Jump to content

2021 Texas Offseason: Sark Attacks Austin

texifornia

By texifornia
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

THUJONE
THUJONE

Just leaving this here for posterity.

fatheryeet
fatheryeet

SOON Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

closetojumping
closetojumping

There are longstanding rumors that Chip Brown is your typical old school sports reporter. By that, I mean he's allegedly a degenerate gambler and alcoholic. There's a longstanding rumor that Chip

Posted Images

Machinator

Machinator 32097

Posted
Posted

Roach

Spoiler

JA’QUINDEN JACKSON’S TRANSFER

I spoke with a few sources over the weekend regarding Ja’Quinden Jackson and his transfer to Utah.  The biggest reason Jackson transferred was a change in the offensive philosophy under Mike Yurcich.  Jackson committed to Texas under Tim Beck and the belief he would play quarterback, but I was told he lost that belief under Yurcich.  As Texas went in a different direction in recruiting quarterbacks, I was told Jackson was somewhat treated as an afterthought by the previous coaching staff.  Utah was a school he felt would utilize him at quarterback where he wanted a fair shot, but something else soured Jackson and his family on Texas. 

Jackson suffered a knee injury near the end of his senior season and arrived on campus still recovering from the injury. I was told that Jackson and his family weren’t happy with the way his rehab was handled and he could still be dealing with long term effects of the knee not healing properly. Following Kenyatta Watson’s transfer, there were allegations by his family of injury mismanagement, and we also heard that many players including Caden Sterns didn’t see eye-to-eye with the way their injuries were managed by the staff.

 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoName

NoName 16309

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Machinator said:

Roach

  Hide contents

JA’QUINDEN JACKSON’S TRANSFER

I spoke with a few sources over the weekend regarding Ja’Quinden Jackson and his transfer to Utah.  The biggest reason Jackson transferred was a change in the offensive philosophy under Mike Yurcich.  Jackson committed to Texas under Tim Beck and the belief he would play quarterback, but I was told he lost that belief under Yurcich.  As Texas went in a different direction in recruiting quarterbacks, I was told Jackson was somewhat treated as an afterthought by the previous coaching staff.  Utah was a school he felt would utilize him at quarterback where he wanted a fair shot, but something else soured Jackson and his family on Texas. 

Jackson suffered a knee injury near the end of his senior season and arrived on campus still recovering from the injury. I was told that Jackson and his family weren’t happy with the way his rehab was handled and he could still be dealing with long term effects of the knee not healing properly. Following Kenyatta Watson’s transfer, there were allegations by his family of injury mismanagement, and we also heard that many players including Caden Sterns didn’t see eye-to-eye with the way their injuries were managed by the staff.

 

as if there were not enough reasons to dislike the prior leadership...

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texifornia

texifornia 56547

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

ESPN's too-early preseason AA list. Relevant picks are:

RB: Breece Hall (ISU)

RB: Bijan

WR: Marvin Mims (OU)

OG: Kenyon Green (aggy)

OG: O'Cyrus Torrence (ULaLa)

APB: Deuce Vaughn (KSU)

LB: Mike Rose (ISU)

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30730180/college-football-way-too-early-2021-all-america-team

Edited by texifornia
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BurntOrange&White

BurntOrange&White 39668

Posted
Posted

Nahlin:

 

By: Justin, Gerry, and Eric

HUMAN RESOURCES

*IT spoke to a source with knowledge of NFL jobs that are currently open, and the Philadelphia Eagles have either interviewed or are planning to interview Stan Drayton. We believe the interview has already taken place, (he was not on the Saturday offer call with Jamarion Miller) but we don’t know for sure. IT will continue to monitor. We’ve heard Drayton is unlikely to leave, and we have reason to believe it, but some things might not be adding up.

*Bryan Carrington has been offered a job at USC, and went out to Los Angeles to visit with the Trojans staff this weekend. Carrington is expected to have a sit down conversation with Steve Sarkisian early this week and likely make a decision on his future by the end of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BurntOrangeBlooded15

BurntOrangeBlooded15 1564

Posted
Posted

I feel like the Drayton to the NFL thing is a win win for us. 
 

