GoldAppleCorps

LT is usually where you play your best guy. That's certainly Banks. When he went down last week in the 1st half, Flood threw Goosby in there. Didn't shuffle the rest of the line at all. 2nd half, Goosby still at LT even with halftime to talk it over. All week in practice, he got starter reps. Banks is still option 1, but Goosby spent the whole week angry and not wanting to let his OL down.

Blitzing is like throwing a fastball. Mixed in judiciously, it keeps the opponent off balance. When it's all they see, it's a home run waiting to happen.

This is normally where I'd post this video: but I refuse to contribute to the degeneration of discourse, so I'm not going to do that.

I understand the player was scheduled for an MRI yesterday. I'm guessing, by the statement, that it didn't show a complete tear or anything that definitive. As such, he's not immediately ruled out on Monday. It's like having a "high ankle sprain", being in a boot, and not bearing weight. Since you didn't break your tibia, you could technically be able to participate at the end of the week. I'm guessing he'll be listed as "questionable" in the first injury report, and "doubtful" in the second. Not really "gamesmanship" since the coach would be criticized if he ruled the Lagway out, then he made a recovery and could play - which is still a possibility. I have no actual knowledge of his status.

During the 3Q/4Q changeover, when we do the drone show, there was a baton twirler in the North end zone with fire batons. That's usually where there's a smoke pot. Could either be a flammability issue with the pyro, or a wish not to obstruct the lady throwing fire in the air. Just my guess.

Every game is a battle in the trenches. As much as I love Sark's magic, Kyle Flood is the guy that changed everything at Texas. I try not to think of all the talented players we wasted over the years when the OL couldn't give them a chance. We cost a lot of kids serious NFL money with our ineptitude. On the flip side, even though the sample size is small, I haven't seen a Texas player quicker than Colin Simmons since Brian Orakpo. Any of our other Edge transfers would be All-Star, except Simmons is making them look pedestrian. The defense can play pass defense in crazy ways when they know the QB will be on the ground within a (vanishingly small) amount of time.

You can attack physical, pressing DBs by moving off the LOS. Using "bunch" formations where only 1 receiver is actually on the LOS and the rest have to get sorted out at the snap is one way of staying out of physical battles. Pre-snap motion also makes those defenders declare who they're playing. Of course, there's always the risk that you lose your "jam" at the LOS. Best thing to do when that happens is to fade forward and pretend like your coverage assignment was the flat. Turning and chasing just means you're going to be out of breath when you hear the band play "Texas Fight".

The ball is not round. It bounces funny. All else being equal, God fights on the side with the best OL.

So what I'm seeing in those stats is that they've got a salty defense - unless you decide to throw the football. I'm not going back and re-watching a ton of Sooner tape, but against the competition they've faced (not saying ours is a ton better), that defense is usually the result of just sending a gazillion guys through the gaps and trying to get the QB on the ground as quickly as possible. Think "7 Breckyn Hagers in the box" style. It'll cause panic and turnovers against lesser mortals. Playing a Sark designed offense, it means the phrase "coverage bust" will be worn out by halftime.

I like this first game with Pochi as the new coach. Panama is exactly the sort of head pounding challenge that's always frustrated me. You know going into the match that they're going to play 9 behind the ball and foul hard every chance they get. You know CONCACAF is going to allow it. Now how do you tactically solve it? This is where the USMNT leaks points. Panama will play for the draw from the outset. Skill-wise, they should be overwhelmed. Beating the big dog(s) is great and all, but when we draw against Panama, Honduras, or Guatemala, the loss of points is crippling.

I think a lot of our "doubtful/questionable" injuries are "hey, its MSST this week and a bye next week. If you're sore, sit out and rest. The season begins in October!".

ULM's basic strategy is to run the ball, waste as much time as possible between plays, and hope for a turnover or two (they've gotten more than their fair share this season thus far). If you figure 70% of Texas possessions end up as TDs, and Texas gets 10 in a game, that's 70 points. They're hoping to chop that down to 6 total possessions, have a couple of those end in turnovers, and win the game 24-20. That's the plan, anyhow. I'll just be the arrogant Texas fan. One school has a carefully curated coaching staff picked from the national elite. They've recruited, retained and transferred in top talent players. They maintain single digit rankings with eyes on winning it all. The other school is ULM who was paid to fill a hole in the schedule.

I'm particularly glad that these lovely children were here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic message board gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen in this day and age.

If your kids didn't get enough lunch, you can always stop at the Island's fudge shoppes.

From the articles, it seems Poch has some unresolved contractual matters with Chelsea pending. I'm guessing it's unlikely he'd officially put pen to paper for another contract before those matters are settled.

This gruntles me greatly. I've believed that the US has the problem of (a) working to get their players into European leagues to develop their skills at the highest level then (b) returning them to tournament competition in CONCACAF where games are played and officiated more like rec-league city park matches. A successful US manager will have to have a foot in both worlds. This is almost certainly the best name we could hope for.

There's getting comfortable, and there's also strategery. If I'm playing an up-tempo, pass first team, I want one of my DBs to have the comm. The call gets to him first, and he sends it to the back end as quickly as possible. If I'm playing a power team, a LB should have it. Obviously getting the correct call to the DL and LB groups is paramount then. Likely, they'll change it up within the game depending on the situation.

Understand that we're discussing a coach for a National Team here. That's different from a club team. For a club team, you have contracts and farm systems (academies) that mean you can go after players that fit "your system". You can have a preferred type of soccer tactic and get players that complement that system. Those players are together for most of the year, working out and practicing to do what you and your assistants tell them. As a manager, you're picking the starting 11 players each game, and making tactical substitutions based on how the game is going. For a national team, you only see your players at certain times throughout the year, and over the course of a four year World Cup cycle as it goes. The players that are available to you are ones that are in the national player registry - legally able to play for your country. During one of the windows of international play, you call in a certain segment of those players to participate in a camp. At the end of that camp, you pick your roster (usually limited to like 25 players) and go set up for a tournament, qualifier, or what-have-you. The kicker is how you select your players. Maybe this guy's usually a really good player, but he hasn't had any action with his club team. He's a substitute or little used. You're asking him to jump right in and attack the game with no pre-season or other type of form. Maybe another guy looks promising, but he's been playing for a weak team in a weak league in eastern Greece or something. Another guy is recovering from injury. Still others have no experience on the national stage, but could be useful later? Do you develop them? Of course, the ultimate prize is playing in the World Cup tournament every four years. To get there, you have to qualify by winning games against other teams in your region. The USA is in the CONCACAF region over here with Canada, Mexico, and the Central American nations. Mexico used to make some noise in the tournament, but really, no teams from CONCACAF really strike fear in the rest of the world. Getting a manager that can use the USA's European developed (we hope) players to quickly jell, form a tactically sound (there's zero time to teach or develop skills on the nation team), cohesive squad that can adapt to the defensively aggressive styles (read: they foul hard and often) played in our region will require a world view of soccer acumen.

We're probably all more or less fans of the Texas Longhorns here. We're used to a stable, competent CEO that oversees a respected, credentialed organization that attracts top talent. It has a history of trophies. It sits on a mountain of moss - if it comes to that. The USSF has none of that. You're looking for a coach to be hired by a neophyte director. That coach will be asked to oversee a program that thinks it has the best average player talent pool (judged by positions and playing time at real, actual soccer clubs throughout the world) in its existence. All that coach has to do is combine largely European based players into a group that can win games in a Central American jungle where the pitch slopes off on the corners into the city park (do they throw batteries at players when Belgium plays France? I dunno). He doesn't have to necessarily win the World Cup. We'll be satisfied with playing in the Final. Funds are limited, so the ideal candidate will be hungry and coach for passion and exposure.

The answer is, of course, FIVE TONS OF FLAX!

Uruguay could still mathematically be eliminated. The US would have to win like 3-0 and have Panama beat Bolivia 5-0 or so, but it isn't a done deal by the numbers. Unrealistic, absolutely.

It's kind of a dumb, small point, but the advice given to referees is that you can't call a handling foul if you play the ball onto your own hand/arm. If you believe that the video shows the ball striking the Ecuador player's face/head before it deflects to his arm, then by rule that can't be called a handling foul. I'm not saying I agree with either the rule or the video evidence. I'm saying that's how referees are instructed.

Better team won.