vs. Texas A&M

At first glance at the 2010 schedule, the two names that pop out are the ever-lurking Boise State and Texas A&M.

We haven't ever beaten A&M, and we haven't played since '06. At first, I thought this was a sure blow-out road money game.

Now I'm not so sure. They went 6-7 last year and had some pretty bad games. They have the same problems in the spread that Texas and Florida have: fast quarterbacks and no receivers to match. Therefore, the QBs are forced to rely on their legs. Hence the 100+ yds each QB scored in the Texas-Texas A&M game.

Our secondary was good last year and looks to improve under Dykes. That should hold Johnson to the ground, at least. But can the line and the LBs put enough pressure on him to prevent the QB scramble? Especially considering the loss of D'Anthony Smith.

A&M comes off of a 6-7 season that ended with a drubbing in the Indy Bowl to Georgia, 44-20.

Now, I think it's within the realm of possibility, with an improved defense and a consistent offense, to not only hold them down, but win. Perhaps not by much.

Our main problem is 4th qtr fatigue...as evidenced in last minute losses to Boise State and LSU last season. If we overcome that - there is no reason that we cannot beat A&M.

Also remember that Dykes has experience through Texas Tech of Big 12 football.

Thoughts? Am I shooting too high?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

At first glance at the 2010 schedule, the two names that pop out are the ever-lurking Boise State and Texas A&M.

We haven't ever beaten A&M, and we haven't played since '06. At first, I thought this was a sure blow-out road money game.

Now I'm not so sure. They went 6-7 last year and had some pretty bad games. They have the same problems in the spread that Texas and Florida have: fast quarterbacks and no receivers to match. Therefore, the QBs are forced to rely on their legs. Hence the 100+ yds each QB scored in the Texas-Texas A&M game.

Our secondary was good last year and looks to improve under Dykes. That should hold Johnson to the ground, at least. But can the line and the LBs put enough pressure on him to prevent the QB scramble? Especially considering the loss of D'Anthony Smith.

A&M comes off of a 6-7 season that ended with a drubbing in the Indy Bowl to Georgia, 44-20.

Now, I think it's within the realm of possibility, with an improved defense and a consistent offense, to not only hold them down, but win. Perhaps not by much.

Our main problem is 4th qtr fatigue...as evidenced in last minute losses to Boise State and LSU last season. If we overcome that - there is no reason that we cannot beat A&M.

Also remember that Dykes has experience through Texas Tech of Big 12 football.

Thoughts? Am I shooting too high?

---

We have a very, very good chance to win this game next year. Tech has had much bigger upsets in the past than this game would be if we won. Plus we are WAY overdue to beat those guys!

I think we lost to LSU and Boise State last year b/c of lack of offensive innovation. I'm gonna go out on a limb and predict our offense will be improved next season.

lets not get ahead of ourselves. This is a new system and an early game in a hostile environment with most likely a new starter. We were all saying the same thing last year about the Auburn game and that didn't happen.

Beating them would not open the throttle for a Cinderella season, it would make Boise State seem a whole lot more beatable.

Everyone goes on about how good Boise State is, and I admit they out-scale the WAC. But for a lower high-level team like Boise, winning your 8 conference games is no biggie. There were two games that impressed me last year: their wins against #16 Oregon and #4 TCU. But the other three OCC games were against Bowling Green, UC Davis, and Tulsa. Give me a break. Start playing some real teams, then we can talk BCS buster.
But they have Virginia Tech to open 2010, and that should be interesting. My money's on VT. Once the Broncos realize they're not perfect, morale will drop, paving the way for a possible loss to Tech.

I won't bite off more than I can chew, however. I'll settle for 7-5 and a win over A&M.

Boise State was very good--as good as anybody in the country last year. They will be better next season...

The Auburn game was ranked in the Top Ten Scariest OCC games for the SEC.

The Dawgs take big bites to get media attention, and its good for us.
Dykes has a monster of an OCC schedule ahead...it does take a while to revamp a team to a new coach so the big games like A&M and Navy will be real strainers.

