Has GP lost his fastball?

[Mean Purple]

I am not attributing our defensive mental lapses to the offense - they are independent. It's just that you notice them more when our offense is constantly playing from behind. Anyone remember the San Diego State game in 2010? We had several breakdowns in that game defensively but we were so much better than SDSU it didn't matter in the end. If we had those same breakdowns against a Big 12 team that year we lose that game by 28.

This a very good point. The philosophy that being behind on offense can put too much pressure on your defense as the game goes on is what I have always heard since I started watching and playing (at a level not worthy of really mentioning) football as a kid. Yeah, the Frogs really started moving the ball in the second half, but the Defense had to be tired a little earlier than normal, especially since this was a first game.

 

[watchoutforthelizard]

Don’t understand continued defense of GP. Yes he won big at TCU but coaching is what have u done for me lately business. TL won big with Cowboys but the organization grew stale under him. No things are not as bad as they were in the dark times of TCU football but another season or two of underwhelming football and frogs are well on their way to returning to those times. I don’t know if the game has passed GP by or the program has just grown stale under his leadership. Either way TCU football is trending in wrong direction.

 

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

TCU is not OU and never has been. But yet they got embarrassed by a team that got embarrassed by a nobody the week before. Buddy? Ooh, sounds threatening!

Does “buddy” sound threatening always thought it was a term of endearment. Obviously tcu isn’t ou they’ve had two heismans..one we could’ve recruited “buddyyyyyyy”

 

[Travis Trucks]

So, for all that is holy, can we at least get a few games into the season before all the whining starts?

This is why I am not sounding the alarm... yet

The last time we looked good in Game #1 that wasn't against the FBS was probably Oregon State in 2010 but they went 5-7 and we won by a TD so I am not sure if that was "looking good".

And even against FBS teams we have looked [ Finebaum ]ty in Game 1. We didn't look exactly crisp against Samford in 2014. South Dakota State in 2016, anyone remember that one? And Arkansas Pine Bluff last year made me want to vomit. SE Louisiana in 2013 wasn't Game 1 but it might as well have been and we looked like [ Finebaum ].

They say a team always has their biggest improvement from Game 1 to Game 2. Still no excuse not to be ready for Game 1. I was expecting our defense to be dialed in today with all the prep time, but they weren't.

 

[Hoosierfrog]

Does “buddy” sound threatening always thought it was a term of endearment. Obviously tcu isn’t ou they’ve had two heismans..one we could’ve recruited “buddyyyyyyy”

Sure, it came off as endearing

 

[Mean Purple]

Quarterback play. We ran more plays to get rid of the ball quicker. Less slow developing plays. We also were able to watch 1st half film, adjust and exploit their Tampa 2/Cover 3 in the 2nd half down the seams.

That Barber drop INT was just really bad luck. If that doesn't happen I think we march downfield and win because whoever was calling plays had their number at the time.

Did seem almost night and day. Don't get me wrong, I think Downing has serious talent. His passing was nothing to yawn at. But it just seemed like it was taking a while the first half.

Downing had the one play where he stood/stepped in the pocket and delivered it. Showed a lot of potential.

 

[Travis Trucks]

I know last year there were some previous players at the Rail Head and they indicated the felt GP was not as hard on players as he was with the Rose Bowl classes, etc.

I've heard the same thing and I have two theories.

One is the transfer portal. With the transfer rules today you have to be a lot more careful as players are a lot more willing to just pack their bags and go.

Two is that on average the more talented players you have, the less coachable they tend to be. There are some exceptions to this but in general that's how it goes. I think we saw this with Shawn Robinson.

 

[Mean Purple]

This is why I am not sounding the alarm... yet

The last time we looked good in Game #1 that wasn't against the FBS was probably Oregon State in 2010 but they went 5-7 and we won by a TD so I am not sure if that was "looking good".

And even against FBS teams we have looked [ Cumbie’s red zone playcalling ]ty in Game 1. We didn't look exactly crisp against Samford in 2014. South Dakota State in 2016, anyone remember that one? And Arkansas Pine Bluff last year made me want to vomit. SE Louisiana in 2013 wasn't Game 1 but it might as well have been and we looked like [ Cumbie’s red zone playcalling ].