If he stays, we have a solid coach who connects well with our RBs and has been a fair - decent recruiter. 
 

if he leaves, we’ve proven to Bijan that it wasn’t us letting him go, and we can go and add even another recruiter to the pool. 
 

win either way in my book 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LTtxfan

LTtxfan 48986

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Machinator said:

Roach

  Reveal hidden contents

JA’QUINDEN JACKSON’S TRANSFER

I spoke with a few sources over the weekend regarding Ja’Quinden Jackson and his transfer to Utah.  The biggest reason Jackson transferred was a change in the offensive philosophy under Mike Yurcich.  Jackson committed to Texas under Tim Beck and the belief he would play quarterback, but I was told he lost that belief under Yurcich.  As Texas went in a different direction in recruiting quarterbacks, I was told Jackson was somewhat treated as an afterthought by the previous coaching staff.  Utah was a school he felt would utilize him at quarterback where he wanted a fair shot, but something else soured Jackson and his family on Texas. 

Jackson suffered a knee injury near the end of his senior season and arrived on campus still recovering from the injury. I was told that Jackson and his family weren’t happy with the way his rehab was handled and he could still be dealing with long term effects of the knee not healing properly. Following Kenyatta Watson’s transfer, there were allegations by his family of injury mismanagement, and we also heard that many players including Caden Sterns didn’t see eye-to-eye with the way their injuries were managed by the staff.

 

So does the medical staff handling rehab change in any way under SARK ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43266

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, texifornia said:

ESPN's too-early preseason AA list. Relevant picks are:

RB: Breece Hall (ISU)

RB: Bijan

WR: Marvin Mims (OU)

OG: Kenyon Green (aggy)

OG: O'Cyrus Torrence (ULaLa)

APB: Deuce Vaughn (KSU)

LB: Mike Rose (ISU)

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30730180/college-football-way-too-early-2021-all-america-team

Who do we think our sleepers are that might have a shot along with Bijan? Overshown? Collins?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JOSEYWALES66

JOSEYWALES66 1790

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ztejas said:

Who do we think our sleepers are that might have a shot along with Bijan? Overshown? Collins?

I think AA might be too much but I really think Joshua Moore will explode next year.   Sark isn't going to start spreading the ball around just to do so.  He's going to exploit weaknesses until the defense stops it.  Moore is the best candidate for that.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43266

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, JOSEYWALES66 said:

I think AA might be too much but I really think Joshua Moore will explode next year.   Sark isn't going to start spreading the ball around just to do so.  He's going to exploit weaknesses until the defense stops it.  Moore is the best candidate for that.

I almost added Moore. I just think it's so hard to make it at WR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LTtxfan

LTtxfan 48986

Posted
Posted

Siap...

2021 Recruiting Class: Meet the Longhorns early enrollees

January 24, 2021 

The Longhorns 2021 recruiting cycle will finish next week after the second signing day period. A portion of the 2021 class has already started arriving on campus in Austin. Nine of the 21 signees have started getting accustomed to the Forty Acres.

The current class is ranked No. 17 according to 247Sports composite rankings. While these players originally signed to play for Tom Herman, they will have a new head coach and staff to get accustomed to. It will be an interesting dynamic with Steve Sarkisian running the show for the burnt orange, but many are hopeful for the future of Texas’ football program.

 Here are the full nine early enrollees:  

  • JD Coffey, Safety: Kennedale  Height  6-0.5  Weight 180
  • Jamier Johnson, CB: John Muir (CA). Height 6-0   Weight 170
  • Derrick Harris Jr, DE: New Caney Height 6-2.5  Weight 215
  • Terrence Cooks, LB: Shadow Creek Height 6-2   Weight 210
  • Jaden Alexis, WR: Monarch (FL) Height. 5-11  Weight. 185
  • Hayden Conner, OT: Taylor (Katy) Height  6-5.5  Weight. 317
  • Gunnar Helm, TE: Cherry Creek (CO)  Height 6-5  Weight 225
  • Charles Wright, QB: Austin High  Height. 6-1  Weight. 194
  • Isaac Pearson, P: Pro Kick Australia. Height 6-2    Weight 215

 

The Longhorns social media department recently put together a video of the early enrollees arriving to campus.

 

https://longhornswire.usatoday.com/lists/2021-recruiting-class-meet-the-longhorns-early-enrollees/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Machinator

Machinator 32097

Posted
Posted
Just now, Fud said:

Anyone got this?

