Spring football 2-Deep (Offense)
- Thread starter Son of Wasatch
- Start date
Here is one for those that still believe Strong inherited a bunch of talent from Mack.
None from Iowa St either. Talent is low. No argument. The argument is how low? Is it low against ou? No. You can't pick and choose when to say Texas lost ONLY because of talent.....and then not only lost but played well below the level expected. I could have taken some of the losses much better if Texas was putting the effort forward it needed to.
The game against ou was a complete team playing HARD and executing.......they were ready to play.
Iowa St. is the Texas team that did not show up......talent did not have anything to do with that game......Texas has more talent than Iowa st.
I don't mean to sound argumentative to you longyac but it is not ALL one way or the other.....talent is not as high as it needed to be....but talent was not the only problem.
I don't know why there is a camp that believes talent is the only issue.
I don't understand how they can say that after playing ou...or even baylor the first half.....
If someone can post where someone specifically said Texas had a "LOT" of talent I would like to see it.....Most just say it was ENOUGH TO COMPETE.
Last edited:
Arlington Lamar runs an offense similar to what Gilbert runs, or has run in the past. Not identical, but similar spread philosophy and sets. I think yac was mixing up Buechele and Davion Curtis, who played at Temple where Gilbert used to coach, and who still uses the same offense he implemented there.
Last edited:
I agree that talent or lack there of has not been the biggest issue here at Texas.There was disfunction in the coaching staff that prevented getting the most out of what we had. I DO blame the administration for submarineing Strong as far as the Wickline situation. that caused so much confusion on the offense. I am not sure who was calling plays....sending in plays....making sure the right personnel was on the field to run those plays, much less who was minding the clock.Where Strong came up short and has to be accountable is not taking charge of this mess and demanding better cooperation. Couple that with the mess that Mack left and you get 6-7 and 5-7 years. I believe this has now been addressed and whether you think our new OC is a savior or just some underexperienced hack, what I DO expect out of this new hire is smoother play calling and everything that goes with it. I am more excited about actually getting plays in with the correct personnel to execute them than I am by the promised "wonder" schemes from Tulsa. The fact that Gilbert brought Mattox with him should improve this by leaps and bounds. One can argue (hell I can dream and fantacize) that this change alone can completely turn this whole thing around.
Strong can get his guys to play very hard for him.The defense will be greatly improved I dont know that we can challenge for the league title, but I bet we can press whoever does.
Strong can get his guys to play very hard for him.The defense will be greatly improved I dont know that we can challenge for the league title, but I bet we can press whoever does.
Buck Major. Isn't Buck Major a great name for a fb player especially someone from Texas? And an ol to boot. Perfect.
Why do you think that is?
When a QB gets worse, it could be:
a. Better competition
b. Teams are getting film on him
c. Injuries
d. Confidence
Another thing I wanted to say was that whoever is the starting quarterback, he's GOT to feel good about the above.
Does a. through d. also apply to the teams WE are playing? Getting rid of the football doesn't have anything to do with someone watching film on the QB.......he should get rid of it. That is taught at every level of football. The better competition was early in the season for Texas with the exception of baylor. Was Heard injured? The O-line actually got better as the year went along imo so he should have improved some.
The talent is all young and needs to be experienced to bring it week in and week out. One win in someone else's stadium in 2015.
Last edited:
Let me just ask you this.......Did Texas play up to its ability against Iowa St.? No skirting around the issue. Was Iowa St. 24-0 BETTER than Texas? I don't think so. They beat Texas and did it easily. No excuse for that. I could have maybe stood it better if Texas at least made it a game.....they didn't. Iowa St. had a losing record and their coach got fired and some are acting as if though they were just BETTER than Texas. No.
Yes Texas needs more talent. yes Texas is young. No they should not have laid the eggs they laid.
Being young is NO excuse for not "bringing it week in and week out". Young players can go hard too.
Last edited:
I did notice you did not answer the question.
If you can explain how being young is an excuse not to play hard I am all ears?
Yes you have made your mind up. It is all ok. I say it is a combination of talent, youth , and coaching. You say it is just talent and youth.
I agree we aren't going to change each others mind.
