Media/$9.95-er postgame analysis articles (Week 12)

[B00M 6743]

Epps is a world beater compared to Burt. Why we ask Burt to run anything but 9s is regarded. 

[Mdhorn 6167]

So Herman raids TCU and Iowa State's recruits annually only to lose to these teams (especially TCU) and then won't admit it's coaching?  Hey Herman, what is it when you lose to your rejects?  

[jinx 2636]

4 hours ago, satyanash said:

InsideTexas: Offensive Report Card----Iowa State

InsideTexas: Defensive Report Card---Iowa State

 

Ouch.  I'm interested in Bucky's take in the morning too.  

This reminded me of last week listening to the Monday presser and Mensa stating that Leitao graded out a "champion".  LOL

[Ignatius 4153]

18 hours ago, Girdwood said:

Williams, Diggs, Acho never won shit here. They need to stfu.

What the fuck did you ever win on the field, bitch?

 

And after you answer ‘nothing’, tell me - are they wrong?  So ex-players can’t bitch but internet randos can?

Edited November 18, 2019 by Ignatius

[satyanash 15778]

Chip Brown: Herman in need of solutions for Texas offense

AMES, Iowa — Tom Herman’s offense has been a disaster in Texas’ last three road games. In all three - Oklahoma, TCU and Iowa State - Texas couldn’t run (ISU) or didn’t know how to run (OU) or abandoned the run (TCU). This is an offense with perhaps the best offensive line it’s had in a decade; the top running back recruit in the state of Texas two years ago; four-star talent all over the place at receiver; and a quarterback, who, by his own coach’s admission, should’ve been a leading candidate to win the Heisman Trophy coming into the 2019 season.

After another winnable-game-turned-loss - 10 games into the season - we heard Herman diagnose the problem perfectly: “Obviously a really, really poor performance by our offense the first few quarters,” Herman said. “We’ve got to really examine our game plan in the run game and our execution. To not be able to run the ball the way we thought - that was the biggest difference.”

With two games left on the schedule, however, we’re still waiting for the coach who called plays on offense masterfully in 2018 to come up with the answers in 2019. Whatever Herman comes up with, as he said in a bewildering post-game press conference in Ames, it will be … “Too little, too late.” Fans (and even his own players most likely) want answers, want solutions. Herman tells his players all the time to give everything they’ve got, and they’ll be put in a position to succeed. Not happening.

Changes are undoubtedly coming. Staff changes? Transfer portal declarations? Reopened recruitments? All of the above? For the fans who think Herman is the one who needs to be changed because he seems incapable of assessing himself honestly, forget that. Herman ain’t going anywhere. We know Herman is a smart guy. But who does he listen to? Who are Herman’s Truth Tellers? Anyone on his staff?

Everyone in football says a head coach who plays the bad cop and runs a demanding program with a burning-hot culture, without a lot of attaboys, can get away with it as long as you’re winning. The bottom line is, one of the most important traits of a head coach is to admit when he’s wrong - to his players, to his assistants, heck, to himself. “I’d never say we got outcoached,” Herman said after Saturday’s loss.

What’s maddening is Herman’s offense has operated well at home, including last week’s victory over K-State, in which Texas ran the ball and ran the final 6:45 off the clock to a game-winning field goal. Away from home, the offense has looked lost, ill-prepared and predictable. A college coach told me when Herman took the job, “Let’s see if he still relies on quarterback power right every time he’s in short yardage.”

I shrugged my shoulders, not quite understanding. But there it was again, on a failed fourth-and-2 (instead of a 38-yard field goal attempt), when his offense was floundering and in desperate need of points - any points at all. The offense regressed Saturday to the point of seven three-and-outs in Texas’ first 11 drives. And this was against an Iowa State defense that had been giving up third downs and big plays recently.

The Longhorns only seemed capable of moving the ball when they spread out in four- and five-wide and went up-tempo. So it was totally perplexing when Texas, with a one-point lead and four minutes left, abandoned that, went 11 personnel and tried to run between the tackles after failing to do that all night. Two running plays for no gain and an incomplete pass later, Iowa State had the ball and drove to the game-winning field goal.

Herman is a relatively young head coach who exploded on the scene with a 13-1 first year at Houston. In his two seasons at UH, he had Major Applewhite calling the plays. At Texas, Herman decided he needed to call the plays after a 7-6 first year. It worked beautifully in 2018, when the Texas offense carried the team in a 10-4 season. It’s not working in 2019, and, because the offense is Herman’s side of the ball, the head coach is being questioned without cover.

I’ve said repeatedly when the head coach plays the role of crazy-eyed drill sergeant in a program with a burning hot culture, he’d better do an exceptional job of making sure his players know how much he cares about them and/or have assistants who can do the same. Players will go through a wall for a demanding coach as long as they know he truly cares. The sign of a well-coached team is week-to-week improvement.

Texas appeared to have come together in the face of crisis last week and found things it could build on heading to Iowa State. That all disappeared in a three-and-out-a-thon in Ames Saturday - along with the chance to turn the season around. Now, at 6-4 (4-3 Big 12), with a road game at one-loss Baylor next up, Herman needs to figure out a way to get his offense going while inevitably pondering bigger changes. The search for solutions will undoubtedly start with a look in the mirror … or should.

