A few glaring errors TCU-TEXAS

OK, I won't say I wasn't very disappointed in our play against TCU. It would be too depressing to go through the whole game and point out every error or issue. And no, I'm not ready to fire Tom Herman, but I do have issues with the program. Yes, injuries have made a major impact, but that does not excuse some of the choices and problems. Let me highlight just a few things that angered me (yes I have an emotional attachment to the horns).

1)The first big one was the 4th and 1 at the 4 yard line in the first quarter where we decided to kick a field goal. I could not believe this decision. Anyone with a passing familiarity of game theory(or analytics) knows this was a very stupid decision. Let me break it down. Lets say you have a 85% chance of making 1 yard and getting the first down. Let's further say, with a 1st and goal inside the 3 there is a 90% chance of a TD. That gives approximately 75% overall chance of making a TD. In probability theory there is something called the effective value whereby you sum up all the values for all the potential events. In this case we have, 75% x 7pts + 25% x 0*, simplistically equaling 5.25 pts effective value if you go for TD. If you go for FG (at the 4 which is basically has the same assurance of an extra point--I'll make it 100%), you have an effective value of 3 points.

*Now, logically there are other considerations. If you don't make the TD, you leave them at the 4 yards line versus a kickoff which in itself is probably worth .5-1 pts at least. So instead of .25 x 0 it should really be .25 x .75pts which would be another fraction of a point to add into the going for it effective value.

Also, we have the knowledge that our defense has been sucking all year and can't stop anyone, so the question is should you be taking some risk to get a lead early? Of course the answer is yes. The decision to go for the field goal was dumb on several levels and I can't fathom how Tom Herman came up with it. At the time, I was yelling at my TV screen and saying to myself, if we need those 4 points at the end of the game I'm going to really be mad. Well, obviously I was mad later.

2) We clearly did not respect the fact that Patterson is a famously good defensive coach. He had his guys jumping our repetitive pass routes and we did not adjust.

3) I will give credit to much better tackling by our defense which led to much better run defense. However, we still had some stupendously stupid things go down on defense. One was the roughing call that cost us 7 pts. That was a lack of discipline to drive the QB into the ground after he threw it. The defense did get us a couple of 1st half turnovers and our inability to take advantage was a big reason we lost the game.

4) OK, so we were still in the game towards the end of regulation, and TCU has another 3rd and long with what about 3 minutes left or something while being up 3 pts. Their QB heaves it down the field and we have a guy in good position with good coverage. The receiver is on the left side of the field to the outside of our cover guy. When the ball is in the air, our cover guy looks back over his RIGHT shoulder. The receiver is to his LEFT. This seemed to be against any normal instinct or instruction of how to defend. It appeared to me that the fact he looked over his wrong shoulder actually opened up the space for the receiver to make the completion. This play effectively ended the game.
---------------------
I did a smattering of critiques just to show how wide ranging our issues are. These cover egregiously bad game theory decisions by our coaching staff, to lack of discipline (personal fouls), to poor game time adjustments, to bad technique or instruction. Last year I was fairly ecstatic with longhorn improvement and results, and I was ready for some regression with the loss of so many defensive personnel. I was not ready for this kind of overall incompetence in a game. Tom Herman had impressed me on many levels. We are paying a lot of money and giving a lot of faith for him to bring us back to NCAA football relevance. This is definitely a setback and I'll be watching closely to see if Tom H and the team get back on the road of improvement. If not I fear we will lose the momentum built from last year entirely and our program will reenter a discordant time.

 

Good post and analysis.

 

I knew this was coming. How many times has TH been criticized on this board from going for it on 4th and whatever instead of taking a FG.

You can quote all the stats you want, he will be criticized on this board no matter what he does. If we win, all is OK. If we lose, bring out the analysis.

There is a history.

 

Exactly what I though ol65 when I read his post on going for it or not. Personally I wanted to go but I knew regardless it would be criticized.

 

Uhh, I think you are generalizing. I specifically haven't criticized him on his going for 4th down and I usually appreciate aggressive play. Obviously, there are situational strategic reasons often for going one way or another. Then, there are match ups etc. Sometimes it could be a very close decision and not obvious at all. This was not a close decision and very obvious. Tom H made the wrong one. And it was the wrong decision whether he won or lost. That is the nature of analytics (or in such things as playing poker or blackjack). The right decision doesn't always work and sometimes making a wrong decision could actually give you a win whereas you would lose with the right one. But overall, you win more making right decisions than wrong decisions.