We want the same thing. Texas at #1
I agree with you. I think they took Iowa St. lightly and it bit them. They were not ready to play. I doubt this will happen this year...I hope it doesn't anyway.
Last edited:
We can assign whatever reason we want as to why we lost to ISU.
Here are the facts
1. Texas has more legit talent than ISU
2. Texas got shut out by ISU
3. Texas lost by 24 pts to ISU
To me the why it happened doesn't matter. The fact that it happened does, and the blame goes on the coaching staff.
So the next question is, will it happen again? If it does, are we still going to say it was because of Youth?
Losing isn't 100% the issue, when we lost to Notre Dame, I wasn't as upset as the fact that we looked like crap, but they were a top 10 team and we were no where close to even being a ranked team. Same thing with TCU. I hated how we lost to Cal but that is football, that is how the ball bounces sometimes. I hated how we lost to OSU because the refs were so horrible in that game.
but the losses to Tech, ISU, and WVU were 100% terrible losses especially after we saw how well the team played against Oklahoma.
Those types of losses can't happen, they are all losses that sit solely at the feet of the coaching staff. Home or away doesn't matter, when you are more talented or at the very least equally as talented your coaches have to put you in a position to win. The Texas staff did not, and that is the basis for my stance on the Texas coaching staff.
I'm happy as hell with how we recruited, Charlie is a witch of a recruiter, but no more excuses, he needs to be a witch of a coach or we need to get one that is.
Here are the facts
1. Texas has more legit talent than ISU
2. Texas got shut out by ISU
3. Texas lost by 24 pts to ISU
To me the why it happened doesn't matter. The fact that it happened does, and the blame goes on the coaching staff.
So the next question is, will it happen again? If it does, are we still going to say it was because of Youth?
Losing isn't 100% the issue, when we lost to Notre Dame, I wasn't as upset as the fact that we looked like crap, but they were a top 10 team and we were no where close to even being a ranked team. Same thing with TCU. I hated how we lost to Cal but that is football, that is how the ball bounces sometimes. I hated how we lost to OSU because the refs were so horrible in that game.
but the losses to Tech, ISU, and WVU were 100% terrible losses especially after we saw how well the team played against Oklahoma.
Those types of losses can't happen, they are all losses that sit solely at the feet of the coaching staff. Home or away doesn't matter, when you are more talented or at the very least equally as talented your coaches have to put you in a position to win. The Texas staff did not, and that is the basis for my stance on the Texas coaching staff.
I'm happy as hell with how we recruited, Charlie is a witch of a recruiter, but no more excuses, he needs to be a witch of a coach or we need to get one that is.
I don't see anything in this post I disagree with really. Coaches get paid and get paid A LOT to have the team ready to play. The one thing that can always be coached is effort. NO reason to not give effort.
There are only so many mulligans a coach that gets paid 5 mil plus a year is going to get. I could have lived with the same record if not for the total eggs laid......man not showing up is inexcusable. Talent does matter and will win you games but effort is how the team is ran.
But I truly believe Strong is on the right track now......well IF he gets the right coaches in place after this crazy off-season. I want him to turn it around. He is a hard guy NOT to like. Good people deserve to win.
I'm patient, but time will tell. I said 24 months, but we can't have any more Tech, ISU and WVU losses this coming season.
I want to see the following.
1. Good effort every game.
2. Good game planning.
3. Much much better half time adjustments
4. Good game management
I expect us to lose to Baylor, TCU, and Notre Dame, but I just want to see us compete with them, doesn't matter the outcome but we need to act like we belong with the big boys.
We lost to Oklahoma two years ago, last year we beat them, both games we looked awesome. I expect no less.
Everyone else I expect to win! Will we? No, but if Strong is doing his job well we will be very competitive in those games and we will see good disciplined physical football. We will see effort, we will see all those things I mentioned above.
Then I will start to believe we have the right man for the job. Right now we have our version of Ron Zook, and if he doesn't prove any better I think we have our version of Urban Meyer waiting in the wings.
1. is non-negotiable for me. Playing hard has nothing to do with talent or youth.
Right now I am hoping Strong is the guy. I do think Herman is a future star as a coach. I would hate for the aggys to get him.
I don't think the defense should get a pass either. If we can't start slowing teams down then a change is needed there to. People say "well in such and such year he had a great defense so he has not forgotten how to coach"......my answer is Mack Brown won a National Championship and Texas got rid of him.
