TEXAS-OU game thread 2023

cnb said:
Click to expand...



All of those stats point to the pressure of playing your equal. Penalties typically are the result of being beaten at your position. OL jumping is because of the pass rush. Holding is because of the pass rush. Pass interference is because you were faked out. YAK is because they are faster than you. Etc.
 
bystander said:
All of those stats point to the pressure of playing your equal. Penalties typically are the result of being beaten at your position. OL jumping is because of the pass rush. Holding is because of the pass rush. Pass interference is because you were faked out. YAK is because they are faster than you. Etc.
Click to expand...
All-true,though no small part was owing to BigXII officials. Historically, I have sworn to never use ref calls as an excuse. Never. DKR said that was part of the game. That said, last year the week before UT game and the week after Baylor had 70 yds of OL holding calls. And, magically, against us played penalty free. Aint no such thing as coincidences. PI is always partially judgement and viewing angle, but come on, there were some muggings. And on third down at the OU goal line, the OU player nearly broke Ewers neck by the face mask. Not seeing and knowing nothing was invented by Sgt. Schultz and perfected by Big XII refs. By the grace of God, with three turnovers and bad play calls, we werent blown out by 20. We could have won and Id howled forever if Id been OU and lost.
 
bystander said:
All of those stats point to the pressure of playing your equal. Penalties typically are the result of being beaten at your position. OL jumping is because of the pass rush. Holding is because of the pass rush. Pass interference is because you were faked out. YAK is because they are faster than you. Etc.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily agree with that and the stats don't support it. If true then Bama, USC, Oregon, Missouri must really suck. Experience and discipline are greater factors. Texas is doing pretty good this year, but no reasonable person can look at the numbers and watch the games and say that more penalties shouldn't be called against Texas' opponents.
College Football Stats - College FB Team Penalties per Game | TeamRankings.com
 
Run Pincher said:
I don't necessarily agree with that and the stats don't support it. If true then Bama, USC, Oregon, Missouri must really suck. Experience and discipline are greater factors. Texas is doing pretty good this year, but no reasonable person can look at the numbers and watch the games and say that more penalties shouldn't be called against Texas' opponents.
College Football Stats - College FB Team Penalties per Game | TeamRankings.com
Click to expand...
I think penalties are often something that you want a few of. You want your guys playing physical enough to push the envelope and getting an interference or other penalty occasionally. You want your OL playing aggressive enough to have a holding call or two. I would call them effort penalties. My comparison is a moving screen in basketball. I want my guys pushing the envelope a little to find the edge of what's legal. You just want to not have the brain penalties like offsides and illegal procedure.
 
Right, in my mind, it goes back to his tendency to be tight early, and wy we don't game plan a heavier run attack early. in fact, to help with his jitters, why not design a run so he gets to use his adrenaline and get licked a time or two to get him settled in. (also I wish we ran more earlier, in general).
 
The first INT he stared down his receiver. I knew where he was throwing it.
The second was more of a lucky bounce for OU.
But QE played awesome after that and well enough to win.
In fact we were winning with 75 seconds left.
QE overcame his early mistakes.
The defense however.
 
I re-watched the game last night. Here are my, of course, biased notes.

*Both teams dropped INT's.
*Both teams had at least one key interference call overlooked against them on big plays. I think we may have both scored on those drives making them a moot point.
*I felt like Matthew McConn... had a button he could push to call for a review. It felt to me (insert my bias) that they were only reviewing plays that were positives for OU. I've never seen a game with so many non-turnover, non-scoring plays reviewed without there being a timeout or some obvious reason to review the play.
*I saw some key big passes by UT were RPO's that saw multiple OL 3-5 yards downfield. Only one was called back. QE is very good at the RPO, by the way. Other than his ball security and sacks that he took, he had an amazing game.
*I thought OU won the line of scrimmage slightly.
*I think the broadcast glossed over how many very good OU players in that game were NOT transfers from last year or failed to point out that, while they may have been a transfer player, they were there last year in the 49-0 game. I saw as many as 24 defensive players roll through and 20 of them were there last year and only 1 OL that was a difference maker was new. The other new one got benched after Sweat used him as a weapon against Gabriel. I guess that didn't fit the narrative. What I think happened is that it takes some time to pick up BV's system AND, most importantly, they are now about 21 months into Jerry Schmidt's S&C program.

These teams are very evenly matched. The next game could be a struggle like this one, but, if either team has a bad day it could be a two touchdown difference. Our bad day was a blocked punt for a TD, a dropped TD, and a missed FG. Yes, you had three turnovers. So, both teams had some form of misfortune.
 