I did not even mention another factor in why it was a wrong decision, because it is more subjective. But what tone for the game was set as a result of that decision. You don't go for 4th and 1 close to the goal shows a lack of confidence in the offense and lets the opposing team really off the hook for allowing you that close to their goal. We went psychologically in the hole by not scoring the 7 there. The amazing part of the story is that he was ready to go for 4th and 2 at midfield, but not 4th and 1 at the 4? Doesn't make any sense to me, but maybe you can explain the other side of this to me. Explain this specific decision and not some generic issue about him going on 4th which I've never commented on before.

 

Somehow you obtained a better binder than Tom.

 

I too thought we should have gone for it for the reasons you stated and I would not have bitched if we didn't get the TD and that he should have kicked a FG.

 

Or get under center with two tackles checked in as RB's and fall forward/be pushed forward for a yard.

 

How about the blind side block on the 1st pick. Maybe the biggest play of the game. Instead of having it on their end of the field we have it 1st and 10 from our 10 yds line. Sam throws a pick and they get 3. But what about the points we didn't get? Different plays on their side of the field could have easily gotten 3 or 7. It's the bone headed plays like this and the personal foul on the QB. These are the plays you can totally control and the plays that are costing us games. Players need to just friggin play smart. Part of being a good player is playing smart, not just hard.

 

Viper, you should be ashamed, you know we’re not getting under center! That’s other teams, we’re Texas!!!

 

Honestly, I wasn't pissed when we took the points, it's obvious we have problems now that we didn't have at the beginning of the season.

 

"let's say" is my issue. but i love when other people think this way. you inserted stats that you posed are hypothetical. if you want to criticize him for the choice, have real stats. because if the stats are 42% on 4th and 1, then your binder would give different advice.

 

Have I mentioned that I am old? I remember a DKRism. The easiest thing to do is gamble with someone else's money.

 

Herman taking the 3 points may have been the smartest thing he has done in 3 years at Texas! I'm so sick of watching the QB in the shotgun formation on 4th and inches! If you are not going to run a "real" QB sneak (under center), or a "real" hand off (I - Formation), then KICK THE FIELD GOAL! I will never complain about this decision.

 

Let's say you have a 100% chance of having a weak offensive line.

 

I call BS on the roughing call, as well as did Tom Herman. That was merely a 300+ lb man tackling a much smaller guy who was standing still. Naturally he is taken down forcefully. 99 did not DRIVE him into the ground. He merely tackled him. It was a BS call. I've seen 10 times worse not draw a flag. Tech's QB was injured earlier in the year when the Arizona player clearly "drove him into the ground" with excessive effort; and there was no flag. This was simply a 300 lb guy tackling a QB who had just released the football.

 

I don't have a problem with Coburn making a familiar and classical hit on the QB. He got there just as the quarterback was releasing the ball or a split moment after he had thrown the ball. either way Coborn's head was well underneath the arms of the quarterback and he didn't know if the QB had actually released the ball thus he needed to bring the quarterback down to the ground and he can't stop his momentum anyway. Coburn is a big guy so yeah the quarterback went down hard but this should be acceptable. the penalty should not have been called.
Yes the blind side block was not needed. He could have shielded him til the defender had turned his body. But that would require thinking, heads up play. The nature of the game is as much violence as possible at the moment, but not every time!

 

The block was totally stupid. Players need to be coached not to block behind a ball carrier. The personal foul was a BS call by a ref that wants to "affect the game" instead of officiate it.

 

It's true I made some ad hoc estimates based on watching football for 50 years. Here is a long analysis that backs up my point with charts and much more detailed stats based on data and games in the NFL. College is different from the NFL and I believe a team like Texas who has recruited top linemen should exceed the results for most games. In any event, even being very conservative with these numbers still yields agreement that the choice to not go for it WAS A BAD DECISION. I would also add if the percentage for 4th and 1 was 42% it would be a very rare occurrence to ever go for it. In the NFL 4th and 3 is converted at a 56% rate to give you an idea.
4th Down Study - Advanced Football Analytics

 

I don't think you guys get the new rules. It is totally up to the referee to render a judgement whether there was UNNECESSARY force used. It is no longer enough to make a legal tackle, but you now can't give the impression that more than necessary force is used (particularly on QB's and vulnerable players like receivers in the air, etc). Football is fighting for survival because of injury concerns, and believe me I miss the idea of lauding violent punishing hits. But now the game has changed and you can't give even the APPEARANCE of unnecessary or excessive force being used. Fans past experience will not comport with the new emphasis. Many things that would never have been called roughing and even today is a totally legal hit can be called personal fouls. Players must try to avoid (especially on QB) ANY excessive or even appearance of excessive force.

 

Basically it's intramural football now and just put flags around their waste and be done with it.

 

KB, Herman says you and I don't know what we are talking about.

 

But at this thread illustrates, many people would have.

 

By kicking the field goal, we lost by 10 instead of 13......