Online Now 1110

Inside the Bubble

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

Online now 806
Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)

Boards ▾

Inside the Bubble

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

6th Street

The place for off topic discussion on Hookem

Reply

What went wrong

  • Jan 7th, 2010.

    I'm sitting with Gus McCrea and his delightful bride enjoying the pageantry of the Rose Bowl.

    TEXAS would lose the game but carry themselves well in the face of great adversity. We entered 2010 thinking about the start of a new era.

    A short 11 months later, we sit trying to make sense of a train wreck of a season where we set new team lows for ineptitude and . . . .well just plain yuckeness. 1st time we've ever finished last in the division, worst finish in conference since 1956. Mack's first losses to Baylor, ISU and OSU. Losses to both traditional rivals. yada yada yada.

    I was asked by another, what went wrong so I thought I'd share my long winded thoughts.

    You mean TEXAS this year?

    Perfect storm of mistakes coming home to roost in one year.

    #1 problem?

    To me the lack of "play-makers" on either side of the ball. (the Gerry Hamilton rule) Guys who make the opposition loose sleep and who must be accounted for every year.

    The lack of ET, Houston and Miller is exposing this D as a 2nd rate unit not capable of "carrying" the team as advertised or as it did at times last year. Not remotely close to the "best D of the Mack era". BTW, not blaming the D for the season simply pointing out they failed to live up to expectations and face it, they underperformed fundamentally.

    Also keep in mind I'm a big believe that defense wins titles and if you want to see the most glaring difference between Stoops and Mack, it's Stoops focus on D.

    On offense, every team we lost to (think about this list)featured better skill position players almost across the board. QB, RB, WR and TE.

    #2

    Lack of OL, TE and WR development (which goes with #1) on O along with a lack of DT, LB and S development on the D.

    We recruited an outstanding "Class of Beef" in 2006 and 2007 only to have it gutted by knuckleheaded behavior (Buck, Webb, Watts), players not panning out as the stars they were projected(Allen, Hix, McGaskey) and a failure to develop the position.

    you have to go back to 2007 to find an OL drafted higher than the 3rd round. We won't have one drafted higher than the 3rd round (if that) for 3 more years.

    We should be OL U.

    WR is just inexplicable. Walker, Hardy, Payne, Webber. 4 highly rated guys who never saw the field. Williams hasn't improved greatly, Hales is a ????, Kirk has become GG's "go too guy" finally but we don't have a dynamic WR.

    Makes no sense in this offense.

    TE is a combination of unlucky and poor development. I'd love to get Brewster back as a run game CO and TE coach. This offense doesn't work well without good TE play.

    On the D side of the ball, we are really weak up the middle without solid play (other than Randall) from DT, MLB or S and we are clearly not built to stop the run.

    To sum up #2 (which ties closely into #1 and #5), this is where the evaluation mistakes fit thus the term "coming home to roost". A mistake you make 3 or 4 years ago, may not show up right away but when it does. . .

    Oh yeah.

    Let me add here our failure to develop our QB depth chart over the years. This was the 3rd time in Mack's tenure we featured a true freshman as our #1 backup. Now he gets a pass for Simms as he had little say in that.

    But let's go back to the spring of 2008. Now most think I'm going to point out not taking a QB was the problem. While true, it wasn't the biggest. The biggest was committing the #2 spot to John Chiles who did little to develop himself as a QB. The summer of his junior year in HS when every other top flight QB was attending QB camps to hone their skills, he played AAU basketball instead. He was often reported playing at Gregory Gym instead of attending 7 on 7 workouts.

    GJ Kinne choose to transfer to Tulsa instead of remaining at TEXAS. He's enjoyed a great career there but I can only fantasize about the outcome of the TEXAS/Bama game if a player in his 3rd year in the program enters the game to lead the team.

    How much different does this year look with Kinne at the helm and GG as the backup coming off his redshirt year?

    QB, RB, OL, TE, DT, S and WR all seriously impacted by prior mistakes who's impact would domino unto the 2010 train wreck.

    #3

    Idiotic decision to changes offense without the horses.

