Sunday Morning Coaches - Week 4 (Sand kicked in our faces Edition)

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Jan 14, 2006
710
426
1,613
#21
Kind of surprised you gave the D a C. When the game was in the balance they had no answer either. F’s all around


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I may be remembering wrong but if Rodarius holds on to that pick that hit him in the hands and if Wallace catches that punt we are tied at 17 in the 4th.
While the D wasn't good, they were no where near as bad as the O.
Not that it matters now.
 

Kev_Dawg

Banned
Banned
Apr 14, 2018
502
200
43
27
Owasso
#22
His body language really gets on my nerves
I don't care if he stands there and is as emotionless as a Confederate statue wearing that gray uniform, all I care about is if he can throw the damn ball accurately. When you actually hit the open receivers everything else will work itself out.
 
Nov 3, 2008
507
69
1,578
#23
I never mind playing hard and fighting and losing to a team that's simply better than us. But Texas Tech ain't. I watched the Ole Miss game and saw nothing out of the Sand Aggies that frightened me, they're mediocre at best and we made them look good.
No clue why you put any stock into the Ole Miss vs. Texas Tech game? Tech lost their starting QB 14 plays into the game and brought a true freshman in off the bench. Tech's entire starting secondary was either injured or ejected for targeting in that game.

That was basically Tech's C - team that Ole Miss beat.

Tech started to get a little healthy last night and was only missing their 1st string QB, 1st & 2nd string RB's, both starting CB's. Tech brought their B - team to Stillwater.

Tech's a good, not great team, that has been really hampered with injuries. Once Tech gets all their starters healthy, they're going to look a lot better than they did in Stillwater.
 
Nov 14, 2010
2,911
1,540
743
#24
What happened to the defense last night was very predictable.

I got touched in the Boise thread for saying that, under the principles they were playing by, they were going to get lit up against an RPO team with Big 12 Talent.

Our approach to the run/pass conflict we were put in confirmed my suspicion that Knowles doesn't even know the concepts he's trying to defend.

He thinks he's looking at plays when what he is actually looking at is concepts.

He doesn't know what he's seeing so he's throwing darts.

He understands the West Coast offense that Boise ran because it's a traditional Pre snap offense that he grew up defending.

Defending these post snap RPO offenses are an entirely different level of understanding that he doesn't have

He's going to need an offensive coach to spend a lot of time with him to explain how all the concepts work together.

It also tells me that we don't have any offensive coaches that understand that offense either that can present it to him.
 
Last edited:
May 24, 2017
6
0
51
60
Stillwater, OK
#25
Ugh. Sometimes I hate being right. I usually start with the offense, but not this week.

Effort: F
I never mind playing hard and fighting and losing to a team that's simply better than us. But Texas Tech ain't. I watched the Ole Miss game and saw nothing out of the Sand Aggies that frightened me, they're mediocre at best and we made them look good. The effort was poor, very poor.

We failed all the way around.
Dude, that is funny! I guess I hadn't heard that before but why let them be called Aggies? That name is reserved for us, texas a&m, new mexico state, utah state, cameron, panhandle state and a couple of others not worth mentioning. tech ain't good enough to be aggies!
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,807
24,060
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#27
Special teams: Well after the exception of last week I'm back to the norm of wondering when Gundy is going to name a special teams coordinator. It looked like we didn't work on kick return or punt return at all during the week...and I wonder if the team has spent much time on those all year.

Defense: I was afraid that our pass defense was suspect but it was downright awful last night. Screens, slants, fades, crossing routes....it didn't matter, they were all open, Tech did whatever they wanted. Our run defense, which I previously thought looked dominant, was also gashed in the 2nd half. Much of that was due to poor tackling but Tech was simply being more physical with sound blocking...something our own OLine has struggled with.

Offense: That was flat out terrible. I think it can be summed up best by looking at the 2nd half drives from last night.
3 plays, 0 yards
6 plays, 56 yards
4 plays, 12 yards
5 plays, 16 yards
3 plays, -3 yards
Total 2nd half production = 81 yards, 0 points.....against Tech. At this point, I can't see the harm in giving Brown a shot.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,574
6,684
1,743
Landlocked
#28
1. We need a new OC.
2. We need a ST coordinator.
3. We need to have the QB under center inside the 10 yard line and on short yardage.
4. Tylan Wallace is awesome.
5. Jim Knowles has a LOT of work to do.
6. TC isn't going to cut it this season with the way Yurcich calls plays.
 
Aug 16, 2012
1,703
955
743
56
#29
Ugh. Sometimes I hate being right. I usually start with the offense, but not this week.

Defense: C-
I predicted that they would put up 44 points on us, so that they put up 41 wasn't all that surprising. As I said during the week, I need a larger sample size that N=1 before I go all in on our defense being world beaters, because I've watched our defense for the past 2 to 70 years or so. The one thing that really surprised me and disappointed me was that they were able to run on us the way they did. Oh, and that we got so little pressure on Bowman the Showman (good night do I hate that). Otherwise, I thought they were going to score a lot and they did.


