Intelligent non assessment, especially considering what he said last year.
Under Phillip Montgomery...
Under Phillip Montgomery...
Connelly doesn't really give a prediction...
- Thread starter Gmoney4WW
- Start date
This is a balanced analysis. While it may favor Ark. State on paper, I will be shocked if TU doesn't win that game (as I was when TU lost to New Mexico last year). That is the 5 wins I consider a minimum. One more W, SMU at home or any road game, and 6-6 and a minor bowl can happen.
Analysis is fair. Projected record is not. This is a 6 win team. Maybe with a lucky bounce or an off day for an opponent, they squeak out 8.
Ouch. But not much I can argue with in there. The prediction is fair based on the data available - but I hope and think it is under estimating. A few notches better here or there, a few ball bounces, and last year's team could have been at 8 wins and bowling for a 9th. Knowing full well what our weaknesses were and are likely to be, we've had an entire off season to fill the gaps, develop talent, and plan for them.
My thoughts:
GAME 1: I think game one will be more telling than it should be. Central Arkansas is a damn good football team, but a damn good I-AA football team. If we don't come out with attitude and pound them like the divisional little brother they are supposed to be - I fear for the season. I need to see domination to start sipping the Kool-Aid again, no excuses. It isn't only the W that matters in this game, it's proving we are a solid football team again. A loss has me shouting that the sky is falling, even if they are a really good FCS team and we had all these injuries and the QB is young and the weather wasn't right and the ball just bounced there way...
GAME 2 will tell us more about Texas than about us. They arguably have as much football talent as any team in the country. Either they've learned how to use that talent or they haven't. Even if they haven't, they should win at home - the 11% chance is probably about right here. But I'd love to crush Texas souls.
GAME 3. Assuming we win game 1, game 3 sets the season. Arkansas State went bowling last year and is expected to field a solid team this year. Respect to the Red Wolves, but if we lose to Arkansas State at home the rest of our schedule makes for a really long season.
If we drop to Arkansas State at home, we could wait until the end of October for our next win. It would be likely that this is a 3 or 4 win season. That's a solid F in my grade book. But I think we beat Arkansas State, show solid improvement, win the games we are supposed to, and find ourselves paying SMU and Navy at the end of the season fighting for bowl eligibility. That's a C, but a good enough improvement to give me hope.
This is year 4. This is Monte's team as much as he wants it to be. He needs to show us he can build a team and coach it to wins.
My thoughts:
GAME 1: I think game one will be more telling than it should be. Central Arkansas is a damn good football team, but a damn good I-AA football team. If we don't come out with attitude and pound them like the divisional little brother they are supposed to be - I fear for the season. I need to see domination to start sipping the Kool-Aid again, no excuses. It isn't only the W that matters in this game, it's proving we are a solid football team again. A loss has me shouting that the sky is falling, even if they are a really good FCS team and we had all these injuries and the QB is young and the weather wasn't right and the ball just bounced there way...
GAME 2 will tell us more about Texas than about us. They arguably have as much football talent as any team in the country. Either they've learned how to use that talent or they haven't. Even if they haven't, they should win at home - the 11% chance is probably about right here. But I'd love to crush Texas souls.
GAME 3. Assuming we win game 1, game 3 sets the season. Arkansas State went bowling last year and is expected to field a solid team this year. Respect to the Red Wolves, but if we lose to Arkansas State at home the rest of our schedule makes for a really long season.
If we drop to Arkansas State at home, we could wait until the end of October for our next win. It would be likely that this is a 3 or 4 win season. That's a solid F in my grade book. But I think we beat Arkansas State, show solid improvement, win the games we are supposed to, and find ourselves paying SMU and Navy at the end of the season fighting for bowl eligibility. That's a C, but a good enough improvement to give me hope.
This is year 4. This is Monte's team as much as he wants it to be. He needs to show us he can build a team and coach it to wins.
