the Mizzou team will still be there, since the overall nature of program hasn’t changed, but rather, all this is due to just one lucky hit on just one player. So like I said, until Mizzou goes out and beats one of the big boys in a convincing fashion and not on the basis of a fluke, the folks at the traditional programs will have right to hold some degree of reservation against the Mizzou program. But of course this does not mean they are right, just that they have a point. It’s all up in the air right now, and let us see how all this pans out.

  44. Scipio Tex said:

    September 24th, 2008 at 10:31 pm

    Alrighty.

  45. Ransom Stoddard said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 4:02 am

    Steven is right about one thing: the elephant in the room right now is that Chile just isn’t that good, at anything.

    Oh, and you haven’t seen brutality until you see what Bryant, Crabtree, et.al. are going to do to our secondary.

  46. Kafka said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 6:01 am

    Chiles is averaging 5 yards per carry this season on 16 carries (this is including 21 yards of sacks). The only horns with better YPC are Colt and Fozzy. Chiles has run for a TD. Chiles is 6′2″, 215 lbs, and runs a sub 4.4 40. He can cut on a dime. With Major coaching Chiles on how to run with more balance, chiles is sure to improve. Hmm.

    The schematic possibilities on O when Chiles and colt are in the game at the same time are mind boggling.

    Chiles’ QB efficiency rating is 223+ (which is very high (highest on the team, in fact)). He has completed 5 of 6 passes (including a TD). His passing is way improved from last year and will probably continue to improve.

    I can remember Jamaal being tackled very easily quite a bit in his career but he still ended up doing great.

    The horns need all the explosiveness they can muster this year. It is waay to early to give up on Chiles.

  47. Gene Claude said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 6:29 am

    I want whatever Steven is taking.

    I think I actually agree with the part of the premise of his last post, though. There are semi-permanent factors that tend towards inertia in college football. Steven, however, overstates them by several orders of magnitude. There have been many, many cases of teams making moves from one caste to another.

    I generally think that in order to set up a permanent address in the college football penthouse you need a geographic or tradition advantage in recruiting. Texas, fortunately for you guys, has both. USC, Miami, Notre Dame (if you count Catholicism as a geographic advantage) have both. Oklahoma, Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan have one and a half (Oklahoma for proximity to fertile Texas and Oklahoma recruiting grounds, Michigan and OSU for the same in Ohio/Michigan/Pennsylvania, but all of those schools are located in relatively icky places).

    If you can’t wait for greenhouse gases to make your favorite Big 12 town a coastal paradise, you probably need to work on building a winning tradition, which should only take a decade or three.

    The thing that Steven is dead wrong about, however, is his premise that Mizzou has fundamental flaws that doom it to the bottom rungs of college footballdom. Just the opposite, in fact. Mizzou has somewhat rare geographic advantages (that are overblown by many gold-colored-glasses-wearing observers, more on that in a minute), and a dormant tradition that is seeing signs of a rebirth.

    First, geography. Mizzou is the only D1 school in a state with a population of more than 5 million and a not awful high school football tradition. If you were to lock the borders, that gives Mizzou the highest population per D1 program without competition in the country. That is a not insignificant inherent advantage. The flip side to this is that Missouri is not at all like states like Nebraska. It is very far from homogenous. The Bootheel is the Old South. The southwest corner has more allegiances to Oklahoma and Arkansas than Columbia. St. Louis is heavily recruited by the Big 10, and Kansas City is closer geographically to KU and KSU than Mizzou.

    As to tradition, how about a little trivia? Rank Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas (in Steven parlance, the “traditional powers”) and Missouri by number of victories in the 1960s.

    UT 85
    Mizzou 77
    Nebraska 75
    Oklahoma 62

    Granted, shit went south in a hurry after that, but Mizzou entering the 1970s was considered a perennial top 20 type of team, with regular sell outs, national name coaches and an overall robust tradition.

    In reality, what happened with Mizzou is 180 degrees from what Steven hypothesizes. Mizzou is not a program playing (far) over its inherent ceiling now. Mizzou for 25+ years was a program playing far below its inherent floor. What caused that? I’ll save that for another day, but in short lack of political support and some really, really awful hiring decisions. Sort of a primer on how to ruin a robust tradition.

    In short, for all 2 of you who made it this far…. Steven, you are confusing us with KU. They suck.

  48. steven said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 6:37 am

    Just was joking a bit about Chiles. I believe he is a good player and it would be nice if his skills could be utilized more in the offense. Certainly, he could be everything R. Taylor was to us. R. Taylor was a little bit faster on the field, but Chiles can cut better than him. I was just poking fun of the fact that Chiles is not all that he was hyped to be (who really is) and that he probably will never end up being our answer at QB or an every down QB. If he manages to do this, then all the beetchin’ about GD needs to stop pretty quick, cause he just accomplished another miracle worker level thing for a second time, with the first being that he helped shaped VY into becoming an effective passer.

  49. HenryJames said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 6:41 am

    Mizzou is the only D1 school in a state with a population of more than 5 million and a not awful high school football tradition. If you were to lock the borders, that gives Mizzou the highest population per D1 program without competition in the country.

    It’s tough to lock down the borders when your two largest cities border other states.

  50. steven said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 6:54 am

    Okay man, I give up. Mizzou is the shits, and I await getting the most demographically diverse ass beating of my life when Mizzou rolls up into town.

    Wonder if I am looking at a mirror image here?

  51. Atomic Teeth » Blog Archive » Mizzou’s Supposed Inherent Inferiority to “The Traditional Powers” said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 7:36 am

    [...] have adapted this from a response to a Barking Carnival thread. There, a UT fan named Steven explained that he and many others from “traditional powers” [...]

  52. Gene Claude said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 7:39 am

    Henry, yes, agreed, the advantage is definitely lessened due to that fact. Of course, the largest city in Nebraska is on the border of the state.

    Steven, as I said at the beginning of all this, I don’t expect/predict that we are walking into Austin and winning. My point is the fact that we are even discussing Mizzou possibly winning in Texas is not an aberration. I firmly believe Mizzou has turned a corner and will be a perennial Big 12 contender. We are still a long way from OU and UT status, however. Ten more years of being a consistent top 20 team might get us in the neighborhood.

  53. Kafka said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 8:34 am

    Back in the day (60s and 70s) Mizzou had several excellent football teams and was consistently in the top 20. Mizzou went down hill when Al Onofrio took over as head coach.

    You never know about the future re: Mizzou football so it is probably best for Mizzou fans to just enjoy the current success.

  54. ponderos said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 9:13 am

    Ten more years of being a consistent top 20 team might get us in the neighborhood.

    Try Top 10, and some titles.

  55. steven said:

    September 25th, 2008 at 9:34 am

    Back in the day, my ancestors technically owned all the f*cking land in the whole f*cking world. A whole hell of alot of good that’s doing me now in paying my rent.

    Don’t take this the wrong way, Yankees, but sh*t, now I sort of understand why you guys drive Husker fans batty. Too bad for them that they suck so bad they cannot do anything about it but beetch and beetch and beetch.

Leave a Reply

Follow Us

Related Articles

Hot Forum Topics

Activity