 

Returning Production For 2021

TEAM
OVERALL OFFENSE (RANK) DEFENSE (RANK)
1. Louisiana 96% 93% (6) 98% (1)
2. UCLA 91% 95% (3) 88% (8)
3. Miami 91% 95% (1) 86% (12)
4. Iowa St. 88% 94% (5) 81% (25)
5. Wash. St. 87% 88% (9) 86% (13)
6. Liberty 87% 95% (2) 79% (33)
7. Oregon St. 87% 94% (4) 79% (34)
8. Utah 86% 81% (34) 91% (5)
9. Oregon 86% 87% (11) 84% (19)
10. Maryland 85% 86% (14) 85% (17)
11. Arizona St. 84% 86% (15) 82% (21)
12. Colorado 83% 86% (16) 81% (27)
13. Ga. Tech 83% 84% (21) 82% (23)
14. Wisconsin 83% 84% (24) 82% (22)
15. Washington 82% 91% (7) 73% (61)
16. Troy 82% 70% (68) 94% (2)
17. CMU 81% 84% (23) 79% (35)
18. Wake Forest 81% 88% (8) 74% (54)
19. W. Virginia 81% 82% (32) 81% (29)
20. California 81% 75% (52) 87% (11)
21. Coastal Caro. 81% 70% (66) 91% (4)
22. Ole Miss 81% 78% (44) 83% (20)
23. Georgia St. 80% 85% (18) 76% (49)
24. Indiana 80% 80% (39) 81% (26)
25. Minnesota 80% 75% (53) 84% (18)
26. Syracuse 80% 83% (26) 76% (45)
27. UTSA 79% 87% (12) 71% (63)
28. UMass 79% 88% (10) 71% (65)
29. Wyoming 79% 79% (40) 79% (31)
30. LSU 79% 82% (30) 76% (44)
31. Akron 79% 85% (19) 73% (58)
32. N. Carolina 79% 77% (47) 81% (28)
33. TCU 79% 87% (13) 70% (66)
34. Miss. St. 79% 72% (62) 85% (16)
35. Texas St. 78% 82% (29) 74% (56)
36. Ball St. 78% 80% (36) 76% (47)
37. Penn St. 78% 74% (58) 82% (24)
38. Purdue 78% 85% (17) 70% (68)
39. Arkansas 78% 70% (67) 85% (15)
40. App. St. 78% 67% (76) 88% (7)
41. Cincinnati 77% 82% (31) 73% (60)
42. Army 77% 79% (42) 76% (46)
43. Oklahoma 76% 78% (43) 75% (51)
44. NC St. 76% 63% (83) 90% (6)
45. Fresno St. 76% 74% (56) 78% (39)
46. Arizona 76% 75% (54) 77% (40)
47. Boston Coll. 75% 84% (22) 66% (79)
48. ECU 75% 71% (65) 78% (37)
49. Michigan 73% 77% (46) 70% (69)
50. Pittsburgh 73% 82% (28) 64% (86)
51. S. Alabama 73% 79% (41) 67% (77)
52. Nevada 73% 82% (33) 64% (84)
53. Florida St. 73% 84% (25) 62% (90)
54. Auburn 73% 73% (60) 72% (62)
55. Oklahoma St. 72% 65% (79) 80% (30)
56. Missouri 72% 82% (27) 62% (89)
57. Iowa 72% 69% (70) 76% (48)
58. Kansas St. 72% 81% (35) 64% (87)
59. Baylor 72% 59% (90) 85% (14)
60. Nebraska 72% 56% (96) 88% (9)
61. EMU 71% 78% (45) 64% (85)
62. Illinois 70% 80% (38) 61% (94)
63. NIU 70% 53% (105) 87% (10)
64. Michigan St. 69% 80% (37) 59% (99)
65. Clemson 69% 46% (118) 92% (3)
66. Rice 69% 59% (89) 79% (32)
67. USC 69% 69% (69) 69% (73)
68. BGSU 69% 59% (88) 78% (38)
69. Texas Tech 69% 63% (82) 74% (53)
70. Houston 68% 71% (64) 65% (80)
71. Memphis 68% 63% (81) 73% (59)
72. Va. Tech 68% 69% (71) 67% (76)
73. N. Texas 68% 67% (72) 68% (74)
74. UCF 68% 74% (59) 62% (91)
75. So. Miss 67% 57% (94) 77% (42)
76. San Jose St. 67% 59% (92) 74% (52)
77. Virginia 66% 72% (63) 61% (95)
78. Vanderbilt 66% 75% (50) 57% (102)
79. Hawaii 66% 55% (100) 77% (43)
80. Navy 65% 56% (98) 74% (55)
81. Utah St. 64% 67% (75) 61% (93)
82. Rutgers 64% 67% (74) 61% (96)
83. FAU 64% 76% (48) 51% (111)
84. Kansas 64% 61% (85) 66% (78)
85. Tulane 64% 74% (57) 53% (110)
86. UTEP 63% 74% (55) 51% (112)
87. MTSU 63% 56% (97) 70% (70)
88. Colorado St. 62% 60% (86) 64% (83)
89. UNLV 62% 46% (121) 79% (36)
90. Ohio 62% 55% (101) 70% (71)
91. WKU 62% 67% (73) 56% (104)
92. Georgia 62% 84% (20) 39% (126)
93. Louisville 61% 73% (61) 50% (114)
94. Arkansas St. 61% 48% (114) 75% (50)
95. Texas 61% 53% (104) 69% (72)
96. Toledo 61% 50% (111) 71% (64)
97. Miami-OH 60% 75% (51) 45% (118)
98. Kentucky 60% 60% (87) 60% (97)
99. Texas A&M 60% 46% (120) 74% (57)
100. ULM 59% 64% (80) 55% (106)
101. USF 59% 51% (109) 68% (75)
102. Boise St. 59% 75% (49) 42% (122)
103. WMU 58% 65% (78) 50% (113)
104. Duke 56% 51% (110) 62% (92)
105. La. Tech 56% 48% (116) 65% (82)
106. Charlotte 56% 66% (77) 46% (117)
107. FIU 56% 48% (115) 64% (88)
108. Florida 55% 41% (125) 70% (67)
109. Tulsa 55% 58% (93) 53% (109)
110. Alabama 55% 33% (126) 77% (41)
111. Stanford 55% 45% (122) 65% (81)
112. Marshall 55% 52% (106) 57% (101)
113. SMU 55% 50% (112) 59% (98)
114. UAB 55% 52% (107) 57% (100)
115. Air Force 54% 59% (91) 49% (116)
116. Buffalo 54% 52% (108) 56% (105)
117. Tennessee 54% 53% (103) 54% (107)
118. San Diego St. 52% 61% (84) 42% (121)
119. Ga. Southern 51% 46% (119) 56% (103)
120. Kent St. 50% 50% (113) 50% (115)
121. Ohio St. 50% 55% (99) 44% (119)
122. New Mexico 49% 56% (95) 42% (123)
123. Notre Dame 49% 44% (123) 53% (108)
124. S. Carolina 47% 54% (102) 40% (124)
125. Temple 42% 41% (124) 43% (120)
126. Northwestern 34% 29% (127) 39% (125)
127. BYU 31% 47% (117) 16% (127)
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Machinator

