Fire Holtz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Brasky

I agree.

Losing a bunch of starters excuse is getting old too. Isn't the whole reason you have depth is for the guys to learn and step up when it's time to. It just so happened that a bunch of them had to step up at the same time. Yeah, did we expect to have the offense of last year? - NO. But did we expect to go out, compete and win some games against bottom of the barrel programs? - YES!.

---

We could very easily be 4-2, 2-0 right now. That would have required better execution in the 1st half of the Tulane game (even with the meltdown in the 2nd half, we still could have won). And the 2 fumbles on the 5 against Kansas (even with the 2 missed FGs). There's a fine line between winning and losing with this team. Hopefully we are learning each week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

That's ANOTHER great post from you! Preach on, brother. I'm rarely even posting this morning because you're speaking for the BOTH of us on this issue.

---

What world do you people live in?? Before last year, we HOPED that maybe, just maybe once a year we could beat a "BCSwhatever you call it" team -- and at very least, played competitively. Last year, we beat a bottom barrel Illinois team and hopeless UVA program and now people think we're expected to just beat BCS teams? We've NEVER beaten Kansas. We're not expected to beat Kansas. We should have beaten Kansas AND WE ALMOST beat Kansas - and with last year's team, we would have - but it's not saying much! Those wins last year over UVA and Illini proved USELESS. So the fact that you're panties are all in bunch because this team -- a team rebuilding from scratch - lost by 3 to a Big 12 team -- is beyond ridiculous.

In fact, you sound like those idiotic MWC fans who think they're all "better than thou" because they beat Oregon State once. Our program isn't BUILT. It's BEING BUILT. We've made great strides in the past few years but calling for the ouster of our coach after 3 or 4 games IN A REBUILD season, only makes our fan base look like a bunch of arrogant, unrealistic yahoos people say we are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgGoneMad

...only makes our fan base look like a bunch of arrogant, unrealistic yahoos people say we are.

---

You realize that's the definition of a "fan", right?

In any case, I'm fine with people saying that. Tech fans demand nothing less than excellence. What of it?

We are irreverent -

Somewhat delusional -

Egotistical -

Smart (very) -

Demanding -

For the most part good looking -

Not very politically correct (ok far from PC) -

But most of all ELITE -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden

We are irreverent -

Somewhat delusional -

Egotistical -

Smart (very) -

Demanding -

For the most part good looking -

Not very politically correct (ok far from PC) -

But most of all ELITE -

---

Sooner is irreverent. Madddawg is delusional. I am the good looking one and Cartek is not very politically correct. Who else u talking about?:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgGoneMad

What world do you people live in?? Before last year, we HOPED that maybe, just maybe once a year we could beat a "BCSwhatever you call it" team -- and at very least, played competitively. Last year, we beat a bottom barrel Illinois team and hopeless UVA program and now people think we're expected to just beat BCS teams? We've NEVER beaten Kansas. We're not expected to beat Kansas. We should have beaten Kansas AND WE ALMOST beat Kansas - and with last year's team, we would have - but it's not saying much! Those wins last year over UVA and Illini proved USELESS. So the fact that you're panties are all in bunch because this team -- a team rebuilding from scratch - lost by 3 to a Big 12 team -- is beyond ridiculous.

In fact, you sound like those idiotic MWC fans who think they're all "better than thou" because they beat Oregon State once. Our program isn't BUILT. It's BEING BUILT. We've made great strides in the past few years but calling for the ouster of our coach after 3 or 4 games IN A REBUILD season, only makes our fan base look like a bunch of arrogant, unrealistic yahoos people say we are.

---

Are you serious? This post must be a joke. Take a look back before last year and the year before that and even go back a few years before that, when have we ever beaten two teams that were BCS teams in the same year before last year? I don't recall us doing that any time sooner than last year EVER. So therefore, that is the new standard for our program. And quit talking up Kansas like they are some Big 12 powerhouse. PLEEEAASE!! Those guys are the whipping boys of the Big 12 (and the rest of college football) and have lost to RICE 2 yeas in a row!!! And you're telling me us EXPECTING to beat KANSAS is WRONG?!?!?! So I guess we should just stop expecting to beat Rice as well then? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that just competing and "losing by 3" was the acceptable barometer for our program, no matter what manner of transition we are in.

And before last year we WON A CHAMPIONSHIP!!! We beat a really good Utah State, Nevada, and KILLED a horrible Ole Miss team ON THE ROAD and so the expectation was raised. I'm sorry we don't go along with your logic where our expectations remain the same for years and years and years, but MY expectation for this program is that our level of success GET RAISED EVERY YEAR.

And let's examine this "Rebuild" season you speak of. All the OL starters are juniors and seniors. The RB's all played last year (except Blake Martin who played almost every snap of special teams). The WR's are all juniors and seniors with the exception of Trent Taylor. The rotation of DL is 4 seniors, 2 juniors, and 2 sophomores I think (both sophomores played last year). The LB's are senior's and juniors with the exception of Beau Fitte. SOO basically only the DB's are most made up of younger players, and we still have a junior starting cb, and a junior starting free safety.

