we improved over the week before... Swoopes is coming of age....good for him... IF, we continue to improve weekly....we will be a great team at season's end....
A lot of things happened last year to lull fans into an idea that this team was ready to take a step up right away and beat a top tier team. A down year in the conference coupled with a three wins that were really aberrations (should have lost to Iowa State, caught K State early in the year and would likely have lost if we'd played them in November, and an Oklahoma game that continues to absolutely boggle the mind in terms of OU's lack of preparation for that game) made that team look a lot better than it was, and the reality is that last year's team would likely have been blown out on Saturday even without their starting QB. Mack got a lot of credit for the turnaround in his first season, but really that didn't start happening until around the middle of the season. There are certainly signs that this team could turn the corner, but like that team, it's going to be limited by personnel, even when the light goes on. It's really easy to get caught up in missed opportunities (which Saturday definitely was), but winning that game wouldn't have changed what this team is right now. In fact, if it had won that game, it would have been based on not being the team that it clearly is right now - inconsistent, short on game-breakers, short on football IQ and the confidence that it can close out a big win against a good team.
In reply to: "It's really easy to get caught up in missed opportunities (which Saturday definitely was), but winning that game wouldn't have changed what this team is right now. In fact, if it had won that game, it would have been based on not being the team that it clearly is right now - inconsistent, short on game-breakers, short on football IQ and the confidence that it can close out a big win against a good team." THIS.
From what I've seen, we're better than KU and ISU. So at least 3-9 by the minimum standard. I think we're about the same level as TCU and Tech. Toss those up and we're 4-8. I truly only expect to win one out of the remaining five games outside the aforementioned. So assuming the team we saw Saturday is relatively the same as the team that finishes Thanksgiving against TCU, we're looking at about a 5-7 season right now. The team can have some kind of come-to-Jesus renaissance and pull something together to improve a little, maybe with an upset over OK State or WVU, or maybe even Baylor with their injury problems. But as long as that OL remains our OL, and as long as we don't know how to properly run hurry up, and as long as our inconsistencies stay inconsistent, I think 2010 will seem like the "now." The bright side of Swoopes is that he looked better Saturday than against BYU, so that's nice, but still not good enough to compete with the other QBs in the conference.
"The bright side of Swoopes is that he looked better Saturday than against BYU, so that's nice, but still not good enough to compete with the other QBs in the conference." Swoope's is light years ahead of what I saw in the Spring Game. Somebody is coaching him up. He is very accurate and I believe will continue to improve. I didn't think Case could beat OU. And he didn't really. It was the only full team output of the season. I'm holding out hope we improve enough to pull out a surprise or two.
Yea, he also threw his obligatory pick six. But Case played well. I doubt Stoopes plays an awful Blake Bell at QB again either.
We are 1-2, should be 3-0 and the bright side is that Mack is gone?? The bright side is we should have our biggest win of the year against Kansas this weekend and our team should dominate both sides of the ball.
Actually, in regards to you Okies, the bright side was that the Mack you described was here last year when he destroyed your Sooners. Oh, wait....now I get what the Sooner said, it is the Sooner bright side that Mack is not here to kick their *** this year. Got it, Live in OK is pointing out the Sooner view of the situation. It will brighten up my day when Charley kicks OU's *** this year also. I will call it here and now, Texas beats OU this year.
Holding last year's win over a Sooner fan is just dumb considering Mack got dick stomped 4 times in Dallas. They're probably sad that he isn't still around.
I remember leaving the Fair Grounds last year after the victory stroll thought the Midway and as I passed the OU trailer being loaded I pointed at a large ice chest being dollied toward the back of the trailer and asked the loader if that is where they put the broken dreams. He laughed and said "Yeah".
"by what stretch "should we be 3-0"? Because on the bright side, we have the talent to beat any team on our schedule, including OU.
Ivan, FWIW, I did not predict an OU blowout. I'm pretty sure I thought OU was only a slightly above average to average team that had overachieved and that Texas was an average team. That did not equal an easy OU win, as some other people expected. If anything, my predictions were among the more optimistic ones for UT on this board. So, I was not stunned that the Sooners lost, and then regrouped to almost win out, go to the Sugar Bowl, and finish 11-2 after losing their best players on offense and defense to season-ending injuries before the middle of the season. If it makes you feel better, I'll tell you I was disappointed OU lost that game to UT. But I thought and knew the game had no impact on the rest of the season, and easily put it out of my mind as a meaningless loss. This season's RRS... is a different story. Sorry. I do not think Texas has the quarterback, offensive line, skill position talent, or special teams to hang with OU. I think they have a very good defense, and if they continue to be as healthy as possible (the Jackson injury noted), then they might be able to keep it within reach for a half. But eventually, OU's superiority in all three phases will enable them to pull away. Objectively, that's how I see it. Again, that's assuming OU stays as healthy as they can be from now until then. You're free to tell me why you think it'll turn out different, and we'll argue over that. This reminds me of the 2005 RRS where UT was chasing a title and OU was rebuilding, constantly banged up, but fielded a respectable defensive unit--the better team won.
I know posters are selling our talent short, but I opine that the talent is on the roster this year to beat any team we play. I am not happy with the coaching and have said so. However, I never give up on the horns and will be sipping my first tepid beer in a waxed cup when they open the fairgrounds on October 11. With three weeks to prepare for OU ( not much needed for Kansas) I can see a fired up group of Texas players take the field and make it winnable game. Especially on defense. Watson's offense may give us a couple of "even a blind hog finds an acorn every once in while" scores. I do not foresee any fear coming from the Texas team when they take the field in Dallas. And the above is the bright side!
The really sad part is my above post will be ignored. The posters that repeat the incorrect information will continue to repeat. I have posted the facts so does that make the incorrect information lies the next time it is posted?
If you're going to use recruiting rankings to show athletic prowess instead of on-field results for that group, then you're going to get no replies. Stating that Demarco Cobbs should be playing at a high level because he was rated well out of HS doesn't account for any of his (lack of) success, or his injuries, or the fact that he really isn't as good as the rankings indicated. Everyone always gets on the "talent is there!" circling the wagons act whenever they don't like something that a new coach does. It happens in the NFL too. Here's another way of looking at it: which of the following is "more" true? 1. Recruiting ranking services rated guys highly because they committed to Texas and had offers from other schools. 2. Recruiting ranking services rated guys highly based on their on-field HS success against good opponents, physical prowess, and recommendations on their abilities to grow and excel at a higher level? The guys coming up with those lists aren't exactly a bunch of Mel Kipers. They rely on third parties to text recruits and/or coaches, watch 13 minutes of Youtube clips of good plays (not the bad plays), and come up with lists based on offers and basics. If you honestly believe that any of those LBs outside of Hicks have earned that recruiting ranking, you're delusional. And if you honestly believe that our coaches haven't "coached them up" to that ranking, I'd say they probably wouldn't be able to start at other places either. Same goes for the OL. To your other point about Stoops, I agree with you. I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to be >.500 against him for a lifetime.