Machinator 32097

Posted
Posted

Methodology stuff

Spoiler

What exactly goes into this?

My returning production formula looks at the most predictive key personnel stats -- the numbers that have the most impact on improvement or regression from season to season. What percentage of your QBs' combined passing yardage is returning? Your offensive line snaps? Your defensive tackles for loss? Returning production is weighted based on what correlates most strongly with year-to-year changes in SP+.

The weighting for the offensive returning production formula changes from year to year as I get more data to play with. The current iteration is as follows:

Returning QB passing yards: 29%
Returning RB rushing yards: 5%
Returning WR/TE receiving yards: 34%
Returning OL snaps: 33%

Those who have been following my work for a while might be surprised by that last number. For a long time, I tracked offensive line starts as the best possible way of measuring experience and continuity up front, but its year-to-year correlations weren't very strong and didn't factor much into the overall equation. But having snap count data at my disposal now has opened things up. As it turns out, continuity up front, as measured by your percentage of snaps returning, has a pretty hefty impact on your year-to-year progression or regression. That makes sense, of course -- your offensive line makes up nearly half of your offensive lineup.

Defense is a little bit trickier. The units aren't quite as well-defined -- teams play with three or four linemen, three or four linebackers, four or five defensive backs -- but this is approximately what goes into the defensive returning production figure:

Returning tackles: 56%
Returning tackles for loss: 6%
Returning sacks: 7%
Returning passes defensed: 31%

This ends up being a nice blend of raw tackling figures and disruption stats. Apparently disruption in the passing game is harder to replace -- continuity matters more there.

Perhaps because of this, continuity in the back of the defense has far more of an effect on your stats than continuity up front. Returning production in the secondary ends up accounting for about 59% of your overall statistical change, a monstrous amount compared to linebackers (minus-33%) and defensive linemen (minus-8%). Apparently change up front is much easier to account for, which might surprise some.

2021: the weirdest year ever for returning production
It probably goes without saying, but measuring returning production at the moment is awfully fraught, and not only because three FBS teams had no 2020 production to return. Some schools have announced which of their 2020 seniors will take advantage of the bonus year allotted to them because of the coronavirus season; for others, you can approximately glean the returnees from local media. But until we see fully updated rosters this spring or summer, it's hard to feel too confident about who will and won't be back.