I keep saying....I expect our defense to be pretty salty this year. I dont think the coaches just forgot how to coach last year, I think we got hit with a perfect storm of inexperience and injuries. coupled with the inability of the offense to keep the defense off the field. Our key players are no longer rookies.Our offense should no longer be in chaos. I think this thing can turn around in a hurry.
I hope Heard makes great progress as a passer and wins the job. With an improved OL he should make strides as a passer which will open up the rest of his athletic skills. Buechele should redshirt and I would still like to see Swoopes in the 18 wheeler package - that was one of the few consistently productive formations we had last season.
nobody asked me, but it looked pretty obvious that teams started stacking the line to prevent him from running....then they just started coming after him, and it never looked like he was accomplished enough to pass his way out of the fix.The offensive play calling/strategy was so disjointed (insert crappy coaching here) that he never got help
the coaches had no idea what they were doing on offense last year, its as simple as that. They called bad plays. They couldn't get the right players in for the plays that were called. They waited too long to to start utilizing younger players (remember Grey was receiving a majority of the carries, most of the year, even though Foreman kept ripping off huge runs).
Blaming it on lack of talent is an oversimplification and frankly, a bit dishonest.
I sincerely hope that Gilbert is up to the task, and Strong lets him run the show.
Blaming it on lack of talent is an oversimplification and frankly, a bit dishonest.
I sincerely hope that Gilbert is up to the task, and Strong lets him run the show.
My understanding is that was because Heard couldn't read a defense and Gray was the one doing it and calling the alignments.
Last edited:
that is totally illogical, but it makes sense (sounds like Yogi wrote that)...I knew the offense was chaotic, but I had no idea that was why. It explains a lot.
It was the Blake Gideon/Dylan Haines choice. Someone had to get the guys lined up right.
look directly below the post where you asked me.
HornsRuleU said: ↑
Why do you think that is?
When a QB gets worse, it could be:
a. Better competition
b. Teams are getting film on him
c. Injuries
d. Confidence
Does a. through d. also apply to the teams WE are playing? Getting rid of the football doesn't have anything to do with someone watching film on the QB.......he should get rid of it. That is taught at every level of football. The better competition was early in the season for Texas with the exception of baylor. Was Heard injured? The O-line actually got better as the year went along imo so he should have improved some.
The player has a big part in his own improvement and I am not blaming it all on the coaches. Don't mean to insinuate that.....our strongest comp was early in the year really except for baylor. And not only do teams study Texas but Texas gets to study them as well. I will ask you again....was Heard injured? Seems any football player would get more confident the more he plays....Strong said he was the most confident player on the roster. My exact example was getting rid of the ball.....taught at every level of football.....either Heard wasn't being taught or could not be taught to get rid of it last year.
Last edited:
Arlington-Lamar didn't run the Gilbert offense - but they did implement certain aspects of it.
Shane Buechele's OC at Arlington Lamar is Damon Evans. Damon's son Dane is a QB at Tulsa. Damon had started installing certain parts of Gilbert's offense back in the summer.
Buechele talked about being familiar with the offense because of the connection his coach had to that program - but I don't think its fair to say Arlington-Lamar ran the Gilbert offense.
Once defenses got a little tape on him, they began to take away what he was good at, and that lead to him looking terrible.
I think that played a part, after all they were both thrown into the mix at the same time and were expected to learn game by game.
People kind of dismissed Locksley early on. I think it had something to do with the fact that he played as a WR in the allstar game and he was rated as an "athelete" by the recruiting services. He was a four star recruit we recruited as a QB and had a great offer list. He is the son of a coach so in theory he should have sound fundamentals.
Everyone fawns over these "dual threat" QB's in highschool that are glorified half backs and have never relied on their arm to move the ball. Locksley is at least as good a prospect as those guys.
Everyone fawns over these "dual threat" QB's in highschool that are glorified half backs and have never relied on their arm to move the ball. Locksley is at least as good a prospect as those guys.
call me crazy....but I think in the end it will come down to a battle between locksley and Merrick. Supposedly, both did extensive film room work as well as all the other work you have to do if you want to compete at a high level......