[SydneyCarton 49540]

Fuck Chip Brown. That being said, there isn’t a single thing in that article that isn’t spot on. 

[satyanash 15778]

 

[scottsins 2047]

Has Scipio published his Offense Post-Mortem?

[Red Five 41814]

I think we’ll feel the impact tremor when that happens.

[Skipper 6416]

I pretty much avoided this board Saturday/Sunday.   But I predicted via text change we would turtle when we got the ball with 4 mins left and lose.   Has any post-game article (or anyone on the board) looked at statistically what the downside was of being aggressive (assuming no turnover).  Even if we go 3 and out and less than 30 seconds run off the clock and ISU has all 3 TO's, does the win probability change at all compared to the actual outcome?   We had only moved the ball all game being aggressive and I just didn't see the downside to sticking to that strategy.    

[satyanash 15778]

InsideTexas: The Inside Scoop

By: Justin Wells and Eric Nahlin

TEAM

A frustrated locker room became much more so after the shorter version of this post-game exchange filtered its way to the players. Question: "Did they just out-coach you today in terms of Xs and Os?" Answer: "No, I'd never say we got out-coached. We continue to make adjustments and they had a couple of wrinkles they adjusted to. We felt like we were putting our guys in good position. But it's really hard to tell without watching the film all the answers to give you. We felt like we were making some sound in-game adjustments."

Perhaps Herman is just saving face for a group of coaches he knows are on the hot seat. Maybe he's telling recruits issues on the coaching staff are being overblown. But when you say you didn't get out-coached, minutes after you got out-coached, it puts the blame on the players. The insinuation is they didn't execute a good game plan or adjustments, but they were there to be made. Accountability is the number one pillar of a strong culture and it should start at the top.

Herman also seems to think coaching is a 60 minute window on Saturday. Clearly he was out-coached during the week. The Iowa State staff had the Texas staff dead to rights from the opening kick. Things were so bad Cyclones players were taunting Texas players by saying they knew what they were going to run, and all too often, they were right. The same thing happened in the Kansas game and I imagine many others.

Player frustration is exacerbated by Herman running such a regimented program. Players are beginning to wonder what are they going through all this for when they're getting beaten by teams with much lesser demands. These players know how other programs are run because they're friends with players from countless different schools. The players feel like they do everything asked of them and it's all for naught. They highly suspect the disconnect is coaching.

While that locker room was the worst its been all season I still expect the team to play with maximum effort versus Baylor. The players don't like that program going back throughout the decade and there are positive incentives to winning out. Nobody wants to return to the Texas Bowl. 

Notes:

Junior Angilau returned to practice on Sunday. I'm unsure if he'll play but he has returned. Josh Thompson is cleared to return but if they play him they are doing him and themselves a huge disservice. The season is over for all intents and purposes; play some younger guys if you absolutely have to. You're messing with another year of school for him, plus he adds value to the 2021 team. 

I asked if any younger guys were making noise on scout team: Tyler Johnsons' play strength was mentioned. It's still unclear if he'll be a tackle or guard but he moves better than Denzel Okafor so we know right tackle is possible. Kennedy Lewis was also mentioned for his speed and ability to make contested catches in the air. On defense, I heard most of the guys are already with the 1st and 2nd teamers but Myron Warren has potential long-term.

Remember when Herman was hired and I said Greg Ward bailed the U of H coaches out of a lot of bad decisions and play calls? They should let Ehlinger do the same. There are some coaching issues behind the scenes that we can only shake our head at but we want to give the staff the benefit of finishing the season and then seeing how Herman responds to those issues.

STATE OF RECRUITING 

As the team spins its tires in the middle of the Big 12 this year, the recruiting class is staying intact for the most part. I think if Texas finishes 7-5 heading into its bowl game, they'll still likely land a Top 10 class nationally, despite coming up well short of expectations on the field.  We're a month away from NSD1. Let's take the temperature on the few remaining targets and a handful of pledges. 

- DL Van Fillinger, Corner Canyon HS (Draper, UT): We'll start with the four-star DL commit. If there's one current pledge I'd worry about, it's Fillinger. The Army All American loves Texas and coach Oscar Giles, especially with how early UT got on him. He also loves his family, and his in-state school - Utah - is a bonafide Pac 12 contender this year. The Utes are pushing the right buttons at the moment. He's set to take his official visit to Austin in December. At this point, that OV looms very large. 

- RB Bijan Robinson, Salpointe Catholic (Tucson, AZ): Despite the inconsistent play from the offense, it appears the five-star ball-carrier is locked into Texas. Robinson's personality really helps here because he committed to UT for more than just football. His mother and family are huge fans of the school and the program. Others are pushing; Ohio State and LSU namely. But Tony Alford (fOSU RB coach) might have his eyes on a job in Fort Collins, while Baton Rouge isn't a culture fit for the speedy Arizona record holder. Because of Robinson's stature and importance, this will be a recruitment we'll watch until NSD1. But today, his horizon is still clad in burnt orange. 

- QB Ja'Quinden Jackson, Duncanville (TX): There were whispers a few weeks ago that JQJ could be looking around, but I'm told Jackson is solid in his pledge. SMU still recruits him hard and OU is testing the waters, but the fact Texas wants him at his desired position of quarterback gives the Horns the edge. Thankfully, he's more focused on Duncanville's playoff run than UT's second half slump. 