Boise St. turned down a 2-for-1 deal with Nebraska. Fear of losing, perhaps? Draw your own conclusions. They're good, but not that good. They need to move up a conference. That opens up teams like Nevada, Fresno, and La Tech to actually compete on some level. Not to mention the other WAC whipping boys (some of whom whipped us, I am ashamed to admit).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Boise St. turned down a 2-for-1 deal with Nebraska. Fear of losing, perhaps? Draw your own conclusions. They're good, but not that good. They need to move up a conference. That opens up teams like Nevada, Fresno, and La Tech to actually compete on some level. Not to mention the other WAC whipping boys (some of whom whipped us, I am ashamed to admit).

---

Why would a top 5 team agree to a 2 for 1 with a lesser team? Alabama looked underwhelming at times last season, but they won. Boise State, I think, has a legitimate argument for being national champions. Same goes for Utah the year previous.

They might have a legit argument, but if they're serious about it, they need to get a stronger schedule. Winning the WAC is not going to cut it for the BCS moguls. And I agree with them. Even (in another universe) if Tech went 13-0 next season, I can almost guarantee they wouldn't get a Natl. bid. Why? Because they would have beaten 7 WAC teams. Boise St. and the OC games are the strongest games.

For any team in a non-BCS conference like the MWC or WAC, the key to BCS love has to be the OC games. That's where the mettle of a team comes out. If you play down your whole season, like Boise State has done for about 10 years, then you never get a real chance to show what you can do.

Maybe I'm just talking smack. I do think they have a bid. But if they want it, they have to prove that they can earn it.

And, back on topic, you have to remember that mobile QB's have always given us trouble. We'll shut down their scrambling, but at the cost of career-high passing yards. Just look at Nevada '08.

I just hope that T-Spang will finally have that figured out for this game. Maybe some depth and talent at LB that we've been lacking for the last few years will help us here. Either way, it all remains to be seen. This game does stand as our best chance to beat aTm that I can remember.

Agreed. The LBs will be the key to this game. The secondary, especially the CBs, performed incredibly in the face of overwhelming mismatch last year against two SEC teams and Boise St. Due to injuries, most of the 2nd string has experience against these spread O teams, and since Tech will be implementing a similar O, the D will improve there as well.

Scramblers come from unbalanced teams with too much talent at QB and nowhere to put it. Sure, UF and UT have great receivers. Just not great enough. And if Tech's CBs and Ss can put enough coverage on and shut down the air game, then it's up to the line.

It's hard to make predictions barely, what, 4 practices with a new O and D in, but the DL and LBs are going to be the deciding factor on our D side of the ball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

At first glance at the 2010 schedule, the two names that pop out are the ever-lurking Boise State and Texas A&M.

We haven't ever beaten A&M, and we haven't played since '06. At first, I thought this was a sure blow-out road money game.

Now I'm not so sure. They went 6-7 last year and had some pretty bad games. They have the same problems in the spread that Texas and Florida have: fast quarterbacks and no receivers to match. Therefore, the QBs are forced to rely on their legs. Hence the 100+ yds each QB scored in the Texas-Texas A&M game.

Our secondary was good last year and looks to improve under Dykes. That should hold Johnson to the ground, at least. But can the line and the LBs put enough pressure on him to prevent the QB scramble? Especially considering the loss of D'Anthony Smith.

A&M comes off of a 6-7 season that ended with a drubbing in the Indy Bowl to Georgia, 44-20.

Now, I think it's within the realm of possibility, with an improved defense and a consistent offense, to not only hold them down, but win. Perhaps not by much.

Our main problem is 4th qtr fatigue...as evidenced in last minute losses to Boise State and LSU last season. If we overcome that - there is no reason that we cannot beat A&M.

Also remember that Dykes has experience through Texas Tech of Big 12 football.

Thoughts? Am I shooting too high?

---

They've also got a good, true freshman RB, Christine Michael. His stats aren't stellar, and I don't know how good their OL, as any RB is only as good as the lanes he gets, but I saw him play in that Texas game and he was impressive. He has the raw talent to be a gamebreaker for A&M this year.

Link to freshman highlights: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ynz-r-vKag

Edit: One, nay two men don't make a TEAM. I mark this as "winable with our A game", and I expect no less after tunning against GSU.

