Ketch's 10 Thoughts From the Weekend (Not since Colt McCoy in his prime in 2008...)

[Ketchum]

I would suggest a different rankings system than the one in place, if it is truly incomprehensible to most of your target audience.

It might require the emergence of a sixth star tier. Separate 6 stars and 5 stars from everyone else.

A four star vs. 3 star translates to a 15-20% chance of developing into an NFL drafted player vs. 8-10% for a three-star.

That's a monster difference between 30-45% and 50-85%.

 

[Ben3490]

Yes, it's not rocket surgery to know if we get a ton of the top national 75 we return to dominance. But there is also a way to get there by overdeveloping our four stars. I think Anwar's point is having a bunch of four stars should equate to a higher ranking with competent coaching. Trouble is like you say we only have one guy on our our line that should be there at this time. At same time RB's are being underdeveloped by our star assistant according to Herman.

 

[Ketchum]

Here is just one of many threads on the topic

https://texas.forums.rivals.com/threads/we-dont-yet-have-the-talent.331902/page-3#post-9471300

This is where nuance in this discussion comes into play because he's right and wrong at the same time.

At the very most basic level, he's wrong. Texas has more raw talent in its program than 8 of the other teams out of the Big 12 and is under-performing against national numbers in player development.

However, a few things must be considered.

a. This is a very young team and what throws the discussion off balance is when you compare a program with massive stability problems to one that is fully stable. In comparing player development from TCU to Texas (for example), it's not apples to apples because the scholarship boards aren't weighted the same, even if Texas has recruited better than TCU.

This is where the massive amounts of attrition really play a part.

b. Every area on the field is not the same. I 100-percent agree with Anwar's statements with the skill positions, but that's a different discussion than what is available along the offensive line.

Again, this is where massive amounts of attrition and injuries have played a huge part.

I guess my larger point is that this isn't a one-dimensional subject matter. In order to truly understand the full situation, you have to see it from three or four dimensions.

 

[trimmwagon]

Love the commitment of Houston Lamar defensive back D'Shawn Jamison, a guy that I think has a little Nate Vasher in him as a college prospect.

Those are precisely my thoughts. Vasher was a nifty high school player who returned punts, kicks, played WR when Texas High needed him, all state corner, and general badass of the gridiron. I'm very pleased to get Jamison and I think he'll make waves here before he leaves.

 

[PaulieD]

That would mean Texas has about 8-10 national top 75 players. Three more classes like that and you're playing for titles with a stacked roster full of future pros.

Amen

 

[rhendon]

Yes, but I don't know if you have a full grasp of what Texas is working with at every position.

We'll keep saying that the coaches need to make the offensive line better, but it's very unrealistic to believe that these coaches should be getting different types of results, given that most of the guys the coaches are counting on are not only very inexperienced and under-developed because of that inexperience, but are massive underdogs at becoming those types of players for a variety of reasons from the moment they step on to campus.

It's like being pissed because your wife can't turn water into wine, but Jesus once did. Basically, we're demanding magic tricks.

ON a larger picture, you're exactly right.... development must be much better.

I use these NFL Draft numbers as metrics because it takes opinion and confirmation bias out of the equation. It's just raw performance development data. You can do with the data what you will, but the math is the math. It's not telling you to correlate it with team success, yet I would argue the teams producing the most NFL talent are going to win the most games.

If Buffalo had produced 5 more draftable players like Mack per year over the course of a four or five year window, it's likely won a shit load of games.

They don't need NFL draft talent to beat 90% of the teams on their schedule.

Maryland ran all over us in week 1. Are all 5 of their OL going to the NFL? No. There are 130 FBS teams in the NCAA. Not every lineman will play in the NFL. Yet there are lines all over the country that are better prepared, schemed with than ours. This isn't a new issue either. This has been ongoing since Colt was here. It isn't just on Herman but other coaches have gotten more from less.

