• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Game Thread Game Two: #1 Ohio State 24, #2 Texas 7 (9/9/06)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
UTMNC said:
I hope Justin isn't reading this thread.
Click to expand...
If Justin were reading this thread he would be in complete agreement that you have no idea what you are talking about.
He would probably love to play in the Texas game, but this is Troy Smith's team. If something were to happen and Zwick were to play, I would still love our chances. He's a more experienced QB than anyone you have, and he's been around plenty long enough to know the capabilities of his teammates.
 
Upvote 0
Here's the question from where I'm looking at this game.
Texas was soft, super soft, and couldn't win the big games...sometimes not even showing up. They always had great talent, and just as much speed as this year's team, but they did nothing with it.
Click to expand...
Here are the games I think we were "soft"
OU 2000-2003
I'm not including 2004 because I saw a bunch of angry kids lay it all out on the field. Being hamstrung by Greg Davis does not equal soft.
2003 Holiday Bowl
2003 Arkansas
2001 Big 12 CCG (just Chris Simms)
And possibly the 2004 Mizzou game. We won, but it was a pathetic showing.

And I think we only started having elite talent around 2001. We still weren't deep, but we had some freaks. So I won't go farther back than that. And I'll stop when Mack and Greg started letting "Vince be Vince" (2004 Mizzou, you know the story by now).

Here's how those seasons ended:
2001 11-2 #5
2002 11-2 #6
2003 10-3 #11
2004 11-1 #4
An average season of 11-2 and an average finish of #7 in the country isn't bad. In any case, it's something.

I think it's only fair to say that the 2001 and 2003 teams underachieved.

Also, I would submit that the following wins were big games:
2001 Colorado
2001 @Texas A&M
2001 Holiday Bowl
2002 @KSU
2002 @Nebraska
2003 Cotton Bowl
2003 KSU
2003 Nebraska
2004 @Arkansas

None as big as the one to be played this fall, but pretty big by themselves.

And then there was Vince.
Vince Young was a phenomenal leader, besides being a freakishly gifted athlete. Without Vince Young the Rose Bowl against scUM, the tOSU game, as well as the NC game to the condoms are all losses for Texas.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's as simple as subtracting his contributions out of those games (we would've had a different game plan, others would have been more involved, might have stepped up, etc), but I can't argue with that.

And now there is no more Vince.
Without Vince Young, will Texas go back to the soft, sissy team that got bushwacked by Oklahoma by 50....twice?
Click to expand...

But also had the pretty good wins listed above and finished ranked an average of 6.5. But yes, we were soft in both those losses. Most other games, not soft at all.

Is Mack Brown a better coach than a few years ago, or did he have that one special player that made everything work?
Click to expand...

My biggest question heading into this season. Maybe I'm seeing what I want to see, but I think he's changed. He and Greg Davis. By "changed" I don't mean he'll throw deep when otherwise he wouldn't, I mean I think he's completely changed much of his coaching philosophy.

Lots of coaches have had that "one special player that made everything work." Frank Beamer is still considered to be one of the best coaches in the country, but he hasn't so much as sniffed the MNC game since Vick left. Lllloyd (as y'all like to call him) actually had a good defense led by Woodson. Wait, that probably doesn't help my case here. Osbourne had Frazier, Tressel had Clarett, Coker had Dorsey, Carroll had Leinart, Stoops had Heupel, and so on and so forth. Some of those were obviously under different circumstances and the players probably weren't quite as important to their respective teams, but I guarantee you each of those coaches would have lost a game or two during their MNC years without their corresponding best player and/or leader.

And that's all I have to say about that. [/Forrest Gump]
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top