I really wish we were playing last year's A&M team with this year's Tech team. I believe that A&M is supposed to be improving a good bit this year compared to last year's team. I know their offense was good last year and probably will be better this year, I just hope their defense is still as terrible as it was against Texas last year. I think this is a very winnable game if we get turnovers and the offense keeps moving the chains and putting 7's on the board. I say on September 11th, 2010, let's go down to College Station, Texas, burn down Kyle Field and leave with our second win of the season!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Boise St. turned down a 2-for-1 deal with Nebraska. Fear of losing, perhaps? Draw your own conclusions.

---

I assumed they turned it down because it was a 2-for-1. Why should they have to give up an extra away game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Winning the WAC is not going to cut it for the BCS moguls. And I agree with them.

---

You know they've played in two BCS bowls, right? It "cut it" those two years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxerdog

I think we lost to LSU and Boise State last year b/c of lack of offensive innovation. I'm gonna go out on a limb and predict our offense will be improved next season.

---

COUGH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsOwYHIolHg

When we were the underdog, our offense was very innovative IMO. When we were expected to win, I think DD got obsessed with dominating the lines.

A&M shot themselves in the foot ALOT last year - especially in the I-Bowl

They are very talented on the offensive side of the ball and we are going to have to score 35 to 40 points to beat them...

They are a AQ team and have AQ talent - it will be tough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgFight71

I really wish we were playing last year's A&M team with this year's Tech team.

---

Right! It always seems like we catch teams like this who are on their way back up and they end up having a good year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hookdown

Right! It always seems like we catch teams like this who are on their way back up and they end up having a good year.

---

Auburn.

Kansas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddawg

Kansas

---

Kansas? Is that a joke? They finished 5-7 last season and 8-5 in 2008 I'd say that's a decline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Allgood

Kansas? Is that a joke? They finished 5-7 last season and 8-5 in 2008 I'd say that's a decline.

---

I believe he was referring to when we played them in 2008

I think we definetly have the talent to step in A&M and get the win. All of our WR's should be able to create seperation and the O Line is experienced enough in big games to not be intimidated. A&M breaks in a new OC and DC this year, so I like our chances at week 2 with those new coaches having the inclined pressure to win early for the A&M faithful. Johnson is going to be tough, but I think our D has the overall speed to hold him in check. Our LBs are very fast and run sideline to sideline as good as Ive seen. I think the only disadvantage would be if we go into the game with an inexperienced QB to be honest. If Ross is able to get back and make some plays by the end of spring and into camp, I see no reason to throw our RS Fr QB into a hostile atmosphere week 2 into the season. Ross has the experience and the game completely slows down by your senior year, as opposed to everyone running 100 mph your Fr. year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nytetyme

I think we definetly have the talent to step in A&M and get the win. All of our WR's should be able to create seperation and the O Line is experienced enough in big games to not be intimidated. A&M breaks in a new OC and DC this year, so I like our chances at week 2 with those new coaches having the inclined pressure to win early for the A&M faithful. Johnson is going to be tough, but I think our D has the overall speed to hold him in check. Our LBs are very fast and run sideline to sideline as good as Ive seen. I think the only disadvantage would be if we go into the game with an inexperienced QB to be honest. If Ross is able to get back and make some plays by the end of spring and into camp, I see no reason to throw our RS Fr QB into a hostile atmosphere week 2 into the season. Ross has the experience and the game completely slows down by your senior year, as opposed to everyone running 100 mph your Fr. year.

---

If Ross wins the starting spot outright, then I'll definitely support him 100%. He should not get the spot just because he is a senior and has experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikedog

If Ross wins the starting spot outright, then I'll definitely support him 100%. He should not get the spot just because he is a senior and has experience.

---

I concur. Thats why I stated he has to make the plays at the end of spring and camp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Allgood

Kansas? Is that a joke? They finished 5-7 last season and 8-5 in 2008 I'd say that's a decline.

---

Try to keep up:icon_wink:.

In 2007 when we found out that Jim Oakes had turned down a home and home with Kansas they had gone 7-5 in '05 and 6-6 in '06. We felt pretty good about the '08 game at the time. They went 12-1 in '07.

ah. The Kansas fiasco. I had almost forgot... That Kansas beatdown still hurts, too.