I've tried my damnedest to account for all the returnees I could find, but it's a guarantee that I've missed some. Again, we'll update these numbers closer to the season, but I figured this was still a worthy exercise and a solid table-setter for the year to come.

As you would probably expect, the returning production figures are higher this year. Whereas the national returning production average is typically 62-63%, it is at 67% and climbing this season as I account for more and more returnees.

Does that mean that more teams are going to improve this year? Kind of: More teams are slated to return their starting quarterbacks, for instance, and more teams are topping 80% overall this year than in a normal season. But since each game is still zero-sum -- someone wins and someone loses -- that means the bar gets raised. If you return what would typically be an average level of production, you're potentially falling behind in 2021.

Is the transfer portal accounted for?
As well as possible, yes. When your team adds a transfer, I add the new player's production to both the team's numerator and denominator. There is an increasing amount of transfers to keep track of with each passing year, but I think I've caught most of them.

For all 2021 transfers, I am assuming that before the season begins, the NCAA will finally get around to granting immediate eligibility for all first-time or graduate transfers. Obviously this might not happen -- counting on the NCAA to do anything athlete-friendly is typically a fool's errand -- and I might have to make adjustments closer to the season. But for now all transfers count toward the 2021 production formula.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
texifornia

texifornia 56547

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, Machinator said:

