I still think that Tom is a good fit for Texas with a lot of upside. Right now the "D" has a lot of issues and until healthy we may not be able to make a fair assessment. But can we agree that the offense can be incredibly productive, with a few tweaks? This receiver corps is incredible, but sometimes under utilized, and the offensive line and running back position is much better. Sam's passing on all but the deep ball is as good as you could ask for. My question sometimes is the play selection.
Last Sat. Texas scored on the first possession and every play was for positive yardage. Sam surprised Kansas on the first two plays with back to back runs for a first down. He threw a slant over the middle, followed by a good run up the middle, rolled the pocket for a deep ball down the middle and then a touch down run up the gut by the running back.
On the second possession Sam threw a short pass to the right side, the running back ran for a first down, he rolled the pocket for a completion to Brewer, ran left for 6 yards and hit Johnson for a first down on the right side. Then he dumped the ball off for 8 yards and hit Johnson for a first down. After an incomplete pass that should have drawn a penalty, he hit back to back passes to Smith for 6 yards a 10 yard touchdown ( with an incredible move by the freshman Smith. This kid is going to be great!!!) All snaps except for the incompletion were for positive yardage.
In these first two series the Kansas "D" seemed to have been kept off balance and the receivers were open, like they do at ou.
On the next series they ran up the middle twice, got sacked, threw into traffic, had a dropped ball for a possible touchdown and ran into the short side of the field with a "receiver" on fourth down and the "D" pushed the offensive line into his lap, giving Kansas a short field to work with. Short fields are really hard on a bad "D".
On the fourth series they ran left and then four consecutive times up the middle, got a motion penalty, threw a 7 yard out pattern, threw a short incompletion, on a third and eight threw a short pass to the receiver behind the first down distance to go line, and on fourth down threw an incompletion to the right side, into traffic.
The reason I bring this minutia up (And if I got a bit of it out of order please don't correct me; it is close enough to make my point.) is to ask if I am the only one who thinks that there is a pattern of changing the play calling from what is working for the sake of making changes. It is like, we know this is working but we need to find out if something else will work as well. Then at some point when the lead is ours, let's take the foot off of the accelerator. I understand that you have to call the plays based on the defense but there does not seem to be better results. Does the team go into a funk with a lead? Seems to me that it is a pattern and it hobbles the players on offense. And then there is that issue of establishing a blow out to take the pressure off of the maligned defense. Also, makes me wonder just how good this offense could be. OU good with all of those receivers open and the defense guessing? Close, maybe. Perhaps a bit more of rolling the pocket to reduce the sacks due to a line being overpowered?
Last Sat. Texas scored on the first possession and every play was for positive yardage. Sam surprised Kansas on the first two plays with back to back runs for a first down. He threw a slant over the middle, followed by a good run up the middle, rolled the pocket for a deep ball down the middle and then a touch down run up the gut by the running back.
On the second possession Sam threw a short pass to the right side, the running back ran for a first down, he rolled the pocket for a completion to Brewer, ran left for 6 yards and hit Johnson for a first down on the right side. Then he dumped the ball off for 8 yards and hit Johnson for a first down. After an incomplete pass that should have drawn a penalty, he hit back to back passes to Smith for 6 yards a 10 yard touchdown ( with an incredible move by the freshman Smith. This kid is going to be great!!!) All snaps except for the incompletion were for positive yardage.
In these first two series the Kansas "D" seemed to have been kept off balance and the receivers were open, like they do at ou.
On the next series they ran up the middle twice, got sacked, threw into traffic, had a dropped ball for a possible touchdown and ran into the short side of the field with a "receiver" on fourth down and the "D" pushed the offensive line into his lap, giving Kansas a short field to work with. Short fields are really hard on a bad "D".
On the fourth series they ran left and then four consecutive times up the middle, got a motion penalty, threw a 7 yard out pattern, threw a short incompletion, on a third and eight threw a short pass to the receiver behind the first down distance to go line, and on fourth down threw an incompletion to the right side, into traffic.
The reason I bring this minutia up (And if I got a bit of it out of order please don't correct me; it is close enough to make my point.) is to ask if I am the only one who thinks that there is a pattern of changing the play calling from what is working for the sake of making changes. It is like, we know this is working but we need to find out if something else will work as well. Then at some point when the lead is ours, let's take the foot off of the accelerator. I understand that you have to call the plays based on the defense but there does not seem to be better results. Does the team go into a funk with a lead? Seems to me that it is a pattern and it hobbles the players on offense. And then there is that issue of establishing a blow out to take the pressure off of the maligned defense. Also, makes me wonder just how good this offense could be. OU good with all of those receivers open and the defense guessing? Close, maybe. Perhaps a bit more of rolling the pocket to reduce the sacks due to a line being overpowered?
Last edited:
