I would be very interested in seeing how the 2017 grades compare to the last three years, because much of what you are scoring is focused on the little disciplined details that often add up to success on the ultimate detail - the scoreboard. Is there any way you can do that without a massive investment of time?
I'd need a bit of time because I didn't do Strong's first two years. But honestly, I wouldn't expect much variation out of what we saw. 6-7, 5-7, 5-7? Especially considering that the 2016 and 2015 were polar opposites of each other (good offensive scores negated by **** defense last year vs. the reverse in 2015), I'd think we'd see a lot of D-F type numbers that were functionally no different than 2010-2013. EDIT: Holy crap, I see that I did do 2014. Again, I'd need time for 2015, but I'd suspect that it was an almost perfect inverse of 2016
Hey, comparing 2 of Strong's 3 years to 2017 should be sufficient to quantify what we all pretty much know from simple observation: those teams were under prepared and undisciplined, and the new sheriff in town ought to correct that.
Here's what I've got 2014: Offense: 63/240 Defense: 101/240 Special Teams: 73/120 2016 Offense: 105/240 Defense: 75/240 Special Teams: 67/120 That translates to 35% offensively, 37% defensively, 58% on special teams. f**k me, that's awful
Glad to see this post. Happy you will be doing the grading this year. I like your comments as much as the scores.
Huge Hpslugga fan, almost wish you were a coach on the staff with your experience in coaching (on a championship High School Texas football team...too bad against my alma mater) and your knowledge of the game. Can't wait to read your assessment of the TH offense.
Just a small point, I wasn't on the staff last year. That was a sweet game, though. Anyways, my only contribution to the staff would be the following, and it's a really minor suggestion (and more long term than short as I don't believe Buechelle is the guy to do this) : An old staple of the Meyer offense while he was at Utah was the triple option out of the gun. They'd line up in a 4-WR, double twins look, motion one of the slots into the backfield, run a zone read off the HB and a speed opt off the WR if the QB kept it at the mesh. Here's why I like this: in addition to being a complicated-as-hell play to defend against because of the triple option concept out of a spread set, you set yourself up with a beyond lethal play action. That run works alley defenders like no other. Because of the spread set, you're basically telling the play-side DE, back-side OLB and back-side CB that they have to cover one of those three players. Well with their concentration so focused on the backfield, the backside WR has a world of opportunity to roam free in the secondary and to the extent 1) the QB has enough time to get him a good ball and 2) the WR sold the run well enough, that'll be an automatic TD. Stuff like this made Meyer famous, and I, for one as a dedicated Tiger Ellisonite, would like to see it down the line as a staple run play for the Horns' running attack once Herman gets his "guy" in at QB. Other than that, I really have nothing else to say because Herman brings the type of system I've been wanting to see at Texas for the past 15 years, and the thing is, he actually believes in it. This isn't some half-hearted dabbling into foreign waters like Brown or Strong. This is who Herman is, and it's who he's always been. I don't suspect he'll have trouble selling this system to future recruits, and as long as he doesn't, this program will come back in a hurry.
Great analysis as usual HP. The only issue that I would bring up is even if Buechelle was the best QB at running the option out of the gun, Herman was still be faced with the issue he has now - one snap away from a receiver being your number 2 QB (and your number 2 now is injury prone). As you indicate this is a long term deal. Give Herman time to restock the QB position with quality players and the real offense will come out.