    Dominate with what you are great at, DO NOT try to become something you are not.

    Not 100% sure who's call it was. GD will pay the price for that mistake but it seriously impacted the development of GG and his timing with his WRs. Of course it didn't help that our OLs and WRs do not seem to have improved much while at TEXAS.

    And as I've mentioned elsewhere, before we hire the latest flavor of the day, I hope Mack and Will sit down to discuss what kind of offense they want to run.

    1st things 1st.

    #4

    Lack of leadership

    A big part of this problem rests solely on the players shoulders. Yes, I get it, some people think it's all coaching but anyone who's been around sports knows that Phil Jackson wins rings because of guys like Jordan and Shaq and Kobe, not because of his triangle schemes.

    From reports of poor turnouts at 7 on 7 workouts to players enjoying the nightlife more than the film study, not a big surprise this team showed a lack of leadership and a cultural divide not unlike '07.

    Ultimately the players must own the team and right now, they don't.

    Decide if you came to TEXAS to win titles or party on 6th street, commit to the team and the game.

    #5

    Lack of red zone scoring by the O

    Want to see the number #1 problem with our team this year?

    Bigger than everything else?

    Simple.

    Inability to score TDs in the red zone. Directly cost us the ISU, Baylor and Aggie games, almost cost us Neb.

    TEXAS' O generally scoring 67% to 74% red zone TDs. This year is a paltry 41% with as many red zone opportunities as last year.

    Taking all the issues described above and like the ingredients of a chef's pastry before baking, the results showed up in red zone scoring.

    It was comical. Many on the net went wild when Mack had the "audacity" to point out (near the end of his press conference) that we weren't forcing enough turnovers (well no shit, anyone who knows football knows great D's get turnovers).

    OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    THROWING MUSCHAMP UNDER THE BUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Was the scream of the hysterical chicken Little's. How could Mack impose such an "astronomical" standard on the D (forget the fact everyone of the Top 25 takeaway teams was at or near that standard).

    Go back to the START of the press conference. Most people begin with what is most important and work backward.

    What was it Mack discussed?

    Oh yeah, lack of red zone scoring was our #1 problem. Guess what? the constitutional scholars, fast food assit managers and struggling IT guys completely missed it and as usual, Mack knew what he was talking about.

    Our red zone TD scoring had fallen off almost half from the high. We had 40 red zone TDs last year (a year many thought our O was poor) but only 22 this year.

    We had 57 chances last year vs 48 this year so you can argue the O didn't get us down there enough but it doesn't change the fact that when we got there, we didn't get it done.

    Last year we scored 95% of the time, 70% of them TDs. This year we scored 81% of the time, only 40% of them TDs

    18 fewer TDs or adjusted for the fewer trips to the red zone, we still left 10 TDs on the table.

    If we don't score TDs in the red zone, we aren't going to win games. Give us just 1 more red zone TD in the ISU, Baylor and Aggie games and we likely win all 3.

    Someone might ask, OK now how do you fix it?

    If I really could answer that, I'd have my resume in Mack's office but from my cheap seat in the upper deck:

    #1 you have to change the "culture" surrounding the team.

    That means coaching changes since it's easier to change coaches than players.

    #2 But having said that, I'd sit every player down and ask him what he's going to commit to in order to get TEXAS back to a National Title.

    Frankly, given the rumors of disgruntled players, there isn't a single player on the team I'd hate to lose if they aren't 100% on board (of course I can say that since I know guys like Jeffcoat and Hicks have "bought in" already)

    If 10 guys leave, so what??? That's 3-4 more ships I can offer right now and trust me, I can name 5 guys I'd go after hard in a heart beat.

    #3 Design the S&C program to fit the new offense we are runnning (I assume the D is already doing this)

    #4 Hire an on staff nutritionalist. Hard to believe we don't have one of those.

    #5 I may not be able to supervise 7 on 7's or offseason work outs but I damn sure can keep attendence. You'd better have a reason to a) not be at a work out and b) not be in class.

    #6 I impliment some of Will's study hall ideas to improve our work in the classroom.

