We all knew going in that Texas would need a near perfect performance, particularly on defense, to pull off the upset today. To Strong's credit, that's what we saw: A near perfect defensive performance, beyond even my lofty expectations. For that, CS deserves high praise indeed. However, as mentioned by others in other posts, I am becoming increasingly concerned about the in-game decisions being made. The field goal decision was very high risk, low reward. Rose has shown us little to date and, already, one low kicked has been blocked previously. In a tight game, to attempt a long FG at that time was a poor decision. Next, at the end of the half, it seemed as though Strong may have panicked. Many mistakes were made and, I wonder if the lack of confidence from the staff was taken on by the team. First, I believe that Swoopes may have scored on the play leading up to the fumble. Perhaps not but, if the coaches in the booth were paying attention, they should have raised the question. Continuing, with 35 seconds remaining, one timeout and an automatic clock stoppage because of the first down, why was the team rushing? There was no need to call a timeout at that point. Instead, they could have instructed Swoopes to simply spike the ball. The play call was suspect. While Swoopes is big and strong, it was evident that our center was being dominated by their nose tackle. While a quarterback sneak may have made sense and the 50, with only 10 yards to defend at the one, Baylor could pinch in and jump the snap. That's exactly what they did. Now, there is no excuse for the mangled snap but, again, I was not impressed with the play call or the clock management. And finally, the fake punt was the final nail in the coffin. Perhaps it is unfair but, given the stellar performance by the D up to that point, the team should have been better prepared for such deception. Yes, the offense did little to help the effort, particularly after the break. But, given the extraordinary performance by the D, I felt that the team was let down by the in-game decisions made by the staff.
I'll give Strong and staff a pass this year. He has already taken the defense light years ahead of last year with basically the same players from last season. We will be a top defense by the end of the year. And lock-down next year. The talent on offense is horrendous. Swoopes is a place holder. After 4 games he still has no identity. You get absolutely no feeling that he can put a game on his shoulders and go win it. Seems like a nice guy... which, sadly, is all you can say. You can't even get mad at him as he should not even be on campus. The offensive line is bad but getting better. Backs are pedestrian. I think the staff is rightly trying everything they can to put points on the board. Obviously they have no confidence in this offense on any level. I don't. There is no identity to it. There is no talent which to consistently depend on getting the job done. I predict we will win six games because of the defense.
Yep - the trend of the offense or lack of is raising many more questions than answers about Charlie -in game decisions, play calling and all - the field goal decision was horrific and the rushing down at the goal line was just terrible - we are not good enough to overcome such poor decisions - but that's why we are 2-3 and falling - no qb and no offensive identity add that to questionable game decisions and we are who we are....
With an offense this bad Strong really needs to pay more attention to special teams. The Horns can't afford to give turnovers, points and field position due to poor ST play and they need to maximize ST scoring to aid the offense. It is disappointing that ST appear to be an afterthought to this staff. Another odd decision was when Gray ripped off 23 yards on two runs only to see Watson call three straight passing plays each an incompletion. Why not force Baylor to stop the run when the team is finding a rhythm? The player bonehead errors need to stop e.g. Harris and his PF. He's a senior and should know better.
I've made a 180 on players and coaches, and coaching. I'm putting a whole lot more of winning on the coaching, not completely so much on the players. The players play consistently as well as they can: key critical game-turning moments, I put on the coaching. Or equally as much. I'm now more focused on sideline calling and leadership. Here are coaches I am more than impressed with. Not a complete list, but to make a point. Kyle Whittingham, Utah Dan Mullen, Miss State Hugh Freeze, Ole Miss Gus Malzahn, Auburn
Way too much chicken little in threads like these. I'm not a big fan of every decision he's made, but the sample size is way too small to draw conclusions about Strong and this staff based on what they've had to work with so far--the OL is a wreck, the QB is not very good, Texas has no real game breakers at the skill positions, and he's having to excise quite a number of knuckleheads from the locker room. That combo sometimes makes even the greatest coaching staff (and its in-game decisions) look bad. As much as I will always appreciate what Mack Brown did as HC, he apparently left this program in a huge mess. It's going to take awhile for anyone to right the ship. Is Strong the one to do it? Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell--and it takes more than 5 games with this cast of characters to find out.
Agreed, waaaay too much chicken little and nit picky crap on these threads critical of a staff that they shouldn't be critical of yet. First year with the crap Mack left them. I see infinite improvement from the defense with the same players as last year! and i know the offensive line is a wreck with an inexperienced qb at the reigns. Try to find me another successful team in the country with no line and an inexperienced qb..................any other teams? there may be some out there i just can't think of any.
Strong's decision making did not cost us the Baylor game. To say otherwise is total nonsense. Answer this question honestly: If Texas had Bryce Petty at QB and Baylor had Swoopes, who wins yesterday. In my mind there is no doubt Texas wins. We had wide open receivers running free all day and Tyrone could not hit them in stride. They were repeatedly going to the ground to make catches, slowing down, stopping, etc. and still made great catches. Catching passes in stride gets us yards that keep drives going, and we score. Our defense played winning ball. The team is making strides. They are light years ahead on defense, and the receivers are making plays. The O line is the most inexperienced in D one ball. Swoopes is raw, and playing with a very limited playbook. These aren't excuses, they are facts. The team will start winning these games when our QB play matures, gets better, and the play book is opened fully.