The prediction is what the computer sees. The computer sees a team of guys who haven’t produced or didn’t produce well enough last year. Coupled with a recruiting grade over the last four years that’s lower than most of our conference (I think that Oklahoma recruits are undervalued and Texas recruits are overvalued by a lot of recruiting services because of more eyeballs but that’s changing more and more). When you put Recruiting & last year’s performance together, it makes sense. We’ll lose almost no one after this season, so if we put out 6-7 wins this year, projections would probably show us at about 8 wins the next year.
The most interesting thing from Connelly’s preview is stats under President/Skipper
- Tulsa offense, first 5 games (with President as starter): Avg. points per game: 35.0 | Avg. yards per play: 5.8 | Avg. percentile performance: 47%
- Tulsa offense, last 7 games (with Skipper as starter): Avg. points per game: 25.3 | Avg. yards per play: 5.6 | Avg. percentile performance: 38%
President started 7 games, including the last game. Two of his starts produced the vast majority of his points - 66 against hapless Louisiana Lafayette, and 51 at Toledo. The offense didn't work with President at quarterback in the five other games, including Tulane, where he was yanked and Skipper got all 28 points.
I just don't get the poor-mouthing of Luke Skipper as starter this year vs. Boomer, President or anyone else. What I saw last year was a QB who was pressured or on his butt a lot, WR's who ran lousy routes or dropped his throws and who improved towards end of season.
He will start this year & lead this team to at least six victories, IMO. I believe our WR's will be coached up on route running & hanging on to the ball. Our solid running game will help the passing game. Against a murderers row of opponents, we will do better than the "experts" expect & knock off at least one of the "big boys".
This team is hungry & it will be reflected in their play. Coach Monty will see to that. TU Football: 1st,last,always!
He will start this year & lead this team to at least six victories, IMO. I believe our WR's will be coached up on route running & hanging on to the ball. Our solid running game will help the passing game. Against a murderers row of opponents, we will do better than the "experts" expect & knock off at least one of the "big boys".
This team is hungry & it will be reflected in their play. Coach Monty will see to that. TU Football: 1st,last,always!
Agreed.
I think a lot of the inconsistent QB play with Skipper was due to the inconsistency at WR.
I'm hopeful that is resolved this year.
Skipper's going to be good. I was kind of surprised when we got that Baylor QB. I honestly believe Skipper can be the next Dane / GJ / Smith
I agree with that. Given an upgraded or improved receiving corps, he could develop into an outstanding QB.
I think the UCONN game was perhaps where we saw Skipper's potential. The drive in the last couple minutes and the near play he made at the end of the game showed his ability to make some plays (granted, UCONN was awful and how their D wasn't in a deep safe defense...or maybe they were and it still didn't work).
It felt like everyone associated with the offense threw in the towel down the stretch. Nobody had any idea what to do, we’d tried all the personnel we had available, clearly we needed a period off and some new blood to rethink things.
That's the pre-snap read. I know we line up in a standard play just about every down with a "check with me" coming from the sideline, but your QB needs to be able to make his own presnap and get out of a bad play OR understand if he reads blitz his normal hot read might not be there because of the coverage called otherwise. I think those types of quick reads we got used to with Dane running the show were not quite there last season. And it may be a function of Skipper just needing more film time and game time because things always seem to move just a bit faster against a real opponent who is trying to rip your head off versus going against your own team's defense in practice and you've got the red or green "no touching me" jersey on.
Funny thing was, President was really good at those reads... he just couldn't make the throws well enough after he made the reads. I think Skipper will benefit from being the clear #1 in spring / fall camp. Monty's a great 1 on 1 tutor.
There's a reason why Baylor took Stidham on top of President. I don't think anyone at Baylor considered President to be a QB at this level, but he does have some crazy, game changing athletic ability. I also think he has a great football IQ and he seems to be a pretty smart kid overall. He, unfortunately, does not have the arm talent to match his football IQ and understanding of this offense.
And I think you're right...if Monty focuses on Skipper and his deficiencies in getting through his progressions quickly, we should have an A QB playing instead of a B. He certainly can throw the ball...the key will be reading it quickly and delivering the ball on time. If the WRs get on the same page we could have another repeat of 2016
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Brad Carson to be Vice Chairman of the AAC Board of Directors
- Latest: goldenhurricane2
-
-
-