    #7 One of my coaching changes is to hire someone with a ST's background. Our STs play have cost us dearly in the past including contibuting to at least 2 conference titles losses.

    This post was edited by echeese262 4 years ago

  • Great writeup. Statistically, the poor performance in the red zone (both offense and defense) and the negative turnover margin are surely the main culprits. In fact, statistically, we held our own in almost every other category. Hard as it is to believe, we outgained our opponents by 82 ypg. Even harder to believe, we outgained our opponents in both rushing and passing yardage. In other words, we weren't dominant, but not nearly as awful as we seemed. But, when you can't score inside the 20, and can't stop your opponent inside the 20, you're going to lose.

    On the turnover side, you might claim that we had incredibly bad luck. We lost 2 out of every 3 fumbles on offense, while our opponents recovered 3 out of every 4 that they fumbled. Some luck was surely involved, but lack of playmakers is also partially to blame here.

    The cultural issues are very valid. Just as Will's hiring at once seemed to energize the defense, some new offensive coaches should, short term, have the same impact on that side. Longer term, you have to have players and playmakers on both sides of the ball to be a championship caliber team. For some years, we have noted that Mack goes after players who want to be Longhorns. Now, those players have to prove that getting a scholarship wasn't their only goal, and that they are ready to "bleed' for the program.

    BTW, with regard to your offseason workout comments, I actually believe it is against NCAA rules for coaches to even get attendance reports. Apparently, since the workouts are voluntary, it is feared that coaches "taking roll" would intimidate players. It's a fine line between business and education.

    This post was edited by texaztom 4 years ago

  • Greet post and good call on your lead, echeese. The team desperately missed playmakers, and you can even substitute leaders for playmakers. Back after the summer practices, questions were being asked about who the leaders were. And there were too many answers, which means there wasn't one.

    I think we all know that teams are made during the heat of 7 on 7's. If no one "owned" the summer, no one was there to " own" the fall. Again, you are 100% right, players have to own the team, and they didn't step up during the practices.

    And the question that Will would not (could not?) answer about who would line up next to Randall this year ultimately killed the defense. No DT run stopper and we could not win.

    But may I make a suggestion? Add special teams. I was embarrassed by the punt returns at the end of the year. A team with the ridiculous talent of Texas telling the PR to fair catch every ball? Really? That is SO much worse than making mistakes of aggression to me.

  • Great post cheese, I do disagree with the 3 TO standard that Mack stated, but I understand why he said it.

    Everything else you knocked out of the park, especially the part about sitting down with every player and asking them what they plan to do this offseason to improve themselves and the program.

    If they can't or don't have an answer, then I would say, "Texas is probably not the place for you."

    On the flip side, the coaching staff can no longer go with who's bleed the most, especially at the S position.

    Vaccaro and Phillips should be the starters, Scott and Gideon should be STs players. I think Brewster should be spun down to LB.

    This post was edited by NLeininger 4 years ago

  • Topgrpguy said... (original post)


    But may I make a suggestion? Add special teams. I was embarrassed by the punt returns at the end of the year. A team with the ridiculous talent of Texas telling the PR to fair catch every ball? Really? That is SO much worse than making mistakes of aggression to me.

    That's a good catch and why I want one of the new hires to have strong STs background but our STs really hurt us this year.

    Thanks for the comments.

  • cheese,

    a few thoughts on yours

    1) Agree with the thought we need to identify an offense - if you want an new OC, find the coordinator who shares what Mack/Will want to do. Then your can recruit specifically to your offense. The new OC will have potential playmakers in Davis and Brown so there's hope from a playmaking standpoint.

    2) Leadership/Playmaker - these go hand in hand. I think whoever emerges as a playmaker needs to also have or at least develop the social skills to emerge as a leader. Even Muschamp has stated that in order to first be a leader, you need to be a producer. It's hard for someone to buy in to a leader that isn't effective player.

    3) Maybe let Giles coach the entire defensive line and hire a special teams/recruiting coordiantor as one of your 9 position coaches.

    4) Surprised there's no mention of GG in your thoughts. I think there are some issues and the QB competition needs to be opened up.