Then RBs and WRs. Again you don't need NFL talent all over the field to win games in college. Its about finding out who your best guys are and getting them the ball. For too many years, we've rotated guys into oblivion looking for who hast the hot hand. Other OCs will know who their playmaker is and get him the ball in space and let him work. Why can't we do that? Why do we keep rotating guys trying to find the hot hand rather than make it?

 

[Ketchum]

Yes, it's not rocket surgery to know if we get a ton of the top national 75 we return to dominance. But there is also a way to get there by overdeveloping our four stars. I think Anwar's point is having a bunch of four stars should equate to a higher ranking with competent coaching. Trouble is like you say we only have one guy on our our line that should be there at this time. At same time RB's are being underdeveloped by our star assistant according to Herman.

The need to develop those four-stars at twice of three times the rate is critical. If you've got a group of five of them, two or three need to develop to their full potential and not just one.

And you have to keep them in the program.

Consider the national championship offensive line as an example. Pay attention to both numbers.

LT - Johnathan Scott - 5th year senior - 60-85% historical NFL projection
LG - Kasey Studdard - 4th year junior - 30-50% historical NFL projection
C - Lyle Sendlein - 4th year junior - 15-20% historical NFL projection
RG: Will Allen - 5th year senior - 15-20% historical NFL projection
RT - Justin Blalock - 4th year junior - 60-85% historical NFL projection

Now let's look at Saturday's starting offensive line

LT - Denzel Okafor - 2nd year sophomore - 15-20% historical NFL projection
LG - Patrick Vahe - 3rd year junior - 15-20% historical NFL projection
C - Zach Shackelford - 2nd year sophomore - 6-8% historical NFL projection
RG - Terrell Cuney - 4th year junior - 6-8% historical NFL projection
RT - Derek Kerstetter - 1st year freshman - 8-10% historical NFL projectio

You guys starting to feel me?

 

[Ketchum]

They don't need NFL draft talent to beat 90% of the teams on their schedule.

Maryland ran all over us in week 1. Are all 5 of their OL going to the NFL? No. There are 130 FBS teams in the NCAA. Not every lineman will play in the NFL. Yet there are lines all over the country that are better prepared, schemed with than ours. This isn't a new issue either. This has been ongoing since Colt was here. It isn't just on Herman but other coaches have gotten more from less.

Then RBs and WRs. Again you don't need NFL talent all over the field to win games in college. Its about finding out who your best guys are and getting them the ball. For too many years, we've rotated guys into oblivion looking for who hast the hot hand. Other OCs will know who their playmaker is and get him the ball in space and let him work. Why can't we do that? Why do we keep rotating guys trying to find the hot hand rather than make it?

Just keep reading. The answers are all in front of you.

 

[Cincohorn]

How can people not feel the glass half full?

Our team has changed DRASTICALLY since Maryland and since Charlie left and since the meltdown of the end of Mack's tenure. If you think that change is all one person (Sam), I understand. Consider this part though - this team has a good set of young receivers that will only get better. They've got RBs that can run routes and get downfield in the passing game and bust free on returns. Not the quality of elite talent to which we are accustomed but as serviceable as RBs from many current CFB elites. We are running great misdirection plays with timed rolls by Sam. We used the freaking tight end for the first time in a long time. The Line is a very bad situation. It's not just injuries but also lack of talent, lack of depth and lack of development for the prior 3+ years. Good line play takes both talent and experience - unless you want to use some tricky dick piddly Tech offense to try to win a national championship. Bad line play is a disaster. After a few games settling in, we are serviceable but there's a long way to go. But do remember here, there's not really a decent run blocker among this crewe other than Vahe. Fix the line problems and we could compete with the elites. Tall order, but not unprecedented.

On the other side, the defense is getting good results generally. They have clear breakdowns at the safety spot and our front 7 struggles to tackle larger, more athletic QBs. Not sure, with the exception of Bama, if we are not much different than the rest of the elites on the defensive side.

