ADVERTISEMENT

Ketch's 10 Thoughts From the Weekend (Let's talk about Tom's game management...)

I mean... all of it was bad.
Going for it wasn't a bad decision especially since Dicker has already missed two from that area of the field twice already this early in the season. The play call and not calling a timeout when the defense lined up was poor. had they made the first down no one would even be questioning it. Same with the muffed punts. going for two was just odd to me. There was nothing to gain and a ton to lose by going for it. yet nobody questions it because we got the two points. Bottom line is he outcoached Gundy in that game and every coach makes a call or two during a game that couch surfers think is the wrong call.
 
Going for it wasn't a bad decision especially since Dicker has already missed two from that area of the field twice already this early in the season. The play call and not calling a timeout when the defense lined up was poor. had they made the first down no one would even be questioning it. Same with the muffed punts. going for two was just odd to me. There was nothing to gain and a ton to lose by going for it. yet nobody questions it because we got the two points. Bottom line is he outcoached Gundy in that game and every coach makes a call or two during a game that couch surfers think is the wrong call.
Herman believes he has one of the best kickers in the nation.
 
Herman believes he has one of the best kickers in the nation.
He may have but he hasn't been consistent from that area of the field. He also thinks he has a better chance of going for it on 4th down in enemy territory too.
 
I'm simply saying we're going to see this Texas pass defense exposed again, by lesser opponents.

Gundy didn't trust his quarterback. He should have.

So Gundy should have based his strategic decisions based on your ability as a prophet for the rest of Texas' season.

44ce1887aa1c3d039b1759130c8fa372--dee-quotes.jpg

Michael Nostradumus

Seems fishy to me. No offense intended. Something tells me Gundy has more insight into his QB's ability in that game than you do.

480x480.jpg


1170089843.jpg.0.jpg


Hook'em Horns!
 
He may have but he hasn't been consistent from that area of the field. He also thinks he has a better chance of going for it on 4th down in enemy territory too.
I think the sample size is way too small to be drawing conclusions about his consistency.

He's consistent enough that Herman let him kick from 59.
 
So Gundy should have based his strategic decisions based on your ability as a prophet for the rest of Texas' season.

44ce1887aa1c3d039b1759130c8fa372--dee-quotes.jpg

Michael Nostradumus

Seems fishy to me. No offense intended. Something tells me Gundy has more insight into his QB's ability in that game than you do.

480x480.jpg


1170089843.jpg.0.jpg


Hook'em Horns!
No, he should have simply had some common sense. It was lacking on Saturday.
 
I think the sample size is way too small to be drawing conclusions about his consistency.

He's consistent enough that Herman let him kick from 59.
It was 57 indoors and it was 4th and 8 not 4th and 3. It was the play call not the decision to go for it. If we needed 3 to win and he went for it on 4th down from that distance instead of kicking it would be a different story.
 
No, he should have simply had some common sense. It was lacking on Saturday.

giphy.gif


You can rename your prophetic prediction "common sense", that doesn't make it so. You're usually better than this.

Hook'em Horns!
 
Both the angst over going for it on 4th down and Herman going conservative late in the game is WAY, WAY overblown! People need to quit believing something is true just because someone says it or writes it. Especially the going conservative part.

All you have to do is look at the play-by-play chart of any game you want to and you will see for yourself it has not happened near as much as people make it sound like. Even Saturday night, while it's possible to make a case that maybe they did get conservative on one drive in the 4th quarter, it's also very possible to make a case that they did not. And it's only on that one drive that you can make any sort of case. And it's far from clear cut.

Here is a perfect example of how ridiculous this has gotten. There is actually a post in this thread that says we started going conservative late in the 3rd quarter against OSU. That is complete utter bullshit. IT DID NOT HAPPEN! Way too many people are just being lazy with their "analysis" and are not looking really hard at the evidence that is out there for all to examine.
 

Here's where the program is at with Herman's 4th down calls.

In 2019 against power 5 opponents, Herman is 1-4 on 4th down conversios, with all three misses taking points off the board. The lone successful conversion was the Duvernay touchdown in the LSU game where the ball was at the LSU 44 and no points were taken off the board.

I'm not sure what's in the binder, but the analytics currently say the offense sucks shit through a straw on 4th down, especially when taking points off the board.​

I think adding a little bit of context to your post is in order.

One of the failed attempts was a perfectly designed play where a player drops a pass right in his hands that should have been an easy touchdown. Only a fool would criticize Herman for that.
 
@Ketchum “His foot is always on the gas, which means he's going to go for it on fourth down, bypass three points in the quest for seven and generally see the game through an aggressive offensive lens.”

How do you explain him choking out our own offense beginning late in the third quarter?

