PonyFans.com

I am always amazed by the number of closet coaches who post on this site. They are so competent, they don't even need the luxury of seeing the team practice to know exactly what kind of game plan we need.

I will now share with you my thoughts and everyone KNOWS I'm NO coach.

The statement has been made that we are playing not to lose rather than playing to win. A wide open offense against Tech would have been a disaster, as it never took Tech more than three minutes to score after getting the ball. Tech was not a team you would want to get into a shooting match with...ball control was our only hope of having a chance. A final score of 84-21 would not have been any better than the score we wound up with.

Against Baylor, we had an improved defense which should have allowed us to open up the game a bit more and we did try with at least three long passes thrown... none of which were successful. Had even one been successful we might have continued to try, but our passing game was definitely out of sync. Mean while, mistakes on special teams put Baylor in positions to score on us.

So why didn't we throw more to our TE...seems to me he was back helping to block so our QB would have a few more seconds to find a reciever. Besides the middle was pretty full of receivers as it was seeing as how our efforts at the long pass were not working.

My very uneducated guess is that as the young defense gels and becomes better at shutting the other team down, we will indeed start opening up the offense, but until then, I think we will continue to try to control the ball and keep the other offense off the field. This approach will also produce point once we stop making mental errors in the red zone.

It may be more fun to see the ball flying through the air left and right, but as Coach Bennett recently said, "the real fun in playing football is WINNING." What the coaches are trying to do is put this team in a position such that if they execute properly they CAN WIN.

[This message has been edited by PK (edited 09-17-2003).]

Coach Bennett has said he wants to throw to the tight ends. But I expect that against OSU, the tight end might again be asked to stay back and help block for Bartel and for the RBs. Maybe once we get into the WAC part of the schedule, we'll see more balls headed toward the TEs. As far as I know, the only ball that's even been thrown toward a TE was the interception against Baylor.

The question is, does Trent Hrncir stay in as the main tight end? If we're going to use the TE primarily as a blocker, shouldn't the larger Ryan Kennedy get a lot of playing time? He's got a big size advantage.

If it only takes Tech 3 minutes to score, then what good does it do to eat up clock and not score? Tech will score their points, you have to score more points than the other team to win a football game. And for the last time, opening it up doesnt mean throw deep...it means throw on first down some, mix it up, corners, posts, deep crosses, i mean come on, you have a QB with a strong enough arm to make any throw on the field. I pose this question: How's that ball control gameplan working for you?

JAF, I hope for your sake none of your classes require reading a textbook, because your reading comprehension needs some work. Nowhere did I say ball control was all run and no passes nor has our ball control game plan not included passes...including an occassional pass on first down. BTW, deep crossing patterns is I believe the same thing as a deep pass. One point I did make,and you seem to have ignored, is that for the plan to work, the players have got to execute the plays properly and the team as a whole has not been consistent in doing this. They have at times lost focus and made stupid mistakes. Also, in the Baylor game the special teams did not play at the level they should have. As for the Tech game...give me a break, there was no way we were going to score more points than Tech without keeping them off the field. When our defense hits their stride and starts shutting the opposition down, then they won't need the additional help of the offense controling the ball. This team is building and improving...your bud Bartel will get his chance to shine, but hey, if you want to coach the team, please send your application to Mr. Jim Copeland.

Easy there big fella!

Guess reading comprehension never really was my strong point, I get bored with the passages. I agree that the gameplan was not executed and I also agree that SMU was not likely to outscore Tech, BUT if the gameplan is not being executed, despite attempts to correct that, then maybe a different game plan would be executed. Or should at least be attempted. All I am saying is this: The La Tech game plan last year was different than the previous games and different than what has been done this year. That was a win. Granted things went right and so forth, but that game plan gave the team a chance to win and it just doesnt seem like what is being done is doing that. Being put in third and 10's all day is not going to win games. And I would send my application to Copeland but the life of a coach is not for me...although i have considered it.

From what I have heard and read, the coaches design each game plan based upon which team they are playing and what the strengths and weaknesses of that team are. As was noted in another recent post, Baylor evidently has a very good pass defense and I'm sure that was taken in to consideration in forming the game plan. Special team mistakes were not in the game plan. This week's game against OSU will be very interesting to see what they come up with. I can assure you that the coaches and players both want to win and they go in to each game with that as their goal...not to play to not lose, but to win. BTW, patience helps with reading comprehension, so read slowly and all the way through.

[This message has been edited by PK (edited 09-17-2003).]