Overall, lets not forget our recent past and how quickly things have actually changed. They've changed since Charlie left. They've changed since 0-1. They won 3 games, two against quality opposition. They lost to 2 teams that were in the national championship discussion - one in double OT and one in a close rivalry game that featured a comeback from a 20 point deficit. This team is playing way better as a unit than they ever did with Charlie and with a great deal more consistency. I'd argue they play a better brand of football (being short of talent obviously) than many successful Mack Brown teams. Those Mack teams squeaked out close wins against the likes of Kansas - remember the swim move? I don't see that being repeated with a Tom Herman coached team. Right now, we have a team that doesn't quit (like Mack's loaded teams did in the past, like every year under Charlie Strong). A team with an attitude (when was the last time for that?). A team that is compelling to watch on the field because they do what they say on the Texas tin - they "Fight". I'm certainly not here to defend every Xs and Os decision. Maybe the OC is not the right guy. There's no doubt about the mistakes we are making and the busted plays/penalties and poor play calls (when viewed from my armchair). That has to be cleaned up. But I'm starting to believe in this group. I think we will slot our way back into the elite stratosphere within the next 3 years, maybe sooner. The class coming in is a game changer for sure.

We have a lot of obstacles in the way. A much sounder OSU team (with senior leadership) and a TCU team that deserves also to be in the national title discussion. So predicting 7-5 seems bold. But I hope people will understand that a hard fought 7-5 where the games against top competition are competitive is a big change for us. Nick Saban's first year at Bama resulted in a 7-6 record including a loss to ULM. That Bama team did have a lot of moxy and fought hard with mediocre results. So even the greatest coaches need time to get their system instituted fully.

 

[Ketchum]

How can people not feel the glass half full?

Our team has changed DRASTICALLY since Maryland and since Charlie left and since the meltdown of the end of Mack's tenure. If you think that change is all one person (Sam), I understand. Consider this part though - this team has a good set of young receivers that will only get better. They've got RBs that can run routes and get downfield in the passing game and bust free on returns. Not the quality of elite talent to which we are accustomed but as serviceable as RBs from many current CFB elites. We are running great misdirection plays with timed rolls by Sam. We used the freaking tight end for the first time in a long time. The Line is a very bad situation. It's not just injuries but also lack of talent, lack of depth and lack of development for the prior 3+ years. Good line play takes both talent and experience - unless you want to use some tricky dick piddly Tech offense to try to win a national championship. Bad line play is a disaster. After a few games settling in, we are serviceable but there's a long way to go. But do remember here, there's not really a decent run blocker among this crewe other than Vahe. Fix the line problems and we could compete with the elites. Tall order, but not unprecedented.

On the other side, the defense is getting good results generally. They have clear breakdowns at the safety spot and our front 7 struggles to tackle larger, more athletic QBs. Not sure, with the exception of Bama, if we are not much different than the rest of the elites on the defensive side.

Overall, lets not forget our recent past and how quickly things have actually changed. They've changed since Charlie left. They've changed since 0-1. They won 3 games, two against quality opposition. They lost to 2 teams that were in the national championship discussion - one in double OT and one in a close rivalry game that featured a comeback from a 20 point deficit. This team is playing way better as a unit than they ever did with Charlie and with a great deal more consistency. I'd argue they play a better brand of football (being short of talent obviously) than many successful Mack Brown teams. Those Mack teams squeaked out close wins against the likes of Kansas - remember the swim move? I don't see that being repeated with a Tom Herman coached team. Right now, we have a team that doesn't quit (like Mack's loaded teams did in the past, like every year under Charlie Strong). A team with an attitude (when was the last time for that?). A team that is compelling to watch on the field because they do what they say on the Texas tin - they "Fight". I'm certainly not here to defend every Xs and Os decision. Maybe the OC is not the right guy. There's no doubt about the mistakes we are making and the busted plays/penalties and poor play calls (when viewed from my armchair). That has to be cleaned up. But I'm starting to believe in this group. I think we will slot our way back into the elite stratosphere within the next 3 years, maybe sooner. The class coming in is a game changer for sure.