- DL Alfred Collins, Cedar Creek (Bastrop, TX): This is another pursuit that can put your stomach in knots. Up to this point, Texas has done everything it can to ensure Collins signs with the good guys. Incredible relationship between coach Giles and Collins' family, proximity from home to campus, and his mother's burnt orange degree are all in UT's favor. He's a great fit, culturally and on the field with the ability to play multiple spots along the defensive line. Right now, It's Texas vs OU. I'm still giving the Horns the nod but Oklahoma is creeping from behind, slowly and surely. If the Grinch steals Collins, he might as well take Christmas too. One must wonder if there's a disconnect between what Alfred and his mother, even if ever so slight.

- ATH Kelvontay Dixon, Carthage (TX): While Keaontay's little brother is working on another state title run in ETX, I still think this recruitment is all but finished. I'd be shocked of Dixon lands elsewhere. And if you've watched his senior tape, you know he's a take on either side of the ball. 

- LB Jaqwondis Burns, IMG Academy (FL) via Terrell (TX): Burns got the red-carpet treatment on his official visit. He was shown where and how'd he fit on this UT defense as a Rover or B-backer, with potential to play Mac. But he's still committed to Ole Miss and doesn't want to make a final decision until after his official to Oxford in early December. I still believe UT can flip him, despite the product on the field the last two months. Being closer to home might help offset SEC narratives. 

- WR Loic Fouonji, Midland Lee (TX): If the long-legged four-star were a natural born Texan, I'd like UT's chances more. But as it stands, the breakout senior has built a great bond with the Texas Tech coaching staff. UT will continue to push, and getting him back on campus is imperative before NSD. Unlike Troy Omeire, who noticed the numbers that Devin Duvernay and the Texas receivers were putting up, Fouonji is more concerned with relationships.

- CB Kelee Ringo, Saguaro (Scottsdale, AZ): Despite the crash of momentum Ringo still loves UT. Whether its enough to sway him away from Georgia or Oregon remains to be seen. But the staff has some hidden confidence here and hopes the ties (Coach Tim Beck's former school and current DB coach Bryant Westbrook) are enough to get him back on campus for his official next month. I'd feel more confident with an OV date. Still, you keep swinging. 

- ATH Taye McWilliams, Lamar Consolidated (TX): I'm not sure what the situation is here with McWilliams other than Baylor likes him at his natural position of running back, while UT views him as an athlete in the linebacker mold. If/when he visits, we'll know more, but for now we think he'll sign with Baylor as a running back.

- CB Dominick Hill, Jones HS (Orlando, FL): The three-star corner and South Carolina commit stays in touch with the Texas staff. He hails from the same school as current Horn LB Marcus Tillman (not sure that helps tbh). Texas is one of his 26 offers - Alabama, Auburn, OU, Florida, and Miami among the others - but I'm unsure which are committable and which aren't. He's said he's solid to the Gamecocks, but don't be surprised to see an official visit to Austin next month. Texas might try to replace one Florida corner (Pouncey) with another.

[Not a cat 5829]

1 hour ago, Skipper said:

I pretty much avoided this board Saturday/Sunday.   But I predicted via text change we would turtle when we got the ball with 4 mins left and lose.   Has any post-game article (or anyone on the board) looked at statistically what the downside was of being aggressive (assuming no turnover).  Even if we go 3 and out and less than 30 seconds run off the clock and ISU has all 3 TO's, does the win probability change at all compared to the actual outcome?   We had only moved the ball all game being aggressive and I just didn't see the downside to sticking to that strategy.    

 I honestly think our win chances would have slightly improved had we quick kicked on first down as opposed to running 2 ill fated dives out of 11 personnel.  Heck three quick incompletions is practically the same effect as a quick kick.  And had we done that and lost I'd have been fine with the overall strategy (but not the other cluster fuck of game prep, running 11 personnel all game when it obviously wasn't working, etc. but that's another issue)   

That was the moment when Turtle Tom lost me.  All this talk about binders full of calculations and that's what he does.      

[satyanash 15778]

Oof.

 

[satyanash 15778]

Bobby Burton: Monday

Quote

It's not exactly Black Monday for the Longhorns. But the hopes of the team are battered and bruised after getting stopped repeatedly against Iowa State. "Stopped" is the operative word. The Longhorns' offense produced eight three-and-outs. Eight! That's such a preposterous number. How putrid was the performance by comparison? Texas, with offensive wunderkind Shawn Watson calling plays and Tyrone Swoopes at QB, matched that total of eight three-and-outs against Notre Dame in 2015.

The final score of that Texas-ND contest was 38-3. On Saturday, Texas at least scored three TDs against the Cyclones. And that's perhaps what's most maddening to Texas fans. Despite starting the game with three-and-outs on three of its first four possessions and despite starting the second half with three more three three-and-outs, Texas had eventually found a way to move the football by opening up the offense and making the Cyclones defend the pass first instead of the run.