Offense: F
TC looked like he did during week 1, when he inspired little confidence that he could get the job done. The play calling was unimaginative - where was the zone read that we used so effectively last week? I didn't see one? I understand that we're going to throw the long ball from time to time to keep defenses honest, and I understand that TC is not great at the long ball. My contention is that he doesn't have to be, that he needs to be an effective game manager, not turn the ball over, be efficient, get us out of bad plays at the line of scrimmage, and the things he does well do them well. Yesterday was nada. Zip, zero, zilch. It was like deer in the headlights. He was the one who froze in the spotlight and not the true freshman on the other side of the ball. Honestly, I would have replaced him in the third quarter when we were still only down two scores and needed to answer. But more than anything I'm disappointed with 128 yards rushing. We should have been able to run all over them. Fourth and 1 and we get chased down from behind for a loss. Really? Such a slow developing play on 4th and 1 that Hill gets caught from behind. Incidentally, with the two blitzers slamming hard inside, a zone-read keep there might have gone to the house. Zero points in the second half. Oh my.

Special teams: F
A week after our special teams made plays that turned the momentum of the game, they turned the momentum of the game again here, but in the wrong direction. A missed field goal from our kicker who was leading the nation in consecutive makes. A muffed punt. Kick returns that don't make it to the 20. Good lord.

Coaching: F
We got out-coached in every phase of the game. I know this board is going to be in full melt down mode today and Gundy is going to receive much criticism. After that performance yesterday he deserves it.

Effort: F
I felt like we came out flat from the outset. It's like the team spent the entire week reading their press clippings after the Boise State game and believing them, and decided that the only thing they needed to do this week was show up. And they barely accomplished that. I never mind playing hard and fighting and losing to a team that's simply better than us. But Texas Tech ain't. I watched the Ole Miss game and saw nothing out of the Sand Aggies that frightened me, they're mediocre at best and we made them look good. The effort was poor, very poor.

We failed all the way around.
I blame it all on the gawd-awful grey uniforms.
 
Apr 27, 2006
1,343
562
1,743
#30
Dude, that is funny! I guess I hadn't heard that before but why let them be called Aggies? That name is reserved for us, texas a&m, new mexico state, utah state, cameron, panhandle state and a couple of others not worth mentioning. tech ain't good enough to be aggies!
Well after last night it appear that we sure aren't good enough to be either.
 

Jostate

CPTNQUIRK called me a greenhorn
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
18,396
13,716
1,743
#31
Lastly (still coaching) - a number of people took great personal offense anytime someone asked about Wudtee getting mop up snaps. 4 games to get a back up ready and we used a guy that will most likely be third on the depth chart next year if he even stays on campus. Asking why he got those snaps didn’t mean anyone wanted Cornhole replaced or questioning him as the starter, but that’s where all the righteously indignant went every time. TC is not the answer and you’re staring a Dax Garman finish right in the face. We could have worked both QBs separately and at least had a semblance of a plan. Shocker that we didn’t. 4 games is 4 games, there is no defensible reason to sit anyone all year now, regardless of their position. Get them reps so the program continues to build. Last night we needed a change badly. Not because it had to be long term but even an Ace doesn’t have it sometimes and you have to go to the pen. What were we going to do, bring 11 in? Strategic genius.
.
This. Everyone acted like anyone who didn't agree with "saving" the #2 and #3 guys was unable to do math. If it takes Cornelius several games to be prepared for actual game time wouldn't it be the same for Brown and Sanders? We have no #2 guy and the starter doesn't appear to be a guy to carry us to the kind of season most were expecting. Another QB has to see the field some time.
 

Jostate

CPTNQUIRK called me a greenhorn
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
18,396
13,716
1,743
#32
I blame it all on the gawd-awful grey uniforms.
As someone else sarcastically pointed out those help to carry us to a top 40 recruiting class.

Half a billion in stadium upgrades, one of the best indoor practice facilities, the rant, the mullet, more changes of clothes than my wife has, all supposed to be big boosts to recruiting. This all adds up to a 30 somethingth ranked class every year.

Apologies to @RxCowboy who asked that we avoid this exact kind of bitching in this thread.
 
Oct 27, 2003
4,338
2,606
1,743
62
McKinney, TX
Visit site
#33
Ugh. Sometimes I hate being right. I usually start with the offense, but not this week.

Defense: C-
I predicted that they would put up 44 points on us, so that they put up 41 wasn't all that surprising. As I said during the week, I need a larger sample size that N=1 before I go all in on our defense being world beaters, because I've watched our defense for the past 2 to 70 years or so. The one thing that really surprised me and disappointed me was that they were able to run on us the way they did. Oh, and that we got so little pressure on Bowman the Showman (good night do I hate that). Otherwise, I thought they were going to score a lot and they did.