We have a lot of obstacles in the way. A much sounder OSU team (with senior leadership) and a TCU team that deserves also to be in the national title discussion. So predicting 7-5 seems bold. But I hope people will understand that a hard fought 7-5 where the games against top competition are competitive is a big change for us. Nick Saban's first year at Bama resulted in a 7-6 record including a loss to ULM. That Bama team did have a lot of moxy and fought hard with mediocre results. So even the greatest coaches need time to get their system instituted fully.

Good post

 

[EG-man]

This is where nuance in this discussion comes into play because he's right and wrong at the same time.

At the very most basic level, he's wrong. Texas has more raw talent in its program than 8 of the other teams out of the Big 12 and is under-performing against national numbers in player development.

However, a few things must be considered.

a. This is a very young team and what throws the discussion off balance is when you compare a program with massive stability problems to one that is fully stable. In comparing player development from TCU to Texas (for example), it's not apples to apples because the scholarship boards aren't weighted the same, even if Texas has recruited better than TCU.

This is where the massive amounts of attrition really play a part.

b. Every area on the field is not the same. I 100-percent agree with Anwar's statements with the skill positions, but that's a different discussion than what is available along the offensive line.

Again, this is where massive amounts of attrition and injuries have played a huge part.

I guess my larger point is that this isn't a one-dimensional subject matter. In order to truly understand the full situation, you have to see it from three or four dimensions.

Absolutely agree with this! Well-stated. Mic drop.

 

[Veritas10]

5-7 5-7 3-3. The solution to every problem on a recruiting site is always hyping recruiting. Patterson or Gundy would he happy to have UT's classes. And would do a lot more with them.

 

[Ketchum]

5-7 5-7 3-3. The solution to every problem on a recruiting site is always hyping recruiting. Patterson or Gundy would he happy to have UT's classes. And would do a lot more with them.

except I'm not hyping recruiting. I'm explaining it.

Yes, those coaches would be happy to have UT's classes, but there's nuance to that as well, as I've fully outlined.

 

[txfight]

Herman will fix this.

I don't agree with you on much, but I agree here.
This wasn't going to be a 1 year fix. Recruiting is just the first step. You have to follow it with Development. Then you have to add Gameplanning.

Herman will do all three, but it takes more than 1 offseason to do Development.

 

[Ketchum]

I don't agree with you on much, but I agree here.
This wasn't going to be a 1 year fix. Recruiting is just the first step. You have to follow it with Development. Then you have to add Gameplanning.

Herman will do all three, but it takes more than 1 offseason to do Development.

correct, especially such a young team.

 

[txfight]

This is a 6-6 team at best. We lose to TCU and OSU. We beat Kansas. We take 2 out of 3 from Baylor, TTU, and WVU. Then we shut up and go to the Alamo Bowl...or wherever.

Anybody who looked at this roster in August, and thought we'd win more than 6 or 7 games if we had ANY sort of injury on the O-Line, doesn't understand that football always begins in the trenches.

Since August, we've been devastated at O-Line. I think the only reason we're even competitive now is because the D-Line hasn't lost anyone yet.

Mack said you have to be 2 deep at every position. When he got us 2 deep across the roster, is when we really started winning.

So everyone needs to reset the expectation that anything beyond getting to a bowl game is gravy for the 2017 Longhorn team.

 

[longhornrumble]

Not one person would dispute that point.

But going back to @Anwar Richardson OP about having enough talent to be an above average team, there's always context within context.

Maryland was a complete failure. It's pretty clear that the way that we have played since, we lost that game because of our own mental demons.