Yet the awareness of that undeniable fact was totally lacking when the Horns got the ball back with the lead with just a few minutes remaining in the game. On that ill-fated series, Tom Herman inexplicably decided to run the ball twice on first and second down. Keep in mind, Keaontay Ingram had managed nine yards on eight carries thus far in the game. So whatever Herman thought he had in the run game had long been proven incorrect. Yet he was stubborn. And it cost the Horns dearly.

As Darrell Royal once said, "Dance with the one that brung ya." In this game, Sam Ehlinger's arm mixed with the play of the running backs out of the backfield, Devin Duvernay and Brennan Eagles had been the only ones dancing, the only ones moving the football. But with all the chips pushed to the middle of the table, with the game on the line, Herman reverted to exactly what hadn't worked all game, what had failed seven times previously.

Herman has played so many tight games in his first three years, it's almost like he doesn't trust himself and his players enough on offense unless he's playing from behind. That's what it looked like and the result was ugly. That final three-and-out gave Iowa State the ball back with the ability to drive the field and win the game. Sure, we can admonish the fact that Malcolm Roach jumped offsides. But let's get real. This game was lost with an inexplicably meager performance by the offense The lack of that awareness of anyone on the Texas staff, specifically the head coach, is scary.

As for calling for the coach's head, I don't think it's time to do any such thing. Instead, I think it's past time for the coach to stop being so hard-headed both on the field and off. Herman needs to stop digging in, he and his coaches need to adapt to a changing landscape, certainly recognizing major trends during a single game. After all, a program can only take so many three-and-outs.

 

[satyanash 15778]

(Scipio Tex) Iowa State Postmortem: Offense

Quote

I'm not breaking down the positions or units. After that coaching and game management performance, that would be the Postmortem equivalent of two runs into the line of scrimmage and a "protect the QB" screen call when you're up 1 and get the ball with 4:01 on the clock. Since I'm not stupid or soft, I'll pass. The big picture failure of this offensive staff to game plan the opponent and run proper in-game tactics are all that matter in maximizing our athletes. So that's this week's focus.

Texas went 3 and out on 61.5% (8 of its 13) offensive possessions. Add in a pair of six and outs (the offense achieves one first down, then punts) and Texas was totally ineffective on 10 of its 13 offensive possessions. The running diversity that was featured and praised against KSU vanished, the RPO game (or any wrinkle) wasn't even attempted, and Texas did the "let's just run our stuff" game plan last seen against TCU and OU that most relevant programs typically reserve for Rice week.

The handling of 3rd/4th and short was similarly feckless and the staff's inability to grasp that they were unprepared in situational football didn't sink in until late when 3rd and 1 became a passing down. The game plan revealed zero scout of opponent's strengths and we ignored ISU's obvious weaknesses (base pass rush, depth up front, some JAGS in their secondary) for most of the game until ISU's double digit leads in each half accidentally forced us into successful tactics.

Texas RBs carried 14 times for a net of 27 yards rushing. Ingram averaged 1.1 yards per carry. Ehlinger's two best runs were passing game scrambles, accounting for 17 of his total 27 yards rushing. The standard running game plan was totally ineffectual. It looked like it had been cobbled together Friday night. "Let's just do three runs. Let's, uh, run some inside zone at NT Ray Lima and then Sam can lead behind our freshmen TE on 3rd down against ISU's stack. When we run counter trey and they squeeze down, make sure the back doesn't bounce it out because we're trying to instill, uhh, toughness."

Yet the three Longhorn possessions that weren't immediately snuffed out all ended in long touchdown drives of 75, 80 and 89 yards. The offense's longest failing drive went for 23 yards. That's unusual. Rare that an offense held to 324 total yards at 5.0 yards per play achieves >75% of that output on three long touchdown drives. It doesn't really match the statistical profile of a football game where an offense is consistently getting dominated. What happened on those drives?

 The first successful Longhorn drive came with 47 seconds on the clock at the end of the first half. Texas went Hurry Up No Huddle, 4 and 5 wide, the OL protected well, and Ehlinger threw sideline strikes against ISU's soft zone to Duvernay (17 yards) and Eagles (33 yards), wisely ignoring any other receiving options. The drive was capped by a sweet throw and catch by a rolling Ehlinger to Eagles, who came back and grazed a foot in the end zone. Sam was 5 of 6 for 75 yards on that possession.

Texas scored on pure individual playmaking and spread tempo. Before that player-led two minute drill, the offensive staff had schemed up 54 total yards on six possessions. Ehlinger, Eagles and Duvernay playing pitch-and-catch behind good protection exceeded that effort in 30 seconds. We didn't build on that. The first three possessions of the second half were three and outs. Nine plays totaling 4 yards. Those three possessions were characterized by multiple drops, a puzzling use of 11 personnel, and a move away from attacking the Cyclone defense with our best receivers. Burt, Woodard and Epps were mystifyingly featured on those series and drew more targets than our best pass catchers.

Down 20-7 in the late 3rd quarter, Texas went 80 yards for a score running tempo from 4 wide. The drive included some impressive improvisational Ehlinger scrambles to keep plays alive, a great RoJo catch, and a pretty 22 yard TD to Ingram against an ISU zero blitz. As with the successful 30 second drive to end the half, Texas threw on every down. Sam went 6 of 10 for 70 yards doing nothing but throwing to Duvernay (2-26, one penalty earned for defensive holding) and dumping it to Texas RBs against ISU's blitzes (Ingram and Johnson combined for 44 yards receiving on 4 catches). Whenever Sam saw a 3 man rush, he held the ball and threw it downfield. Whenever he saw blitz or double teams outside, he dumped it to a back. Sometimes football is that simple when you trust your QB and play fast.