OUBubba said:
I re-watched the game last night. Here are my, of course, biased notes.

*Both teams dropped INT's.
*Both teams had at least one key interference call overlooked against them on big plays. I think we may have both scored on those drives making them a moot point.
*I felt like Matthew McConn... had a button he could push to call for a review. It felt to me (insert my bias) that they were only reviewing plays that were positives for OU. I've never seen a game with so many non-turnover, non-scoring plays reviewed without there being a timeout or some obvious reason to review the play.
*I saw some key big passes by UT were RPO's that saw multiple OL 3-5 yards downfield. Only one was called back. QE is very good at the RPO, by the way. Other than his ball security and sacks that he took, he had an amazing game.
*I thought OU won the line of scrimmage slightly.
*I think the broadcast glossed over how many very good OU players in that game were NOT transfers from last year or failed to point out that, while they may have been a transfer player, they were there last year in the 49-0 game. I saw as many as 24 defensive players roll through and 20 of them were there last year and only 1 OL that was a difference maker was new. The other new one got benched after Sweat used him as a weapon against Gabriel. I guess that didn't fit the narrative. What I think happened is that it takes some time to pick up BV's system AND, most importantly, they are now about 21 months into Jerry Schmidt's S&C program.

These teams are very evenly matched. The next game could be a struggle like this one, but, if either team has a bad day it could be a two touchdown difference. Our bad day was a blocked punt for a TD, a dropped TD, and a missed FG. Yes, you had three turnovers. So, both teams had some form of misfortune.
Click to expand...
I think the difference was injuries on Texas side.
 
X Misn Tx said:
Did y'all see Chip Brown's tweet?

QE completed 26 of his last 28 passes, including 19 straight...
Lost in drama of OU loss, Ewers completed 26 of his last 28 passes, including school-record 19 straight
Click to expand...
That part is true. The part I have frustration with is like last year when X was playing hurt, why was JT even out there if he wasnt 100%? He hurt us blocking on one of QE sacks and his slant that bounced off his hands obviously hurt. We are not a 1 man team. If your hurt, next man up. Helm is way more than capable. We have recruited very well. In watching Sarks show with lowel galindo, Sark is one super positive guy. He never once even noticed that ou knew the play as soon as we lined up. That has to change. We also need to instill a rabid dog mentality but not sure we have the leadership on the coaching side to accomplish that. If pk has fight in him, its never evident. Most dc have that look of intense lets get it on, pk more like lets have starbucks and since we never hear him interviewed, it would be hard to argue the point.
 
longhornlegend said:
That part is true. The part I have frustration with is like last year when X was playing hurt, why was JT even out there if he wasnt 100%? He hurt us blocking on one of QE sacks and his slant that bounced off his hands obviously hurt. We are not a 1 man team. If your hurt, next man up. Helm is way more than capable. We have recruited very well. In watching Sarks show with lowel galindo, Sark is one super positive guy. He never once even noticed that ou knew the play as soon as we lined up. That has to change. We also need to instill a rabid dog mentality but not sure we have the leadership on the coaching side to accomplish that. If pk has fight in him, its never evident. Most dc have that look of intense lets get it on, pk more like lets have starbucks and since we never hear him interviewed, it would be hard to argue the point.
Click to expand...
I don't get it either. Sark keeps talking about now Texas has the depth, next man up, but yet he plays an injured player that can't block.
 
Just watched Sark's Monday presser again.
He was IMO brutally honest both in pointing out his mistakes and in lack of execution.
It sounds like in the locker room He let the players know they failed to do their assignments BUT he also I think installed in those players he and they could correct that.
IMO I think Sark was disappointed in the intensity and execution. He would never say that publicaly.

One example was the 2 defenders keying on one ou wr and letting another go uncovered.
OK I am ON the band wagon BUT
Ou was not Little Sisters of the poor AND our intense rival. That they played as a top 10 team might be because they are.
As Sark said Every goal is still out there.
I am still drinking the burnt orange kool aid.
 
Horn6721 said:
Just watched Sark's Monday presser again.
He was IMO brutally honest both in pointing out his mistakes and in lack of execution.
It sounds like in the locker room He let the players know they failed to do their assignments BUT he also I think installed in those players he and they could correct that.
IMO I think Sark was disappointed in the intensity and execution. He would never say that publicaly.