This really leaves losses to 2 top 10 teams in USC and OU. Both have arguably the 2 best QBs in all of football and they are damn good teams. We took both to the wire. They ARE NOT "above average". They are exceptional CFB teams and we were in both games until the end.

I don't know. We totally need to shore our team up with recruiting. There's absolutely no question. It's pretty clear that's in the works. I guess what I'm saying is, are we really playing that poorly? This was a 5-7 team last year and we absolutely played with 2 of the best teams in the country. Maybe I'm naive in that I don't think we're all that far away.

Tell you what, we need some OL. I'm not worried with our other positions because it's either own the roster or about to come through the door. If we don't start placing an emphasis on OL recruiting, the foundation will continue to have cracks in it.

 

[Ketchum]

But going back to @Anwar Richardson OP about having enough talent to be an above average team, there's always context within context.

Maryland was a complete failure. It's pretty clear that the way that we have played since, we lost that game because of our own mental demons.

This really leaves losses to 2 top 10 teams in USC and OU. Both have arguably the 2 best QBs in all of football and they are damn good teams. We took both to the wire. They ARE NOT "above average". They are exceptional CFB teams and we were in both games until the end.

I don't know. We totally need to shore our team up with recruiting. There's absolutely no question. It's pretty clear that's in the works. I guess what I'm saying is, are we really playing that poorly? This was a 5-7 team last year and we absolutely played with 2 of the best teams in the country. Maybe I'm naive in that I don't think we're all that far away.

Tell you what, we need some OL. I'm not worried with our other positions because it's either own the roster or about to come through the door. If we don't start placing an emphasis on OL recruiting, the foundation will continue to have cracks in it.

It didn't help that this is a bad year for offensive line prospects in the state of Texas. It's one of the worst OL classes I've seen in 20 years.

 

[txfight]

There's been so much debate on Sam v. Shane that nobody is talking about our real issue; O-Line.

I don't think it's even fair to call out these RB's for poor play. The line Foreman ran behind last year is much better than these guys.

I also don't think you can anoint a QB savior behind this line. I love the grit of Ehlinger, and every now and then he drops a pass like that one to RHM on the sideline against OU, or the TD pass against USC. But outside of a few of those throws, I'm not liking his deep ball or really anything that isn't a short crossing route or screen play. But neither he nor Shane has had the benefit of a decent pocket and a running game this year. The only certainty in my mind is we're going to need both QB's if we're going to keep asking that position to be our run and passing game.

 

[rhendon]

Just keep reading. The answers are all in front of you.

But it isn't even about them over performing. You don't need them to over perform to be average. Just to be average in NCAA would be a great thing on the OL. It isn't even about getting push on guys to open holes or things like that. Its literally to eliminate dumb mistakes. False starts, holding, unsportsmanlike conduct penalties are still all happening way to much. Just pure basic assignment playing football is being missed week after week.

You didn't address much in your post on the topic of our rotation into oblivion so guys can't get into a rhythm. Our use of playmakers since Greg Davis has been under performing at best to pretty much non-existent, except for last year where we fed D'Onta 50 times a game.

 

[txfight]

But going back to @Anwar Richardson OP about having enough talent to be an above average team, there's always context within context.

Maryland was a complete failure. It's pretty clear that the way that we have played since, we lost that game because of our own mental demons.

This really leaves losses to 2 top 10 teams in USC and OU. Both have arguably the 2 best QBs in all of football and they are damn good teams. We took both to the wire. They ARE NOT "above average". They are exceptional CFB teams and we were in both games until the end.

I don't know. We totally need to shore our team up with recruiting. There's absolutely no question. It's pretty clear that's in the works. I guess what I'm saying is, are we really playing that poorly? This was a 5-7 team last year and we absolutely played with 2 of the best teams in the country. Maybe I'm naive in that I don't think we're all that far away.

Tell you what, we need some OL. I'm not worried with our other positions because it's either own the roster or about to come through the door. If we don't start placing an emphasis on OL recruiting, the foundation will continue to have cracks in it.

