TT/SMU Analysis

[Nacho]

Not a pretty picture in this analysis. Seems to think our secondary is lousy. That was probly true last season but I think this is one area in which we should see great improvement , especiall out of the safeties. Rutledge will be fine at one CB. Humphrey is the question mark. If he can hold his own this may not be the weakeness this so-called expert thinks it is.

scroll down a little bit:

<A HREF="http://www.collegefootballnews.com/wac/2003_Predictions/August30.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.collegefootballnews.com/wac/2003_Predictions/August30.htm</A>

[Stallion]

yeah but to really analyze SMU's secondary against Tech's offense you need to go deeper than the 2 CBs and Safeties. Tech will go with 4 maybe 5 receiver sets plus their RB caught almost 100 passes so he's an extra receiver in their offense. How deep is SMU when you get to the Nickel defense or when you give the starters a rest? Not very. The thing SMU has going for it and why I would lean toward SMU beating the spread is that Tech really is banged up on defense and has very little experience anyway. Seems like they got about 3-4 guys who are going to have to start on defense who really aren't 100%.

[ponyte]

The analysis assumes that the O-line for Tech will handle a smaller yet more nimble SMU D-line. If Tech was a huge rushing team (and they could well be Sat. night) then the larger TTU O-line has an advantage. However, in pass protection, quickness and nimble D-linemen may create problems for the TTU line. If that is the case, then the passing game takes on a new dimension...an effective pass rush. SMU does have capable pass rushers. The new TTU QB is not as experienced as the previous TTU QB. The pass rush is an unknown factor that isn't addressed in the analysis.

[OldPony]

Actually, I think the guy's probably has it about right. SMU's only chance is to be able to consume lots of clock running the ball. If that doesn't materialize, we will be in for a very long day and 28 points may not be enough. If it does, the game could be a version of last year's game. Experience counts a lot in the secondary so hopefully our pass D will be better. I saw a lot of very lousy tackling from our secondary last year ie the long breakaways. Pray that Bennett's personal attention to this group will pay off. If not, we will be in for a long season and trouble anytime the other team throws well or can get running backs into our secondary.

[Stallion]

you can count on one hand the number of times SMU has had a truly effective pass rush in the last 10 years. I love Stansbury but he's our only pass rushing threat. Tech's OLM are experienced and are as well versed in pass blocking as any team in the country. Plus when the RB has 98 receptions on the year you know that Tech has a pretty good scheme on how to dump the ball off before taking sacks. It will be interesting to see if Bennett plays a conservative gameplan-my opinion is that we will get blown out in Lubbock playing conservative bacause Tech will score often. If SMU really is going for a win then Bartel, Cunningham, Rushbrook AND the running game with Kincade and Fitzerald are all going to have to play big roles. SMU needs a balanced offense where SMU throws at a minimum 30 times to have a chance to WIN. Now if you just want to play it close then running the ball might be best-but don't be surprised if a track meet breaks out and your 30 points behind. When you are playing a team that averages 49 points at home you better have a gameplan that can get you at least 28-30 to have a shot at winning.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 08-28-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 08-28-2003).]

[Hoop Fan]

They predict 48-20. Like I said in another post, 27 points points probably won't win the game, but SMU needs that much if the offense is really going to be improved this year. I think we need 35 for a shot at winning the game. Sounds lofty, but Bartel needs to jump on them like he did La Tech last year.

[Stallion]

I agree-Tech looks to have some real weakness, injuries and inexperience on defense-don't be so timid that you don't identify them until late in the 3rd Quarter when you are down by 30.

[EastStang]

That's why I said, first or second play, play action fake handoff to Kincaid and hit Cunningham long. Their stadium would go quiet instantly.

[OldPony]

The run must be our bread and butter for this game. If we throw 30+ times, we will have lost. Passing needs to be effective to maintain ball control and in the range of 20-22 or so passes. We need to complete 12-15 at the right times but if we don't chew up a lot of clock this will be a disaster. The biggest key though may be the D. If our secondary gets burned through sloppy tackling, the track meet will start but it will be a one team meet. Here is hoping that the linebackers can stay with the backs and that the corners make tackles.

[Hoop Fan]

I think you are right OP, but we need a big passing play or two early in the game. We are not just gonna line up and ram it down their throat. My point is that I think the passing game needs to be effective early to open up the running game, not vice versa.

In the end, we are 24 point underdogs for a reason. The Tech offense must be really good, even without Kingsbury. Vegas is often wrong, but they rarely miss the mark by much. We need to score and open things up to set the tone for the rest of the season IMO. There is no glory in holding the score down and keeping it close, we did that against TCU last year too and it didn't bode well for the rest of the season.

[OldPony]

I must agree HF. Whether its a bomb or some 1st down throwing, we need to make them honest. I really am more afraid of our defense than their defense though.

[FloridaMustang]

HF is right on. We have to establish a passing game IMMEDIATELY. Our offense can't revert to "ball control" and running the ball 30-40 times a game. Our running game will not put enough points on the board to win the game. Not against this team. We need to have a balanced offensive game. Bartel needs to be exceptional, the recievers need to surprise a lot of people, and KK will need to prove why he's on the Doak Walker watch list. With that said, I think we also need to take more chances on offense. I like LaTech because they take chances. McCown can throw the long ball and so can Bartel. LaTech hung in with Miami for a long time, and they did so by opening up their offense. If they had played conservatively, then they would have been down 70 points at halftime. I hope that Bennett proves to everyone that he's a good as a coach as most people think he is.

[EastStang]

I think you need to score at least four TD's to win this game. To do so, you need to run and pass. I have no problem running 30-40 if our passes find big gains. What would be perfect is to have a four point lead with 8 minutes left in the game and reel off a 15 play drive for a TD. Sort of like the Riggo drill the Redskins used to run in the 4th quarter.