I'm excited. We have more depth across the board than we've had in a long time, at least that I can remember.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nytetyme

Ross has the experience and the game completely slows down by your senior year, as opposed to everyone running 100 mph your Fr. year.

---

Let's not forget the DUI charge...we aren't the kind of team to pamper players simply because of skill. I do think he's the best we've got so far, but there's alot of trust to make up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Let's not forget the DUI charge...we aren't the kind of team to pamper players simply because of skill. I do think he's the best we've got so far, but there's alot of trust to make up.

---

I am sure that Ross will have the same opportunity to earn the starting spot that every other QB will be given. While I don't want Tech to be lenient with these kind of issues, the QB who gives us the best chance to win should be awarded the starting role, given that they've done the work to earn the position. Ross may have a steeper hill to climb than some of the others, but if he climbs it, he should be awarded.

I agree. If he earns it after this, he deserves it.

We seem to play our best games when we are the underdogs. Auburn, Boise State, LSU. Everyone expected blowouts in those games, but look what happened. Even with the loss of many of our starters, we gave them a run for their money. All three of those games were lost in the 4th quarter. We even led LSU for the first time in school history.

If we'd played Nevada and Fresno like we played the top dogs, we might have had a few more wins.

A&M along with their Big 12 officiating crew will make it a very tough game. I'm just glad we have a warm-up game to work out the kinks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nytetyme

I concur. Thats why I stated he has to make the plays at the end of spring and camp.

---

Hopefully, Ross can get out there and compete for the starting spot this Spring. That being said, I don't expect the starter to be decided until the Fall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TECH88

A&M along with their Big 12 officiating crew will make it a very tough game. I'm just glad we have a warm-up game to work out the kinks.

---

We may have to play harder to beat the Big 12 crew than the actual football team...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LThoo

lets not get ahead of ourselves. This is a new system and an early game in a hostile environment with most likely a new starter. We were all saying the same thing last year about the Auburn game and that didn't happen.

---

We are coming off a rough year. Everything I read says that A&M should be much improved from last season. They will have recruited to fill those voids in the passing game. I am sure this will be a little bit like AU last year. We will come in thinking we have more than we do and A&M will be better than advertised. I just hope that we are better at the beginning of next season than we were at the beginning of 09.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

I agree. If he earns it after this, he deserves it.

We seem to play our best games when we are the underdogs. Auburn, Boise State, LSU. Everyone expected blowouts in those games, but look what happened. Even with the loss of many of our starters, we gave them a run for their money. All three of those games were lost in the 4th quarter. We even led LSU for the first time in school history.

If we'd played Nevada and Fresno like we played the top dogs, we might have had a few more wins.

---

Not true. We beat lsu the very first time we played them I believe.

I won't be making any predictions at all this year. I learned my lesson after last year.:bigcry:

9/11/10 - @ Texas A&M

This game should be interesting. A&M went 6-7 last year, and ended with a crushing defeat in the Indy Bowl against UGA, 44-20.

Johnson is a scrambler. Tech's CBs have the speed and coverage ability to severely limit his air game, and that means that the line will have to compensate by shutting down the ground game and scrambles.

Tech has never beaten Texas A&M in the seven games they have played since 1981.

While the game against Grambling should be a given victory, this one will be a true test of Dykes' coaching skill.

However, the A&M offense is still very good, while the defense is lacking. If we can force turnovers and keep the chains moving, it should be a winnable game.

But a team coming off a 4-8 season and major coaching changes rarely breaks out a Cinderella season, and unless Tech's offense and defense go through an incredible maturation, these bragging rights will stay at College Station.


This was from http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3...techs-schedule breaking down our season next year.

The defense didn't have major changes. We lost some guys but still have a lot of good ones. Same DC. If the offense can gel some, I believe it is definitely winnable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WWDog

Not true. We beat lsu the very first time we played them I believe.

---

actually, the 4h. but he's wrong nonetheless.
that was, however, the most points we've ever scored against them (and the least they've scored against us since 1913).
still not a win, so not much to brag about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WWDog

Not true. We beat lsu the very first time we played them I believe.

---

I was going off of what I remembered of the ESPN commentators talking about it during the game. Which means they are wrong, because they said multiple times that this was the first time ever that Tech had come close to winning.
Thanks for pointing this out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arkansasbob

actually, the 4th.

---

Stassen.com only has data back to 1904...Louisiana State vs. Louisiana Tech.

There are two games in 1904, within a week of each other. Can anyone explain this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Stassen.com only has data back to 1904...Louisiana State vs. Louisiana Tech.

There are two games in 1904, within a week of each other. Can anyone explain this?

---

i don't know. it was 1904 so it probably wasn't a big deal back then. after the first game, it probably went something like this:
Tech guys: "i bet it would be a different story if we played in ruston with neutral refs."
lsu guys: "ok, how about next week?"
Tech guys: "it's on like a chicken bone"

I am waiting to get excited about beating A&M. My excitement will come, I just have to buy the new version of NCAA football for the PS3 and win a few national titles with Tech first. Then I figure, wow, we are so good in this game, we are gonna pull this one (A&M) off... man, I love Tech football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arkansasbob

actually, the 4h. but he's wrong nonetheless.
that was, however, the most points we've ever scored against them (and the least they've scored against us since 1913).
still not a win, so not much to brag about.

---

As far as I know that was our first win in football ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by detltu

As far as I know that was our first win in football ever.

---

Indeed. Before that, we had lost to LSU a few times, and both Arkansas and Tulane once. That LSU game was also the first time a Tech football team ever scored any points in a game.

Anyone else ever bothered by the fact that we've never beaten Tulane in football?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SixWings

Indeed. Before that, we had lost to LSU a few times, and both Arkansas and Tulane once. That LSU game was also the first time a Tech football team ever scored any points in a game.

Anyone else ever bothered by the fact that we've never beaten Tulane in football?

---

Very much so.

hard to beat somebody when you can't get them to play you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Let's not forget ........

---

Believe me, nobody has.

Just like Auburn, until we can show that we can beat A&M, you have to like A&M. We keep signing up and showing up and they keep beating us. At least with Auburn, we at least have one tie and that was about 20 years ago. The rest are all loses and with A&M, it's just all loses if my memory is correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SixWings

Anyone else ever bothered by the fact that we've never beaten Tulane in football?

---

Like, what, 8 times? Absolutely embarrassing.

The chance that we'll get to rectify that situation is small though...we concentrate more on big money attention games. Which is good. No one on ESPN wants to watch that particular instate rivalry except Dawg and Wave fans. It's not exactly the Iron Bowl.

Tulane may have won the battles on the field, but we will win the war when Green Wave football is a thing of the past...

It already pretty much is...and will be if we ever meet them again.

But like I said, I'd rather continue to play the big dogs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Like, what, 8 times? Absolutely embarrassing.

The chance that we'll get to rectify that situation is small though...we concentrate more on big money attention games. Which is good. No one on ESPN wants to watch that particular instate rivalry except Dawg and Wave fans. It's not exactly the Iron Bowl.

---

And the Iron Bowl wasn't exactly the Iron Bowl before it was PLAYED and BECAME the Iron Bowl.

I'm not advocating playing Toolame and having them be a rival, but we shouldn't blow it off either.


As for the highlighted line above, that mentality along with many other factors is the main reason that the I-Bowl didn't take us in 97 when we went 9-2 and should have whipped us some tigger ass instead of the boring rematch against Notre Lame. If you make the games GOOD and it's with good teams, the TV will FOLLOW. They don't exactly drool over the Kansas/Penn St/aTm vs TECH matchups either.

Very true...we shouldn't pander to the TV moguls. Make them come to us. Good point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

We may have to play harder to beat the Big 12 crew than the actual football team...

---

No such thing as a "Big 12" or "WAC" crew now with the crews for Big 12 and WAC games being mixed under the CFO umbrella along with other conference crew members. Cooper Castleberry (veteran former Big 12 ref from Lufkin) was the ref for our Hawai'i home game last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealityCheck

No such thing as a "Big 12" or "WAC" crew now with the crews for Big 12 and WAC games being mixed under the CFO umbrella along with other conference crew members. Cooper Castleberry (veteran former Big 12 ref from Lufkin) was the ref for our Hawai'i home game last year.

