Interesting comments by Greg Davis

Lots of good stuff from GD.

Cody Johnson sounds like a pretty good back, but damn how many RBs are we going to play!! Right now we have four guys that are expecting to get the ball in the backfield not counting Chiles. I don't know what the offense is going to look like this season but I am damn curious.
 
I think our offense is going to help the Horns win a lot of games this year.

So will the defense, for that matter.

And special teams.

And Mack's sideline clapping.........
 
Ok... so the haters want to believe that the stats are padded against bad competition... so I went ahead and did the work to take out the bad competition. That means only quality out of conference opponents would be considered and I also took out the annual cream puffs in the Big XII (Iowa St and Baylor) to take away any more excuses.

Taking into account only "Quality" opponents, since 2000, Greg Davis' offense are averaging 35.10 points per game!!! That includes games against teams that were ranked: #1, #1, #19, #10, #12, #14, #17, #4, #24, #10, #2, #24, #24, #19, #22, #12, #16, #1, #12, #21, #15, #2, #17, #17, #3, #14, #9, #21, #10, #22, and #8.

That 12 games against top 10 teams and 31 against top 25 competition.



2007

#19 TCU – 34
OU – 21
Neb – 28
OSU – 38
K ST - 21
Tech – 59
AM – 30
#12 ASU – 52

283/8 = 35.375 pts/game

2006

#1 tOSU -7
OU – 28
Neb – 28
Tech – 35
OSU – 36
K St – 42
AM – 7
Iowa – 26

209/8 = 26.12

2005

#4 tOSU – 25
Missou – 51
OU – 45
CU – 42
Tech – 52
OSU – 47
Kansas – 66
AM – 40
CU – 70
#1 USC – 41

479/10 = 47.9

2004

Ark – 22
OU – 0
Missou – 28
Tech – 51
CU – 31
OSU – 56
Kansas – 27
AM – 26
#12 Mich – 38

279/9 = 31

2003

Ark – 28
K St – 24
OU – 13
Neb – 31
OSU – 55
Tech – 43
AM – 46
#15 Wash St – 20

260 / 8 = 32.5


2002

UNC – 51
OSU – 17
OU – 24
K St – 17
Neb – 27
Tech – 38
AM – 50
LSU – 35

259 / 8 = 32.38

2001

UNC – 44
Tech – 42
OU – 3
OSU – 45
CU – 41
Missou – 35
Kansas – 59
AM – 21
CU – 37
#21 Wash – 47

374 / 10 = 37.4

2000

OSU – 42
OU – 14
CU – 28
Missou – 42
Tech – 29
Kansas – 51
AM – 43
#8 Ore – 30

279 / 8 = 34.88

Total = 2422 / 69 = 35.10
 
The collective minds must come together, think negatively and compare notes with their blogmates. You confuse this with fact. Their existence depends on being able to find negative spin, blame and deflect the fact they may not know what they are talking about any more or less than anybody else.

There is a special place in hell for factsayers like you. I hope you have cold beer there. Wait, I have the answer!

Major was responsible for those stats because he was either part of the team, called GD before the game and told him what to do or travelled back in a time machine.

Vince, being Vince made those statistics happen. Um...pigs flew? I give up.
 
Those are interesting stats. One question I have is what ranking are you using Texas Tower? I always look at ranking at the end of the season. TCU last year lost 5 games and they weren't ranked at the end of 07 for instance.
 
OK, I'll post a few stats related to games from that period of time.

Roy Williams (2000-2003) in 4 games against OU, 4.5 rec./game, 59 yds/game and 0 TDs. That last stat is criminal. In four years GD couldn't find a way to get RW into the endzone. Now for those who say "OU took RW out of the game" or "you take what the defense gives you" I say, yup that's what a mediocre OC will do. The good ones find a way to still make their best weapons important.

But it wasn't just a matter of taking what OU gave. GD didn't take much of anything from OU. From 2000 to 2004 (a five game span that covered our losing streak to them) our offense was atrocious.

2000 - We scored 14 pts against an OU team that gave up an average of 15 per game against all other opponents. Our scoring against OU was matched or surpassed by powerhouses like UTEP (14), Rice (14), and Kansas (16), along with KSU (31 & 24) and A&M (31).

2001 - We scored 3 pts against OU who averaged 14.1 per game. That compares with a mediocre NCar (27), UNT (yup, North Texas managed 10), KSU (37), OkieSt (16), and even Baylor put up 17 on OU.

2002 - Here was GDs shining moment over that span. We scored a whopping 24 pts against an OU team that gave up 14.8 per game. Nevermind that Fran at Ala scored 27 on them, A&M 30, and Leslie at OkieSt hung 38 on them.

2003 - We scored 13 pts while OU averaged 15.5 pts against all others. FresnoSt put up 28, a mediocre UCLA had 24, TTech had 25, and KSU 35.

2004 - A memorable offensive display in which we put up a big ole goose egg (0) against the worst OU defense over that span which averaged 18.3 pts/game against all other opponents. Obviously our offensive output was matched (Baylor) or exceeded (all others) by all OU opponents, but among those Bowling Greem found a way to score 24, KSU 21, OkieSt 35, A&M 35, and USC 55. Yup, that's fine company for us to be right there offensively with a miserable Baylor squad.

Could we do worse for an OC than GD. We sure could, but at Texas I think we have a right to expect to have among the best coaches. And above that, when you look at the offensive talent and resources we had, especially over that 5 year span, those kind of offensive results are just terrible. So much talent wasted in those games.
 
When the offense does well, its because of the great players in spite of GD. When it does poorly, it is solely because of GD and not poor execution.
rolleyes.gif
 
Our offense didn't score 24 points on OU in 2002, it only scored 17.

OTOH, some of the "The following teams scored more than we did against Team X" are misleading. In some cases it really does show that a good-looking performance wasn't so hot. In other cases though, it just says "well, we didn't beat out all 11 other teams, but we did better than most of them"

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
Guys, like him or not he is what you get, no change will happen until He wants to change something. Please move on.

Frankly, I think he has done damn good across the board, and he has actually surprised me several times. The best OC on the planet, no, but as said NOT ALL of Vince's success was because of Vince.
 
Royal also didn't have scholarship limits. There's a lot more parity in college football than in Royal's era. We could essentially hoard all the top talent in those years and leave nothing for the rest of the regional teams.
 
Vince would have NEVER become or been "Vince" the way people think about him nor been successful if let loose. He admits this as well. Greg Davis made him an actual quarterback. Without this, we don't become national champions. We don't win without Vince. Vince does not win without being taught, mentored and groomed. Period.

We owe Greg Davis our national championship as much as anybody else. The hero that is Major Applewhite is that because of Greg Davis. An offense that some like, Georgia's, is done by a protege of Greg Davis, another man who calls him at least once a week for advice and information.

He is a great quarterbacks coach, most of us agree on this. He may not be the best or most dynamic OC in some peoples minds. But what are the numbers and against what competition with what results over time do the others have? Where are they now, what are they doing and with whom? What names do you wish we had whose systems would work in theory? Norm Chow? Who?

We all would love to have more than one MNC. There are many teams that would, a couple do in the last ten years. A couple of teams have been in the title game more than once. But we have beaten every single one of those teams (unless Miami is one of them and we have not played them.) We beat two of them in their own backyard.

If we have VY we beat the buckeyes again (probably). Blaming him is the easy way out but that seems to be human nature.
 
I'm back from my vacation to oregon (what an amazingly beautiful state!) and see that this thread is still going.

I agree with most of what you say about GD. In general, he is a competent OC. He was the OC of one of the greatest college offenses of all time (2005 horns) and did a better job with Vince than Norm Chow did (though I will admit that pro Ds are much tougher to deal with than college Ds).

Having said that, nobody is perfect and there are opportunities for the horns O to improve. I don't find the arguments based on season statistics very compelling (those arguments remind me of the old joke about the statistician who drowned in a river with an average depth of two feet).

It is more interesting and relevant to focus on how the horns perform against OU. The answer is that, in general, Stoops' D has had the upper hand versus the O of Mack and GD. It is interesting to figure out why because Stoops is a young guy and could be at OU for a long time. Stoops has won 6 out of 9 from Mack. The normal occurrence in these coaching rivalries is that once a coach starts regularly beating another coach, that pattern continues until the losing coach is replaced. This implies that Stoops is probably going to keep winning most of hiis games against Mack. To change that pattern is very difficult. the horns have won 2 of the last 3 games versus Stoops but those games were the senior and redshirt senior years of Mack's number 1 ranked 2001 recruiting class. There are no other number 1 ranked classes in the UT pipeline right now.

The reason that I was encouraged by GD's comments is that they address specific weaknesses that I thought needed addressing (power running, short passing, tall WR for the deep passing game, interceptions, inclusion of Chiles in the O, etc).

It is good that GD is acknowledging these problems and has a specific plan to deal with them.
 
People said that Peyton Manning and Tennessee could not win the big game. What it was is that they could not beat Florida. More specifically they could not beat Florda's DC. Hmm, who was that at that time? Rhymes with, ooops.

OC names are buzz words it seems. Hot one or two years, luke warm the next, cold one year then hot again. Names come out in waves. What is funny is that pretty much all if not all fanbases do the same thing. They want a different OC or DC. They want the perceived greener grass on the other side of the fence.

All coaches on either side of the ball get out schemed sometimes. All coaches lose games and all coaches have bad seasons or personnel problems. It is a team effort so if an O is down, the D can help. It goes both ways. There have been seasons our O has carried us for sure.

He has been consistent with much more positive than negative in his tenure here. The line about hot women comes to mind at this time. No matter how gorgeous and sexy a woman is, somewhere there is a man who is absolutely sick of her ****. Somewhere, that coach who was the hot commodity two years ago has internet fans calling for his job.

We def. have ours who do that. They thrive on negativity and having to find flaws. They go on in stylistic writing with Dennis Miller like metaphors and imagery in blogs. They have their lapdogs drooling wanting more, proclaiming their greatness and insight. They are actually sometimes right, we all are. It is a crapshoot for speculation and opinion. Only they attack the opposing opinion rather than respecting it.

This is the way it will always be.
 
There is no doubt that Stoops is an outstanding coach (especially on D) but his post season woes in recent years show that he can be beat.

I actually admire the really talented rude/funny guys from Barking Carnival. They are funny and usually know what they are talking about. I can understand that not everybody appreciates their routine.
 
I'm surprised nobody has posted this but I found this free article in rivals that might shed light on this. If the article is true, I hope Mack has truly wised up and given GD more freedom to play to win. I bet for Mack, watching OU in the championship game is like you had a chance to ask out the prom queen but you were 2 minutes late and your watching the other guy dance with her while your stag and have no one. Anyways, here's the link.The Link
 
I guess the reason no one has posted this is because they already have. This link is all repackaged info from other sources.
hookem.gif
 
Yup, very obvious that somebody there reads Chip Brown or listened to him on the radio. But for many it will be new info and maybe eye opening.

I don't think any Longhorn site, blog or fan page is entirely bad. They all have strengths and weaknesses, just like this site does. The Barking crew are spot on at times, sometimes not. Same with Orangebloods or anybody else. It is important, in my opinion, to take all of it with a grain of salt and an open mind. Don't let a bias or negative tendency skew perception or ability to learn. To me that just makes sense. Don't go into an article with your mind already made up yet still realize it is okay to be skeptical of what you read v. what you see.

We need all existing sites and blogs to round out and strengthen our fanbase and fandom. Hell, we could even use more, why not?
 
Well said lOOp. I enjoy BC mostly because it's really funny. BON has some good info. AAS and Bevo Beat have some good info. MBTF is my first stop. I can't get into the pay sites but somebody usually links to HF. There are other sites I haven't found yet. We all just want to know what's going on with our Horns 'cause we're HornFans.
hookem.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top