Open letter to Coach Bennett and Coach Burns

[Ikus]

Dear Coach Bennett/Coach Burns:

First things first: congratulations on the victory - the improvement this team showed Saturday was exciting and encouraging to all of us.

I am not a coach, and I don't claim to know as much as you do. So my letter is basically a question, not a complaint. The question: why does Ryan Kennedy not get the ball more? It seems to me this guy is nearly impossible to tackle. The other team can put a LB on him and he can run until he gets open. If they leave a safety on him, he runs through him. Against LaTech, he destroyed some poor DB en route to a 20-yard gain (before it was called back for that facemask flag). Yesterday, he had 3 catches for 43 yards, and again, he there's nobody on the other team who could have contained him.

Again, I'm not a coach. But why wouldn't it be smart to keep feeding the ball to Kennedy until someone proves they can stop the big guy?

Thanks. And again, congratulations on a well-deserved victory. Good luck next week - beat Nevada!

[Lamont_Cranston]

I agree. Ryan Kennedy's a STUD! Get the ball to him more often!

[Pony Up]

This seems simple, but it makes sense. Remember when TCU had that Kelly Blackwell guy? Everyone knew the ball was headed his way 10-12 times a game, and there was nothing a lot of teams could do about it. That was back when TCU didn't have a lot of offensive options, and even the stronger teams in the SWC were unable to stop him. It seems to me Kennedy has the ability to be even more dangerous than the great John Hampton. Keep feeding him the ball and let the opposing coaches pull their hair out trying to figure out how to deal with him. If they double- or triple-team him, then someone else should be wide open. Seems to me he creates serious mismatches that we should be able to exploit - starting Saturday against Nevada.

Go Ponies!

[BrianTinBigD]

I know that those that sit around me are sick and tired of listening to me [deleted] abouth the lack of use that Kennedy seems to get. He is 4th on the team in receiving and has 17 catches for 215 yards. He is a huge target and would seem like a great choice to get the ball to in 3rd and 4 situations. The problem I see is that we have these stupid 5 wide sets and we try and get the ball to our undersized receivers. We don't have 5 dependable wide receivers at this time. So why do we need 2 extra receivers that don't seem to get open and are not getting the ball thrown their way. Can't we go with 3 receivers, Kennedy, and a running back? Just my take on the situation.

Of course I am not as smart as Coach Bennett is about football. He has forgotten more about it than I will ever know. A good example is when you go for 2. You go for 2 when you are down by 2 late in a game or there is just enough time to score twice and you were down by 16. You do not go for 2 when you are up by 11 in the 2nd half. That is why I spend most of my life working with numbers. Like 11+1=12. 8+3=11. So if SMU kicks the extra point then Tulsa must score 2 touchdowns to win.

[PlanoStang]

Of course I am not as smart as Coach Bennett is about football. He has forgotten more about it than I will ever know. A good example is when you go for 2. You go for 2 when you are down by 2 late in a game or there is just enough time to score twice and you were down by 16. You do not go for 2 when you are up by 11 in the 2nd half. That is why I spend most of my life working with numbers. Like 11+1=12. 8+3=11. So if SMU kicks the extra point then Tulsa must score 2 touchdowns to win.

Yup "go for 2 scenarios" are definately in Bennett's "football that I've forgot" category. Coach Burns should lose that chart for him, and make him use his noggin.

[Stallion]

I prefer to run the 3 WR/1TE set as well which TCU uses more since it helps in the running game. Plus next year Vincent Chase will be eligible and a 4 WR set keeps our best recruit and promising Kennedy on the bench. Also, SMU will have several options at RB next year who might rejuvenate the running game with an extra TE. When it gets down to it-I think you've still got to be able to run the ball in college football to be consistently successful.

[gostangs]

I would fall in the category of wearing everyone out around me about this also - kennedy seems to me like the best TE in the WAC (Stallion - correct?). We have one play to him - that one throw back play that usually works. How can we not drag him across the middle about every other play? I think it was La Tech, early in the game that he bowled over three of their guys early but called back for holding - might have changed the tempo of that game if it had stood. I know its late in the season - but lets get some plays in for him.

[GoRedGoBlue]

I prefer to run the 3 WR/1TE set as well which TCU uses more since it helps in the running game. Plus next year Vincent Chase will be eligible and a 4 WR set keeps our best recruit and promising Kennedy on the bench. Also, SMU will have several options at RB next year who might rejuvenate the running game with an extra TE. When it gets down to it-I think you've still got to be able to run the ball in college football to be consistently successful.

Bring back the Triple-Shoot!! (wait, that was TCU's offense under Wacker...well that was pretty good too!)

[Charleston Pony]

we've had trouble running in short yardage situations for years. Wait until next year with some double tight end sets and Kennedy and Chase acting as bookends. SMU football will get better.