Somewhat agree with Cary, but there is an issue with Watson (who Strong defers to on offense). It appears that the highpoint for Swoops was the UCLA game. In the two succeeding games he has digressed to the point he is the ineffective Swoops we saw last season. The assumption that Watson made was obviously that Swoops performs best in a hurry up situation. That is a failed assumption as shown at the end of the UCLA game and yesterday against an overrated Baylor team. Patterson knew what he was getting with Strong - the best defensive coach available. The issue was that Patterson fell for Strong's line that Wickline would be the OC and call plays. At some point Strong will have to let Watson go as he has proven his past is his past which means he isn't a top tier D-I OC. Burning Herd's shirt unless an injury to Swoops would be a stupid move at this point as more than just better QB play is needed on offense. Somehow the defense needs to win 4 games in order to get the extra practice time that comes with a bowl game.
Agree with Hookem Danno and CaryHorn. We're only 5 games into the Strong's era, and -The defense is playing much better and more consistently, and improving with every game. -On offense Strong and Watson are trying to make chicken salad with chicken ****. -Special teams are horrid, but that can be fixed. (Holy crap! There has to be a guy who played HS soccer on campus who can kick better than Rose!) -Have not always been crazy about the play calling on O but some of that is dictated by that this team can reasonably be asked to execute right now. But we knew that the offense was going to be a project this year and that was before Ash and half the starters were injured or suspended. If bad decisions have cost us anything, it might* have cost us the UCLA game. The cold hard truth is we just don't have the horses to beat a Baylor or BYU.
Also agree regarding Heard's red shirt. This decision (non-decision) not to burn it up to this point is irksome. It stands to reason that at some point Swoopes will get banged up and/or need a breather. So we might be faced with burning his shirt for one or two damn games toward the end of a lost cause season.
I was brutally critical of Mack Brown when he deserved it and, I will be brutally critical of any Texas coach when I believe it is justified. Few of us expected to win yesterday. In fact, few of us, including me, expected us to even be competitive. But, we were, very competitive. While we may not have won the game yesterday without the coaching blunders, it is plausible. Granted, the offense was inept for most of the game. But, without a terrible FG call in the first quarter and our failure to anticipate a fake punt in the third quarter, we may well have gone into the final period tied, 0-0. That is a formula for an upset. Given the Herculean effort by the defense, we could have been in a position to make it very interesting in the final 15 minutes. Instead, due to poor coaching decisions, the game was over by then. I don't understand how anyone can contend that the coaching staff, with the poor in-game decisions, is not at least partially culpable?
Oh they are. The decision to kick a FG was a crucially terrible play call and I see your point that going into halftime 0-0 is a recipe for an upset and we blew it right then. You also have to give credit where credit us due. No one expected this game to be competitive, but it was. The coaches are partially culpable for that too.
The field goal attempt was absolutely the right call! If we miss they take over at the 35. Only 15 yards difference. Rose easily can kick it the distance, Making it is probably 50/50. And to go up 3 with on the first drive would have given us a huge "we can do this" advantage. With this offensive who knows when you might have another chance to score. To many of you are talking out both sides of your mouth.
Everyone knows Rose can kick it a mile (distance). However, he can't hit the side of a barn (accuracy). This is why the decision to kick a 52 yard field goal is simply wrong.
Strong gets a pass on the BYU game. They were breaking in a new QB and center. Poor coaching decisions contributed to the UCLA loss (coin flip, clock management at the end) and the Baylor loss (field goal attempt, but also not challenging the apparent Swoopes TD before the fumble).
So you guys must be watching him in practice everyday and the coaches don't. or the coach said "Hey guys, lets have Rose try a field goal even though we all know by watching him in practice that he cannot hit the side of a barn." And all the other coaches answered, YES!!! What chutzpah! You guys sure know a lot about our coach's decision making process.
Reading these posts makes me think that, for a lot of you guys, any play call that does not work is a bad call, although I too wish we had stayed with the running game until Baylor stopped it. In watching the replay of the earlier blocked field goal, it appeared that it was not a low kick, but that the center of our offensive line was blown up and pushed back toward the holder, and as coach Strong stated, he makes those kicks in practice. Regardless of your opinion of coach Strong's decision making, someone will have to explain to me the difference between making coaching decisions at this or a lower level of competition. You make decisions based on your team, the opposing team and the situation at hand.
UTdad, the decision-making process relative to the FG attempt should have taken a number of factors into account. Here's my initial, basic premise: To stay in the game with Baylor and make it competitive, it would take a stellar performance by the defense (which we got), and adroit management of field position. In other words, any way that we could help our defense would be crucial. So, if we could frequently force a long field for the opponent, that would help the defensive effort, considerably. When weighing the decision whether or not to attempt the field goal, a number of additional factors come into play. First, what is the proficiency of our kicker, given his track record year to date, and evaluating the distance? Candidly, Nick Rose's performance so far this year has been suspect at best. Not only has he lacked success in his attempts, but he has also struggled with extra points. He has missed at least one, and a few others were shaky. Next, what is our line's ability to seal off the rush? The track record to date is not good. We all know that the line has very little experience, and the center is talented, but raw. That's a formula for disaster, particularly as the length of the attempt increases. Finally, we had already had one attempt blocked this year! So, the probably of success was not high, regardless of what Rose may or may not have been doing in practice. Under the bright lights (so to speak), the track record has not been good. Based on a risk reward analysis, in my judgement, the decision to even make the attempt was not sound.
Our players played hard in this game. We were out coached on offense and special teams. We lost because we were out coached. I don't disagree with the fg attempt. The failure was on special teams coaching. Properly coached special teams very seldom have a blocked fg, especially up the middle. The fiasco before half time when we burned a time out after picking up a first down on Baylor's one yard line was on the coaches. The coaches were not prepared to send a play in after the first down stopped the clock with 35 seconds left, like spiking the ball and preserving the time out. Basic coaching. The fake punt was again on the special teams coach and resulted in a touchdown. The Baylor and UCLA were winnable games that were lost by bad coaching. I include in " bad coaching" the hiring of Watson and Vaughn by Strong.
