-
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!
- Thread starter Clarity
- Start date
- Status
campies
Senior
I'll be the first to admit as a Longhorn fan that some of the criticism to VY's throwing ability is valid. He doesn't throw for a lot of TD's, he has a high amount of INT's, and he passes with a side-arm motion thats not pretty to look at, and often inaccurate on easy throws. However, this is the same Vince Young who was the #1 rated Quarterback/Dual-Threat/Overall Player in the nation coming out of HS in 2001, the #1 rated quaterback at the Elite 11 QB camp for arm strength and MVP honors, and the MVP of the US Army AA game. Now, all of those accolades obviously do not make a top notch passer by themselves, but to act like VY is simply a track star with running back flair masquarading as a D-1 QB is insane.ace1076 said:
This guy has a gun of an arm, made to throw a football, and more people knowledgable of the game than you or I have been able to see that. Some where along the adjustment to college, and exposure to the offensive developmental cancer that is our OC Greg Davis, Vince has either remained fundamentally much the same, or perhaps slightly degressed, mechanically, and that has effected his performance as a passer. Does he have accuracy problems? Yes. Has his reliance on running the past 2 years predominantly in terms of the offense overshadowed his prowess of a passing QB ? No doubt. Does any of this mean that he is unable to beat a team through the air by adapting to the team offensive changes vis a vis personel changes, w/o sacrificing his devestating ability to control the game with his feet? Absolutely not, and the primary reason is, Vince Young is a winner as much or more than he is a superb physical specimen and athlete, and winners do what is necessary to keep winning.
For those reasons, I believe its very reasonable to expect Vince Young to be an effective if not dominating passer to complement his most-definately dominating running ability to the effect of a complete player who has the tools to adjust as needed in order to win. Whether he is able to put all of that together and come out with a win in our game at the 'Shoe remains to be seen.
Upvote
0
Mobyhorn
Freshman
Both Schools are Big. This game is big and a rarity.
This game, on the other hand, is a rarity in college football today. While the recent BCS ranking systems have, possibly, forced schools to schedule much weaker teams, there is something great about scheduling a first-time meeting like this one, regardless where it is to be played. And there was a time when I think Texas would have avoided, and probably did avoid such a match. For example, Texas continually avoided games with LSU. They scheduled Tulane instead. South Carolina would be scheduled instead of Alabama or Tennessee. I do remember several games with USC (one included OJ) in which the games were both close and down to the wire. But those were few and far between. Texas only met big traditional schools in bowls, and being locked into the Cotton Bowl as the Southwest Conference Champ only prolonged the dearth of really classic matchups. When Texas beat Notre Dame in the 1970 Cotton Bowl, I thought it would open some eyes and improve the out of conference schedule. It did not, for the most part.
These two games in 2005 and 2006 will come and go before we know it. I plan to enjoy it regardless of the outcome. I also plan, as a UT alum, to keep lobbying for classic games such as these. Good luck to the Buckeyes. I hope you enjoy these as much as I will.
I'm not so interested in comparing campus enrollments. We all know both schools are major state universities. Each has comprehensive curricula and each has excellent faculties and noteworthy academic programs.High Lonesome said:
This game, on the other hand, is a rarity in college football today. While the recent BCS ranking systems have, possibly, forced schools to schedule much weaker teams, there is something great about scheduling a first-time meeting like this one, regardless where it is to be played. And there was a time when I think Texas would have avoided, and probably did avoid such a match. For example, Texas continually avoided games with LSU. They scheduled Tulane instead. South Carolina would be scheduled instead of Alabama or Tennessee. I do remember several games with USC (one included OJ) in which the games were both close and down to the wire. But those were few and far between. Texas only met big traditional schools in bowls, and being locked into the Cotton Bowl as the Southwest Conference Champ only prolonged the dearth of really classic matchups. When Texas beat Notre Dame in the 1970 Cotton Bowl, I thought it would open some eyes and improve the out of conference schedule. It did not, for the most part.
These two games in 2005 and 2006 will come and go before we know it. I plan to enjoy it regardless of the outcome. I also plan, as a UT alum, to keep lobbying for classic games such as these. Good luck to the Buckeyes. I hope you enjoy these as much as I will.
Upvote
0
Mobyhorn, wow...what a great first post. Have a Great Post Award. Oh yeah, by the way, welcome to the board. 
Upvote
0
Mobyhorn
Freshman
Comparing Experiences
The first reason (I cite this with shame.) was due to pervasive racism. In the Fifties a good part of Texas had segregated high schools. When I came to Austin to start school at UT in 1962, Austin had a segregated high school. That school produced some stellar athletes, none of whom were even considered by Texas or any other southern school in the major conferences. In the late 1950's, UT did manage one Hispanic halfback, Rene Ramirez, but no black athletes. In fact there were no black athletes actually contributing to the Texas program until the 1970's. The thirty-game win streak, between 1968 and 1970 included no black athletes (except for a few in 1970). It was a tragedy, considering how many fine athletes of color had to leave the state to play college ball. Without these players, the coaches knew, regardless of their racial orientations, that these teams could not compete on a national scale.
The second reason was the size of Texas, its insularity towards the rest of the country, and, probably a few practical matters regarding funding trips to other parts of the country. The original Southwest Conference, except for Arkansas, were all in Texas. The view was that Texas football was unique, had plenty of players to go around, and thus there was no need to recruit nationally--the latter attitude still persisting to this day. Showing up in the Midwest, Mideast or the West Coast wasn't warranted for recruiting. Being featured on national television was not a priority. The State of Texas certainly believed in its roots as a Republic then. (There are handfuls of them still lingering who usually wind up with a term in federal prison.)
Texas MNC win over Notre Dame in 1970 began to change those views. Television was a bigger deal by that time. Royal even uttered the choice statement, following the victory over Notre Dame, that:"I had better get me some of those burners." (There should be no guessing about what he meant.)
At the time, you older Buckeyes may recall, there was a lot of quibbling about who should have been awarded the MNC.
A lot of the above has changed now. Unfortunately, BCS formulae, with their never-ending iterations, have provided a 21st Century reason for avoiding good teams. Hopefully, these two games will be Classics in the truest sense.
Thanks for the response. The question will be: Are you going to eat the longhorn or feed it!! To expand on my previous post, I offer the following commentary on UT football history as an additional explanation about why I think Texas never played many national rival games.MililaniBuckeye said:Mobyhorn, wow...what a great first post. Have a Great Post Award. Oh yeah, by the way, welcome to the board.
The first reason (I cite this with shame.) was due to pervasive racism. In the Fifties a good part of Texas had segregated high schools. When I came to Austin to start school at UT in 1962, Austin had a segregated high school. That school produced some stellar athletes, none of whom were even considered by Texas or any other southern school in the major conferences. In the late 1950's, UT did manage one Hispanic halfback, Rene Ramirez, but no black athletes. In fact there were no black athletes actually contributing to the Texas program until the 1970's. The thirty-game win streak, between 1968 and 1970 included no black athletes (except for a few in 1970). It was a tragedy, considering how many fine athletes of color had to leave the state to play college ball. Without these players, the coaches knew, regardless of their racial orientations, that these teams could not compete on a national scale.
The second reason was the size of Texas, its insularity towards the rest of the country, and, probably a few practical matters regarding funding trips to other parts of the country. The original Southwest Conference, except for Arkansas, were all in Texas. The view was that Texas football was unique, had plenty of players to go around, and thus there was no need to recruit nationally--the latter attitude still persisting to this day. Showing up in the Midwest, Mideast or the West Coast wasn't warranted for recruiting. Being featured on national television was not a priority. The State of Texas certainly believed in its roots as a Republic then. (There are handfuls of them still lingering who usually wind up with a term in federal prison.)
Texas MNC win over Notre Dame in 1970 began to change those views. Television was a bigger deal by that time. Royal even uttered the choice statement, following the victory over Notre Dame, that:"I had better get me some of those burners." (There should be no guessing about what he meant.)
At the time, you older Buckeyes may recall, there was a lot of quibbling about who should have been awarded the MNC.
A lot of the above has changed now. Unfortunately, BCS formulae, with their never-ending iterations, have provided a 21st Century reason for avoiding good teams. Hopefully, these two games will be Classics in the truest sense.
Upvote
0
Thanks for the historical perspective, Moby. Another good read.
One of my oldest memories of college football is Street's 4th down bomb to Randy Peschel (I had to look his name up) in the 'Big Shootout' against the Hogs in 1969. I'm sure that 15-14 victory is a fond memory for you, also.
One of my oldest memories of college football is Street's 4th down bomb to Randy Peschel (I had to look his name up) in the 'Big Shootout' against the Hogs in 1969. I'm sure that 15-14 victory is a fond memory for you, also.
Upvote
0
BuckeyeSkins
Go Bucks/Hail to the Redskins!!
Excellent, informative posts Moby. Welcome to the board. I look forward to reading more of your well written and knowlegeable posts. Again welcome to the Planet!
:cheers:
:cheers:
Upvote
0
High Lonesome
Hook 'Em
Well moby I must admit that I don't really want to talk about attendance either; however, this thread has a way of going very strange places. We are already at post 458 and still have till september. It is nice to see another horn around here. I must admit that allready you seem to be much more knowledgable than I about the history of Texas football. I just graduated last august and grew up in a family of aggies, longhorn history is not my strong suite. It has also been pointed out that I cannot spell and I almost never proof read my posts. Regardless, it is always nice to have intelligent posters your side of the discussion.
Upvote
0
Mobyhorn said:
Well, since Longhorn is what's for dinner, it's obvious they'll get eaten up. Then again, we can still feed the Longhorns plenty of our Horseshoe turf, seeing as they'll have plenty of time face down in it.
And you can knock it off with all the great posts already...we're only alloted some many Great Post Awards per day. :)
Upvote
0
texhornfan
Junior
tickets-osu-Texas
I Keep hearing rumors that Texas will only be allowed 5,000 tickets, surely that cain't be right. It was reported that 20,000 Texans were at the Rose Bowl. One news paper said that a third of the people at the Rose Bowl were from Texas. That may be an exageration. There will be 5,000 Texans that will jog to Cbus besides the ones that drive and fly. Can someone in the know straighten me out.
I Keep hearing rumors that Texas will only be allowed 5,000 tickets, surely that cain't be right. It was reported that 20,000 Texans were at the Rose Bowl. One news paper said that a third of the people at the Rose Bowl were from Texas. That may be an exageration. There will be 5,000 Texans that will jog to Cbus besides the ones that drive and fly. Can someone in the know straighten me out.
Upvote
0
- Status