  • I only have one point of contention with your post. One red zone TD against Baylor, A&M and Iowa State don't "win" those games IMO. Texas was much further "away" from winning those games IMO than people want to admit.

    If A&M doesn't have their own special teams issues, what do you think the score would have been?

    The Texas offense was inept the entire season.

    The reason they were inept is because they were inconsistent. And that's why they had issues in the red zone, where spaces get tighter and plays have to happen quicker.

    The Texas quarterback was as bad as bad gets. All year long, even against Nebraska where he was 4 for 16. He doesn't see the field, he doesn't feel the rush and he doesn't have the feet, accuracy or acumen to make it happen.

    Add in the fact that his receivers are not very good with the exception of Mike Davis, and his running backs wouldn't start at UTEP, you get the idea.

    This offense is an epic failure. And it's not just red zone scoring. It's inconsistent everywhere on the field.

    The first four possessions of the second half against A&M?

    Two turnovers followed quickly by two three-and-outs.

    They were nowhere near the red zone. Yes, they need to get better in the red zone, but my guess is they all set Mack Brown records for offensive turnovers and three-and-outs. I mean, the offense was so bad this year, you can't even pretend that it was just in the red zone.

    Sorry for being so long winded, but you get the idea. I think Mack trying to push it on red zone acumen is not the whole or correct picture.

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • dallashorn02 said... (original post)

    3) Maybe let Giles coach the entire defensive line and hire a special teams/recruiting coordiantor as one of your 9 position coaches.

    It's not a bad idea IMO but relatively few teams have full-time only special teams coordinators.

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)

    It's not a bad idea IMO but relatively few teams have full-time only special teams coordinators.

    I'm not sure Giles should be retained. He's one of the worst recruiters and evaluators on the staff.

    If Houston is truly his area, then he has done a horrible job. Especially when one considers Texas hired him from UH.

  • I agree that the offense was exceptionally awful...and in every phase. OL, TE, RB, and QB. We couldn't fall back on anything offensively and be successful. We had a below average OL, blocking for below average RBs and a below average QB.

    Our WRs couldn't get separation, were poor downfield blockers, and had bad hands. Our TEs couldn't block or catch, and when they did catch the ball it was almost as though the defense left them open knowing they couldn't convert a 1st down.

    Our RBs weren't allowed to establish any continuity because of play calling, but they were also in the training room as much as on the field.

    GG had happy feet in the pocket, often because of the poor blocking on the edges. His intermediate and deep passes were erratic. His short passes were often short of the 1st down marker when we needed more yardage. Though, this is as much on the play calling and route running.

    The interior of the OL was probably the most promising aspect of the offense, especially considering they are coming back next season. The OTs were horrific. Britt Mitchell made a mockery of our supposed culture of accountability.

    This was a systemic breakdown of the first order. When something like this happens you can't just tinker with things. This is akin to a patient hemorrhaging in the trauma unit. Invasive procedures are needed, and quickly.

    Don't matter what they throw at us. Only angry people win football games. Darrell Royal

  • My biggest complaint about aggy was Kelley not getting any time that I recall.

    I have some hopes that a new OL coach combined with the return of Kelley-Allen-Snow-Walters-Hopkins will actually be a prove to be a great starting point. That would be 2 seniors, 2 RS Sophomores, and a true sophomore. Then you have Espinosa and Porter in the rotation on the interior.

    The big question is what can the new OL and S&C coach do with Buchanan, Ashcraft, Poehlmann, and Kriegal. How far their development goes this offseason will determine whether or not Westermen and Flowers get to RS.

    This post was edited by NLeininger 4 years ago

  • This post is for members of Horns247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial
  • NLeininger said... (original post)

    I'm not sure Giles should be retained. He's one of the worst recruiters and evaluators on the staff.

    If Houston is truly his area, then he has done a horrible job. Especially when one considers Texas hired him from UH.