Returning Production For 2021

TEAM
OVERALL OFFENSE (RANK) DEFENSE (RANK)
1. Louisiana 96% 93% (6) 98% (1)
2. UCLA 91% 95% (3) 88% (8)
3. Miami 91% 95% (1) 86% (12)
4. Iowa St. 88% 94% (5) 81% (25)
5. Wash. St. 87% 88% (9) 86% (13)
6. Liberty 87% 95% (2) 79% (33)
7. Oregon St. 87% 94% (4) 79% (34)
8. Utah 86% 81% (34) 91% (5)
9. Oregon 86% 87% (11) 84% (19)
10. Maryland 85% 86% (14) 85% (17)
11. Arizona St. 84% 86% (15) 82% (21)
12. Colorado 83% 86% (16) 81% (27)
13. Ga. Tech 83% 84% (21) 82% (23)
14. Wisconsin 83% 84% (24) 82% (22)
15. Washington 82% 91% (7) 73% (61)
16. Troy 82% 70% (68) 94% (2)
17. CMU 81% 84% (23) 79% (35)
18. Wake Forest 81% 88% (8) 74% (54)
19. W. Virginia 81% 82% (32) 81% (29)
20. California 81% 75% (52) 87% (11)
21. Coastal Caro. 81% 70% (66) 91% (4)
22. Ole Miss 81% 78% (44) 83% (20)
23. Georgia St. 80% 85% (18) 76% (49)
24. Indiana 80% 80% (39) 81% (26)
25. Minnesota 80% 75% (53) 84% (18)
26. Syracuse 80% 83% (26) 76% (45)
27. UTSA 79% 87% (12) 71% (63)
28. UMass 79% 88% (10) 71% (65)
29. Wyoming 79% 79% (40) 79% (31)
30. LSU 79% 82% (30) 76% (44)
31. Akron 79% 85% (19) 73% (58)
32. N. Carolina 79% 77% (47) 81% (28)
33. TCU 79% 87% (13) 70% (66)
34. Miss. St. 79% 72% (62) 85% (16)
35. Texas St. 78% 82% (29) 74% (56)
36. Ball St. 78% 80% (36) 76% (47)
37. Penn St. 78% 74% (58) 82% (24)
38. Purdue 78% 85% (17) 70% (68)
39. Arkansas 78% 70% (67) 85% (15)
40. App. St. 78% 67% (76) 88% (7)
41. Cincinnati 77% 82% (31) 73% (60)
42. Army 77% 79% (42) 76% (46)
43. Oklahoma 76% 78% (43) 75% (51)
44. NC St. 76% 63% (83) 90% (6)
45. Fresno St. 76% 74% (56) 78% (39)
46. Arizona 76% 75% (54) 77% (40)
47. Boston Coll. 75% 84% (22) 66% (79)
48. ECU 75% 71% (65) 78% (37)
49. Michigan 73% 77% (46) 70% (69)
50. Pittsburgh 73% 82% (28) 64% (86)
51. S. Alabama 73% 79% (41) 67% (77)
52. Nevada 73% 82% (33) 64% (84)
53. Florida St. 73% 84% (25) 62% (90)
54. Auburn 73% 73% (60) 72% (62)
55. Oklahoma St. 72% 65% (79) 80% (30)
56. Missouri 72% 82% (27) 62% (89)
57. Iowa 72% 69% (70) 76% (48)
58. Kansas St. 72% 81% (35) 64% (87)
59. Baylor 72% 59% (90) 85% (14)
60. Nebraska 72% 56% (96) 88% (9)
61. EMU 71% 78% (45) 64% (85)
62. Illinois 70% 80% (38) 61% (94)
63. NIU 70% 53% (105) 87% (10)
64. Michigan St. 69% 80% (37) 59% (99)
65. Clemson 69% 46% (118) 92% (3)
66. Rice 69% 59% (89) 79% (32)
67. USC 69% 69% (69) 69% (73)
68. BGSU 69% 59% (88) 78% (38)
69. Texas Tech 69% 63% (82) 74% (53)
70. Houston 68% 71% (64) 65% (80)
71. Memphis 68% 63% (81) 73% (59)
72. Va. Tech 68% 69% (71) 67% (76)
73. N. Texas 68% 67% (72) 68% (74)
74. UCF 68% 74% (59) 62% (91)
75. So. Miss 67% 57% (94) 77% (42)
76. San Jose St. 67% 59% (92) 74% (52)
77. Virginia 66% 72% (63) 61% (95)
78. Vanderbilt 66% 75% (50) 57% (102)
79. Hawaii 66% 55% (100) 77% (43)
80. Navy 65% 56% (98) 74% (55)
81. Utah St. 64% 67% (75) 61% (93)
82. Rutgers 64% 67% (74) 61% (96)
83. FAU 64% 76% (48) 51% (111)
84. Kansas 64% 61% (85) 66% (78)
85. Tulane 64% 74% (57) 53% (110)
86. UTEP 63% 74% (55) 51% (112)
87. MTSU 63% 56% (97) 70% (70)
88. Colorado St. 62% 60% (86) 64% (83)
89. UNLV 62% 46% (121) 79% (36)
90. Ohio 62% 55% (101) 70% (71)
91. WKU 62% 67% (73) 56% (104)
92. Georgia 62% 84% (20) 39% (126)
93. Louisville 61% 73% (61) 50% (114)
94. Arkansas St. 61% 48% (114) 75% (50)
95. Texas 61% 53% (104) 69% (72)
96. Toledo 61% 50% (111) 71% (64)
97. Miami-OH 60% 75% (51) 45% (118)
98. Kentucky 60% 60% (87) 60% (97)
99. Texas A&M 60% 46% (120) 74% (57)
100. ULM 59% 64% (80) 55% (106)
101. USF 59% 51% (109) 68% (75)
102. Boise St. 59% 75% (49) 42% (122)
103. WMU 58% 65% (78) 50% (113)
104. Duke 56% 51% (110) 62% (92)
105. La. Tech 56% 48% (116) 65% (82)
106. Charlotte 56% 66% (77) 46% (117)
107. FIU 56% 48% (115) 64% (88)
108. Florida 55% 41% (125) 70% (67)
109. Tulsa 55% 58% (93) 53% (109)
110. Alabama 55% 33% (126) 77% (41)
111. Stanford 55% 45% (122) 65% (81)
112. Marshall 55% 52% (106) 57% (101)
113. SMU 55% 50% (112) 59% (98)
114. UAB 55% 52% (107) 57% (100)
115. Air Force 54% 59% (91) 49% (116)
116. Buffalo 54% 52% (108) 56% (105)
117. Tennessee 54% 53% (103) 54% (107)
118. San Diego St. 52% 61% (84) 42% (121)
119. Ga. Southern 51% 46% (119) 56% (103)
120. Kent St. 50% 50% (113) 50% (115)
121. Ohio St. 50% 55% (99) 44% (119)
122. New Mexico 49% 56% (95) 42% (123)
123. Notre Dame 49% 44% (123) 53% (108)
124. S. Carolina 47% 54% (102) 40% (124)
125. Temple 42% 41% (124) 43% (120)
126. Northwestern 34% 29% (127) 39% (125)
127. BYU 31% 47% (117) 16% (127)

#95 vs #1 to lead off the season. Should be an appropriately spicy game vs the Cajuns.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dijon Robinson

Dijon Robinson 1511

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Machinator said:

