State of college football (and TCU) summed up.

[TechAdvisor]

So in his 4th year in the NFL, after gaining 2,000 yards yards in a season and being named All-Pro, Saquon Barkley needed to be, “developed?” LOL. Your razor needs some serious sharpening, Occam.
iDK why you have this emotional need to deny the obvious: TT bought a [ Finebaum ]load of talent and it elevated them immediately. Why is that so hard to accept? I’ve got Tech friends who will readily accept that for what it is and be happy for it.

If the players Tech brought in were "finished products", why didn't they lead the nation in sacks or the conference in interceptions at their previous stops?? Why were they playing for Stanford, Miss St, UCF and North Dakatoa instead of Ohio State and Alabama?

Why is it so difficult to accept the fact that Texas Tech brought in good players and they got even better based on their statistical output?

Put another way: If Coach Joey and friends are so awesome at, “developing,” then why didn’t they, “develop,” the players they recruited, instead of going to the portal and buying an entire new defensive line? LOL.

1. The DC Wood, who has improved every single defense he's ever coached is in his first season.
2. McGuire literally did develop players like, see Jacob Rodriquez, Behren Morton, Cam Dickey and others
3. Does filling roster holes with portal transfers mean you're a bad coach or can't develop players?
4. Can good coaches develop portal transfers into even better players?

 

[Mean Purple]

Where is all this talent? Who?

Eric McAlister was the 37th rated WR coming out of the TP two years ago. Josh Hoover was a 3-star, ranked the 42nd best QB in his class. Jordan Dwyer was the 18th rated WR in the TP last year. Joseph Manjack was the 99th rated WR in the TP. Far as I know we have zero O-lineman or D-lineman who are really NFL prospects. Maybe Markus Deal? Do we have any elite talent at LB or DB? I'm not really seeing it, please enlighten me on who those players are.

Seriously, what makes you think we have some super talented roster that the coaches just can't figure out how to use or coach?

it all makes sense now. It's not that you are selective with the data you toss out, its that you don't know what data really matters. (probably why you don't get the whole SOR). Seriously, you get real stuck on some rankings and seem to ignore what's on the field.
Eric McAlister is currently one of the more talked about WRs in the game. Man is a serious threat and our opponents plan extra for him. Dwyer has shown out game after game. Manjack is considered a threat.
And another thing, and this is key, so pay attention: There are a lot of guys who show out for winning teams who don't go pro. You seem to have this odd view that field factor don't matter. That they are only great in college if they go NFL. You also would have to be ignoring the analyst who have been pointing out that TCU has great talent they just need to finish.

 

[HornedFrogAz]

Where is all this talent? Who?

Eric McAlister was the 37th rated WR coming out of the TP two years ago. Josh Hoover was a 3-star, ranked the 42nd best QB in his class. Jordan Dwyer was the 18th rated WR in the TP last year. Joseph Manjack was the 99th rated WR in the TP. Far as I know we have zero O-lineman or D-lineman who are really NFL prospects. Maybe Markus Deal? Do we have any elite talent at LB or DB? I'm not really seeing it, please enlighten me on who those players are.

Seriously, what makes you think we have some super talented roster that the coaches just can't figure out how to use or coach?

I'd give a more detailed response but @Mean Purple already covered most of what I would've said.

However, I never said we had a "super talented" roster, I said we have talent that plays below their ability and that is on discipline & coaching.

I've said it before but the sophistry you employ, seemingly arguing just to argue, is as tiresome as your lack of insight into the game on the field.

 

[Mean Purple]

I'd give a more detailed response but @Mean Purple already covered most of what I would've said.

However, I never said we had a "super talented" roster, I said we have talent that plays below their ability and that is on discipline & coaching.

I've said it before but the sophistry you employ, seemingly arguing just to argue, is as tiresome as your lack of insight into the game on the field.

the lack of discipline has cost us big in several games the past two years. and that's a coaching thing for sure. that's a "he's a players coach" thing. that's a not jumping their ass enough thing.

 

[Wexahu]

it all makes sense now. It's not that you are selective with the data you toss out, its that you don't know what data really matters. (probably why you don't get the whole SOR). Seriously, you get real stuck on some rankings and seem to ignore what's on the field.
Eric McAlister is currently one of the more talked about WRs in the game. Man is a serious threat and our opponents plan extra for him. Dwyer has shown out game after game. Manjack is considered a threat.
And another thing, and this is key, so pay attention: There are a lot of guys who show out for winning teams who don't go pro. You seem to have this odd view that field factor don't matter. That they are only great in college if they go NFL. You also would have to be ignoring the analyst who have been pointing out that TCU has great talent they just need to finish.

Don't you think the staff should get some credit for putting these guys, and Hoover, in positions to succeed? You think it's all just the players having success in spite of the coaches? It's not like were considered can't miss guys when we got them. That's what I don't get. We get these pretty unheralded guys that turn out to be pretty good players, and nobody wants to give any credit to the coaching, the schemes, or anything. It's just a bunch of Dykes sucks, and Briles needs to go crap.

What analysts have pointed out how talented we are? Tim Brando? RGIII? And relative to who? I don't think I've watched a game yet where the color analyst said so and so team had no talent, they always talk up everybody.

 

[Mean Purple]

Don't you think the staff should get some credit for putting these guys, and Hoover, in positions to succeed? You think it's all just the players having success in spite of the coaches? It's not like were considered can't miss guys when we got them. That's what I don't get. We get these pretty unheralded guys that turn out to be pretty good players, and nobody wants to give any credit to the coaching, the schemes, or anything. It's just a bunch of Dykes sucks, and Briles needs to go crap.

What analysts have pointed out how talented we are? Tim Brando? RGIII? And relative to who? I don't think I've watched a game yet where the color analyst said so and so team had no talent, they always talk up everybody.

hey look everybody, it's another Wex shift.

 

[Wexahu]

I'd give a more detailed response but @Mean Purple already covered most of what I would've said.

However, I never said we had a "super talented" roster, I said we have talent that plays below their ability and that is on discipline & coaching.

I've said it before but the sophistry you employ, seemingly arguing just to argue, is as tiresome as your lack of insight into the game on the field.

So those players I mentioned have played below their ability? What exactly is there ability, relative to the players they are playing against? And if their ability so exceeds what they've been able to show on the field, why didn't more teams want them?

 

[HornedFrogAz]

So those players I mentioned have played below their ability? What exactly is there ability, relative to the players they are playing against? And if their ability so exceeds what they've been able to show on the field, why didn't more teams want them?

ugh

 

[BrewingFrog]

I'd give a more detailed response but @Mean Purple already covered most of what I would've said.

However, I never said we had a "super talented" roster, I said we have talent that plays below their ability and that is on discipline & coaching.

I've said it before but the sophistry you employ, seemingly arguing just to argue, is as tiresome as your lack of insight into the game on the field.

The "ignore" button comes in handy.

 

[SW toad]

the lack of discipline has cost us big in several games the past two years. and that's a coaching thing for sure. that's a "he's a players coach" thing. that's a not jumping their ass enough thing.

A culture where literally no accountability exists for fumbles, pre-snap penalties, wrong route ran, interceptions and on and on. I sometimes think about a TCU football game where Dykes engages with the players like he engages with the refs would evolve.

 

[Mean Purple]

A culture where literally no accountability exists for fumbles, pre-snap penalties, wrong route ran, interceptions and on and on. I sometimes think about a TCU football game where Dykes engages with the players like he engages with the refs would evolve.

just the amount of times those have happened is eye opening.

 

[SW toad]

just the amount of times those have happened is eye opening.

It was either vs Cincy or Houston where frogs had 5 penalties and opponent had 0 in 1st half.

I think if the coaches, particularly OL Ricker & Special teams Tommerdhal ? would adopt at least a couple days a week during spring/fall camp teaching the players the new rules, playing to the whistle, watching snap etc that would help. I sometimes wonder if the coaches know about repetition is the mother and simply don't practice it.