    I've thought about Giles as well...& his HOU recruiting/evals need to improve...but with Orakpo, Kindle, Jeffcoat, Acho, & hopefully Wilson, I suspect Giles returns

  • I agree that we need to be OL U. We should have a top OL every year. We have not had one for a few years. I think Colt and some exceptional WR's(Cosby/Shipley) helped hide that issue. while pass blocking was ok the last couple of years, our run blocking was poor. whether thru scheme, development, evaluation or bad luck, it has not been at the level we should see. A solid OL will give you the ability to run any offense and help "protect" the overall offense. If our OL had been better at running the ball last year with Colt out, we may have been able to survived in the NC game. We just either seem to ask our OL to do things they can not do nor do we seem to give them any help with the playcalling or misdirection. That is where I would start with any "fixes"

  • mcb0703 said... (original post)

    I've thought about Giles as well...& his HOU recruiting/evals need to improve...but with Orakpo, Kindle, Jeffcoat, Acho, & hopefully Wilson, I suspect Giles returns

    When guys like Jackson Jeffcoat mention Giles' development of Brian Orakpo as a reason for coming to Texas, that says something to me.

  • cheese -

    its funny that you see all that went wrong in retrospect, when you and I argued all last year over whether there were things that were wrong. You kept indicating that the wins meant nothing was wrong overall and specifically with GD and Mcworter.

    Had we acted at the end of the year and fired Mcworter, some of this could have been avoided. Had we acquired a few JUCOs to plug holes (DT and TE maybe...perhaps tackle) you can add another couple of wins.

    Now, it is clear that GD needs to go immediately, and you are now on board. But it was clear that the recruiting issues have been present for a while. Why did it take this inevitable losses for you to start seeing the problem? Wouldn't it have been better to be be proactive?

  • good thought provoking post echeese.

    some thoughts...

    #1 lack Playmakers: I think they were there but either were not ready for the season (developed) or werent utilized; eg, monore, goodwin, hales, williams, fitzhenry, etc.

    #2 lack development: spot on

    #3 offense changes: I am not sure this is as big of a deal as it appears. This is fundamental to football and shouldnt be as huge deal to the OL as it appears.

    #4 Lack leadership: Way overblown,IMO - just like offense changes - it goes back to development, motivation and coaching. Part of the coaches job is to develop leaders and the amount of effort they put into that endeavor depends on the quality of natural leaders on the team.

    #5 Lack R/Z scoring: ABSOLUTELY... but that is normally emblematic of a poor offense. You have to have core, high percentage plays in a tighter space (R/Z). I cant think of any "core" plays the Horns had this year. They were so inefficient that the only real play they could come up with in the red-zone was Cody up the middle and a Tucker FG.
    .
    Not to pile on but some I would add to why they had a poor season....
    .
    Offensive identity? The coaches failed miserably to change the offensive identity this past off season but they HAVE to be better this off season. If GG is your main man, then most of the cute offenses will not work. GG needs to be in a type of spread or pro offense. If you add a running game to the mix with Malcom Brown, you almost have to go with a pro style offense. A Jim Harbaugh scheme would work well with GG, Malcom, Cody, etc. This is also the type of offense that I believe Will Muschamp really wants to install when he becomes HC so... why wait? it fits

    Defensive line? at least there werent any DL injuries for the most part but most of us knew the DT was going to be an issue this year. Muschamp needs to get some of the players beefed up to be a Roy Miller mauling type of NT. Randall would make a dominant DT (3tech) and a difference maker in my opinion.

    Middle Linebacker? Hicks should concentrate on putting about 10 lbs of muscle on starting this month. He needs to get up to about 230+ lbs.

    Safety? They have to develop a FS. They cannot afford to have two strong safeties (Scott/Gideon) on the field at the same time again next year.
    ..............

    #1 "Culture?" The warm and fuzzy, tickle me bunny GD culture is... Mack Brown.

    #2 Commitment? I'd sit every COACH down and ask him what is he going to commit to in order to get TEXAS back to the National Title.

    #3 S&C program? agreed... change the culture

    #4 nutritionist? ok... start with the S&C coach and Taylor Bible

    #5 7 on 7? If they are going to goof around and play out of position, I am not sure that the 7 on 7 is that big of a deal. If it is not important to the coaches, it will not be important to the players... that is teenagerology 101. That goes back to the adult leadership issue. I would rather hear that they are involved in weight training, getting in shape, and fundamental drills the players can do themselves.

