and i have came to the conclusion that we are not half as good as either of these teams. TCU would beat us by 45 and SMU is a good touchdown or 3 better also.

No.

We stopped playing TCU at just the right time to keep our streak intact.

TCU is much better than us now, but SMU is not. They have improved, but we would beat them handily head-to-head.

SMU/UAB game was very close...and UAB had like 6 turnovers.

TCU would beat us. It wouldn't be by 45 points.

SMU is not better than us. That's WAY over the top.



[This message has been edited by tjsmith (edited 10/5/2009 1:48p).]

I grew up in a Frog family and live in DFW, so I try to keep close watch on TCU. It doesn't seem like they've put together a full game yet this season. They toyed with SMU for most of the game. SMU would not beat us. TCU, I'm afraid, would own us. There is no way we could protect JJ against their defensive line.

TCU is overrated but they'd still beat us. Good, fast defense but their offense isn't remotely Top 25 calibur. If they play a real top 20 team, they'll lose.

When can we expect to have TCU talent???

^
We've surpassed them in talent. Problem is 90% of it is on offense (excluding the line, but next year we will have surpassed them in that too, albeit it will be very young, raw talent).

^

TCU would beat arkansas and YES TCU would beat us by 45

CJS, I know what you're thinking. Allow me to explain. TCU's offense is way below ours talent wise (i.e. quarterback, receivers, running backs), their Oline is way better than ours... obviously, whose isn't? Defensively, they are way better, especially on the D-Line.

BUT... if you look at who Sherm is recruiting, do you really think it will take us light years to catch them in those troubled departments??? Not from where I'm standing. D-Line will take the longest, cause I do think that's the one area where Sherm needs to pick it up.

But TCU wouldn't beat us by 45. More like 28-17.

It's going to be hard to catch TCU defensively, no matter how good our recruiting is, at least as long as Patterson and Bumpas are there. I'd say their defense is one of the top 5 in the nation. I'd only be comfortable saying that Alabama, Florida, and tOSU have as good a defense as TCU overall this year. They have a tremendously wonderful but simple secondary scheme that's unique as far as I know in college football. (Yes, I know that Va. Tech runs the same base formation, but they don't go about it in the same way.)

Honestly, I don’t think they’ve ever out recruited us, so it must be something else. Is it development? Is it just chemistry? Maybe it’s simply attrition/player development? I don’t know… That’s where I am trying to get to. Our team is ultimately not playing up to its potential when you look at that supposed talent we have (speaking historically). I think we have out recruited TCU (and yes, I realize this is only Sherm’s second year), but I feel confident that we would lose to TCU this year. Why should I assume another recruiting class ranked ahead of TCU would net a different hypothetical result? I don’t see the logic.

^
My point is that it is more scheme than anything else.


I have to edit this one to respond because it won't let me reply again because of the whole rookie thing. CJS, what I mean by what I said above is this is why TCU overachieves (as stated below). As far as the match up with us, this very good, developed defensive scheme would be part of it, but it would also be a mixture of the things you said above. Their talent is definitely more well developed, but ours is superior in several areas and will be even more so after Sherman continues to recruit. Again, it IS his second year, and being on the team last year and getting to work with him opened my eyes as to how good a coach he actually is and how far behind we fell thanks to Fran. It's about recruiting in the right areas, which Sherman is doing.


[This message has been edited by tjsmith (edited 10/5/2009 5:23p).]

So there are several inferior teams that could out scheme us? That's what you are saying. Where would the blame lie with something like that?

TCU is a special case. They, like Boise State, are perennial overachievers under their current head coaches. For every 2 teams like these, you get another 80 teams that play right where they ought to.

What TCU does is recruit to fill a very specific niche. They coach a scheme that, for the defensive secondary, is extremely simple to execute, which is paramount. However, for an opposing offense, it's a nightmare because it is so completely removed from the way anyone else plays offense. It's like playing one good team a year that runs the option. What Patterson has done is to divorce what his secondary does from what his front 6 does. What I mean is, the front 6 gets a call, and the secondary gets a call, but the two do not depend on each other. No one else as far as I know play this. For most teams, what the secondary does is dependent on how the front 7 is playing - e.g. who, if anyone, is blitzing, how are the linebackers covering, etc. For TCU, the front gets their call, and the back gets their call, and the two are virtually independent. What's more, they split their secondary into two parts each with a distinct call. The free safety is in charge of the side with the most receivers and makes a call to the strong safety, that side's CB, and the LB who lines up on that side; the weak safety lines up the opposite CB and linebacker.