They say a team always has their biggest improvement from Game 1 to Game 2. Still no excuse not to be ready for Game 1. I was expecting our defense to be dialed in today with all the prep time, but they weren't.

Any chance the frequent change in who we expected to play game 1, and then the delay, had anything to do with some of it?

 

[Travis Trucks]

This a very good point. The philosophy that being behind on offense can put too much pressure on your defense as the game goes on is what I have always heard since I started watching and playing (at a level not worthy of really mentioning) football as a kid. Yeah, the Frogs really started moving the ball in the second half, but the Defense had to be tired a little earlier than normal, especially since this was a first game.

Our defensive scheme is at its best when we are ahead and putting pressure on the other team's offense. If you can get ahead, especially by 2 scores, you force the other team out of their game plan. And when you force the other team out of its gameplan, they are a lot more erratic and have a hard time connecting on big plays. Teams are a lot more willing to go for the home run play when they are ahead and can afford to do so.

The weakness of the GP defense always has been and always will be big plays. The idea is to prevent the other team from nickel and diming you at the expense of the big play. And its a lot easier to set up those big plays when you are playing from ahead and can stick to your scouting report and game plan.

It seems like every damn game over the last 3 years we are always playing from behind because we dig an early hole.

 

[Mean Purple]

I've heard the same thing and I have two theories.

One is the transfer portal. With the transfer rules today you have to be a lot more careful as players are a lot more willing to just pack their bags and go.

Two is that on average the more talented players you have, the less coachable they tend to be. There are some exceptions to this but in general that's how it goes. I think we saw this with Shawn Robinson.

Is that an attitude issue of the player (used to being highlighted - not necessarily bad, but has an impact) or a need to keep the freakish ability in tact or a mixture of both or none?

 

[Travis Trucks]

Did seem almost night and day. Don't get me wrong, I think Downing has serious talent. His passing was nothing to yawn at. But it just seemed like it was taking a while the first half.

Downing had the one play where he stood/stepped in the pocket and delivered it. Showed a lot of potential.

Downing has a high floor, but a low ceiling too. He doesn't have the upside of Duggan. Servicable as a backup.

 

[Hoosierfrog]

This is why I am not sounding the alarm... yet

The last time we looked good in Game #1 that wasn't against the FBS was probably Oregon State in 2010 but they went 5-7 and we won by a TD so I am not sure if that was "looking good".

And even against FBS teams we have looked [ Cumbie’s red zone playcalling ]ty in Game 1. We didn't look exactly crisp against Samford in 2014. South Dakota State in 2016, anyone remember that one? And Arkansas Pine Bluff last year made me want to vomit. SE Louisiana in 2013 wasn't Game 1 but it might as well have been and we looked like [ Cumbie’s red zone playcalling ].

They say a team always has their biggest improvement from Game 1 to Game 2. Still no excuse not to be ready for Game 1. I was expecting our defense to be dialed in today with all the prep time, but they weren't.

Finally some sanity from someone that has actually padded up.

As mentioned before this is why Gary likes a preseason game against a SWAC team and as GP said all week, he wished we had played a game before. It’s got to be hard to adapt to game speed against a conference team after a year with conditioning and practices being cut short.

I never expected to challenge for the CFP, but I’m guessing there will be improvement (hoping).

 

[Travis Trucks]

Any chance the frequent change in who we expected to play game 1, and then the delay, had anything to do with some of it?

Yes and No. You don't really start gameplanning for opponent #1 until 2 weeks before the game. We learned we weren't playing SMU in Game 1 on September 4. So that means we had 3 weeks to prepare for Iowa State. However I do think too much prep is detrimental. It can get really boring doing the same things for 12 weeks. All practice and no play after a while probably brings on complacency. Say you had to study for a test but had 12 weeks to do it. After 6 weeks of studying you would probably be like "scheiss this" and just check out mentally until the test. This is why I was so adamant against cancelling the SMU game and if we were going to cancel it at least try to make something happen against another team like Sam Houston State who had an opening.

Most of fall camp is spent simply installing plays, learning the playbook and schemes, getting into game shape, and running plays/scrimmages against our own offense/defense. When I was there the only opponent we prepared for in the spring/fall camp was Air Force.

 

[Travis Trucks]

Is that an attitude issue of the player (used to being highlighted - not necessarily bad, but has an impact) or a need to keep the freakish ability in tact or a mixture of both or none?

Anyone good enough to get a scholarship to play for us is going to be freakishly good at football. They were practically football gods in high school. So there comes a sense of entitlement. A mindset that the player has it all figured out and doesn't need some coach screaming at them in practice. With this comes less of a desire to work hard, improve and watch film.

I never played at TCU outside of mop up duty but I used to go in and watch film voluntarily in the summer with the guys who did play anyway. It was always upperclassmen in there vountarily watching film. I feel like the best players are students of watching film, but you can't force guys to go into the film room outside of mandatory meetings. You can only compel them to do it during the season when the coaches are actually allowed to coach by the NCAA. But guys like Andy and Jake Kirkpatrick used to go watch film all the time, even during the season during lunch time or in the morning. How many guys do we currently have doing that? It's not something that can be forced by the coaches - this is where the players themselves have to step up and compel it through leadership.

 

[Hoosierfrog]

I even have questions about UT right now. You mentioned Miami. Everybody is on that bandwagon so far this year, but they have had some rough goings in the secondary. L'ville exposed that in their game with the Canes.

I don't know if I put as much weight in being a small private school. We have pumped a ton of money into the program and we are upper tier in the "arms race" for facilities.

I know last year there were some previous players at the Rail Head and they indicated the felt GP was not as hard on players as he was with the Rose Bowl classes, etc.

I wasn’t referring to money or facilities. I’m merely talking historical success of private schools in the major conferences. Is there a single private university, in the power 5 that has sustained top tier status. USC nope. Stanford, nope. Northwestern, uh uh. Vandy, never. Miami, outside the thug era, no. Wake, no. BC, nyet. Duke, no. Syracuse, no. Baylor, snicker. I’d even wager Notre Dame wouldn’t be nearly the icon it is if they had to compete in a conference all these years.

 

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I wasn’t referring to money or facilities. I’m merely talking historical success of private schools in the major conferences. Is there a single private university, in the power 5 that has sustained top tier status. USC nope. Stanford, nope. Northwestern, uh uh. Vandy, never. Miami, outside the thug era, no. Wake, no. BC, nyet. Duke, no. Syracuse, no. Baylor, snicker. I’d even wager Notre Dame wouldn’t be nearly the icon it is if they had to compete in a conference all these years.

I think you’d lose the Notre dame wager...

 

[Mean Purple]

I wasn’t referring to money or facilities. I’m merely talking historical success of private schools in the major conferences. Is there a single private university, in the power 5 that has sustained top tier status. USC nope. Stanford, nope. Northwestern, uh uh. Vandy, never. Miami, outside the thug era, no. Wake, no. BC, nyet. Duke, no. Syracuse, no. Baylor, snicker. I’d even wager Notre Dame wouldn’t be nearly the icon it is if they had to compete in a conference all these years.

yeah, I can see that view.

 

[More Frogs the Better]

I don’t get the perpetually bad o-line play year after year, rotating coaches in and out. And we seemingly still put 1-2 guys in the league per year. It just doesn’t translate on the field. So what does that mean?

Just a weird deal to me.

I would surmise it means that the pool of OL player talent is better than the talent of those we have had coaching them.

 

[wilson912]

Just one game but it must be galling to HCGP to give that many big plays, especially the run game. He’s gotta make adjustments and find guys in the trenches who want it. We have so much talent at RB - let’s at least use it, give the ball to these guys! Big game next week, great to have games to talk about!

 

[Hoosierfrog]

I think you’d lose the Notre dame wager...

Notre Dame has always picked its own schedule, kept all of their money, for years they refused to play in bowls and stacked up NCs while everyone else had the stress of competing for a league and a bowl game. ND Used to plays no bowl game and get awarded a NC when someone lost a bowl while they sat and watched.

So, yeah I think they would have had a much harder time competing in conference and having the same success. There is no reason to believe ND would have fared any better than any other private school had they been in a major conference From day one. Their biggest rival, USC, is an example.

ND has been getting their arse kissed by college football for over a century. Do you think ND would have gotten jobbed like we did in 16 using the same scenario? Do believe anyone would’ve said, oops sorry Domers, you don’t have the extra conference championship data point? I tend to think not.