Tech Big Underdogs in 1st Game

I’m not sold that we don’t have the talent. We lack experience and it seems a few of our guys with experience left when Cumbie started cracking the whip a little. Our kicking game outside of kickoffs is horrid. Our return game is bad except for 1 good return per night. I think we will surely miss the Bell brothers. Hopefully, Hebert and Allen will shoulder the load and open up opportunities for others to get in on the action by sucking up double teams. I am probably off base a little, but I don’t see that much difference in QB1 and 2 and Kendall. Both will be serviceable with reps. Keep our defense off the field and turn those 3 INT’s into at least 3 FG’s and that game is more like 38-30 final. Yeah, blue glasses and all, I’m back on the optimism train!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techman05

I’m not sold that we don’t have the talent. We lack experience and it seems a few of our guys with experience left when Cumbie started cracking the whip a little. Our kicking game outside of kickoffs is horrid. Our return game is bad except for 1 good return per night. I think we will surely miss the Bell brothers. Hopefully, Hebert and Allen will shoulder the load and open up opportunities for others to get in on the action by sucking up double teams. I am probably off base a little, but I don’t see that much difference in QB1 and 2 and Kendall. Both will be serviceable with reps. Keep our defense off the field and turn those 3 INT’s into at least 3 FG’s and that game is more like 38-30 final. Yeah, blue glasses and all, I’m back on the optimism train!

---

You are right. Get rid of those INTs and the score swings much closer. Mizzou was struggling to move the ball early. We made it effortless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TechDawgMc

So I'm a bit puzzled by this. My impression of most of Holtz's tenure is that we had talent but the coaching was mediocre. Holtz seemed content to play close to good competition--and lost a lot of games he should have won. But the "should have won" thing implies talent to me. Was it a last year slide that left the cupboard empty?

---

Specially recruiting his last 3 years -

There are just no DUDES on either side of the ball - maybe Tyler Grubbs but no one especially on the offensive side of the ball

COA has a little to do with it, but talent is really an issue

And I think Saturday against SFA will be a mighty struggle

I thought early in the game we had a little success running between the tackles. Not sure why we went away from that and were determined to try to run sweeps and end arounds where Mizzou's speed on defense could shine.

The new corners in the secondary looked good. I am curious about C. Woods as he was listed 3rd at one CB spot on the depth chart and did not see any time in the game. Is he injured or does this speak to a talent gap?

Wasn't really trying to pick on Smoke, but his endurance issue has been noticable since he started at Tech. I was not aware of his health issue, maybe that's part of it. You can see the backplate/kidney protector he wears but he still looks pudgy for a "speed" guy.

I imagine the pandemic/shutdown had some sort of negative impact to recruiting as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tech52

I imagine the pandemic/shutdown had some sort of negative impact to recruiting as well.

---

No more than for any of our "peers". One of those being Lafayette, who found a way to pay some COA. Our new peer is ulm. Our leaders think our stuff outshining their stuff is enough to get us over the hump.

I will say they got rid of Holtz as soon as they could. No way they could fire him until he completely tanked the program, which is exactly what he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

No more than for any of our "peers". One of those being Lafayette, who found a way to pay some COA. Our new peer is ulm. Our leaders think our stuff outshining their stuff is enough to get us over the hump.

I will say they got rid of Holtz as soon as they could. No way they could fire him until he completely tanked the program, which is exactly what he did.

---

Yes, Holtz completely tanked the program. This is exactly what I warned Les Guice about in a letter 2 years before they fired Skip Holtz. As far as I know, no school --including LA Tech-- is required to let a football coach completely tank the program before firing their ass. I swear, our leadership has no vision about anything.


https://www.idlehearts.com/images/th...ion.jpg?x85372

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

Yes, Holtz completely tanked the program. This is exactly what I warned Les Guice about in a letter 2 years before they fired Skip Holtz. As far as I know, no school --including LA Tech-- is required to let a football coach completely tank the program before firing their ass. I swear, our leadership has no vision about anything.


https://www.idlehearts.com/images/th...ion.jpg?x85372

---

Its nice to have a good reason to fire someone. Coming off 2019, can’t. 2020 was a wreck, but everything was a wreck that year. 2021 was the first really good reason. Few schools in our position fire a coach after one bad season.

Holtz was probably counting on resting on his laurels and his coast out plan allowing him to skid to the bottom of the barrel for at least a couple more years. He proved our point perfectly by doing pretty much nothing in an honest to goodness achieving sense at Tech in his last couple of years while miraculously winning the USFL championship. It simply proves that he could’ve done much better at Tech if he hadn’t been complacent and lazy. Now I guess in following his normal trajectory he’ll start backsliding there.