Nt Daily Blog - Nt / Navy Game Comments/report Card

[Cr1028]

...and this makes what difference? They aren't exerting themselves a longer amount of time. Less if anything - we've got the playclock down to the last tick before we're starting the play.

...and doesn't the other team we're playing have to contend with the same time situation? Not like there is a rip in space-time on the UNT sideline and not on the Visitors...

We aren't talking about what the other defense is doing. We are talking about the reasons the Mean Green defense is underperforming. One of those reasons may be be the longer games.

You keep saying time clock, time of possession, 31 minutes to 29 minutes, and so on. Let me tell you, the game last longer than 60 minutes or 80 minutes if you count halftime.

You like numbers? Here are some numbers for your college degree to consider:

Last year's average elapsed time for a North Texas game was exactly 3hrs. If you throw out the 7 overtime FIU game that lasted 4hrs 25 mins, then that avearage drops to 2hrs 52min.

This year's average is 3hrs 34mins. The shortest game this year lasted 3hrs 9mins at Troy. That is 9 minutes longer than last year's average even with the 7 OT game.

So I ask you with all of your mathmatical wizardry and condescending tone if you could explain to us with lesser intelligence, how can it be possible that the game lasts 34 minutes longer, they play 5 to 9 more plays per game, and still are on the field less. Please, educate us.

For the record, I'm not saying there is no fault with the players, coaches, or the fresh paint fumes at Fouts, I am just saying that there are other varibles involved here.

Edited November 14, 2007 by Cr1028

[H-towngreen]

all these numbers and long posts are giving me tired head

[FirefightnRick]

We aren't talking about what the other defense is doing. We are talking about the reasons the Mean Green defense is underperforming. One of those reasons may be be the longer games.

Fatigue and the correlation to points scored vs Navy.

1st half vs Navy: 45 points.

2nd half vs Navy: 29 points.

The longer we play, the better we get?

Rick

[SilverEagle]

NT80-

read CR1028's comment.

FFR-

read my post.....I said some may "POSSIBLY" be playing hurt.....who knows unless you have spoken personally with TD or the team doctor.

I am at Fouts Field watching the same games you have this year and have been watching them since '66......and these defensive guys are slow. I see the big difference with more opposing teams running around our tackles and running past our corners and safeties. Personally, I think the defensive front four look like they did for the last three years. But if you notice, and you see the same games I do, teams are not running up the middle too much against us this year......they seem to run around the corners and run past the corners and safeties. Yea, sometimes the opposition busts one up the middle for big yards but they did that the last three or so years.

For ALL of you I still respect your comments but disagree with some of your opionions.

I watched my first North Texas game around 1963, and I too watched the Hayden Fry transition. When our defense went up against a good running tean in ULM, they didn't look slow to me....they looked very motivated. In the Navy game, they looked OK for the first half. But they looked confused, demoralized and/or down right beaten in the second half.

You've alluded to the possibility that the current members of GMG.com would have been impatient with Hayden Fry the first year or so that he was here. That first year, Hayden cobbled together a bunch of leftovers from Rod Rusts 1-10 team and any others that he could find (walk-ons etc) and put together a 5-5-1 team. The next year the team took a step back at 2-7-2, but in those two years our worst losses were 3-52 to Cincinatti, 9-56 to San Diego St., and 0-41 to Memhis.

Hayden did not start his career with a defense that had 9 returning starters. He would have probably had a much better record those first two years if he had.

[pollock]

Ya just can't make a Yugo into a Mercedes overnight.....

Well, that's true, but it doesn't apply because that isn't what needed to happen.

Our offense changed from a Buick to a twin-turbo hot rod of some kind (fast as hell and puts up all kinds of numbers, but totally unreliable and breaks down a lot).

Last year our defense was a plain old Chevy. Not as good as it used to be, but still serviceable and consistent. If it had just stayed a Chevy (and with 9 out of 11 returning starters, that shouldn't have been a trick), we would probably be bowl eligible at the end of the season.

But no, Mendoza got a hold of it, loosened all the lugnuts, put sugar in the tank, and hammered a potato into the tailpipe. Bada-bing, bada-boom, we're 1-8.

[MeanGreen61]

Ya just can't make a Yugo into a Mercedes overnight

Maybe not, but Mendoza proved you can turn Buick into a Yugo in less than a season.

It's amazing how some attribute coaching (and rightfully so) as the reason for the transition of our offense from bland and unproductive to exciting and productive, but blame our pathetic defense on the players and not the coaching & coaching schemes.

Edited November 14, 2007 by MeanGreen61

[KingDL1]

Maybe not, but Mendoza proved you can turn Buick into a Yugo in less than a season.

It's amazing how some attribute coaching (and rightfully so) as the reason for the transition of our offense from bland and unproductive to exciting and productive, but blame our pathetic defense on the players and not the coaching & coaching schemes.

Is just as amazing that some do not take in to account the turmoil that has been going on behind the scenes on defense, even with it making headlines. I want discipline first and foremost.

[eulesseagle]

ok lynch mob--

if you were watching the same games i was then:

1. OU & Ark........no chance...just outclassed...............not fault of Mendoza

2. SMU...............too many INTs in the 2nd half and one INT back for a SMU TD & special teams allowing long run backs......not fault of Mendoza.

3. FAU...............two blocked punts by our endzone leading to two easy touchdowns.................not fault of Mendoza.

4. LaLa..............INT in endzone and two other INTs......cornerbacks could not keep up with speedy WRs.........not fault of Mendoza.

5. LaMo.............cant remember

6. Troy..............no offense and defense had 7 turnovers with no offensive response..............no fault of Mendoza.

7. MTSU............we just got outplayed.

8. NAVY............once in a lifetime scoring game with one INT in endzone, offensive holding in endzone and subsequent TD off free kick......not fault of Mendoza.

Lynch mob,

1. What I have seen is our offense and special teams are creating too many mistakes allowing the opposition to score.

2. The other thing I have seen is our slow & flat footed corners not responding fast enough........not fault of Mendoza for inheriting these slower than average kids.

3. It appears to me that even though we all have seen the same games we are getting different perspectives. Some of you just look at the bottom line and there is not a thing wrong with that perspective.............HOWEVER.............none of you have pointed out some of the faults of the offense throwing INTs in the endzone, throwing INTs that went the other way for opponents TDs, the blocked punts by FAU and MTSU that led to TDs from all within 5 or 10 yards or all the break downs of the special teams allowing the opposition to just run through NT like crap through a goose. I am afraid I do not see where any of this is Coach Mendoza's fault.

4. Until the Navy game NT had far more INTs than TDs.

NT could have won the SMU game if it were not for the mistakes of the offense.

NT could have won the FAU game if it were not for the two blocked punts by our endzone.

NT could have won the Troy game if we had some offense off of 7 turnovers by the defense.

NT could have won the Navy game if it were not for the offense and special teams.

In all respect to the Lynch Mob why don't all of ya think about what mistakes that the offense and special teams have made that have led to the demise of our offensive point production.

Again I say that there is a BIG difference between the time off the clock passing verses running the ball.

Of course NT did not have many fumbles and INTs under Coach Dickey under his controlled run offense.....but guess what......this ain't Coach Dickey's team anymore.

Ya'll running around who are the judge and jury should take a look at the WHOLE picture.....(offense, defense & special teams) before you lynch Coach Mendoza.

What is happening ain't all Coach Mendoza's fault, period.

Edited November 15, 2007 by eulesseagle

[GoMeanGreen1999]

8. NAVY............once in a lifetime scoring game with one INT in endzone, offensive holding in endzone and subsequent TD off free kick......not fault of Mendoza.

NT could have won the Navy game if it were not for the offense and special teams.

Please, Please tell me that you don't honestly believe that the 74 points (10.8 yard avg. per carry) given up by our horrendous defense was not on Mendoza's shoulders?

You honestly believe that the reason we lost the Navy game was due to our offense? Seriously?

Wait, I know you can't be serious - this is really a joke.

Edited November 15, 2007 by GoMeanGreen1999

[STE]

Please, Please tell me that you don't honestly believe that the 74 points (10.8 yard avg. per carry) given up by our horrendous defense was not on Mendoza's shoulders?

You honestly believe that the reason we lost the Navy game was due to our offense? Seriously?

Wait, I know you can't be serious - this is really a joke.

I had the same thought GMG1999.

There is no doubt that we could have won some games in spite of our defense. However, the Mendoza defenders will not admit that they are wrong on this issue. The simple fact is that the offense has gotten better and the defense continues to perform poorly. The RD defenders would rather blame the players than the coaches.

As a side note, I want to mention that I heard the guys on “College Game Day” say a few weeks ago that when Brent Venables and Bobby Jack Wright came to Oklahoma in 99 they were totally unprepared for some of the pro style offenses that they starting facing at that time. I’m paraphrasing but the Game Day crew said Stoops had to send them to educated quickly. Perhaps others watching the program can remember more.

Any way, I mention this because if this can be the case with Venables coming from a successful K-State team and Wright coming from Texas – then it can sure be the case with Mendoza coming from SLC. Fortunately for the Sooners, they were able to pick up on the complex offensive schemes quickly and adjust their defenses accordingly. Can Mendoza do the same? Is this even the right place for him to learn? I assume Mendoza has other assets to offer the team such as recruiting ability. If so, and assuming Dodge wants to keep Mendoza, I hope he will appoint a Co-Defensive Coordinator who can mentor him.

[FirefightnRick]

Is just as amazing that some do not take in to account the turmoil that has been going on behind the scenes on defense, even with it making headlines. I want discipline first and foremost.

I thought you said you didn't know what was going on with the team?

KingDL1

and I don't know what is happening in practice. I don't know how bad the discipline problems are and I don't know how bad the discontent is on the defense.

Which is it? Discipine problems or not? Discontent or no discontent. Is it the higher level of talent and the mighty power of the opposing offenses or not? Pick something and hang on tight with it!

Rick

[KingDL1]

I thought you said you didn't know what was going on with the team?

KingDL1

Which is it? Discipine problems or not? Discontent or no discontent. Is it the higher level of talent and the mighty power of the opposing offenses or not? Pick something and hang on tight with it!

Rick

Rick, it is still a little early this morning and I am not real sure what you are getting at. But I am pretty sure you can have multiple problems, I am sure life would be much easier if it was one dimensional.

Starting with the charges of Racism, and players getting suspended on the defense it would seem we have quite a hangover from last years coaching staff. More importantly my understanding is the new discipline standards are causing some major discontent, that with the old staff they were above the rules. What I don't know is how many or how bad it truly is. We saw on the videos One Two that problems exist.

I think this is a great indicator that they have had problems with discipline and some of the players having a discontented attitude.

The thing that really wrapped it up for me was this quote:

"He still didn't throw them under the bus. He didn't tell everyone what they really did," says player Evan Fentriss. "All the rules that they broke along the way and everything… Dodge he just had to eat it and that just shows his character."

So ignore it if you wish, but I think there are a long list of variables this coaching staff has had to deal with that may explain the drop off from last year to this year. Is Mendoza the man I do not know. Yes even with the list I still have my questions but I do believe Dodge has a better insight then any of us.

Edited November 15, 2007 by KingDL1

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

I think this is a great indicator that they have had problems with discipline and some of the players having a discontented attitude.

Or, like I said a couple of weeks ago, Dodge and his staff of high school coaches don't have control of their lockerroom. Rather than stepping up and buying into the program, upperclassmen have divided it somewhat. In short, the defensive coaches have failed to get the guys on their side of the ball to buy into what they are doing (manning up on OU's receivers, trying to react to the option rather than playing assignment football).

Anyway, if such really is the case, as it appears to be, maybe it's good that so many defensive players are graduating. It's a shame Dodge wouldn't hire a coaching staff that suited their strengths, but...we got what we got when we had our AD and BOR let our high school coach hire a staff full of high school coaches to guide college athletes. Surely, next year will be vastly different.

[FirefightnRick]

The thing that really wrapped it up for me was this quote:

So ignore it if you wish, but I think there are a long list of variables this coaching staff has had to deal with that may explain the drop off from last year to this year. Is Mendoza the man I do not know. Yes even with the list I still have my questions but I do believe Dodge has a better insight then any of us.

Two of those three players haven't played a down this season. The other didn't play in three of our worst defensive showings, OU, SMU and Navy. And considering the show of unity in that video from two of the defensive leaders I'm not seeing how discipline and attitude problems caused our currrent defensive performance on the field.

Rick

Edited November 15, 2007 by FirefightnRick

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

The defensive talent may have slipped over the last few years but it's not substantially lower than say, 2005. In 2005, with Ken Evans as DC we ranked 101 in total defense and 97 in schoring defense (31.5). Along came Fred Bleil in 2006 and with some dropoff in talent we finished 64th in total defense and 79th in scoring defense (25.3). This past year the significant losses on defense were Pruitt, Loren and Graves, none of which were among the tackle, tackle for loss, or sack leaders (although Graves had been in 2005). This year we are 118th in total defense and 119th in scoring defense. The number of points allowed has almost doubled from last year.

The schedule ihas been slightly harder. Teams that we have played this year have a winning percentage of .457; last year it was .434 for the entire year. This year, with the last three games included it projects to be .422.

The reasons are there. Sure, we need nore talent on defense. The same could be said about offense. The talent that is there is being underutilized. Tackle leaders from years past are having about half of the production as in previous years. Some aren't even having a fourth of their best year's production. The offense had lost much more than the defense and many were not really suited to the spread offense but look at the progress that they have made.

Nothing will change until the end of the season (nor should it). Then, after thorough evaluation, a decision will be made on the retention of the coaching staff. I expect coaches to be replaced or possibly reassigned. It won't be easy but it should be necessary.

P.S. Don't forget that special teams will need as hard a look as the defense.

[Cr1028]

Fatigue and the correlation to points scored vs Navy.

1st half vs Navy: 45 points.

2nd half vs Navy: 29 points.

The longer we play, the better we get?

Rick

I think the Navy backs just got tired from all the long runs they put up.

[PlummMeanGreen]

The defensive talent may have slipped over the last few years but it's not substantially lower than say, 2005. In 2005, with Ken Evans as DC we ranked 101 in total defense and 97 in schoring defense (31.5). Along came Fred Bleil in 2006 and with some dropoff in talent we finished 64th in total defense and 79th in scoring defense (25.3). This past year the significant losses on defense were Pruitt, Loren and Graves, none of which were among the tackle, tackle for loss, or sack leaders (although Graves had been in 2005). This year we are 118th in total defense and 119th in scoring defense. The number of points allowed has almost doubled from last year.

The schedule ihas been slightly harder. Teams that we have played this year have a winning percentage of .457; last year it was .434 for the entire year. This year, with the last three games included it projects to be .422.

The reasons are there. Sure, we need nore talent on defense. The same could be said about offense. The talent that is there is being underutilized. Tackle leaders from years past are having about half of the production as in previous years. Some aren't even having a fourth of their best year's production. The offense had lost much more than the defense and many were not really suited to the spread offense but look at the progress that they have made.

Nothing will change until the end of the season (nor should it). Then, after thorough evaluation, a decision will be made on the retention of the coaching staff. I expect coaches to be replaced or possibly reassigned. It won't be easy but it should be necessary.

P.S. Don't forget that special teams will need as hard a look as the defense.

Many points that pretty well sizes things up for many of us, GrayEagleOne.

Now back to the MGRN play by play where Super Jamario has just scored a touchdown!

Edited November 16, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen