Ketch's 10 Thoughts From the Weekend (I hate to say it, but a change is needed...)
- Thread starter Ketchum
- Start date
Arguing over which coach is worse is pointless. Neither should be coaching at THE University of Texas.
I'll say it again. A lot of these kids were pure shooters in HS, and by all accounts they light it up in practice. Our problem is that about 90% of possessions we run an offense that would embarrass most pickup games. We do not space the court, move away from the ball, set picks to get guys open, look for the post men, or do much anything (besides dribbling) to pressure the defense. As a result we get a lot of poor looks, and when we do get an open shot we almost look surprised.
Watching this offense operate is about as fun as a root canal.
BY "Gad" did not know it ... I mean I would not have wanted a machine to shape some of my LH opinions lo these many years ... You missed it once again !!! BTW HNY!!!
Re :# 7----I feel your pain, I feel your frustration, I feel your sadness, I feel your apathy, Ketch. When will it ever end? And next Sept., just like you {and countless others} I'll suit up again, only be disappointed once again when all is said & done.What's that old saw about he definition of insanity............? 
Will Jerry one day ask for forgiveness & salvation if he doesn't atone for his sins {besmirching the name & legacy of the Dallas Cowboys} in this life? Not a bet I'm ever likely to take.
Meantime, I hear Foles is soon to be on the market.
Will Jerry one day ask for forgiveness & salvation if he doesn't atone for his sins {besmirching the name & legacy of the Dallas Cowboys} in this life? Not a bet I'm ever likely to take.
Meantime, I hear Foles is soon to be on the market.
If these guys are so good, why isn't is showing up in their potential draft status. By your definition recruiting is based upon who gets drafted and were. These are average to good players not great players.
I think we both have fair points. I still see guys miss wide open shots. The mid-range shots are tough to watch.
What are we talking about when we say "talked about recruits?" Honestly, I feel Bomar is way too high for a couple of reasons. The first is, it's not as if we ever had a chance for him. Sure, we talked trash about him for going to OU but I don't feel like it was a ton. As it is, he only lasted 2 seasons (including a redshirt) so it's not as if he was there long. Honestly, I think Lache (pronounced Lake) is way too low at 10. It feels like we talked about him for 3 years before his eventual signing with RU. Mustain at 6 is puzzling. Not sure he even warrants a top 10 ranking. Shepard is also too low in that like Lache (pronounced Lake), Shep's recruitment was talked about for 3 years before he signed with LSU and the fact it was tied to Gilbert. I think Luck belongs on that list moreso than a Bomar or Mustain. Hell, 11 years later we talk about him as Ground Zero for the QB recruiting mistakes made by Mack.
Say it all you want but it doesn't make it accurate. There are not a "lot" of these players that were pure shooters in HS. My guess is you can go back and read @DustinMcComas report(s) on EVERY current player and MAYBE you read something like "pure shooter"/whatever such tag associated with Jase Febress and maybe something similar for Hepa and that is IT. Roach was not a "pure shooter" in HS. Coleman was not a "pure shooter" in HS. You MIGHT see language such as "potential to develop..." with someone like a Ramey, but simply put, we don't have PURE SHOOTERS on this team outside MAYBE Febres and perhaps, at best, Hepa.
Now, yes, our offense doesn't help. But our problem starts with a lack of shooters.
Yes, guys miss open shots on occasion, but here's the issue. How consistently throughout the course of the game are they getting those open shots? What kind of rhythm has been created for making those shots? If you run 10 bad possessions in a row on offense and then you run one good one and get a guy his first good look at a shot... well making that shot is not as easy as it looks because it's been so long since you had a good look, it's just as hard as trying to shoot an open shot cold off the bench after just checking in.
You get a guy a good look at a 3 every two minutes of game time, he will make more than his share of them. You get a guy one good look at a 3 every 10 minutes of game time, none of those shots will be taken in any kind of rhythm or flow.
When Dak gets that whopper of a contract, I'm going to sob.Re :# 7----I feel your pain, I feel your frustration, I feel your sadness, I feel your apathy, Ketch. When will it ever end? And next Sept., just like you {and countless others} I'll suit up again, only be disappointed once again when all is said & done.What's that old saw about he definition of insanity............?
Will Jerry one day ask for forgiveness & salvation if he doesn't atone for his sins {besmirching the name & legacy of the Dallas Cowboys} in this life? Not a bet I'm ever likely to take.
Meantime, I hear Foles is soon to be on the market.
I was AT the tech game on Saturday and found myself looking at my phone quite a bit. Totally non entertaining and it just looks like the guys aren’t really all there a lot of the time. If they’re not inspiried, I’m sure not.
Okafor was better than good. Nelson was good.
No one else has proven to be close to either of those marks.
A. Just went off gut feel. It was hard to order them.
b. There absolutely was a Bomar obsession because of the way his recruitment went and the fact Mack went all-in on him to such a degree that impacted every quarterback they wanted once they missed.
c. Lache might very well be ranked too low.
d. Mustain's recruitment was WILD. I think you're forgetting the Days of our Lives nature of it all.
e. No way Luck warrants a place. He's not in the area codes of some names that barely missed.
Again, we sorta have to define "talked about." I mean, what discussion of QB missteps in the last 10 years even remotely include the names of Bomar and Mustain. Rest assured Luck comes up in them all the time. Again, just coming at it from a different vantage point.
I joined the site during the 2005 recruiting cycle on the heels of the Rose Bowl win against Michigan. I was fascinated with the recruitments of Perriloux, Bennett, and Fred Rouse. I felt like all three can be rolled into one as a storyline. I also feel like the storyline of Kyler may be higher as well.
I have a feeling that winter 2005 time period saw one of your greatest increases in the membership.
It's really hard to argue with #1. It's just disappointing. And you are right. Change is inevitable. Texas struggles to be even decent under Smart.
I've said it before and I will keep saying it. Greg Robinson is the best defender of spread offenses I have seen. He wrote the book on bend but don't break.
We had to hire a hatchet man to fire Mack and Rick Barnes. There's no hatchet man on campus right now and I still argue this school doesn't make a shit about basketball.
OK, I may have overstated the case. And of course there will be varying opinions of what constitutes a "pure shooter." But at this point we are in a chicken and egg discussion - do we have lousy shooters, or is the offense getting them lousy shots. It may very well be both.
However, I have not seen enough of these guys to vouch that they are not good shooters. And we keep hearing from Smart how well they shoot in practice.
On the other hand, I have seen this offense for that last 3+ years and it is a stagnant, awful mess. We don't consistently get guys free looks, our guys don't consistently move off the ball to get themselves into a prepared shooting position, and we don't consistently deliver crisp passes to enable a quick, accurate shot.
So in this chicken/egg scenario, I'm of the opinion that the prime factor (and the most easily fixable) is our offensive system. I may very well be wrong, but that's what it looks like to me.
I thought it was pretty well documented that CDC's number one sport is basketball. Obviously, football is king at Texas (and CDC knows that) but he is a basketball guy through and through. I doubt he'll sit idly by and let our basketball program struggle to achieve mediocrity.
It's not really a "chicken/egg" scenario. We don't have shooters which is where it starts. Would give them better looks more consistently help to some extent? Sure. But we don't shoot 32% (262nd) mainly because get don't generate good looks. We shot like crap because, well, we have generally poor shooters. BTW, DUKE is only shooting 33% from the 3s this season which is EASILY their worst in I don't know how long. Hell, you have to go back TEN years to even find a season where they were as low as 35%. Are they suddenly generating far less good looks? No. They simply don't have the shooters amongst their top scorers as they normally have had.