 

[HornyWartyToad]

If the players Tech brought in were "finished products", why didn't they lead the nation in sacks or the conference in interceptions at their previous stops?? Why were they playing for Stanford, Miss St, UCF and North Dakatoa instead of Ohio State and Alabama?

Why is it so difficult to accept the fact that Texas Tech brought in good players and they got even better based on their statistical output?


1. The DC Wood, who has improved every single defense he's ever coached is in his first season.
2. McGuire literally did develop players like, see Jacob Rodriquez, Behren Morton, Cam Dickey and others
3. Does filling roster holes with portal transfers mean you're a bad coach or can't develop players?
4. Can good coaches develop portal transfers into even better players?

“Filling roster holes?” lol, they bought an ENTIRE DEFENSIVE LINE. I guess you went to TT, so I’ll say this real slow so you can follow: When you’re the best player at your position on a mediocre team, opposing teams (and this is a radical concept so read it several times) will tend to focus their attention on limiting what you do, thereby limiting your stats. When you are taken out of that environment, and put into one where EVERY OTHER PLAYER in your unit was likewise the best in their group, then guess what? Opposing teams can’t focus on limiting one guy, and EVERYONE gets better stats and plays better. Shocking, I know, but it’s a thing.
Again- Be happy you have a smart GM and a guy willing to break the salary cap to buy all the pieces. . . But stop with pretending like your coaches are suddenly horse whisperers who can pull things out of players that were never there before. It’s laughable.

 

[Cougar/Frog]

“Filling roster holes?” lol, they bought an ENTIRE DEFENSIVE LINE. I guess you went to TT, so I’ll say this real slow so you can follow: When you’re the best player at your position on a mediocre team, opposing teams (and this is a radical concept so read it several times) will tend to focus their attention on limiting what you do, thereby limiting your stats. When you are taken out of that environment, and put into one where EVERY OTHER PLAYER in your unit was likewise the best in their group, then guess what? Opposing teams can’t focus on limiting one guy, and EVERYONE gets better stats and plays better. Shocking, I know, but it’s a thing.
Again- Be happy you have a smart GM and a guy willing to break the salary cap to buy all the pieces. . . But stop with pretending like your coaches are suddenly horse whisperers who can pull things out of players that were never there before. It’s laughable.

I read yesterday that BYU's entire NIL for this season is about the same as the D-Line. So BYU spent a little more than $7mil, and is playing a reported $48mil team on Saturday. Ohio St.'s team last year was a $23mil roster.
Now I like the staff and system at Tech to analyze and max the money. Tech didn't need to go get a QB, because it had 2 home grown QBs
Auburn and Florida and LSU paid big portal money and got nothing, while Tech and Indiana did good.
There is a coaching issue and evaluation issue and integrating the team issue, so it isn't just money. I thought Jackson Arnold was an overhyped bust at OU, so I was a bit shocked at Auburn throwing money at him. I am not surprised he failed again.
Transfer portal team building requires excellent and extensive staff to evaluate needs and players. That is isn't cheap but it is necessary. That is what a solid GM like Blanchard can do.
So congrats Tech, I hope you lose Saturday so you don't get a 1st B12 championship, but go on and win your home CFP game.

 

[TechAdvisor]

“Filling roster holes?” lol, they bought an ENTIRE DEFENSIVE LINE. I guess you went to TT, so I’ll say this real slow so you can follow: When you’re the best player at your position on a mediocre team, opposing teams (and this is a radical concept so read it several times) will tend to focus their attention on limiting what you do, thereby limiting your stats. When you are taken out of that environment, and put into one where EVERY OTHER PLAYER in your unit was likewise the best in their group, then guess what? Opposing teams can’t focus on limiting one guy, and EVERYONE gets better stats and plays better. Shocking, I know, but it’s a thing.
Again- Be happy you have a smart GM and a guy willing to break the salary cap to buy all the pieces. . . But stop with pretending like your coaches are suddenly horse whisperers who can pull things out of players that were never there before. It’s laughable.

Instead of actually reading and comprehending what I'm saying, you're creating a strawman, then patting yourself on the back for beating an argument no one is making.