So the real question is, why has there been such a tough transition for us on offense? Well, a brand new QB is mainly where the blame lies, but also the implementation of a new offensive system through the first 5 games is more to blame. Holtz hasn't run the same "high tempo offense" he claimed he would keep intact. He's run some morph of a spread he claims "helps our defense", and yet we are still giving up 27 points per game and 198 rushing yards per game (given the Army game inflates that a bit). So based on FACTS, its safe to say that his "strategy" hasn't worked. So wouldn't that place most of the blame of these last few losses to some of the WORST TEAMS IN D-1 squarely on his shoulders? I would say the answer is yes.

DGM wants tech football to know its place. That's clear. In his opinion, that place is firmly below our FLAGSHIP WBB program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWarner63

And let's examine this "Rebuild" season you speak of. All the OL starters are juniors and seniors. The RB's all played last year (except Blake Martin who played almost every snap of special teams). The WR's are all juniors and seniors with the exception of Trent Taylor. The rotation of DL is 4 seniors, 2 juniors, and 2 sophomores I think (both sophomores played last year). The LB's are senior's and juniors with the exception of Beau Fitte. SOO basically only the DB's are most made up of younger players, and we still have a junior starting cb, and a junior starting free safety.

---

I wish I knew the EXACT numbers, I can only take a stab. Here's how many Div 1 games I think these guys have played in coming into the season:

QB: 0
Backup: 0

RB: 12
Backup: 3

OT: 4 ?
backup: 0
OG: 24
backup: 0
C: 0
backup: 0
OG: 0
backup: 0
OT: 0
backup: 0

WR: 36
WR: 36
WR: 36
WR: 12? (at USF...injured a lot)

DE: 12
DT: 36
DT: 24
DE: 36

MLB: ? (at Texas Tech)
backup: 10?
OLB: 0
backup: 3 ?

CB: 0
backup: 0
CB: 12
backup: 12
S: 0
backup: 0
S: 0
backup: 0

P: 0
K: 0

That's rebuilding, imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgGoneMad

What world do you people live in?? Before last year, we HOPED that maybe, just maybe once a year we could beat a "BCSwhatever you call it" team -- and at very least, played competitively. Last year, we beat a bottom barrel Illinois team and hopeless UVA program and now people think we're expected to just beat BCS teams? We've NEVER beaten Kansas. We're not expected to beat Kansas. We should have beaten Kansas AND WE ALMOST beat Kansas - and with last year's team, we would have - but it's not saying much! Those wins last year over UVA and Illini proved USELESS. So the fact that you're panties are all in bunch because this team -- a team rebuilding from scratch - lost by 3 to a Big 12 team -- is beyond ridiculous.

In fact, you sound like those idiotic MWC fans who think they're all "better than thou" because they beat Oregon State once. Our program isn't BUILT. It's BEING BUILT. We've made great strides in the past few years but calling for the ouster of our coach after 3 or 4 games IN A REBUILD season, only makes our fan base look like a bunch of arrogant, unrealistic yahoos people say we are.

---

\


Nice rant, but you are wrong about Kansas, unless your definition of NEVER excludes 1987.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skilldawg

Sooner is irreverent. Madddawg is delusional. I am the good looking one and Cartek is not very politically correct. Who else u talking about?:)

---

We Choudawg is not the good looking one...

I get the playing time stat, it's very important. But being a junior or senior, even if you haven't started much, you've gotten playing time at some point, and you've played against your teammates for 2 years or so and they were good players. And if you are a juco guy, somebody saw enough in you to think you could come in here right away and play. Either way, a junior or senior should be expected to be able to come in and compete at the same level as the guy across from him at least. You don't have to dominate him, but if you can at least match up with him well and win 50% of the battles, that's enough to help us be somewhat effective.

I think they are getting there. We aren't terrible, we just make crucial mistakes that cost us games. But it is rebuilding when so many players have never played at this level before. We are NOT a veteran team. Last year's team was a veteran team and you could tell y'all had been there before and knew what you were doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

I think everyone on the board will agree with that, including me. Having said that, I saw several "coaching mistakes" last night that are just irritating. Here are just three examples:

1) Why did Holtz continue to run Higgins on run plays after Higgins had already left the game hurt? Higgins ended up getting hurt again. This reminded me of Washington Redskins coach Mike Shannahan doing the same with RGIII in the 2012 playoffs (for which he was severely criticized).

2) When Higgins left the game with an injury, why ask Scotty Young --coming off the bench cold, and having not played in 3 weeks-- to throw A PASS on his very first play, on 3rd down and 4? Of course Young overthrew his receiver and we had to punt. Why not RUN the ball with Dixon or Martin in that situation? (we averaged almost 10 yds per carry last night.)

3) With about 3 min left in the game, why did Tech call a timeout before the play clock (and the game clock) ran down to almost zero? LA Tech could have run another 20 seconds (or so) off the game clock and THEN called time out. IMO, this was a mismanagement of the game clock when time was precious to both teams.

---

A POI on #3.... the announcers said that it was a Tech timeout but the timeout on the graphics display was actually a UTEP timeout. Not sure but I think the announcers got it wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T1

I think they are getting there. We aren't terrible, we just make crucial mistakes that cost us games. But it is rebuilding when so many players have never played at this level before. We are NOT a veteran team. Last year's team was a veteran team and you could tell y'all had been there before and knew what you were doing.

---

So back and read his game recaps from USF...

Losers find ways to lose and winners find ways to win -

Go back