1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

[Greg Johnson Sucks] TX @ Nebraska

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout' started by Smokey, Oct 21, 2006.

  1. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,938
    Likes Received:
    41,496
    Talk about your selective memories, Major.

    This is exactly what you said
    Reality indicates that this statement is wrong. Both teams were profoundly affected by the wind.

    And to think, you are doing engaging in this charade to justifiy the moronic argument that Texas should emulate throwing into the wind (8-18, one interception) with a weak armed QB - the guy was underthrowing long passes with a 25 mph wind on saturday.

    Nebraska (idiotically) tried to throw into it because the run was getting stuffed and they were consistently in 2nd & 3rd and long situations..........and they paid the penalty with an interception that cost them seven points, and poor field position which cost them seven more.

    So Major, I bid this argument adieu........

    [​IMG]

    ...but let the meltdown that keeps on melting continue. I like it when people like yourself who take a special pride appearing objective fall off the wagon, it's a difficult climb back to the top.
     
    #241 SamFisher, Oct 24, 2006
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2006
  2. Rocketman95

    Rocketman95 Hangout Boy

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    48,984
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    There is nothing I love more than people saying Major is having a meltdown. He is by far the most even-keeled person I've ever met. Yet, someone who will argue about anything and everything says Major's the one having the meltdown. Yeah, right.
     
  3. tinman

    tinman 999999999
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 1999
    Messages:
    104,473
    Likes Received:
    47,391
    Jeff Van Gundy would make a better Offensive Coordinator than Greg Davis.
     
  4. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,938
    Likes Received:
    41,496
    Thanks for your asssistance RM95 but Major can handle this by himself; enough queens in this thread already.

    [​IMG]
     
  5. Desert Scar

    Desert Scar Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    8,764
    Likes Received:
    11
    But they did put up 7 against OSU and had TOs of their own that lead to OSU points. Basically they forced the D to play near perfect versus OSU to have a chance to win, but yes the D did not deliver. Also, the 1st and last 2 series versus NU were what was troubling. When you are inside the 10 you either go power/smashmouth, or try to get a big wideout on an isolation int he end zone. They never went power/smashmouth, and they picked the least oppertune time of the whole game to throw the fade--when a TO loses you the game and setting up for an equivalent extra point wins the game. But these are small issues, the play calling is a minor issue, I take more issue with the general philosophy and formations.

    I could care less whether most fans think the team is being too conservative--though I think a traditional or pro type or power sets on one form of another more describes what I am talking about, I would hope coaches care less too. I am a Cowboys fan too. But I am not blaming their offensive play calls for losing last night. Sometimes you do the right thing put your players don't execute or your opponents simply make some great plays that stop you. What I object to is not putting the players in the best spot for them to be successfull--trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

    The right thing to do for McCoy (or Snead, it was up for grabs) and Texas in prep for this season was maximizing power sets and establishing the interior run game. You can still be unpredictable in conservative sets like this. That is where a sprinkling of play actions, counters, reverses, and half back passes mix in. Just look at Pittsburg, USC, etc. Again football 101, and I do fault Davis/Brown for not seeing the big picture and the best way to maximize talent (Charles/Sweed/Young/Finley/Pittman) while reducing the role/risks for inexperienced QBs. To me it was quite obvious once VY declared this should have been the direction for last year--but I think as Kevin Gilbride was all caught up in his system (e.g., "Chuck and Duck"), GD/Brown must have been caught up in a system, giving it more credit than the special players that made it work. What is funny is they finally realized they should change the system to fit VY, but then kept far too many components once this remarkable player left, rather than adapt to the new pieces in a way that maximizes their potential and limits their risks.

    Also, Carroll and Tiffin stuck with this formula (more traditional, starting between the tackle runs) and they had a lot more experienced/reputed QBs coming into the fold, considered the best pair of WRs, and much less proven tailbacks, and a little bit less returning OLs. But it works because the offense limits mistakes and relies on the defense while the offense and passing game tries to get its see legs down the line. Sooner or later I think SC will lose this year, but I doubt it will because the coaches put players in position that put more pressure on them than neccesary or that they underutlized the skill players they do have.

    Finally, lets look at it this way. Of the top teams, four have a staple of 3 WRs sets. They are Ohio State, Florida, Louiville and Texas. Now coming into this season which of the 4 does not belong: Smith, Leak, Brohm or McCoy? How could we have not possibly forseen the bind we put ourseleves in--it is obvious to the causul observer? Short of McCoy/Snead playing like Rex Grossman as a fresh we were in trouble. Yet lots of teams win NC with less than a Rex Grossman, 3 in the 8 years of the BCS--OSU, LSU, and Tenn. Further, even teams with Quinn, Navarre and Ainge have a base 2 WR offense and establish interior runs 1st.