There are two ideological camps about Texas Tech out there;

Camp #1 Texas Tech bought a roster and that explains all of their success
Camp #2 Texas Tech brought in two new coordinators who had a history of improving their respective units, had a cohesive NIL strategy, was the first program to hire a GM and give him full autonomy to do evaluation and negotiate offers while investing heavily into talent acquisition.

I'm arguing against Camp #1 and for Camp #2 because I know the history of DC Sheil Wood and how he takes over bad defenses and instantly improves them at 5 straight stops. The common denominator of defensive improvements at Army, Troy, Tulane, Houston and Texas Tech is not NIL spending, it's Sheil Wood.

Every single defense Wood took over was ranked outside the top 30 before he got there and inside the top 30 for total defense in all four seasons since he was first named DC in 2021. You don't get top 30 defenses at Tulane, Houston and Texas Tech without being a really good coach and it's not because of NIL spending at Army, Tulane and Houston.

Sheil Wood and Mack Leftwhich are excellent coaches, they were excellent coaches at their previous stops and that wasn't because of NIL money being spent.

Coaching matters and the Texas Tech coaches should be getting credit instead of just hand waiving all the accomplishments as "bought an ENTIRE DEFENSIVE LINE".

 

[FrogBall09]

we will all see soon enough with the Tech staff contract extension - because the game has changed now and once the current NIL contracts using the unlimited Campbell/Sellers money are done, they won't be able to come back.

If you want to pay a player beyond the schools fund - so using NIL - the payment has to be considered market value for the services being performed by the player based on the framework and calculator Deloitte implemented. And when they test ran it, none of the higher dollar amount current Tech NIL deals passed as allowable in the future. Neither did Manning's deal at Texas. About 80% of the private party deals evaluated failed.

in the future - NIL will come down more to a schools ability to line up a lot of smaller deals for a larger group of players than a few really large payment deals from big donors.

 

[Wexahu]

we will all see soon enough with the Tech staff contract extension - because the game has changed now and once the current NIL contracts using the unlimited Campbell/Sellers money are done, they won't be able to come back.

If you want to pay a player beyond the schools fund - so using NIL - the payment has to be considered market value for the services being performed by the player based on the framework and calculator Deloitte implemented. And when they test ran it, none of the higher dollar amount current Tech NIL deals passed as allowable in the future. Neither did Manning's deal at Texas. About 80% of the private party deals evaluated failed.

in the future - NIL will come down more to a schools ability to line up a lot of smaller deals for a larger group of players than a few really large payment deals from big donors.

Not trying to be a smartass, but who is going to enforce it, and will it withstand the legal challenge(s) that is sure to come?

Just seems like there are so many teams, and so many players involved, and there are so many gray areas in the rules, that workarounds will be very common. Hard to start putting the toothpaste back in the tube.

 

[Big Frog II]

The State of College Football is a disaster. No one may know it now, but it is.

 

[NovaScotiaFrog]

we will all see soon enough with the Tech staff contract extension - because the game has changed now and once the current NIL contracts using the unlimited Campbell/Sellers money are done, they won't be able to come back.

If you want to pay a player beyond the schools fund - so using NIL - the payment has to be considered market value for the services being performed by the player based on the framework and calculator Deloitte implemented. And when they test ran it, none of the higher dollar amount current Tech NIL deals passed as allowable in the future. Neither did Manning's deal at Texas. About 80% of the private party deals evaluated failed.

in the future - NIL will come down more to a schools ability to line up a lot of smaller deals for a larger group of players than a few really large payment deals from big donors.

I'm not convinced that his would stand up . That was what the Alston case was all about. And since the US Congress just kicked the can down the road on the SCORE act, those NIL restrictions aren't really enforceable right now.

 

[Frog Attack II]

My personal opinion: we're using the "rules" to justify a relative low # (compared to other programs). If we want to compete at the highest levels, we need to start asking for forgiveness once there's someone to tell it to. Right now, no one's going to be watching. The other manner is to just act in what our "interpretation" of the rules are.

But living by "rules" right now will leave us behind.