It's terribly confusing for a quarterback because you can have 2 different coverages on either side of the field. Plus, it's easy to roll up those two extra safeties for 8 in the box.

It's something that they have committed to doing well and that no one else does.

For the sake of argument, we would win. That's all.

quote:

---

What TCU does is recruit to fill a very specific niche. They coach a scheme that, for the defensive secondary, is extremely simple to execute, which is paramount. However, for an opposing offense, it's a nightmare because it is so completely removed from the way anyone else plays offense. It's like playing one good team a year that runs the option. What Patterson has done is to divorce what his secondary does from what his front 6 does. What I mean is, the front 6 gets a call, and the secondary gets a call, but the two do not depend on each other. No one else as far as I know play this. For most teams, what the secondary does is dependent on how the front 7 is playing - e.g. who, if anyone, is blitzing, how are the linebackers covering, etc. For TCU, the front gets their call, and the back gets their call, and the two are virtually independent. What's more, they split their secondary into two parts each with a distinct call. The free safety is in charge of the side with the most receivers and makes a call to the strong safety, that side's CB, and the LB who lines up on that side; the weak safety lines up the opposite CB and linebacker.

It's terribly confusing for a quarterback because you can have 2 different coverages on either side of the field. Plus, it's easy to roll up those two extra safeties for 8 in the box.

---

In simpler terms, they run a 4-2-5 the right way.

Concise to the point of eloquence; you, sir, are a scholar and a gentleman of the finest sort.

TCU has played a complete game this year at Clemson. I was there and it was a solid performance.

Where are TCU's quality wins this season? A Virginia team that despite playing great against North Carolina this past week, lost to William & Mary?

A 14-10 win over a Clemson team that just lost to a bad Maryland team?

SMU? Texas State?

We out-recruit most teams that we play every year....including TCU

We just don't develop players like TCU.

They had 5 guys drafted last year (more than any other school in Texas, including tu)

They develop 2 and 3 star recruits probably better than anyone in the country and have kept a coaching staff mostly in place for 9 years.

They don't get the chance to play many big time games because it's almost impossible to schedule them, but if you ever watch them play, it's hard to say they aren't a fully legit football program.

It would be nice to have a defense that good year in year out....make you miss the w.crew

texasrebel might be the worst troll yet

TCU puts what talent they get on D. They emphasize speed on the D-line. For example a kid I played with in HS was a FS. They converted him to a DE and put some weight on him. they play many of their kids out of their HS positions and by doing this put a lot of speed on the field. They get pushed around by big dogs, but against the teams that they play it is the perfect recipie for success.

If $Bill wasnt so greedy, TCU would have already put the beat down on A&M.

WAT???!!!!

I've seen Byrne blamed for a lot of stuff, but his greed helping us avoid a loss to TCU hasn't been one of them.

[This message has been edited by Bob the Enzyte Guy (edited 10/6/2009 2:02p).]

quote:

---

Ranger_Red


TCU puts what talent they get on D. They emphasize speed on the D-line. For example a kid I played with in HS was a FS. They converted him to a DE and put some weight on him. they play many of their kids out of their HS positions and by doing this put a lot of speed on the field. They get pushed around by big dogs, but against the teams that they play it is the perfect recipie for success.

---

OU didn't push them around a couple years ago up in Norman. And if memory serves, the tu game was more about the tu defense doing a number on the offense and the tu special teams had a couple of big plays.

[This message has been edited by Macarthur (edited 10/6/2009 2:03p).]

tcu's defense would most likely shut us down. But there offense is so pedestrian they probably wouldn't beat us by more than two scores unless we kept turning it over.

We would beat smu much like we beat uab.

Enzyte, $Bill is so concerned with having cupcakes at home and refuses to play TCU in a home and home. A&M is not good enough to get a onesie from the Frogs, so its kinda awesome.

tcu would not beat us.... now back to your regularly scheduled program

Here's TCU's recruiting ranking per Rival.

2006: #61
2007: #80
2008: #96
2009: #46
2010: #54

Average #67


How is it possible they're ranked...

[This message has been edited by AggieDruggist89 (edited 10/6/2009 8:07p).]

conf usa, or wac or whatever....and confidence and coaching.

there's also a reason they lose to one mid-major every year.

quote:

---

Honestly, I don’t think they’ve ever out recruited us, so it must be something else. Is it development? Is it just chemistry? Maybe it’s simply attrition/player development?

---

It is something else. It's called playing in the Mountain West Conference every year. Throw TCU in the Big 12 and they would get destroyed, and the build up of teams they have produced over the recent years wouldn't be there.