    In sum we should have protected McCoy the way SC and Cal protected their inexperienced (yet more experienced than our) QBs, allow their QBs to primarily throw in the most advantagous situations, particularly while they are getting their sea legs (early season and tight games). Maybe, even probably, we still lose to OSU. Then again we went for 172 on the ground and 5.5 average with 6 blockers versus OSU, maybe with 7-8 blockers and more carries among Young and Charles we could have got 250 or 300 on the ground and had a real shot to put up 14-17-21 points and shorten the number of possessions and keep the defense rested where we need just a few big stops against a very potent offense. But either way IMO this approach would have given us our best chance versus the #1 team and it would not have been nearly as close versus an overmatched NU squad (NU's talent really didn't belong on the same field with UT or SC).
     
  6. tinman

    tinman 999999999
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 1999
    Messages:
    104,473
    Likes Received:
    47,391
    if Greg Davis coached in the NBA, players would be running sideways and away from the paint. the refs would actually call ILLEGAL OFFENSE.
     
  7. tinman

    tinman 999999999
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 1999
    Messages:
    104,473
    Likes Received:
    47,391
    if Greg Davis coached a track team, the batton passes would not go forward, they would be screen passes.
     
  8. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,938
    Likes Received:
    41,496
    That's right they did not, just like other offensive teams under well regarded coordinators ahve failed to do the same in even less daunting circumstances. They were not perfect, I never argued Davis was. But this illustrates the incredibly high standard to which people hold him. it's higher than that granted to so-called genius coordinators despite results which are not appreciably different and in many cases are superior.

    Sorry but the fade was the safest possible call in that situation short of spiking the ball. Brown defended it up and down yesterday, and Bob Davie was stupid to criticize it. They HAD to stop the clock with a brand new kicker, and a pass out of bounds was the safest way to do it. A pass to the middle of the zone across the line has more risk of being tipped or picked. A pass short of the end zone might be tackled in bounds. The bottom line is that the horns had to stop the clock...and they had enough confidence in their players (something that other posters are railing on Davis about) to try to score a TD.



    I know you don't, but most fans do care, read this thread for example. You have people citing Nebraska's 8-18, 1 int worth of passing into the wind as something to aspire to.
     
  9. Desert Scar

    Desert Scar Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    8,764
    Likes Received:
    11
    I agree among passes it is safe. But they shouldn't have been passing, and as safe as it was, it was very close to being an INT. They also never centered the FG try with 3 downs to do it. I think the whole series too unness risks and didn't maximize the chances to win. Personally I think with 32 seconds their was plenty of time to run off of the left guard to center the kick (worst case) or maybe even get the TD. NU probably even uses their TO to ice the kicker and save time for a possible KR and Hail Marys--they were using their time outs at that point of the game--and that is pretty much standard protocal rather than waiting for Texas to kick an extra point length field goal with 5-6-7 seconds left. IMO Davie was right on, Texas lowered the chances to win the game--including possible INT, making a bad kick angle, and saving time for a NU, with the last series of plays.

    Now really Sam, does the above really simple statement not strike you as odd as a causal observer? This is in the spirit of my general gripe (philosophy coming into this year), not individual play calling.
     
  10. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,938
    Likes Received:
    41,496
    Well Mack differed with you and Davie obviously and calculated the risks differently:
    ...and it worked out in the end; there's not much more to say about that.


    As I said, there are multiple sides of that coin; keeping 3 WR's maintains continuity for all the players (mccoy included) and for the future which has value; keeping 3 WR's keeps more playmakers on the field (not to mention there is no true fullback on the team); Keeping 3 Wr's has generally worked most of the time this year; not to mention that Davis/Brown have been lambasted in the past for being too conservative.

    There is a case to be made on your side as well, but Davis/Brown have chosen to continue along the course which led to their most successful period ever, until things go drastically wrong (and I don't believe a loss to Ohio state is enough to indicate that, though many do, apparently) they're not going to junk it.
     
  11. Bassfly

    Bassfly Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    970
    Likes Received:
    16
    "selvin young can even kinda sorta play fullback too" LOL. all your posts are a joke desert scar. its funny cause you act like you have a better pulse on the team than the coaches. no offense man cause i know youre a ut fan and all but youre a moron.
     
  12. updawg

    updawg Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,985
    Likes Received:
    166
    I think they would probably watch the clock tick down to Zero and us not get a FG off in time so they could win.
     