On the next possession, Ehlinger led another long touchdown drive while going 6 for 10 for 89 yards. On that drive, Texas converted a 2nd and 35 with consecutive Ehlinger strikes downfield to Eagles (30 yards) and Duvernay (27 yards). The only successful runs on that drive were Ehlinger scrambles for 9 and 10 yards, respectively. A called Ehlinger run on the goal line was completely stuffed. An Ingram run early in the drive was stuffed. Two conventional runs? 0 yards gained. It was all Sam, Duve, Eagles, RB outlets and tempo 4 wide with a Sam 4th down scramble creating the Epps TD toss on 4th and 8.

On the only three drives in the game where Texas showed any offensive success, they spread it out with 4 wide, put the game completely in Sam's hands at tempo (on those possessions, he was 17 of 26 for 233 and 3 tds with two first downs on scrambles), limited target focus to Duvernay, Eagles and the RBs and tore up the ISU's blitzes and zone letting Sam control the offense. Texas stumbled into a winning formula late in both halves and abandoned it.

On Ehlinger's other 14 passing attempts on ten other failed drives featuring suboptimal personnel and tactical mixes, Ehlinger was 5 of 14 for 40 yards passing. The nature of our successful offensive drives are important context to how the game ended.

Up 21-20, with 4:01 on the clock, Texas got the ball on its 15. Texas might have run the ball against ISU but not with the game plan we brought to Ames. So I'm not interested in discussing whether we could have installed the Veer during a time out. The ball in Sam's hands throwing to the RBs, Duvernay, Eagles or #11 taking off running from the pocket were the only things that worked all game. The Longhorn ability to run the ball when it wanted to run was an abject failure for four quarters. My evidence for these assertions is...ALL OF THE EVIDENCE.

At this juncture, if you rely on football platitudes to get through Saturdays or lack the guts to run the right strategy despite the protestations of people who can't do math, you believe Texas MUST RUN THE BALL in that game situation because "gotta burn clock!" No. You want to move the chains. That's the only way to burn clock. By doing the thing that worked in moving them. Throwing. And the decision is not really close. Here's why:

1. This is the college game. The clock is preserved by first downs. Teams running tempo score quick. Remember when Texas went 75 yards in 30 seconds before the half on six plays? Texas took one timeout on that drive and a spiked ball could have done the same trick. 4:01 is an eternity. If you understand this, everything else follows a very clear logic chain. Texas got the ball with 4:01 on the board, not 1:31.

2. Burning ISU's time outs there is not the primary game factor. Again, look at the clock. It's 4:01, people. The clock guarantees them a meaningful possession with tons of time if you can't get first downs. If Texas were up by 9 points, you can argue to turtle up on offense. We were up 1.

3. Texas on our own 15 yard line in a one point ball game is a supporting argument for yardage maximizing tactics which are, coincidentally, the only way to also eliminate clock. We don't want to burn clock with give-up runs. BECAUSE WE CAN'T BURN THE CLOCK ENOUGH FOR IT TO MATTER. Running the ball surrenders the ball. Possession of the ball is all that matters. Everything else is a distraction to that truth. At 4:01, you can only bleed clock as a result of being able to move the chains.

4. Adopting conventional clock-burning wisdom (run-run-conservative throw), Texas burned a grand total of....drum roll....1:01 off of the clock and surrendered the ball. Iowa State still retained a time out with 3:00 left on the clock. Useless. Texas also did nothing to advance field position, which is crucial in a 1 point contest. In that game situation, theTexas focus can only be on moving the chains and possessing the ball. So what tactics best supported Texas moving the chains? What was working on the last two Longhorn possessions?

5. Tom Herman offering that he expected his runs to gain yards is laughable. ISU was dominating our running game before they overloaded the run. Those were give up plays. Herman knows what he did. He also knows the next day that the math doesn't check out in the game situation.

6. Texas can only win by continuing the only successful offensive strategy that has worked all game. The only thing that has worked in 3 of 12 prior possessions. Spread out ISU and throw the ball. In bounds. Obviously, you let clock run while doing so. Texas cannot attack the clock without first attacking the chains.

7. Throwing the ball on 1st and 2nd down gives Texas the initiative. ISU is thinking run. If they adjust and match coverage, a positive Ehlinger scramble is also a likely outcome since he's purely in WIN GAME mode and will gladly take an easy gain over the possibility of a bigger play downfield. Texas held all of the cards. They couldn't surrender them fast enough.

8. This all just a probability exercise with the added data of actual game information. The Texas staff called the game like they hadn't watched the prior 56 minutes of regulation. The Texas coaching staff blew it.

Tom Herman called two give up runs and a low risk 3rd down and long screen to Duvernay as if Ehlinger were a true freshman QB who had to be protected and not the only thing keeping the wheels on the offense in Ames. A QB with no turnovers who had just walked his offense down the field on 80 and 89 yard touchdown drives, throwing on nearly every down. What a breach of trust.