Offense: F
TC looked like he did during week 1, when he inspired little confidence that he could get the job done. The play calling was unimaginative - where was the zone read that we used so effectively last week? I didn't see one? I understand that we're going to throw the long ball from time to time to keep defenses honest, and I understand that TC is not great at the long ball. My contention is that he doesn't have to be, that he needs to be an effective game manager, not turn the ball over, be efficient, get us out of bad plays at the line of scrimmage, and the things he does well do them well. Yesterday was nada. Zip, zero, zilch. It was like deer in the headlights. He was the one who froze in the spotlight and not the true freshman on the other side of the ball. Honestly, I would have replaced him in the third quarter when we were still only down two scores and needed to answer. But more than anything I'm disappointed with 128 yards rushing. We should have been able to run all over them. Fourth and 1 and we get chased down from behind for a loss. Really? Such a slow developing play on 4th and 1 that Hill gets caught from behind. Incidentally, with the two blitzers slamming hard inside, a zone-read keep there might have gone to the house. Zero points in the second half. Oh my.

Special teams: F
A week after our special teams made plays that turned the momentum of the game, they turned the momentum of the game again here, but in the wrong direction. A missed field goal from our kicker who was leading the nation in consecutive makes. A muffed punt. Kick returns that don't make it to the 20. Good lord.

Coaching: F
We got out-coached in every phase of the game. I know this board is going to be in full melt down mode today and Gundy is going to receive much criticism. After that performance yesterday he deserves it.

Effort: F
I felt like we came out flat from the outset. It's like the team spent the entire week reading their press clippings after the Boise State game and believing them, and decided that the only thing they needed to do this week was show up. And they barely accomplished that. I never mind playing hard and fighting and losing to a team that's simply better than us. But Texas Tech ain't. I watched the Ole Miss game and saw nothing out of the Sand Aggies that frightened me, they're mediocre at best and we made them look good. The effort was poor, very poor.

We failed all the way around.
I blame it all on the gawd-awful grey uniforms.
Finally, someone that tells it like it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,574
6,684
1,743
Landlocked
#37
I gave them a C because I expected them to score pretty much what they did. I thought we would score in the 50s.
Yeah, the defense got about a C- or so. But they didn't stand much chance at all. Knowles didn't put us in a position to succeed, but the defense got screwed completely by the offense. They didn't stand a chance given our offensive performance.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
19,226
8,703
1,743
Earth
#38
I blame it all on the gawd-awful grey uniforms.
Burn them with hot fire...Also, I've noticed we can't seem to win games where we use fireworks on the stadium...I love the touch but so far we have lost to Texas at home, Bedlam last year, and this game...those are the only games I can recall us using them.
 

Kev_Dawg

Banned
Banned
Apr 14, 2018
502
200
43
27
Owasso
#39
Yeah, the defense got about a C- or so. But they didn't stand much chance at all. Knowles didn't put us in a position to succeed, but the defense got screwed completely by the offense. They didn't stand a chance given our offensive performance.
What I don't understand is people (mainly not on this site) bashing the defense. Unless the team undergoes a complete overhaul, the offense is always going to carry OSU football. Whenever we only score 17 points we should expect to lose. The goal for the defense is to achieve a top 30-40 ranking and holding Tech in the 30s would've been completely reasonable.
For this game, the defense gets a pass, although they certainly didn't have a good game. Tech has the #1 offense in the nation. If we give up a bunch of points to Iowa State, KU, KSU, etc., then I will be more concerned. Being on the field 41/60 minutes is a valid excuse for giving up some points. With all of these RBs there is no excuse for not having the offense on the field for a lot longer.
 

cowboyethics344

Federal Marshal
Apr 2, 2008
17,510
8,259
1,743
#40
What I don't understand is people (mainly not on this site) bashing the defense. Unless the team undergoes a complete overhaul, the offense is always going to carry OSU football. Whenever we only score 17 points we should expect to lose. The goal for the defense is to achieve a top 30-40 ranking and holding Tech in the 30s would've been completely reasonable.
For this game, the defense gets a pass, although they certainly didn't have a good game. Tech has the #1 offense in the nation. If we give up a bunch of points to Iowa State, KU, KSU, etc., then I will be more concerned. Being on the field 41/60 minutes is a valid excuse for giving up some points. With all of these RBs there is no excuse for not having the offense on the field for a lot longer.
Yep. Our defense is fine. Our offense and stupid fumbles killed our momentum. The defense was out there the entire game because our QB couldn’t complete a freaking 10 yard pass and our coach just wanted chunk it deep every other play killing a down.

Bottom line, if you can’t score more than 17 against Texas tech then you have huge offensive problem. It’s clear that we have a QB problem. The only person that doesn’t understand or acknowledge it is coach Mike Gundy