Returning Production For 2021

TEAM
OVERALL OFFENSE (RANK) DEFENSE (RANK)
1. Louisiana 96% 93% (6) 98% (1)
2. UCLA 91% 95% (3) 88% (8)
3. Miami 91% 95% (1) 86% (12)
4. Iowa St. 88% 94% (5) 81% (25)
5. Wash. St. 87% 88% (9) 86% (13)
6. Liberty 87% 95% (2) 79% (33)
7. Oregon St. 87% 94% (4) 79% (34)
8. Utah 86% 81% (34) 91% (5)
9. Oregon 86% 87% (11) 84% (19)
10. Maryland 85% 86% (14) 85% (17)
11. Arizona St. 84% 86% (15) 82% (21)
12. Colorado 83% 86% (16) 81% (27)
13. Ga. Tech 83% 84% (21) 82% (23)
14. Wisconsin 83% 84% (24) 82% (22)
15. Washington 82% 91% (7) 73% (61)
16. Troy 82% 70% (68) 94% (2)
17. CMU 81% 84% (23) 79% (35)
18. Wake Forest 81% 88% (8) 74% (54)
19. W. Virginia 81% 82% (32) 81% (29)
20. California 81% 75% (52) 87% (11)
21. Coastal Caro. 81% 70% (66) 91% (4)
22. Ole Miss 81% 78% (44) 83% (20)
23. Georgia St. 80% 85% (18) 76% (49)
24. Indiana 80% 80% (39) 81% (26)
25. Minnesota 80% 75% (53) 84% (18)
26. Syracuse 80% 83% (26) 76% (45)
27. UTSA 79% 87% (12) 71% (63)
28. UMass 79% 88% (10) 71% (65)
29. Wyoming 79% 79% (40) 79% (31)
30. LSU 79% 82% (30) 76% (44)
31. Akron 79% 85% (19) 73% (58)
32. N. Carolina 79% 77% (47) 81% (28)
33. TCU 79% 87% (13) 70% (66)
34. Miss. St. 79% 72% (62) 85% (16)
35. Texas St. 78% 82% (29) 74% (56)
36. Ball St. 78% 80% (36) 76% (47)
37. Penn St. 78% 74% (58) 82% (24)
38. Purdue 78% 85% (17) 70% (68)
39. Arkansas 78% 70% (67) 85% (15)
40. App. St. 78% 67% (76) 88% (7)
41. Cincinnati 77% 82% (31) 73% (60)
42. Army 77% 79% (42) 76% (46)
43. Oklahoma 76% 78% (43) 75% (51)
44. NC St. 76% 63% (83) 90% (6)
45. Fresno St. 76% 74% (56) 78% (39)
46. Arizona 76% 75% (54) 77% (40)
47. Boston Coll. 75% 84% (22) 66% (79)
48. ECU 75% 71% (65) 78% (37)
49. Michigan 73% 77% (46) 70% (69)
50. Pittsburgh 73% 82% (28) 64% (86)
51. S. Alabama 73% 79% (41) 67% (77)
52. Nevada 73% 82% (33) 64% (84)
53. Florida St. 73% 84% (25) 62% (90)
54. Auburn 73% 73% (60) 72% (62)
55. Oklahoma St. 72% 65% (79) 80% (30)
56. Missouri 72% 82% (27) 62% (89)
57. Iowa 72% 69% (70) 76% (48)
58. Kansas St. 72% 81% (35) 64% (87)
59. Baylor 72% 59% (90) 85% (14)
60. Nebraska 72% 56% (96) 88% (9)
61. EMU 71% 78% (45) 64% (85)
62. Illinois 70% 80% (38) 61% (94)
63. NIU 70% 53% (105) 87% (10)
64. Michigan St. 69% 80% (37) 59% (99)
65. Clemson 69% 46% (118) 92% (3)
66. Rice 69% 59% (89) 79% (32)
67. USC 69% 69% (69) 69% (73)
68. BGSU 69% 59% (88) 78% (38)
69. Texas Tech 69% 63% (82) 74% (53)
70. Houston 68% 71% (64) 65% (80)
71. Memphis 68% 63% (81) 73% (59)
72. Va. Tech 68% 69% (71) 67% (76)
73. N. Texas 68% 67% (72) 68% (74)
74. UCF 68% 74% (59) 62% (91)
75. So. Miss 67% 57% (94) 77% (42)
76. San Jose St. 67% 59% (92) 74% (52)
77. Virginia 66% 72% (63) 61% (95)
78. Vanderbilt 66% 75% (50) 57% (102)
79. Hawaii 66% 55% (100) 77% (43)
80. Navy 65% 56% (98) 74% (55)
81. Utah St. 64% 67% (75) 61% (93)
82. Rutgers 64% 67% (74) 61% (96)
83. FAU 64% 76% (48) 51% (111)
84. Kansas 64% 61% (85) 66% (78)
85. Tulane 64% 74% (57) 53% (110)
86. UTEP 63% 74% (55) 51% (112)
87. MTSU 63% 56% (97) 70% (70)
88. Colorado St. 62% 60% (86) 64% (83)
89. UNLV 62% 46% (121) 79% (36)
90. Ohio 62% 55% (101) 70% (71)
91. WKU 62% 67% (73) 56% (104)
92. Georgia 62% 84% (20) 39% (126)
93. Louisville 61% 73% (61) 50% (114)
94. Arkansas St. 61% 48% (114) 75% (50)
95. Texas 61% 53% (104) 69% (72)
96. Toledo 61% 50% (111) 71% (64)
97. Miami-OH 60% 75% (51) 45% (118)
98. Kentucky 60% 60% (87) 60% (97)
99. Texas A&M 60% 46% (120) 74% (57)
100. ULM 59% 64% (80) 55% (106)
101. USF 59% 51% (109) 68% (75)
102. Boise St. 59% 75% (49) 42% (122)
103. WMU 58% 65% (78) 50% (113)
104. Duke 56% 51% (110) 62% (92)
105. La. Tech 56% 48% (116) 65% (82)
106. Charlotte 56% 66% (77) 46% (117)
107. FIU 56% 48% (115) 64% (88)
108. Florida 55% 41% (125) 70% (67)
109. Tulsa 55% 58% (93) 53% (109)
110. Alabama 55% 33% (126) 77% (41)
111. Stanford 55% 45% (122) 65% (81)
112. Marshall 55% 52% (106) 57% (101)
113. SMU 55% 50% (112) 59% (98)
114. UAB 55% 52% (107) 57% (100)
115. Air Force 54% 59% (91) 49% (116)
116. Buffalo 54% 52% (108) 56% (105)
117. Tennessee 54% 53% (103) 54% (107)
118. San Diego St. 52% 61% (84) 42% (121)
119. Ga. Southern 51% 46% (119) 56% (103)
120. Kent St. 50% 50% (113) 50% (115)
121. Ohio St. 50% 55% (99) 44% (119)
122. New Mexico 49% 56% (95) 42% (123)
123. Notre Dame 49% 44% (123) 53% (108)
124. S. Carolina 47% 54% (102) 40% (124)
125. Temple 42% 41% (124) 43% (120)
126. Northwestern 34% 29% (127) 39% (125)
127. BYU 31% 47% (117) 16% (127)