This entire Texas staff blinked. The result was Iowa State ball with 3:00 left on the clock, down 1, with a time out still in their back pocket. Which only served to set up another example of inattention to detail when a team captain jumped offsides on a 4th and 4 field goal attempt, guaranteeing the Longhorn loss. Texas is now 6-4 and they deserve every bit of it.

[TwiceHorn 32156]

Yeeouch.

[ColeTrickle 12]

That was depressing 

[jinx 2636]

Inside Texas obviously doesn't know what they are talking about with this upset locker room talk.  Mensa told us just last week that that was all made up.  I'm sure they know they just didn't play hard enough to win and want to try harder this week for their Great Leader.  

[CurlyDumps 4691]

14 minutes ago, jinx said:

Inside Texas obviously doesn't know what they are talking about with this upset locker room talk.  Mensa told us just last week that that was all made up.  I'm sure they know they just didn't play hard enough to win and want to try harder this week for their Great Leader.  

Yeah! When Mensa aggressively pushed back against that bogus “5th hand” information which clearly vexed him, then claimed he paid it no mind, then admitted he personally met with every freshman during the bye week to clear the air, he sure showed IT what’s what.

[MrBig 5713]

We need to analyze the footage of every one of Tom’s kisses of the players to see who really leans into it and who is just a dead fish. That will tell you who has “bought into” his program. 

[hornhorn 100]

15 minutes ago, MrBig said:

We need to analyze the footage of every one of Tom’s kisses of the players to see who really leans into it and who is just a dead fish. That will tell you who has “bought into” his program. 

I LOLed.

[Fozzz 152]

21 hours ago, scottsins said:

Has Scipio published his Offense Post-Mortem?

They had a shitty game plan for sure, and the decision making on that last drive wad awful. That being said, considering they lost their most explosive offensive player to an NFL practice sqaud, the offense has overall been a delight this season. 

[Bill Lumbergh 7351]

(Scipio Tex) Iowa State Postmortem: Offense

I'm not breaking down the positions or units. After that coaching and game management performance, that would be the Postmortem equivalent of two runs into the line of scrimmage and a "protect the QB" screen call when you're up 1 and get the ball with 4:01 on the clock. Since I'm not stupid or soft, I'll pass. The big picture failure of this offensive staff to game plan the opponent and run proper in-game tactics are all that matter in maximizing our athletes. So that's this week's focus.

Texas went 3 and out on 61.5% (8 of its 13) offensive possessions. Add in a pair of six and outs (the offense achieves one first down, then punts) and Texas was totally ineffective on 10 of its 13 offensive possessions. The running diversity that was featured and praised against KSU vanished, the RPO game (or any wrinkle) wasn't even attempted, and Texas did the "let's just run our stuff" game plan last seen against TCU and OU that most relevant programs typically reserve for Rice week.

The handling of 3rd/4th and short was similarly feckless and the staff's inability to grasp that they were unprepared in situational football didn't sink in until late when 3rd and 1 became a passing down. The game plan revealed zero scout of opponent's strengths and we ignored ISU's obvious weaknesses (base pass rush, depth up front, some JAGS in their secondary) for most of the game until ISU's double digit leads in each half accidentally forced us into successful tactics.

Texas RBs carried 14 times for a net of 27 yards rushing. Ingram averaged 1.1 yards per carry. Ehlinger's two best runs were passing game scrambles, accounting for 17 of his total 27 yards rushing. The standard running game plan was totally ineffectual. It looked like it had been cobbled together Friday night. "Let's just do three runs. Let's, uh, run some inside zone at NT Ray Lima and then Sam can lead behind our freshmen TE on 3rd down against ISU's stack. When we run counter trey and they squeeze down, make sure the back doesn't bounce it out because we're trying to instill, uhh, toughness."

Yet the three Longhorn possessions that weren't immediately snuffed out all ended in long touchdown drives of 75, 80 and 89 yards. The offense's longest failing drive went for 23 yards. That's unusual. Rare that an offense held to 324 total yards at 5.0 yards per play achieves >75% of that output on three long touchdown drives. It doesn't really match the statistical profile of a football game where an offense is consistently getting dominated. What happened on those drives?

 The first successful Longhorn drive came with 47 seconds on the clock at the end of the first half. Texas went Hurry Up No Huddle, 4 and 5 wide, the OL protected well, and Ehlinger threw sideline strikes against ISU's soft zone to Duvernay (17 yards) and Eagles (33 yards), wisely ignoring any other receiving options. The drive was capped by a sweet throw and catch by a rolling Ehlinger to Eagles, who came back and grazed a foot in the end zone. Sam was 5 of 6 for 75 yards on that possession.

Texas scored on pure individual playmaking and spread tempo. Before that player-led two minute drill, the offensive staff had schemed up 54 total yards on six possessions. Ehlinger, Eagles and Duvernay playing pitch-and-catch behind good protection exceeded that effort in 30 seconds. We didn't build on that. The first three possessions of the second half were three and outs. Nine plays totaling 4 yards. Those three possessions were characterized by multiple drops, a puzzling use of 11 personnel, and a move away from attacking the Cyclone defense with our best receivers. Burt, Woodard and Epps were mystifyingly featured on those series and drew more targets than our best pass catchers.