One example was the 2 defenders keying on one ou wr and letting another go uncovered.
OK I am ON the band wagon BUT
Ou was not Little Sisters of the poor AND our intense rival. That they played as a top 10 team might be because they are.
As Sark said Every goal is still out there.
I am still drinking the burnt orange kool aid.
Click to expand...
If we had brain farts and poor execution, last week was the time to do it.
 
dukesteer said:
You’re right, and this is a tough criticism. QE’s skill set is spectacular, and because of him yesterday, we almost pulled off a miracle that would have probably been an undeserved win.

However…

I do believe that he represents almost no running threat which is a liability. I’m not suggesting that we can’t be great with him. I’m just saying that I wish he could run a bit more, and take a hit. Contrast that to someone the size of Murphy (does anyone doubt that he could take a hit?), or the speed of Manning.

In the college game, my gut feel is that the ability to run can be critical at times.
Click to expand...
GA won the last two NC with a QB with zero run threat. ‘Bama won their recent NC’s with a QB with no run threat. In fact, they benched a run threat QB for Toua who was, again, zero run threat.
Based on his showing in the Houston game, we are way better off with Ewers than Murphy.

history shows that teams with pocket QB’s are MUCH more successful that running QB’s.
 
old65horn said:
GA won the last two NC with a QB with zero run threat. ‘Bama won their recent NC’s with a QB with no run threat. In fact, they benched a run threat QB for Toua who was, again, zero run threat.
Based on his showing in the Houston game, we are way better off with Ewers than Murphy.

history shows that teams with pocket QB’s are MUCH more successful that running QB’s.
Click to expand...
While this is generally true, there is a nuance that cannot be ignored. Both Tua and Bennett were not runners. However, both had excellent pocket awareness and escapeability. Additionally, both had better offensive lines than we have, so far. But the escapability is a huge deal.

Ewers has very limited pocket presence and almost no escapability. He’s basically a sitting duck, and defenses know it. That will not serve him well in his career, ether in college or in the NFL.
 
dukesteer said:
Ewers has very limited pocket presence and almost no escapability. He’s basically a sitting duck, and defenses know it. That will not serve him well in his career, ether in college or in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Ewers much better this year than last year as evidenced by his scrambles for TD’s. I agree it’s a weakness but can he make another step change improvement next year?
 
dukesteer said:
While this is generally true, there is a nuance that cannot be ignored. Both Tua and Bennett were not runners. However, both had excellent pocket awareness and escapeability. Additionally, both had better offensive lines than we have, so far. But the escapability is a huge deal.

Ewers has very limited pocket presence and almost no escapability. He’s basically a sitting duck, and defenses know it. That will not serve him well in his career, ether in college or in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Ewers has had a number of nice runs including several for crucial first downs and 5 TDs.
 
dukesteer said:
While this is generally true, there is a nuance that cannot be ignored. Both Tua and Bennett were not runners. However, both had excellent pocket awareness and escapeability. Additionally, both had better offensive lines than we have, so far. But the escapability is a huge deal.

Ewers has very limited pocket presence and almost no escapability. He’s basically a sitting duck, and defenses know it. That will not serve him well in his career, ether in college or in the NFL.
Click to expand...
I am sorry, but I cannot even give you a “generally true” on any of your opinions.
 
dukesteer said:
I was attempting to be non-combative. Both Tua and Bennett were better runners, and had better pocket presence and escapability, than Ewers has shown so far.
Click to expand...
I am not trying to be compatible either. Your original post was that you did not like QE because he was not a dual threat and you thought that was the trait of successful QB’s in college.

I pointed out that almost all, if not all, QB’s of NC teams were NOT runners theat QBs. Faced with these facts you changed the reason of your QE criticism from “not a running threat” to he has “poor pocket awareness”. This is strictly an opinion not based on data.

There has been no evidence to date that Murphy is as good a runner as QE let alone a better runner. I do agree that you have a right to your opinions and I was simply pointing out that is what they are and not based on data.
 
Am I just forgetting but I thought in spring game two years back Malik was quite the runner. Maybe I’m just dreaming, been true before so could be again but I seem to remember him showing some running skill.
 
nashhorn said:
Am I just forgetting but I thought in spring game two years back Malik was quite the runner. Maybe I’m just dreaming, been true before so could be again but I seem to remember him showing some running skill.
Click to expand...
Malik was hurt - he didn’t play. You may be remembering 3 years back with Sark’s first year QB who portaled to Nebraska.
 
True that Thompson was a pretty good runner, but for some reason I always gave Malik that credit too. Guess we’ll see Sat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top