PonyFans.com

In the 2nd half.

he's also getting to debut against a team that has learned to lose

We'd make a waterboy making his debut look good.

We failed to blitz and our 3 man rush put no pressure on him. We were out coached on both sides of the ball. On offense Kingsbury had a much better game plan with short passes to all areas of the field. Some question the talent difference; to me it was superior coaching and better game planning by TT.

Mayfield was accurate throwing downfield too.

I really hope Tech is a lot better than I think they are, but it would not surprise me to see them finish 3-6 or even 2-7 in the Big XII. I did not see a big difference in the talent on the field tonight, but I saw a huge difference in attitude and confidence. It looks like our guys have come to EXPECT to lose these games. That weak holding call that erased our go-ahead TD was a game changer and our guys just don't have what it takes to overcome that kind of bad break

this tech team will probably lost their last 6 games of the year. Look at their schedule and tell me who you think they will beat.

losing is one thing - if you get beat fair and square by a better team - great. We had no fire, no inventive plays, no risk taking on defense - very lackluster. One of the few times i could say that the crowd was better than the team deserved.

UConn, Temple, and Memphis are worse than we are. SMU has a chance to go to a bowl this year.

ok - those three plus montana are 4 wins - where do you find the other 2, for the 5th straight "who cares" bowl?

This one is on Mason. THe D was not at all prepared. I fully understand that we had no previous game films or even an idea of personnel (QB) until late. But still, we failed to put any pressure on the QB and never tried to hide coverages.

The kid couldn't throw long but we respected the long pass. Our personnel changes looked like a complete cluster fudge. That isn't the kids' fault, that's Mason's.
And our D was gassed in the 4th quarter.

We looked like we weren't used to the speed of the game.......

PonySnob wrote:We looked like we weren't used to the speed of the game.......

No we didn't. At the beginning, we were playing the same speed they were. To me, the biggest difference was their reserves against ours. They have better athletes and better depth overall, but our starters hung in with theirs. When fatigue set in, their backups help up against our tired starters.

There's a reason that kid won the starting job over Webb. He's got some talent.

he made almost no mistakes. unheard of for a freshman in his first start. of course we made him look better since we didn't even blitz

HorsePower wrote:

PonySnob wrote:We looked like we weren't used to the speed of the game.......

No we didn't. At the beginning, we were playing the same speed they were. To me, the biggest difference was their reserves against ours. They have better athletes and better depth overall, but our starters hung in with theirs. When fatigue set in, their backups help up against our tired starters.

There's a reason that kid won the starting job over Webb. He's got some talent.

I agree. I thought we hit hard and did not miss as many tackles as I thought we would.

True. Until we wore down late, the defense was pretty decent.