GoldAppleCorps

How I know I'm with my crowd: Playing in Bb is no fun, but necessary to accommodate the bagpipes!

"Is there anything you can't take?" "Yeah. Country music."

I guess this would have been too cliche?

The thing I saw that I haven't seen from a Texas RB in a while was, after handling his business shifting through the OL gap, he accelerated AWAY from the pursuing DB! Previous RBs could break tackles, get free, then get tracked down by an opposite field DB. While I don't wanna scoff at 20 yard runs, seeing a Texas back be the fastest guy on the field made my heart happy!

So in an extension of the usual policy, will the cameras pan over to the cardboard cutouts waiting in line at Allen Fieldhouse in the middle of the 3rd quarter?

I've never understood betting these kinds of lines. You're at the mercy of how long a coach wants to play the starters, or how keyed up the 2nd string is. You're up 30 going into the 4th quarter. The game's over. Does Casey Thompson stretch his legs and gallop for 2 TDs before letting Hudson Card throw bombs? Conversely, does whomever draws backup RB duty goof it up, fumble, and give up a cheap TD? You're basically betting on how successful the backups are going to be at wasting time. And yes, I'm wondering out loud. I'm by no means stating that Texas coasting up 30 in the 4th is a given. I've seen Vince step out of an ankle tackle on 4th down, Case coast a pass with 0:12 left, and Dicker hit with 0:00 left. The struggle is real.

Baylor is very worried about Charlie Brewer's next hit. They want to minimize (eliminate) his QB running. That's a problem, because their OL is, well, not adequate. If ever Texas wanted to mount a pass rush, Saturday would be ideal. Brewer hasn't changed. If you give him time, a receiver will get open (that is, jog to the middle of the field). If he's pressured, he'll flee the pocket and chuck it.

Those 7 new positives come from all sport testing at Baylor. Right now, their official position is that they expect to have sufficient numbers cleared to play by Wednesday to at least meet Big 12 minimum guidelines. I have no special insight, so I dunno if that means "exceed" or "barely there" or what another positive test would mean. Reportedly, those disqualified by positive tests or contact quarantines were receiving Zoom based coaching during the 11 days previous that Baylor shut down the program. Those with sufficient negative tests to meet had in-person conditioning and group practice. Putting those statements together sounds like some Baylor position groups might arrive in Austin to play with only 3 days max to install the game plan.

If I ever hit myself in the back of my head with my own arse, I'll immediately be spoken of in past tense. His position coach can't wait to find out he's Ok - so he can run him till he pukes for trying to leap over a defender and fumbling!

We played about 15 minutes worth of competent football that entire game. Everyone remembers the Crabtree catch and the heartbreaking end, but forgets that we were behind 22-6 at half, and continued bumbling well into the 3rd quarter - Ship's punt return for a TD notwithstanding.

It should be obvious by now that one of the main principles of this offense is that every play, starting from the players who report between the numbers to alignment to pre-snap motion to post-snap reads, has multiple places the ball can go. It's designed to create one on one match ups before the play, and then to exploit those where the offense player wins his match up. A given formation and a route might look and go one direction in the 1st quarter, but then go a different direction in the 3rd or 4th. It's a ridiculous amount to keep up with. I'm grateful that the head coach ceded authority to a dedicated assistant. One thing I always admired oSu for that I hope Texas replicates is the willingness to let their best athletes play. By that, I mean they may only have one dominant receiver, and he may have drawn tight coverage, but the Cowboy offense still would throw the ball over and let him out-battle the defense. I've seen either Sam's or Yurcich's quote to that effect. Another feature of this offense is that it's tough to turtle. Even with a lead, you can only run it in mathematically favorable conditions. If you send a "run first" group on the field, and the defense loads the box to stop it, you still are basically obligated to make the easy pass. The backups only know this scheme, too, so they don't really stop the onslaught when they enter. I'd also be remiss if I didn't point out that the receivers coach is evidently doing something in practice besides saying, "Uh, get open!". Our big bodies and speedy guys are now differentiating themselves to the defenders.

I didn't spend much time looking at the Tech/HBU "highlights", but it looked to me like the Tech safeties just weren't playing their position, to put it bluntly. HBU didn't drive methodically. Rather, they scored on uncontested pitch and catch type passes where it looked like the safeties just stood deep in "Cover-2" position and sort of didn't cover their side of the field. The receivers would be released deep by the CBs. The safeties were uninterested in the results until the receivers trotted by them with the ball. Don't know if that's something you can correct in practice in a week.

Johan Cruyff's "total football"!

Hear, hear! UTEP obviously aren't world beaters, but I was impressed by their QB. His receivers victimized him a couple of times on some easy drops (a couple which would have meant points). However, he knew where the ball should go, and he put it in the best spot for success. Too many times over the last few seasons, the Texas defense gave up cheap points on a brain fart that let a receiver (or RB) sprint untouched to the end zone. For this game, they all knew their roles and executed. The defense's job in this game wasn't to embarrass the opponent. What they did, they largely had to do without exotic shifts and stunts. The issue was decided early, and there was no reason to put a lot of the tricky stuff on tape. While the pass rush could have been better, this QB was making quick decision and there was no reason to risk a bust for the sake of a big hit. You can't really win accolades against a team like UTEP, but you can sure lose them.

I'd like to believe that the problem isn't this pervasive, but I'm afraid you're right. The culture of "protecting your partner" is more felt than the culture of "protect and serve". Most of the public don't have a full sense for the crud cops put up with, so it's easy to latch on to the "we have to protect each other" vibe. What has to be understood is that every time an incident like this happens, it makes every officer's job that much more dangerous. In America, we succeed based on the mutual respect for law enforcement - given and received. There aren't enough officers to fend off a complete breakdown of the citizenry, nor should there ever be. Every time an officer treats a citizen, suspect or no, with less than full dignity the two way pathway erodes just a little further.

Cops are allowed mistakes. Overlooking evidence, misidentifying a suspect, misreading a traffic control device or brethalyzer test could all be mistakes. In the heat of the moment of physical struggle, getting in an extra punch or two might be considered a human mistake. Kneeling on a man's neck for 9 minutes, 4 of which he was restrained, 2 of which he was nonresponsive, cannot be considered a mistake. It can only be considered a deliberate act intentional and indifferent. Right now, I believe the general public is asking why these overreaches in use of force seem to happen almost exclusively to suspects with black skin. I do not personally agree with the "All Cops are Bastards" sentiment. Law Enforcement has an ugly, dangerous job to do. All the officers I know entered in to the service with a servant's heart. HOWEVER: I do believe the problem goes beyond the police. I believe we're all steeped in the notion that black skin is inherently more dangerous and suspicious than white skin. It's nothing we're doing deliberately or consciously. It's just the way we've operated for 500 years - only the last 50 of which we've even pretended to see black skinned people as people. It's going to take time to unlearn, but we'll never unlearn it if we don't recognize it and try to do better.

Obligatory:

At some point, we all lost sight of the fact that elections are (supposed to) be won by convincing voters to vote for your issue. They aren't sports events where we can talk crap to anyone not wearing out team colors since it won't affect the outcome. From the Dem perspective, Bernie Sanders never had enough support to be the nominee. It was largely unfortunate that a few early state contests were stacked with his favored demographic. It left the impression that he was poised to shock the nation with surprise wins as he did in 2016. That was never the case. The Democrat voters simply did not see things his way nationally to any great degree. HOWEVER... I mentioned that elections are won through votes. While Sanders only ever commanded about 35% of Democrat voting base, no one is foolish enough to believe that Joe Biden can win the general election with only 65% of Democrat support voting for him. That means voters who preferred Sanders are critical to Democratic hopes in the fall. Making fun, insulting, or demeaning their zeal is stupid, counterproductive, and ultimately fatal. They and their ideals are the future of the Democratic Party. This is politics. You just never get everything you want. Change never goes as fast as you want. You cut deals and accept compromise. Joe Biden has been in the game long enough to understand this. His platform will include Sanders ideals that he thinks are realistically attainable (not everything is - once again, it's politics, and nobody gets everything).

The cardinal sin in this offense is letting one defender impact two offensive players. If the receivers line up too close to each other, then the QB can't read the true intentions of the defenders. By setting up wide enough, you force the edge defender to declare himself as "force" or "contain", since he can't credibly do both from that distance. The QB can then move his eyes to the next level. Who's going to be key there? If the safety comes over to help, that will open up one area of the field. If the LB flares out, another is open. The receivers (and backs) should see it, too. At the snap, read that key. With no deep inside help, put the DB on your outside shoulder and post. With quarters, snap it off and curl. Of course, it really helps if, during practice, your receivers coach looked at a 6'5" 220 lb body and said something other than, "At the snap, um, get open or something.". The offense is designed to create one on one matchups. The ball should go where you've won that matchup - usually post-snap. The OC helps by designing those matchups and making them unpredictable. It's ultimately up to the players to win those matchups!

College football teams are the very definition of "a lot of people in tight spaces, sharing facilities, and flying across the nation". If we're still in the throes of this pandemic (or a resurgent aftershock - likely to occur when we lift the "stay at home" stuff), then even practicing is a bad idea. Asking these athletes to participate in a season when they haven't been near each other for at least a month is doing them and the game a huge disservice - and risking serious injuries. I'm really hoping we're in the clear by July. That's optimistic, but not fanciful.

When this is all over in November, the Democratic Party needs to do an objective, full post-mortem on why Elizabeth Warren couldn't get more traction. She seemingly checked all the boxes. Name recognition, track record, debate performances, policies and platforms, and was arguably personable. I'm not saying she should have won. Votes are still subjective. However, I want to see if there was a better reason than "we really don't want a female to run for President". If that really is the underlying cause, I'm not looking for condemnation so much as I am recommendations to try and help correct that.

I fear you're right, but I hope this isn't widespread. Some people just like to crow. Typically, they lack personal accomplishment. Bernie's ideals will still be there in next year's legislative session. They were never going to be enacted solely by a President. If Bernie's supporters believe in his ideals and not just his cult of personality, then a Democrat led Congress can push the necessary legislation to a Democrat President.

My wife (white attorney) early voted for Warren last Saturday. I'm a lazy white dude, so I waited until Tuesday to vote (discussions about voting in 15 minutes in my white upper-middle suburb versus 7 hours at Texas Southern to be held later). Warren was my ideal choice, but by Tuesday it was clear she was nonviable. I picked Biden. I still believe 2016 was an ugly, unfortunate outlier. It shouldn't be normalized. Political decisions should still be made through coalition building and honest, ethical compromise. The talking (screaming) heads have, I believe, about run their course. There's a ton of Joe Biden that's not to my liking. However, the perfect cannot be the enemy of the very good. Joe earned the respect of a wide field of voter demographics over the course of his career. I trust him with the Presidency.