Guess this is what happens when Herman's entire offense consisted of grinding Sam into a fine powder every game

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enchubben

Enchubben 5509

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Followed by On The Road #95 TEXAS vs #39 Arkansas

Based on these metrics, we will be the less experienced team in every game this year. (But I bet we'd crush Alabama at #110, right? :/)

Can't imagine wanting to be responsible for gameplanning against this roster the first couple of weeks though. Complete unknown with respect to roster and offensive identity.  The only real known is that you need to contain Bijan. 

Edited by Enchubben
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burt Macklin

Burt Macklin 18999

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, texifornia said:

#95 vs #1 to lead off the season. Should be an appropriately spicy game vs the Cajuns.

Yeah, really not liking how that one is setting up. On the bright side, we all know Herman was too stupid to actually play our best  players so this metric isn’t as much of a negative for us as it would be for a well-coached team. A lot of this also hinges on replacing our QB production, which I’m optimistic about since Sam had a down year in a dysfunctional offense last year. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hmmm

Hmmm 155

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Dijon Robinson said:

Guess this is what happens when Herman's entire offense consisted of grinding Sam into a fine powder every game

Not to mention our prior's staff propensity to play the upperclassmen veterans who've earned it over talent, a la Mack Brown.  Looking at you Bijan, Collins, and Wiley.

In the past two seasons, our entire OL has pretty much remained the same throughout the season.  Which is pretty remarkable on a number of levels.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hmmm

Hmmm 155

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Bodacious Bevo said:

Those two and I'd say Jamison has a decent shot at returner and not decent shot at CB. Jake Smith isn't happening but I'll throw him in because I love him 

I'm with ya on Jake.  Don't expect him to be an AA next year but do think he has more untapped potential than Moore.  Jake is the best route runner on the team, perhaps even faster than Moore (his words), and can actually create separation.

Edited by Hmmm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...