  13. Rocketman95

    Rocketman95 Hangout Boy

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    48,984
    Likes Received:
    1,445
    So, under this logic, all criticisms of coaching is moronic since 99.99999% of the people here do not have a better pulse on the team than the actual coaches.
     
  14. Bassfly

    Bassfly Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    970
    Likes Received:
    16
    nah, its one thing to question play calling like major, francis, others have. its another thing to try to dictate the entirety of our offense, down to formations, personnel etc etc. read that one desert scar post-- its ridiculous.
     
  15. Desert Scar

    Desert Scar Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    8,764
    Likes Received:
    11
    You have made a case for it well, I am sure it is what they were thinking.

    1) However I think it means they have given themselves/their scheme more relative credit rather than to the central player who made it efficient in the toughest of circumstances (VY). (Granted others have given them that credit too, coordinator of the year award and such, though I think they missed the big picture as well)

    2) In terms both playmaking and flexibility having Charles (line as a second RB or as a slot WR/hybrid RB) or Finley (as a 2nd TE or H-Back) is a much bigger threat to the defense and much more difficult to scheme for than a 3rd WR within a short passing game system (Cosby). They (Charles, Finley) help the run game a lot by having an extra blocker (Selvin for Charles) or misdirection runner (Selvin one way in the interior, Charles the other way around the end, who gets the ball, only we know), and provide as much presence to the pass game as well. Very similar to how SC added some variances for Bush (sometimes played with LenDale) and their 2 match-up problem causing TEs last year. A little nuance would have gone a long way towards getting more of your playmaker as regular threats, keeping the D off balance and most importantly buttering up a defense strait through the gut through a dominant line.
     
  16. Desert Scar

    Desert Scar Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    8,764
    Likes Received:
    11
    Kettle, black. Can't find a single point you refute. BTW I was not saying traditional full back, more like two tailbacks. SC did it with LenDale and Bush. But if one was to block, yes that is Selvin, that is where the kinda sorta came through since you need it for emphasis to understand the point.

    I suppose you think a 3 WR set that uses a lot of shutguns is a good idea when you have fresh QBs coming in to go along with the best returning OL, defense, and among the best group of other skill players. OK got it, you are not alone. I know of at least 2 coaches that felt that way.

    Really kinda stupid point. Any Tom, Dick, Harry and Bassfly can come in monday morning and say we should have ran ____ on that 3rd down or ____on that 1st down. That is called monday morning quarterbacking (but it applies to coaches). Coaches should take more fault/respnsibility for schemes and philosophy that don't best utilize their players rather than simply when good players don't make plays they are supposed to make or when a specific call doesn't work out.
     
  17. Cohen

    Cohen Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    10,751
    Likes Received:
    6

    Heh... 'No offense but you're a moron' is pretty moronic, wouldn't you say?
     
  18. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,938
    Likes Received:
    41,496
    Desert Scar you are going to love this.......


     
  19. percicles

    percicles Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Messages:
    11,989
    Likes Received:
    4,446
    Nice to see my sentiments regarding the lack of a true full back echoed. :)
     
  20. Desert Scar

    Desert Scar Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    8,764
    Likes Received:
    11
    Sam, thanks for the article. I think it is the party line to a T. I think Sendlein is right, and I think Texas had from about Jan 10 and on to prep for an I (Melton could be molded into a prototype FB), proset (which can have more 2 tailbacks--Selvin and Charles, not necc a traditional fullback) or a set with a blocking TE + H-Back (Finley), and using Finley/Charles is much scarier and difficult for opponents than just adding Cosby as a 3rd WR out there.

    Finally, just as an aside you do not need to be 230lbs to be a between the tackles runner, the author is just wrong. Just ask Warrick Dunn, Barber, Dorsett, Faulk, etc., all of them smaller than Selvin Young. Charles has good instincts in tight space and slipping tackles as does Young. In fact the guy in the I with Ricky as a fresh (Shon Mitchell was his name I think) was small.

    GD and the author are smart, I have no doubt they have articulate justifications for their positions. Maybe they are even correct that right now it is too late to run effective I, pro form or power sets. But that doesn't mean they were right for best setting up the team once VY left, they had Spring football and on to retool for fresh QBs and mold H-backs, hybrid FB/tailbacks, etc,--nothing they said above made be question that as smart as GD may be he used series misjudgement in preping for this season (brains and wisdom don't always go together--that is why we have spin doctors, lawyers and an Iraq War, with apologies in advance for an analogy between football and war). And yes it appears a UT lineman would agree with me in principle even if he would never cross his coaches.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now