This is spot on. The only thing I'd add is that I'm not 100% certain that MD game was an aberration until I see us contain another truly mobile QB. I think those Lamar Jackson-esque QB's give us fits (they give a lot of teams fits.) I truly wish Pigrome would have stayed healthy. It would have been interesting to see him play Michigan, OH State and Wisconsin.

 

[c.c.rider]

Didn’t Earl play as a frosh

redshirterd.

negative mr. guru

Campbell attended the University of Texas at Austin, where he played college football for the Texas Longhorns football team from 1974 to 1977.[9] As a freshman in 1974, he played in all 11 games and rushed for 928 yards and six touchdowns on 162 attempts

 

[HornOps]

negative mr. guru

Campbell attended the University of Texas at Austin, where he played college football for the Texas Longhorns football team from 1974 to 1977.[9] As a freshman in 1974, he played in all 11 games and rushed for 928 yards and six touchdowns on 162 attempts

I think he was referring to Earl Thomas

 

[dvp7299]

hmm nothing about USA failing to qualify for the world cup. interesting.

 

[matamoroshorn]

It didn't help that this is a bad year for offensive line prospects in the state of Texas. It's one of the worst OL classes I've seen in 20 years.

We could get the top 5 OL in the nation and still not use them to their best abilities.

We ran the ball last year with no problem, even before Warren was hurt. The OL grades were worse last year than this year. Then D'Onta took the rest of the carries for the year. Even Porter ran for yards last year at a 4.5 yds/carry clip.

You can't tell me that Arizona, Army, Navy and UNLV have better lineman than we have starting now. Its not like we are playing top defenses. You have to find a way to run the ball without your QB taking the bulk of your carries or you won't have a QB very long.

If you can't scheme a running game without a running QB, then maybe you should not be the OC at Texas.

 

[c.c.rider]

I think he was referring to Earl Thomas

ain't but one Earl in my book, and that's BIG EARL

.....but you're undoubtedly right...and ketch is right...and i'm right

 

[Cincohorn]

txfight - I think most fans will ignore your point about Ehlinger. He's clearly not all there as a passer. I'd really like to understand from Ketch and other experts here - what is his ceiling? What was Drew Brees like at this stage in comparison?

 

[c.c.rider]

txfight - I think most fans will ignore your point about Ehlinger. He's clearly not all there as a passer. I'd really like to understand from Ketch and other experts here - what is his ceiling? What was Drew Brees like at this stage in comparison?

frosh at purdue....barely played

 

[Ketchum]

But it isn't even about them over performing. You don't need them to over perform to be average. Just to be average in NCAA would be a great thing on the OL. It isn't even about getting push on guys to open holes or things like that. Its literally to eliminate dumb mistakes. False starts, holding, unsportsmanlike conduct penalties are still all happening way to much. Just pure basic assignment playing football is being missed week after week.

You didn't address much in your post on the topic of our rotation into oblivion so guys can't get into a rhythm. Our use of playmakers since Greg Davis has been under performing at best to pretty much non-existent, except for last year where we fed D'Onta 50 times a game.

As I've stated, Texas is behind the curve. We see agreement there.

The offensive line situation has multiple issues, not just one.The experience of that group, and the lack of it, especially when combined with the quality of projected upside, is the elephant in the room.

Folks are asking young, long-term projects to be way ahead of their natural curve and then getting upset when they can't pull it off.

As for the amount of rotation taking place, I've been vocal about needing to scale that back quite a bit. The position coaches own that IMO.

 

[Ketchum]

negative mr. guru

Campbell attended the University of Texas at Austin, where he played college football for the Texas Longhorns football team from 1974 to 1977.[9] As a freshman in 1974, he played in all 11 games and rushed for 928 yards and six touchdowns on 162 attempts

He was referring to Earl Thomas.