Five passes by the starter

[GangGreen]

It was simply disgusting to watch. Everything this team did against SMU just went completely down the toilet.

Our coaching staff proves, yet again, that they can not learn from past experience. They are so arrogant that after a good win they still believe they can rely on this lazy, unimaginative piece of crap offensive scheme that only works against the worst teams in the nation.

I think Ramon Flanigan is done coaching for the season. He will be content to pat himself on the back for beating his alma mater.

What Rick posted above is putrid. He deserves to get his ass fired!

[DeepGreen]

Is Akron even worth listening to if we're going to play like this?

←

No!

And is it worth my time to drive 700+ miles to watch us potentially steamrole to sub-100 yards of offense? No!

Only game I may attend is La Tech. The rest of my tickets and parking passes will be mailed back to the Athletic Department.

[foutsrouts]

Games like this make we want to ask when basketball season starts. Why do Dickey/Flannigan have to try and prove that we can play smash mouth football against OOC teams? What was wrong with our game plan against SMU and why couldn't we follow something fairly similar to that plan against Tulsa? Was the two headed monster named Dickey/Flannigan picked on as a child and now feels the need to try and prove how tough and strong he is by going straight at the heart of the opponent's defense? Not very smart if you ask me. Hope the smell of tires wakes them up and helps them come to their senses before we get zipped next week. I think Akron will set the tone for the entire season.

[shaft]

The Sky is falling! The Sky is falling!

Let's see we played Texas better than we the last time saw them.

We played Tulsa better than we did last year.

We beat SMU.

So far it looks like were set to have a better season than the last two.

[DeepGreen]

The Sky is falling!  The Sky is falling!

Let's see we played Texas better than we the last time saw them.

We played Tulsa better than we did last year.

We beat SMU.

So far it looks like were set to have a better season than the last two.

←

What were the game stats from last year? What did we have, 90 yards of total offense. Yep, we played them better.

[UNTFan23]

The Sky is falling!  The Sky is falling!

Let's see we played Texas better than we the last time saw them.

We played Tulsa better than we did last year.

We beat SMU.

So far it looks like were set to have a better season than the last two.

←

based on ...

Averaged over 3 games:

9 pts per game

8.6 first downs a game

165.3 yds total offense

48.6 rushing yds

102.6 passing yds

Remember, the SMU game is really "padding" the stats right now.

[chrisfisher]

The Sky is falling!  The Sky is falling!

Let's see we played Texas better than we the last time saw them.

We played Tulsa better than we did last year.

We beat SMU.

So far it looks like were set to have a better season than the last two.

←

damn, that is twisted way to make this season "feel good." I wonder if this is how DD thinks? I don't think we could have scored against a decent high school team with that game plan last night. Time for some coach firings - won't happen though from what I've read in this forum.

[shaft]

It funny how people on this board think their really in touch with the program, but have a hard time seeing UNT place in the D1 landscape.

We use a playbook that works for the type of players we are able to get. We play in a conference that gives us a place to be competitive and grow as a program. Growth takes a lot longer in a place like Denton than anyone on this board will admitt.

The chicken littles on this board and going to froth at the mouth about how this is Dickey appologist propaganda. But deep down the know its the truth, the hate to admit it, which it want brings out so much anger on this board.

[UNTFan23]

The Sky is falling!  The Sky is falling!

Let's see we played Texas better than we the last time saw them.

We played Tulsa better than we did last year.

We beat SMU.

So far it looks like were set to have a better season than the last two.

←

2005 - 2006

Total Offense 129 - 86

First Downs 8 - 6

Yds per Rush 1.9 - .9

Passing 59 - 62

Attempts/Completions 10/22 - 6-11

Yds per Pass 2.2 - 5.6

On defense we were basically a wash in every category. The only real difference, the score. It's really hard to say we played Tulsa any better this year then last when you sit down and break down stats.

Ok, so we did a little better on passing, but that had little effect on the outcome of the game.

Edited September 17, 2006 by UNTFan23

[chrisfisher]

It funny how people on this board think their really in touch with the program, but have a hard time seeing UNT place in the D1 landscape.

We use a playbook that works for the type of players we are able to get.  We play in a conference that gives us a place to be competitive and grow as a program.  Growth takes a lot longer in a place like Denton than anyone on this board will admitt.

The chicken littles on this board and going to froth at the mouth about how this is Dickey appologist propaganda.  But deep down the know its the truth, the hate to admit it, which it want brings out so much anger on this board.

←

I think this is loser talk....not that you are a loser, but rather have become accustomed to losing. Last night, I recall the Tulsa announcers discussing Tulsa's horrendous win/loss record over a 20 year period... that is until the new, current coach came in and turned the program around in 4 years, including several bowl games (Liberty Bowl Champ last year). And they did this is in a more competitive CUSA division. If they can do it in Tulsa, why can't we do it in Denton? To expect anything less of our program is a disservice to the university, coaches, players, and fans. Sorry, I refuse to "see our place" as you envision it.

Edited September 17, 2006 by chrisfisher

[TIgreen01]

I really don't get why this game was such a surprise to you people. FFR posted the numbers. I've been to every home game but one during DD's years. This is NOT new. Yes, the offense seemed better during the '03-'04 years....but the reality is that we have never been a high powered offense in the last 9 years. At our best, we are efficient...but in almost every case where we have gone up against superior talent, or a creative gameplan, we get whooped.

We are at the same crossroads the Texas Aggies were at during Slocum's last 2 years---wanting to take another step, but getting impatient in getting there. I can only hope our administrators handle the situation better than tamu did....their football program is a shadow of what it once was....

Edited September 17, 2006 by TIgreen01

[Zeke]

I really don't get why this game was such a surprise to you people.  FFR posted the numbers.  I've been to every home game but one during DD's years.  This is NOT new.  Yes, the offense seemed better during the '03-'04 years....but the reality is that we have never been a high powered offense in the last 9 years.  At our best, we are efficient...but in almost every case where we have gone up against superior talent, or a creative gameplan, we get whooped.

We are at the same crossroads the Texas Aggies were at during Slocum's last 2 years---wanting to take another step, but getting impatient in getting there.  I can only hope our administrators handle the situation better than tamu did....their football program is a shadow of what it once was....

←

I would love to have Slocum here.

[SilverEagle]

It funny how people on this board think their really in touch with the program, but have a hard time seeing UNT place in the D1 landscape.

We use a playbook that works for the type of players we are able to get. We play in a conference that gives us a place to be competitive and grow as a program.  Growth takes a lot longer in a place like Denton than anyone on this board will admitt.

The chicken littles on this board and going to froth at the mouth about how this is Dickey appologist propaganda.  But deep down the know its the truth, the hate to admit it, which it want brings out so much anger on this board.

←

You mean "works for the type of players our coaches choose to go after". If we are not able to get more talented players to come here, it could be for two reasons..

1. We have maybe one or two coaches who can evaluate (remember that K-mart had to talk Dickey into offering a "ship" to Johnny Quinn), and recruit.

2. There are many outstanding athletes out there who would give North Texas more serious consideration, but who the hell would want to play in our offensive scheme? And what defensive player wants to come here and spend most of the game out on the field, where he gets exhausted and ends up looking bad.

[NT80]

...their football program is a shadow of what it once was....

←

So is ours.

[Mean'n'Green07]

I think this is loser talk....not that you are a loser, but rather have become accustomed to losing. Last night, I recall the Tulsa announcers discussing Tulsa's horrendous win/loss record over a 20 year period... that is until the new, current coach came in and turned the program around in 4 years, including several bowl games (Liberty Bowl Champ last year).

←

I think thats a pretty damn good post chris. I'd like to think RV thinks the same way. He thinks big and so far has given every athletics program here pretty good conditions to work with. I really wonder what he thinks about the football program after last night's loss, and his opinions on DD.

On another note: Shaft, how does running the ball on third and long compliment our players? How does running the ball with 9 players in the box supposed to help us? How does giving our starting QB 6 pass attempts supposed to help open up that run game. We have the talent to win the sunbelt, but unless we can shake things up I don't see that happening.

[Green Crazy]

Early in the game, JT ripped off a couple of 13 yard runs (I think one was called back for illegal procedure).  The line obviously opened up some holes early.  So, what happened?  Tulsa coaching staff adjusted appropriately and our coaching staff did not.  Once TU adjusted to plug the holes and stop the run all we needed to do was hit a couple of quick, simple passes to give them something else to think about. 

Keith

←

Your exactly right! It seemed that early in the game the Tulsa defense was sitting back, expecting WW to run or maybe play action pass and JT was able to have a little room. Then Tulsa realized that we weren't trying to set something up, we're just stubborn. After they realized we weren't going to stop running the ball, it was church. The O-line was bad, but the play calls made them look worse. We need to spice it up or we're going 5-7. The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Also, who actually makes the play calls for offense, I would think DD would have last word on that decision? If DD thought they were bad plays being called, why wouldn't he veto and call a different play, after all it's his job that's on the line. I would think that since RF is fairly young, his offensive ideas would be more modern and creative. Does anyone know who makes the play calls?

Edited September 18, 2006 by Green Crazy

[Eagle1855]

Does anyone know who makes the play calls?

←

[bigrobdsp]

Personally, I'm not excusing the playcalling.  31/11 is really questionable, from a layman's perspective.  I am just wondering out loud if ANYTHING would have worked with what we had up front.

←

coaching 101 says that screen plays and quick slants tend to slow down a rush. but since both of those are pass plays I doubt they are even in our playbook. I can promiss that draw plays off center do not tend to work when the middle of the d line is getting great penitration. having said that I am just going to assume that DD and RF are much better versed in football than I am and were working on somthing, but ran out of time before their plan could come to fruition. (sarcasm)

[LongJim]

←

Lord, I was a-laughin'...

[Green Crazy]

←

I guess the reason it takes so long for the play to get to the qb and the delay of game penalties are the result of a "ask again later" answer.

[mad dog]

coaching 101 says that screen plays and quick slants tend to slow down a rush.

←

Totally right, and in a typical instance I would agree with you. The problem was that defenses haven't really been blitzing, per se. They read and react to the run, true enough, so it can look like a blitz on a running play. But the primary defense we've seen is a shallow contain, solid gap coverage defense. A shallow contain is the LAST defense you want to try the quick slant against, because they are all lined up close just waiting to read the play. Since contain defenses are more read-oriented than most, a screen pass would be begging for failure, too, especially so against a team with good linebackers.

The pass we've GOT to start hitting is the 10-15 yard seam/skinny post to the Tight End. Andy Blount made a career out of this route, and it really REALLY losened up the defense. Trouble is, you need about an extra second to pass, even with a quick tight end, and our offensive line isn't giving that at all. Compounding that is that is isn't an easy throw, and a rattled QB is likely to throw it too short or long, both of which are a pick. If you can give your QB the time, this route just demolishes the defense we've been seeing, which is based around taking away the ground game, short passes, and deep balls. There is, so to speak, no "middle" to the opponent's defense. Even a mid-to-deep in or drag across the formation would kill them, but again, that requires protection we don't have.

[Guest JohnDenver]

Play action loosens up the contain coverage.

Designed roll-outs takes one side of the contain coverage out of the picture.

However, on ANY given pass play, we have two WRs on the field. Both of them always end up on the same side of the field and are double covered -- without fail. A roll out with the option of the QB running for 7 yards will bring the extra DB down to try to stop the run and open up the WRs again.

We don't need a skinny post to be complete ... we only try that once a game. That isn't enough to matter. Any team will see that ONE pass completed for 20 yards and then know we won't try it again. We didn't even try it against Tulsa until the 4th. We did however try two screen passes. ouch. Passes to the TE? It would be great, but they are ALWAYS on blocking schemes, so we can have that "extra" second to pass to one of our two WRs on the field (which are both double covered).

Teams are blitzing. Tulsa bitzed a fair amount. They blitzed the run gaps, but it is still a blitz none-the-less... They were right 90% of the time, we were running up the middle gap.

[TIgreen01]

The pass we've GOT to start hitting is the 10-15 yard seam/skinny post to the Tight End.  Andy Blount made a career out of this route, and it really REALLY losened up the defense. Trouble is, you need about an extra second to pass, even with a quick tight end, and our offensive line isn't giving that at all.  Compounding that is that is isn't an easy throw, and a rattled QB is likely to throw it too short or long, both of which are a pick.  If you can give your QB the time, this route just demolishes the defense we've been seeing, which is based around taking away the ground game, short passes, and deep balls.  There is, so to speak, no "middle" to the opponent's defense.  Even a mid-to-deep in or drag across the formation would kill them, but again, that requires protection we don't have.

←

We were sacked ONE time against Tulsa....5 on the season with 4 coming against Texas. Exactly how much time do our TE's need to get up field??!?!

[bigrobdsp]

Totally right, and in a typical instance I would agree with you.  The problem was that defenses haven't really been blitzing, per se.  They read and react to the run, true enough, so it can look like a blitz on a running play.  But the primary defense we've seen is a shallow contain, solid gap coverage defense.  A shallow contain is the LAST defense you want to try the quick slant against, because they are all lined up close just waiting to read the play.  Since contain defenses are more read-oriented than most, a screen pass would be begging for failure, too, especially so against a team with good linebackers.

The pass we've GOT to start hitting is the 10-15 yard seam/skinny post to the Tight End.  Andy Blount made a career out of this route, and it really REALLY losened up the defense. Trouble is, you need about an extra second to pass, even with a quick tight end, and our offensive line isn't giving that at all.  Compounding that is that is isn't an easy throw, and a rattled QB is likely to throw it too short or long, both of which are a pick.  If you can give your QB the time, this route just demolishes the defense we've been seeing, which is based around taking away the ground game, short passes, and deep balls.  There is, so to speak, no "middle" to the opponent's defense.  Even a mid-to-deep in or drag across the formation would kill them, but again, that requires protection we don't have.

←

I have not really been able to watch the games as of yet but this makes since. If I am right though hasnt WW had alot of succes with bootleg passes? (the two or three maybe broken plays that he has bootleged on) isnt that what the Texas score was on? also, wouldnt a throwback screen play (screen play where the QB rolls right and tosses back across the field left) work well against this sort of defense? I dont know that WW has the arm to make that throw as it is tough, but I would hope that RF can squeeze some practice time in on these sort of plays in case they get into the same situation against Akron or L Tech. Texas ran an awful lot of these types of plays before perfecting their newest offensive formation with VY. even one or two of these per half should loosen up the running lanes for WW and JT.

[mad dog]

We were sacked ONE time against Tulsa....5 on the season with 4 coming against Texas.  Exactly how much time do our TE's need to get up field??!?!

←

I think that's more attributed to Woody's elusiveness than a lack of pressure.

When I say an extra second, I mean one more solid second of being able to look around the WHOLE field before sprinting around to avoid pressure.

When you scramble, you are paying more attention to the guy trying to tackle you than anything downfield and your vision tends to narrow to the side of the field you are running to. That's why coaches always tell their receivers to run back into the QB's area of vision when he's running for his life, so he can SEE you.

Play action loosens up the contain coverage.

Play action will force the contain coverage into react mode, sure enough, but even then, you are going to need to attack the middle as well as deep downfield. If you do just one or the other, you're going to be smothered. All the opposing defenses I've seen have been sitting on that deep playaction pass, because they trust their front seven to handle the run.

Designed roll-outs takes one side of the contain coverage out of the picture.

However, on ANY given pass play, we have two WRs on the field. Both of them always end up on the same side of the field and are double covered -- without fail. A roll out with the option of the QB running for 7 yards will bring the extra DB down to try to stop the run and open up the WRs again.

We have a LOT of triple wide formations. They do not always line up on one side of the field. However, I like the QB option run idea a lot. I hope we see more of that.

We don't need a skinny post to be complete ... we only try that once a game. That isn't enough to matter. Any team will see that ONE pass completed for 20 yards and then know we won't try it again. We didn't even try it against Tulsa until the 4th. We did however try two screen passes. ouch. Passes to the TE? It would be great, but they are ALWAYS on blocking schemes, so we can have that "extra" second to pass to one of our two WRs on the field (which are both double covered).

Here we will have to disagree. I think that's the void area of the field that defenses are challenging us to go. Whether or not we try it again really isn't my point... I'm just saying we SHOULD try to hit that route often. Not that we will or have.

The tight ends are NOT always on blocking schemes. Beau Davidson and Bryant Seidle have been out in routes a lot, too. We didn't see a lot of them at Tulsa, because we called 31 run plays, and a TE's responsibility is to run-block in those situations. When you run a lot, i think it is fair to say your TE is going to block a lot.

Teams are blitzing. Tulsa bitzed a fair amount. They blitzed the run gaps, but it is still a blitz none-the-less... They were right 90% of the time, we were running up the middle gap.

Even though it looks like a blitz, what they are really doing is reading the O-line step off. Once the OL crosses the LOS, the other team's defense knows it is a run, and hit their gaps hard. It looks like a blitz, but watch how quick Tulsa dropped into coverage on pass plays.