Down 20-7 in the late 3rd quarter, Texas went 80 yards for a score running tempo from 4 wide. The drive included some impressive improvisational Ehlinger scrambles to keep plays alive, a great RoJo catch, and a pretty 22 yard TD to Ingram against an ISU zero blitz. As with the successful 30 second drive to end the half, Texas threw on every down. Sam went 6 of 10 for 70 yards doing nothing but throwing to Duvernay (2-26, one penalty earned for defensive holding) and dumping it to Texas RBs against ISU's blitzes (Ingram and Johnson combined for 44 yards receiving on 4 catches). Whenever Sam saw a 3 man rush, he held the ball and threw it downfield. Whenever he saw blitz or double teams outside, he dumped it to a back. Sometimes football is that simple when you trust your QB and play fast.

On the next possession, Ehlinger led another long touchdown drive while going 6 for 10 for 89 yards. On that drive, Texas converted a 2nd and 35 with consecutive Ehlinger strikes downfield to Eagles (30 yards) and Duvernay (27 yards). The only successful runs on that drive were Ehlinger scrambles for 9 and 10 yards, respectively. A called Ehlinger run on the goal line was completely stuffed. An Ingram run early in the drive was stuffed. Two conventional runs? 0 yards gained. It was all Sam, Duve, Eagles, RB outlets and tempo 4 wide with a Sam 4th down scramble creating the Epps TD toss on 4th and 8.

On the only three drives in the game where Texas showed any offensive success, they spread it out with 4 wide, put the game completely in Sam's hands at tempo (on those possessions, he was 17 of 26 for 233 and 3 tds with two first downs on scrambles), limited target focus to Duvernay, Eagles and the RBs and tore up the ISU's blitzes and zone letting Sam control the offense. Texas stumbled into a winning formula late in both halves and abandoned it.

On Ehlinger's other 14 passing attempts on ten other failed drives featuring suboptimal personnel and tactical mixes, Ehlinger was 5 of 14 for 40 yards passing. The nature of our successful offensive drives are important context to how the game ended.

Up 21-20, with 4:01 on the clock, Texas got the ball on its 15. Texas might have run the ball against ISU but not with the game plan we brought to Ames. So I'm not interested in discussing whether we could have installed the Veer during a time out. The ball in Sam's hands throwing to the RBs, Duvernay, Eagles or #11 taking off running from the pocket were the only things that worked all game. The Longhorn ability to run the ball when it wanted to run was an abject failure for four quarters. My evidence for these assertions is...ALL OF THE EVIDENCE.

At this juncture, if you rely on football platitudes to get through Saturdays or lack the guts to run the right strategy despite the protestations of people who can't do math, you believe Texas MUST RUN THE BALL in that game situation because "gotta burn clock!" No. You want to move the chains. That's the only way to burn clock. By doing the thing that worked in moving them. Throwing. And the decision is not really close. Here's why:

1. This is the college game. The clock is preserved by first downs. Teams running tempo score quick. Remember when Texas went 75 yards in 30 seconds before the half on six plays? Texas took one timeout on that drive and a spiked ball could have done the same trick. 4:01 is an eternity. If you understand this, everything else follows a very clear logic chain. Texas got the ball with 4:01 on the board, not 1:31.

2. Burning ISU's time outs there is not the primary game factor. Again, look at the clock. It's 4:01, people. The clock guarantees them a meaningful possession with tons of time if you can't get first downs. If Texas were up by 9 points, you can argue to turtle up on offense. We were up 1.

3. Texas on our own 15 yard line in a one point ball game is a supporting argument for yardage maximizing tactics which are, coincidentally, the only way to also eliminate clock. We don't want to burn clock with give-up runs. BECAUSE WE CAN'T BURN THE CLOCK ENOUGH FOR IT TO MATTER. Running the ball surrenders the ball. Possession of the ball is all that matters. Everything else is a distraction to that truth. At 4:01, you can only bleed clock as a result of being able to move the chains.

4. Adopting conventional clock-burning wisdom (run-run-conservative throw), Texas burned a grand total of....drum roll....1:01 off of the clock and surrendered the ball. Iowa State still retained a time out with 3:00 left on the clock. Useless. Texas also did nothing to advance field position, which is crucial in a 1 point contest. In that game situation, theTexas focus can only be on moving the chains and possessing the ball. So what tactics best supported Texas moving the chains? What was working on the last two Longhorn possessions?

5. Tom Herman offering that he expected his runs to gain yards is laughable. ISU was dominating our running game before they overloaded the run. Those were give up plays. Herman knows what he did. He also knows the next day that the math doesn't check out in the game situation.

6. Texas can only win by continuing the only successful offensive strategy that has worked all game. The only thing that has worked in 3 of 12 prior possessions. Spread out ISU and throw the ball. In bounds. Obviously, you let clock run while doing so. Texas cannot attack the clock without first attacking the chains.

7. Throwing the ball on 1st and 2nd down gives Texas the initiative. ISU is thinking run. If they adjust and match coverage, a positive Ehlinger scramble is also a likely outcome since he's purely in WIN GAME mode and will gladly take an easy gain over the possibility of a bigger play downfield. Texas held all of the cards. They couldn't surrender them fast enough.