He absolutely did not choke out our own offense beginning late in the third quarter. Look at the play-by-play chart from the game for proof.
 
Last edited:
It’s interesting that you say CTH is always aggressive on offense. I disagree. I think he goes into a shell and gets very conservative in the 4th quarter of games he’s leading, instead of putting the pedal to the metal and finishing teams off. We saw it last night, we saw it against ou last October, and many other times. That’s when he should be aggressive, or at least assertive with his play calling. There are ways to be safe with the ball and still try to move the chains and run the clock. Handing off to the RB on a “no read” zone read play is not it, especially when the other team is putting 9+ guys in the box.

He takes big risks at stupid times, but won’t take small risks when he can put the game away. He has a long ways to go as a end of half and end of game manager IMO.

We did not go into a shell against OU last year. It's also totally false that it has happened "many other times".
 
I think you take the three at that point in the game with 3 yards to make. I spent the whole rest of the game wishing we'd taken the near automatic 3. With both offenses being scoring machines, never take a zero. I understand wanting 7 every time; but that's not actually going to happen so don't throw points away. As the final score shows, that 3 being there would have saved a lot of anxiety in the late part of the game.

There were numerous plays that would have saved a lot of anxiety in the late part of the game.
 
Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

On the first play where we went for it on fourth down, we wasted the entire clock looking like we didn't know what we were going to do and then rushed up to the line and ran a bad play. I don't know why you take exception to that criticism. My point is since everyone in the universe knows we're going to go for it on 4th down now anyway, why not at least take advantage of the time by lining up and forcing the defense to show their hand.

Anyone that knows anything about football could see that play was stuffed before we even ran it.'

You chose to use half your article to talk about CTH's devotion to a glorified chart he mindlessly obeys when making decisions on when to go for it on first down and then chastise me for chiming in. Pot meet kettle.
 
Last edited:
The irony in that is when Okie State was BEGGING us to knock them out, we went into a shell on offense despite obscenely great field position. Against a team that we were wearing out.

There is only one possession where you can make a case that we went into a shell. And even that is "somewhat" debatable.
 
It was 57 indoors and it was 4th and 8 not 4th and 3. It was the play call not the decision to go for it. If we needed 3 to win and he went for it on 4th down from that distance instead of kicking it would be a different story.
ok.
 
Both the angst over going for it on 4th down and Herman going conservative late in the game is WAY, WAY overblown! People need to quit believing something is true just because someone says it or writes it. Especially the going conservative part.

All you have to do is look at the play-by-play chart of any game you want to and you will see for yourself it has not happened near as much as people make it sound like. Even Saturday night, while it's possible to make a case that maybe they did get conservative on one drive in the 4th quarter, it's also very possible to make a case that they did not. And it's only on that one drive that you can make any sort of case. And it's far from clear cut.

Here is a perfect example of how ridiculous this has gotten. There is actually a post in this thread that says we started going conservative late in the 3rd quarter against OSU. That is complete utter bullshit. IT DID NOT HAPPEN! Way too many people are just being lazy with their "analysis" and are not looking really hard at the evidence that is out there for all to examine.
I'm talking about a much bigger picture than the fourth down play. Those that can't stop focusing on the fourth down play aren 't really worth continuing the conversation with.
 
There is a strong glare on my screen. What am I missing on the aggy gonna aggy photo? I love making fun of them, I don’t want to miss out.
 
I had the same initial thought about Gundy’s game plan in the first half. I was thinking I must be missing something. The guy always has Texas dialed up. I was thinking any second now he’s gonna start moving the QB and throwing all over the place with lots of QB running in there. Then I felt for sure he’d come out of halftime with a new attack and didn’t. It was the most confusing thing because it was like someone else was coaching. I was grateful, but confused. He did say pregame that the key for the offense was gonna be being able to run the ball, so I guess he really had a game plan around that and believed his guys could do it. Oops.

Also, I don’t hate Herman’s mentality of aggression, especially with a largely veteran offense and an elite QB. However, if you’re gonna do it, you better damn well know. He didn’t. That play call was futile. At least he sees that now. I’d be interested to know if that play had been called in fourth and three or greater before.

What are your thoughts on Epps? Just an off game or a little too square peg round hole?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: magnahorn
Good stuff, but Ehlinger will not be in New York at the end of this season, nor will he skip his senior season. Tua Tagovailoa and Joe Burrow are the front runners. Justin Fields and Wisconsin running back Jonathan Taylor are in the conversation. Jalen Hurts and Trevor Lawrence are in the mix. Nobody outside of Austin is talking about Ehlinger for the Heisman.
Not surprising at all. Win that LSU game and maybe we are having a different conversation. There’s still time, but I see him on the outside right now as well.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT