Shane Buechele

If Shane had avoided that first sack the game may have turned out differently. He didn't seem to be the same qb we saw last year after that. This loss falls squarely on both lines and the opening game plan. The way this game unfolded is why I wish we ran Warren a lot at first.
 
Buck-Horn said:
Let me clarify....none of the QB's are individual failures...that's not my point!! But, those 4 QB's did lead losing programs for the most part. Slice & dice all you want. As a starting QB, SB is 5-8! Is that HIS fault? That's a fair debate!
Click to expand...

No. Three of those QBs lead losing programs.
They are done. Their story is told.
Shane still has almost 3 full years to write his story.
When he leaves the University of Texas we can grade his performance.
 
moondog_LFZ said:
No. Three of those QBs lead losing programs.
They are done. Their story is told.
Shane still has almost 3 full years to write his story.
When he leaves the University of Texas we can grade his performance.
Click to expand...

Not saying it is any one QB's fault, regardless of their records. But, it is certainly fair debate over the team's success record & the relationship of the QB in his role. To be a championship caliber team, you usually need a championship caliber QB. And MY opinion (and it is ONLY a fan's opinion....which is why we have this board!) is that SB has not shown any proof or consistency (yet!) to be that QB. We shall see!
 
X.

I assign part of my blame to you. If you had changed shirts again to start the fourth quarter, all would have been good. This was obviously a four shirt game.

:beertoast:
 
Buck-Horn said:
Not saying it is any one QB's fault, regardless of their records. But, it is certainly fair debate over the team's success record & the relationship of the QB in his role. To be a championship caliber team, you usually need a championship caliber QB. And MY opinion (and it is ONLY a fan's opinion....which is why we have this board!) is that SB has not shown any proof or consistency (yet!) to be that QB. We shall see!
Click to expand...
Jay Barker, Charlie Ward, Danny Weurffel, Scott Frost, Josh Heupel, Craig Kenzel.... I could go on.
 
I'm not really upset with Buechele, but rather upset because I thought Herman would help him improve and develop his skills more than he has. I wanted Herman to replace Strong, but am really disappointed in what I saw and the lack of improvement.

A friend told me during the game (paraphrasing as close to a quote as possible) - This team is like an old pickup with 200,000 miles. You wash and wax it, fill it with gas, and put a new driver behind the wheel, but you still have an old pickup with 200,000 miles. For it to be better, you need to replace some of the moving parts, and we haven't.
 
Buck-Horn said:
As a starting QB, SB is 5-8! Is that HIS fault? That's a fair debate!
Click to expand...
I don't agree with such logic. It suggests that Buechele, a true freshman last year, is "primarily responsible" for the 5-8 record.

Following that logic, one would have to assume that with another QB behind center in those13 games, the record would have been considerably better. If that is what is being suggested, I vehemently disagree. Unless, of course, the alternative QB would have been Vince Young, Andrew Luck or someone of similar credentials. And even so, I'm not sure that this team -- with its coaching deficiencies -- would have done much or even any better over those games.
 
Was it Boo's fault we got called for 2 PIs on rub plays? Did Boo hold 2x in a row when trying to make a come back? He threw one pick on a 3rd and forever that netted us a 50 yd punt. Did Boo give up 51 points? Boo played a very solid game.
 
SabreHorn said:
I'm not really upset with Buechele, but rather upset because I thought Herman would help him improve and develop his skills more than he has. I wanted Herman to replace Strong, but am really disappointed in what I saw and the lack of improvement.

A friend told me during the game (paraphrasing as close to a quote as possible) - This team is like an old pickup with 200,000 miles. You wash and wax it, fill it with gas, and put a new driver behind the wheel, but you still have an old pickup with 200,000 miles. For it to be better, you need to replace some of the moving parts, and we haven't.
Click to expand...

For me it wasn't a lack of improvement, it was regression. This wasn't the KU nightmare with a team that had already quit on a lame duck Coach. This was "the new era!", in front of a friendly home crowd, against a (mid-level) Big 10 team. Undisciplined, unprepared. There are 50,000 students on campus and not one can kick a field goal? More penalty yards than rushing yards? WTF??? The reason that a player holds is because he, or a team mate, is getting manhandled.

Shane's performance over-all, taking into account he was injured and running for his life all day, was probably an improvement. But with the deficiencies this ball club showed, the jury is out on that.

I want to believe this game was an aberration. But my fear is that winning on Cullen Blvd. and winning elsewhere are not the same thing, and we fell for it. The Ags are on the hook for $11.75MM, for that transgression with Sumlin.

Of course if he comes to Dallas in October and wins, lots will be forgiven. At least a year ago we had the manic highs of beating Notre Dame and Baylor at a time when both were thought to be top notch competition.

Time will tell. Hook Em.

:texasflag::bevo:
 
And Colt's laser like game didn't truly kick in until his junior year.
Click to expand...

Remember all the calls for him to be replaced with John Chiles?

To be a championship caliber team, you usually need a championship caliber QB.
Click to expand...

Usually, yes. OTOH, teams have won National Titles with Chris Leak, Craig Krenzel, and Greg McElroy.
 
Shane's problem right now is trust.
He doesn't trust his o-line to protect him without holding. He doesn't trust his defense to make a stop - even if it's 3rd and 19 with a backup, freshman quarterback. He doesn't trust his kicker to make a chip shot field goal. He doesn't trust his backs to make a yard or two or pick up a blitz. He doesn't trust his fans to stay behind his team even when the going gets tough (I never saw UCLA fans boo or throw things on the field when they were getting mauled by Aggie). And worst of all: He may not even trust his coaches anymore to call the right plays or prepare them or make proper adjustments.
He only trusts his instincts and his arm.
 
Last edited:
I haven't heard from any definitive source that Shane is out for the SJ St. game. Herman said that if his shoulder was OK, he'd play.
 
I watched the rerun of the game yesterday. The offense didn't lose that game.

Boo and those receivers are special. Add any kind of running threat and we are going to be hard to stop. I would never go aggy and blame the Big10 refs, but I note there were some very questionable holding calls at critical times and on big plays.

I also don't see us playing from behind very often in the future unless we turn the ball over.

We could be in for some more high scoring games.

48-45, 42-37 etc.

I aslo noticed something I haven't seen in three years.. Half time adjustments.

Lighten up, this team is going to be fun.
 
41 points should be plenty enough to beat Maryland.

Our defense is problem one, not Shane and the offense. How many long runs did Maryland break right up the middle and NO frickin' linebackers are any where to be seen? And, if they are around, they whiff. It's been like that for a long time. All through the Strong era back into the end of the Brown era. It's enough to drive you insane.
 
I never had the feeling that Shane was the problem during the game... I was more concerned with the defense and the lack of a running game.
 
yelladawgdem said:
For me it wasn't a lack of improvement, it was regression.
Click to expand...

While I saw some good solid performances, there were a number of plays where some of the line, and other positions appeared to be brain dead. Overall, the results were disappointing. Individually there were a number of positives and good plays, unfortunately negated by a poor performances and as stated, regression in some areas. Boo played fairly well, but had his share of "what the hell" type plays. There were questionable plays called as well, and most notably the 4th down and long and 4th an goal. Last Saturday, the poor play and decisions outweighed the good plays cost the team a winnable game. Fortunately, its one game and early in the season. I hope the coaches and team, learn from this one and don't repeat the same plan expecting a different outcome.
 
bystander said:
I never had the feeling that Shane was the problem during the game... I was more concerned with the defense and the lack of a running game.
Click to expand...

^^^ Your right.

Shane made some mistakes, but he was not the problem. Despite a lack of a commitment to run, the offense scored (edit) 20 points and would have scored more except for 1 missed + 1 blocked FG & drives eventually killed by a penalty or not converting on 4th down.

Despite scoring (edit) 21 points, mostly the D and Un-special teams cost UT the game IMO. The D could not stop them when they needed to. Numerous blunders, missed assignments, inability to slow / stop the run, out of position / over pursuit, giving up too many big plays, etc.
 
Last edited:
WorsterMan said:
^^^ Your right. Shane made some mistakes, but he was not the problem. Despite a lack of a commitment to run, the offense scored 27 points and would have scored more except for 1 missed + 1 blocked FG & drives eventually killed by a penalty or not converting on 4th down.

Despite scoring 14 points, mostly the D and Un-special teams cost UT the game IMO. Numerous blunders, missed assignments, inability to slow / stop the run, out of position / over pursuit, giving up too many big plays, etc.
Click to expand...

I will say that Shane made a couple of throws that BARELY made it; deep outs that could have been pick sixes. He had a couple of nice tight long balls but other wobbled. I can't fault his arm; he just has to stay within himself.
 
All 3 phases of the game were the problem. We scored 3 offensive touchdowns, one towards the end when it didn't matter. The holding penalties and PIs were legit calls that ruined drives. For crissakes, I don't get why so many people can't say that the offense was part of the problem. It was the same thing last year. The defense and special teams sucked too. An all-around crap effort.

It was great to see us "win" the 3rd quarter. That gives some hope to coaching adjustments at the half and some heart. We shall see.
 
horninchicago said:
All 3 phases of the game were the problem. We scored 3 offensive touchdowns, one towards the end when it didn't matter. The holding penalties and PIs were legit calls that ruined drives. For crissakes, I don't get why so many people can't say that the offense was part of the problem. It was the same thing last year. The defense and special teams sucked too. An all-around crap effort.

It was great to see us "win" the 3rd quarter. That gives some hope to coaching adjustments at the half and some heart. We shall see.
Click to expand...

No argument on the three phases problems. I was focusing on Shane.
 
WorsterMan said:
^^^ Your right. Shane made some mistakes, but he was not the problem. Despite a lack of a commitment to run, the offense scored 27 points and would have scored more except for 1 missed + 1 blocked FG & drives eventually killed by a penalty or not converting on 4th down.

Despite scoring 14 points, mostly the D and Un-special teams cost UT the game IMO. Numerous blunders, missed assignments, inability to slow / stop the run, out of position / over pursuit, giving up too many big plays, etc.
Click to expand...
I agree with your premise but the offense only scored 20 points. 21 points came from a pick six, punt return for TD and blocked FG for a TD.
 
horninchicago said:
It was great to see us "win" the 3rd quarter. That gives some hope to coaching adjustments at the half and some heart. We shall see.
Click to expand...
I think TH's decision to go for it on 4th down inside the 10 instead of taking the sure 3 points killed momentum, not to mention took 3 points off the board. And the strange decision to go for in the 4th quarter at midfield with plenty of time left when we're only one score down was baffling. Especially since the Terps QB was out, and they were forced to go with a true freshman who has a limited play book to begin with. Why not put him in the worst position possible? We have the best punter in the Conference, we could have pinned them deep. We keep our great field position advantage. But we lost all that when the play (running Boo) was stuffed.

We had played our way back into the game and then those decisions, which seemed like panic, which failed, put us behind the eight ball and sealed the defeat. The odds were against us on those plays. Like I said, baffling.
 
bystander said:
No argument on the three phases problems. I was focusing on Shane.
Click to expand...

I know.

caryhorn said:
I think TH's decision to go for it on 4th down inside the 10 instead of taking the sure 3 points killed momentum, not to mention took 3 points off the board. And the strange decision to go for in the 4th quarter at midfield with plenty of time left when we're only one score down was baffling. Especially since the Terps QB was out, and they were forced to go with a true freshman who has a limited play book to begin with. Why not put him in the worst position possible? We have the best punter in the Conference, we could have pinned them deep. We keep our great field position advantage. But we lost all that when the play (running Boo) was stuffed.

We had played our way back into the game and then those decisions, which seemed like panic, which failed, put us behind the eight ball and sealed the defeat. The odds were against us on those plays. Like I said, baffling.
Click to expand...

Agreed. As I think about it further, maybe, MAYBE, although he didn't say it, TH though he could count on his dumb *** defense to stop that freshman at midfield if we couldn't pick up the first down. Really it was just a bad decision, IMHO.
 
yelladawgdem said:
But my fear is that winning on Cullen Blvd. and winning elsewhere are not the same thing, and we fell for it.
Click to expand...
No argument really but his Cullen group whipped *** on a few good teams (OU, FSU, Louisville). I know they also lost to some lesser teams but those big wins didn't seem like flukes. I can't explain it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top