    #6 study hall? good idea... Muschamp is a leader

    #7 ST coach? should be a priority.

    This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by SoldierHorn 4 years ago

  • BobbyBurton said... (original post)

    I only have one point of contention with your post. One red zone TD against Baylor, A&M and Iowa State don't "win" those games IMO. Texas was much further "away" from winning those games IMO than people want to admit.

    If A&M doesn't have their own special teams issues, what do you think the score would have been?

    The Texas offense was inept the entire season.

    Bobby,

    We can adjust the parameters all we like and get a thousand different possible results.

    Scoring TDs early and putting the pressure on the other team was something we failed to do all season.

    It impacts the play not just of our team but impacts the play and play calling of the other.

    You can't convince me it did boost Baylor's belief they could win holding us to FG's on our 1st 3 drives.

    The aggie game finished as a 7 point game yet we blew a chance to go up 14-0 early.

    6 Red zone shots vs ISU only 2 TDs.

    Yeah, perhaps a tad bit embellished but not that far. 1 extra/right there TD in each of those games changes our play calling (more running) changes our defensive approach and more importantly, changes the bad guys approach.

    Not saying we weren't inept this year by any means but we gave the season way in the red zone.

  • New board, same old echeese.

    "It was comical. Many on the net went wild when Mack had the "audacity" to point out (near the end of his press conference) that we weren't forcing enough turnovers (well no shit, anyone who knows football knows great D's get turnovers).

    OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    THROWING MUSCHAMP UNDER THE BUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Was the scream of the hysterical chicken Little's. How could Mack impose such an "astronomical" standard on the D (forget the fact everyone of the Top 25 takeaway teams was at or near that standard). "

    Wrong, and you're not even close. Mack said: "We only forced two turnovers, and we have to have a minimum of three per week we feel like to win the game." Translation: 2 is not enough, we need 3 (or more) to win a football game.

    No team in college football this season averaged 3 or more turnovers per game. The closest were Hawaii and Toledo, at 2.75 per game. The top two teams in the BCS averaged 2.58 and 1.5 per game.

    To get into the "Top 25," which you claimed were all "at or near" Mack's standard, a team would need to average 2.08 takeaways per game. Mack said that 2 isn't enough. So... how exactly can you justify your ridiculous claim that "everyone [sic] of the Top 25 takeaway teams was at or near [Mack's] standard?"

    "Go back to the START of the press conference. Most people begin with what is most important and work backward. "

    First of all, I dispute your simple equation of the order in which a topic is addressed during a press conference to the subjective importance to the coaching staff. But your factual claim really isn't even true (shockingly!).

    Let's see what Mack said was important at the beginning of his presser. You can read it here: http://www.mackbrown-texasfootball.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/110110aaa.html

    After a few pleasantries, Mack started his analysis of the team with a discussion about penalties and third down performance. Mack moved on from there to "Red zone and turnovers," which he implied were the biggest concerns ("Red zone and turnovers is what we've said"). He then made a few comments about red zone performance followed immediately by his analysis of turnover margin (including a criticism of the defense's failure to gain takeaways). So, Mack treated red zone performance on par with turnover margin. And, it appears that he views these as a bigger concern than the two he addressed first (penalties and third down efficiency).

  • BrickHorn said... (original post)

    . But your factual claim really isn't even true (shockingly!).

    Not sure I'd lead trying to make claims of fact given your "history".

    But I'm not suprise you waste little time trying to screw up this board.

    ******************
    Guys played very hard on Saturday night. There’s a real fine line between winning and losing. In fact, [Media Relations Director] John Bianco got me some stats a few minutes ago. It’s really interesting when you look at the difference in last year’s team to this year’s team and show you the fine line between winning and losing. We’re obviously making too many mistakes. Penalties last year at this time - we had 59 penalties. Right now we’ve got 59 penalties. We had too many penalties Saturday night. We had 11 that hurt us. Obviously it’s the same as last year. Third down percentage – last year we were converting 44 percent of our third downs offensively. This year we’re converting 41 percent of our third downs. That’s not as bad as it seems. We’d like to do better. Defensively last year we were holding people to 24 percent of their third down conversions. This year we’re giving up 36 percent. We’re not doing as well on defense and giving up more big plays in that area.