8. This all just a probability exercise with the added data of actual game information. The Texas staff called the game like they hadn't watched the prior 56 minutes of regulation. The Texas coaching staff blew it.

Tom Herman called two give up runs and a low risk 3rd down and long screen to Duvernay as if Ehlinger were a true freshman QB who had to be protected and not the only thing keeping the wheels on the offense in Ames. A QB with no turnovers who had just walked his offense down the field on 80 and 89 yard touchdown drives, throwing on nearly every down. What a breach of trust.

This entire Texas staff blinked. The result was Iowa State ball with 3:00 left on the clock, down 1, with a time out still in their back pocket. Which only served to set up another example of inattention to detail when a team captain jumped offsides on a 4th and 4 field goal attempt, guaranteeing the Longhorn loss. Texas is now 6-4 and they deserve every bit of it.

Remember against Oklahoma State when everyone except Gundy seemed to know that if they'd simply stop running and start passing they'd win? Remember being so happy that Gundy stubbornly kept running?

 

Saturday showed me how that game felt from the other angle.

 

[XYZ 2154]

11 hours ago, satyanash said:

(Scipio Tex) Iowa State Postmortem: Offense

That was brutal.

[CurlyDumps 4691]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

They had a shitty game plan for sure, and the decision making on that last drive wad awful. That being said, considering they lost their most explosive offensive player to an NFL practice sqaud, the offense has overall been a delight this season. 

Going back to OU, the offense has been sputtering fecal splatter against defenses with a pulse. 

[satyanash 15778]

 

[Red Five 41814]

Christmas came early for you, Saltygash.

[Wally Pryor 5417]

2 hours ago, Bill Lumbergh said:

Remember against Oklahoma State when everyone except Gundy seemed to know that if they'd simply stop running and start passing they'd win? Remember being so happy that Gundy stubbornly kept running?

 

Saturday showed me how that game felt from the other angle.

 

Paul gets it. 

Sucks that we're paying a staff $12MM to $13MM and they don't.  

[ShowMeALoss 143]

This is such a bad take. If the coaches were great in the first place, Texas wouldn't have to replace them. If things didn't show upward trajectory in the first 2-3 years, what makes people think that it's going to magically improve in years 4 and beyond? Alabama changes coordinators almost every year and they don't skip a beat but sure blame our sucktitude on not keeping the worst coordinators in football long enough. Surely if we gave them 4 years, they would have turned us into a national championship contender.

[Fozzz 152]

27 minutes ago, ShowMeALoss said:

This is such a bad take. If the coaches were great in the first place, Texas wouldn't have to replace them. If things didn't show upward trajectory in the first 2-3 years, what makes people think that it's going to magically improve in years 4 and beyond? Alabama changes coordinators almost every year and they don't skip a beat but sure blame our sucktitude on not keeping the worst coordinators in football long enough. Surely if we gave them 4 years, they would have turned us into a national championship contender.

Next year is the make-or-break season for Tom.  There was a lot of evidence heading into this season indicating that Texas was likely to take a step back this season in terms of record, but most Texas fans, being fans, chose to ignore that evidence.  

[Sejjr 3250]

Taylor Gaspar Estes needs to rethink her 2/2 twittering. 

If her point is that Texas fans are bitchy bitches with a penchant for coach blaming, that is one thing. But following up with "if only we'd give these poor maligned assistant coaches more time to really coach their guys" reeks of Belmont feeding her a script. If an employee continues to under perform and there are better replacements available, why would you not upgrade?

The fear I have with Herman at this particular point in time is that he might have a stubborn refusal to change. We saw it in the game plan on Saturday. 

[ShowMeALoss 143]

3 minutes ago, Sejjr said:

Taylor Gaspar Estes needs to rethink her 2/2 twittering. 

If her point is that Texas fans are bitchy bitches with a penchant for coach blaming, that is one thing. But following up with "if only we'd give these poor maligned assistant coaches more time to really coach their guys" reeks of Belmont feeding her a script. If an employee continues to under perform and there are better replacements available, why would you not upgrade?

The fear I have with Herman at this particular point in time is that he might have a stubborn refusal to change. We saw it in the game plan on Saturday. 

Correlation doesn't imply causation. Yes, we have had poor results and coaching turnover over the past decade but that doesn't mean coaching turnover caused the poor results.

[Valmy77 13629]

"There are two types of coaches, them that have just been fired and them that are going to be fired."

It is just how this business works.

[Valmy77 13629]

5 minutes ago, ShowMeALoss said:

Correlation doesn't imply causation. Yes, we have had poor results and coaching turnover over the past decade but that doesn't mean coaching turnover caused the poor results.

Well I would need to see some historical evidence of a football coaching staff that failed consistently for years and then suddenly was a success. We searched for such evidence during the Chuck regime, trying to make ourselves feel better and failed to find any IIRC.

[Tailgate 3085]

17 hours ago, MrBig said:

We need to analyze the footage of every one of Tom’s kisses of the players to see who really leans into it and who is just a dead fish. That will tell you who has “bought into” his program. 

I’m a slow....does he really do this here too? I know it was a Houston thing. But seriously....if I was a player I’d happily decline.