---

Those guys still know where their bread is buttered.

They will protect their AQ clients first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Champ967

Those guys still know where their bread is buttered.

They will protect their AQ clients first.

---

Maybe so, but with the mixed crew setup you wouldn't see more than 2-3 former Big 12 officials mixed with former WAC, MWC, and CUSA (and possibly others) in the crew. That's a far sight better than a full 7-man crew who exclusively work Big 12 games. At least the chance of an outright hosing like the infamous Little Rock fiasco should be reduced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealityCheck

Maybe so, but with the mixed crew setup you wouldn't see more than 2-3 former Big 12 officials mixed with former WAC, MWC, and CUSA (and possibly others) in the crew. That's a far sight better than a full 7-man crew who exclusively work Big 12 games. At least the chance of an outright hosing like the infamous Little Rock fiasco should be reduced.

---

If it's outright hos you're looking for --

Drive north from Dubach for about 10 minutes.

aTm will probably win 9 games, at least, and get a nice bowl, the Alamo Bowl, or something, maybe the Cotton Bowl. They are a lot like Auburn was last year.

The Dawgs will NOT go undefeated this year...sorry to say. So, given that certainty, I would predict that aTm will be one on the "L" side. Boazy will be another.

Other than those, home games to USM and Navy represent a HUGE opportunity to garner a couple of quality wins. I hope we'll run the table at home this year...oh and that silly "road" game in S'port too, and play no worse than .500 in the WAC on the road. We should be bowling, if we can do that.

Oh...not to say I don't want to beat aTm or Boazy, but realistically, on the road, well, you know...

Quote:

---

Now I'm not so sure. They went 6-7 last year and had some pretty bad games. They have the same problems in the spread that Texas and Florida have: fast quarterbacks and no receivers to match. Therefore, the QBs are forced to rely on their legs. Hence the 100+ yds each QB scored in the Texas-Texas A&M game.

---

:bigcry:

This is hilarious.
A&M has a sure-fire 1st round draft pick at WR (Jeff Fuller) that missed 5 games with a broken leg last year along with what is probably their best and deepest corps of receivers in the last 15 years.
FYI, Johnson threw for over 300 yards in that Texas game last year.

We'll have to defend the pass....just a tad. :icon_roll:

Lets take it a step further:

-A&M's quarterback threw for 3,579 yards last year (against Big12 caliber competition).
-He threw 30 Touchdowns against only 8 interceptions (seems like he can toss it a bit).
-That offense averaged 465 yards per game.
-281 yards per game PASSING...you know....through the air.
-184 yards per game Rushing.
-32 points per game against some decent quality athletes.
-Their offense ranked #5 in the nation when it was said and done.

Their top three rushers were:
-RB-- C. Michael (878 yards and 5.1 per carry)
-RB-- C. Gray (784 yards and 4.8 per carry)
-QB-- J. Johnson (759 yards)....so yes, he does a bit of scrambling.

Their top 4 WR's caught 40+ catches each....With 14 different players making receptions.
The best two among them (Fuller and Freshman Nwachukwa) caught 7 and 6 touchdowns respectively. The freshman, Nwachukwa, hauled in 708 yards worth of catches at a clip of 17.7 yards per catch (he's fast). Both are over 6 foot tall, with Fuller going 6'4 and weighing about 220.

Bottomline: If you think they are one dimensional with nothing but a scrambling quarterback......you've missed the boat.

I'm not saying they don't have receivers, no, not at all. And they do have great receivers. The matchup between QB and the deep field is just not what it could be.
And if our corners are anything like last year, that window will be, if not closed, way less open.

There is a reason that Tebow, Johnson, and McCoy run so much. They're good at it, for one. For two, despite the talent in the WR corps, most of the time there's simply no one open. The QBs then fall into a rhythm of running without much passing.

Of course, it's hard to boil a QB's or WR's skill down to one thing. But that's the trend I've noticed.

In the case of the Big XII QBs, the defense is good but not to SEC level. Which is why Tebow throws more than they do.

But they ARE very good passers when they have a window. Which is why we have to shut down the air game as tight as we can.

Seems like a "pick your poison" type of game from my point of view.

A&M is a team that can toss it around, and a team with a scrambling QB, and a team with a pretty solid backfield of runners. I think you have to pick something and take it away and hope they don't make you pay for it.

One thing I'd do is blitz the living crap out of them. A&M replaces 3 starters on the O-line (center and two tackles) and may start a true freshman or redshirt freshman at the tackles this year. Our gameplan should be to terrorize those offensive tackles with overload blitzes early and often.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbone1

Our gameplan should be to terrorize those offensive tackles with overload blitzes early and often.

---

Sounds good to me.

Maybe I sound too confident on my predictions :icon_wink:
There are stats, then there are stats.
I guess you could slice it any which way, and I'm probably being far too optimistic. But if you never dream high you'll never get anywhere.

Thanks for these stats tho. I obviously couldn't be bothered to look 'em up. :o

The only aTm game I saw last year was vs Arkansas and they looked terrible. I knew at the time though that with a year running that offense that they would be better when we played them.

A team like aTm will usually only improve...
One of our best developing weapons under Dykes is going to be the ability to create confusion. Dykes has never liked complication or heavy playbooks. We're getting faster, we're thinking faster, we're making play decision at the line.

His plan is to get in 85 plays per game. That would be the record if we could pull it off. Interestingly, last season, aTm was second fastest in the nation with 80 plays per game.

So we gotta outspeed 'em.

someone may correct me if i'm wrong, but i think we used to get in around 85 plays per game back in the crowton/early bicknell days. clock rules have changed since then, so it's probably not easy to get that many in any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arkansasbob

someone may correct me if i'm wrong, but i think we used to get in around 85 plays per game back in the crowton/early bicknell days. clock rules have changed since then, so it's probably not easy to get that many in any more.

---

I count 79 against Bama in '99.

Looks like around 77 in the OT game with Auburn.

Low 70s the week before that against Tulsa.

Broke 80 in the record setting game with Nebraska (68 passes!).

Oh. Here you can see the total number of offensive plays for each game in 2001. Averaged 75. Broke 80 three times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

I count 79 against Bama in '99.

Looks like around 77 in the OT game with Auburn.

Low 70s the week before that against Tulsa.

Broke 80 in the record setting game with Nebraska (68 passes!).

Oh. Here you can see the total number of offensive plays for each game in 2001. Averaged 75. Broke 80 three times.

---

that's actually 71 pass plays against nebraska if you include the sacks.

based on this information, i'm guessing 85 plays in a game would not be a record. we were faster with rattay in '98 and '99 than we were in '01 (79 plays against 'bama and 82 against nebraska and they were both clock-killing running teams).

We are going to beat A&M and I am going to dog my friend Jonathan Stewart who is a starting linebacker until he cant take it anymore. He should have signed with us and I will make him regret not doing it.

I am most excited about this game right now. To go to Kyle Field and win would be a huge start and would set the tone for the entire season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saturdaynightlivas

I am most excited about this game right now. To go to Kyle Field and win would be a huge start and would set the tone for the entire season.

---

I think the Bulldogs will have more fan support at this game than they have had at any away game (S'port is not away) than they have eperienced in a long time. We will be there to support you guys...probably more fans than the last LSpoo game.

Me and my bunch making the trip also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MiloBumP

I think the Bulldogs will have more fan support at this game than they have had at any away game (S'port is not away) than they have eperienced in a long time. We will be there to support you guys...probably more fans than the last LSpoo game.

---

Appreciate that!

Regardless of whether or not we win the football game (I like our chances), I promise we will beat them at partying/tailgating/drinking.

Not sure when it starts but me and my crew will be there a half of day before game time....ofcourse we'll be tailgating with some Aggie friends of mine but they're good folks....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg78

Not sure when it starts but me and my crew will be there a half of day before game time....ofcourse we'll be tailgating with some Aggie friends of mine but they're good folks....

---

Non sequitur!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LookingForResults

Non sequitur!

---

Your killin' Smalls.......

I also have some Aggie friends...but for 4 hours that night they'll be my enemies haha.

Yes, we are generally averaging 80 plays. I heard the goal was 85. Which means we'll most likely break the roof on that one.