    Red zone and turnovers is what we’ve said. Last year our red zone scoring touchdowns - we scored 24 touchdowns last year in 38 trips. So 63 percent of the time in the red zone we scored. We held the opponents to only eight touchdowns in 15 trips. Fifty-three percent of the time we kept them from scoring touchdowns. Red zone touchdowns this year, as compared to 24-of-38 [last year], we’re only 15-of-36. That’s killing us. We have got to score more touchdowns in the red zone. We went from 63 percent to 42 percent in the red zone. Last year we were holding [opponents] to 53 percent at 8-for-15 trips scoring touchdowns in the red zone. Right now we’re giving up 14 touchdowns in 22 trips. They’ve been there a few more times. Our offense has been in there about the same number of times. We’re just not scoring points.
    *******************************

    http://www.texassports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/110110aaa.html

    And yes, anyone who has a clue about football knows turnover margin is a critical factor in the outcome of games.

    And again, if you know football you know you gotta score in the red zone and when you are doing it at almost half the pace as in the past, you aren't going to win many games.

    Two pretty obvious truths about football yet to hear some spin it, pointing out reality is "throwing Will under the bus" and "covering for GD".

    Huh?

  • echeese,

    You didn't address the point I made. No one is arguing that generating turnovers isn't important. The point is that the SPECIFIC goal Mack set for the defense (at least 3 turnovers per game) is ludicrously high to the point that it's almost impossible to reach.

    Sure, Mack has criticized both the offense and the defense. But the standards have been asymmetric - the defense is held to a nearly-impossible standard, while the offense is held to depressingly low standards (which it somehow has managed not to meet). Any rational fan can see clearly that the offense was a much bigger problem than the defense this season. If Mack was indeed criticizing the two units equally (as opposed to merely presenting a public face to that effect), then that's a problem.

  • The irony is the standard is not Mack, rather it's Will's (per one of the players).

    Almost as sad as you hijacking my sig pic.
    no

  • Brick, I don't think "goals" have been unfair toward the defense.

    He mentioned the three turnovers per game one time in all his pressers this year that I remember.

    Some have latched on to that as some sort of unfair ideology toward the defense. While unfair to the defense, he probably has similarly unfair goals to the offense, i.e. a goal for his offense to score TDs 75% or 80% of the time in the red zone.

    Coaches have things like that. All of them do.

    But I watched all of Mack's pressers this year that were publicly available. I don't think there was a single one where I felt he had more issues with the defense than the O outside of UCLA.

    That's just my take, watching and listening to everything from specific words, to intonation to how he acted when he described both.

    There is no question in my mind he "feels" the defense is a heck of a lot closer to success than the offense.

    I think he's truly perplexed by the problems of the O because the issues are so numerous, everything from player evaluation, to the scheme, to the acumen of position coaches.

    Just saying, I watched them all and never once did I get the feel he put the onus of the poor season on the defense. And I think some have latched on to the 3 turnover comment as some way to build their argument that Mack won't make a change on offense. I have to say that I didn't get that from him at all, all year long.

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

  • Bobby -

    It's not that Mack has been harder on the defense in the sense that he's implied that the D was more at fault than the offense. Honestly, there's no way he could get away with that - everyone (maybe even echeese) would see through that veneer. The problem is far more subtle. Mack has treated the offense and defense as approximate equals this season. Because the defense has objectively outperformed the offense (and it hasn't really been close), that alone indicates that the goals Mack has applied to each unit are skewed. So, seemingly equal treatment, in reality, equates to unfair treatment.

    Now, that doesn't mean that Mack's private assessments of the team echo his public statements. But the sheer fact that Mack's statements give the impression that the two units have equally underperformed is troubling.

    This post was edited by BrickHorn 4 years ago