I'm not sure if anyone noticed this or saw it after the game against Nevada, but during his post-game interview Tubberville had just been asked about how his team was able to fight back, and he had this exact quote to say:

"We'll we're not a good football team but we're scrappy."

Am I the only one who finds this type of comment completely inappropriate for a head coach to be saying on so many different levels? First of all,  if this were verifiably true that would mean that he himself is not a "good" coach if he cannot field a "good" team.

Secondly, is he calling the entire team, including coordinators, position coaches, etc. bad as well? I wonder what these guys would have to say about that comment, as I think Brown and Glasgow are certainly on their way to becoming great coordinators. 

Finally, how the hell are you supposed to build confidence in your team and foster a competitive spirit within your players when as the head coach you are putting them down and essentially saying they are a BAD team on TV after a WIN!!?!?!? 

I guess Tubberville is already writing games against the following teams that would have to be considered better than "bad" off as losses: OU, OSU, ATM, UT, BAY, KSU, ISU. 

I tell ya, this guy sure does know how to piss me right off sometimes. Some of the things he says just seem totally uncalled for to me. At times I am left to wonder if he even realizes what he says and how it sounds, because if so he would have to be some kind of idiot to think it right to say many of these things. 

First off, let me say that if Maryland does infact hire Mike Leach as their next head coach, they will immediately gain me as a fan and I have decided I will legitimize this by purchasing a Maryland Terrapins hat and watching every UMD game on espn3. Let's just say that it's hard to be proud of your school when they conspire to fire the winningest coach in school history in likely the most unethical manner possible, so I now vicariously live through your football program. I can't tell you how painful it now is watching Tommy T make a fool of not only himself, but every player on our team.

Anyway, I made this post on doubletnation.com a long time ago to get an in-depth look at just how much production Leach gets out of his players compared to the other 11 teams in the big 12. It's a lot to read, but I promise it is worth it, as I was amazed when I finished making it at what the statistics presented. This is my way of emphasizing how excited I am to see Mike Leach back in football. It's very refreshing for me to see that the University of Maryland is smart enough, open-minded enough, and decisive enough to see through all the bullshit that Leach had to put up with at Tech and realize that this is a good man who cares about his players, academics, and is a damn good coach with a damn good scheme to boot. Enjoy and go Terps!!!! Below is the original post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had a lot of time on my hands, so I decided to try and figure out a way to truly examine the performances of every Big 12 team since 2002 in such a way that it took each program's advantages or disadvantages from a recruiting standpoint into consideration and could give a real number to gauge their productivity relative to the type of recruit they get. In this calculation, teams are rewarded for acquiring wins while having lesser recruits, while teams are punished for failing to acquire wins while having greater recruits. As we all know, Tech has been able to massively overachieve given the current pecking order in recruiting that exists in the Big 12, while schools such as, o I dunno, Texas A&M maybe, have managed to massively underachieve despite having what many "experts" (from rivals.com) declare great recruits/recruiting classes. 

The information that I came up with resulted in each team earning what I call a "Power Score" in that it is a great indication of how much "boom for your buck," if you will, each team gets per recruit based on how many wins they earn with said recruits. This score consists of the amount of wins earned by each team beginning with the 2002 season and ending with the 2008 season (both total wins and conference wins) divided by the average star rating of a recruit their team signed, according to rivals.com, beginning with the class of 2002 and ending with the class of 2008. By doing this, every possible signee who could have contributed in any way to any teams' total win number over this time period is included in the calculation. Below is a table displaying the results:

Team               Wins from '02-'08 (Conference Wins)  Avg. Stars per player ('02-'08)   Power Score (Conf. Power Score)

Baylor                               25 (10)                                                           2.27                                              11.01 (4.41)

Colorado                          42 (27)                                                           2.86                                              14.69 (9.44)

Iowa State                        32 (15)                                                           2.49                                              12.85 (6.02)

Kansas                             45 (22)                                                           2.66                                              16.92 (8.27)

Kansas State                   48 (26)                                                          2.85                                               16.84 (9.12)

Missouri                           55 (29)                                                           2.86                                               19.23 (10.14)

Nebraska                         53 (28)                                                           3.13                                               16.93 (8.95)

Oklahoma                        78 (53)                                                           3.64                                                21.43 (14.56)

Oklahoma State             51 (27)                                                            2.88                                                17.71 (9.38)

Texas A&M                      42 (24)                                                           3.09                                                13.60 (7.77)

Texas                                77 (47)                                                          3.66                                                 21.04 (12.84)

Texas Tech                      62 (35)                                                          2.71                                                 22.88 (12.92)

As I mentioned before, as Tech fans we all know our team regularly overachieves, but I found this result to be pretty surprising! Your Texas Tech Red Raiders have the #1 power score in the overall wins category, and the #2 power score in the conference wins category! Below is the complete rankings list:

OVERALL:

#1 Texas Tech - 22.88

#2 Oklahoma - 21.43

#3 Texas - 21.04

#4 Missouri - 19.23

#5 Oklahoma State - 17.71

#6 Nebraska - 16.93

#7 Kansas - 16.92

#8 Kansas State - 16.84

#9 Colorado - 14.69

#10 Texas A&M - 13.60

#11 Iowa State - 12.85

#12 Baylor - 11.01

CONFERENCE:

#1 Oklahoma - 14.56***

#2 Texas Tech - 12.92

#3 Texas - 12.84

#4 Missouri - 10.14

#5 Colorado - 9.44

#6 Oklahoma State - 9.38

#7 Kansas State - 9.12

#8 Nebraska - 8.95

#9 Kansas - 8.27

#10 Texas A&M - 7.77

#11 Iowa State - 6.02

#12 Baylor - 4.41

***OU's conference power level is particularly high because Big 12 championships accounted for extra wins against conference foes, thus further rewarding their performance.  

Unsurprisingly, Baylor and Iowa State finished 12th and 11th respectively in both lists, because they quite simply could not accumulate wins. Also unsurprisingly, the Aggies, one of only 4 teams in the conference to have an average star rating above 3, finished 10th in overall wins and conference wins despite having what would seem like a considerable advantage as far as recruiting is concerned compared to most teams. Texas Tech, on the other hand, had only the 9th highest average star rating, but was able to finish very high on both lists. What else does these calculations tell us though? These observations are fairly obvious and do not require calculations to agree upon, only common sense. What may surprise you, however, lies ahead. Consider this: 

For Texas Tech, you can multiply their power score (22.88) and their average star rating (2.71) and you will come up with an answer of 62.0048, or 62, the number of wins Tech had from 2002 to 2008. What really makes this table interesting is that you can apply this formula to any team and see how they would perform with another team's talent. For comparison's sake, let's see how our team would have fared from this time period if they had the talent level of UT:

22.88 (Tech's power level) X 3.66 (UT's avg. star rating) = 83.7408 

WOW! What a whopping number! If we had the same talent level as UT over the same time period based on the information presented in the table, we would have achieved 84 wins (if we round up) compared to UT's 77 wins that were actually accumulated over that time!  Even with A&M's talent level we theoretically achieve about 71 wins compared to their 42 over the same time period! Of course, these calculations must be taken with a massive grain of salt, as they do not factor in uncontrollable variables of football such as turnovers, injuries, etc. But from simply a comparison of performance standpoint based on past trends acquired strictly from the information presented in the table, they are a great indicator of how much production a team gets, or would have got, out of their, or another team's players!  

You can also multiply the power level of a team by the avg. star rating of a team to get the total wins the team would acquire, and then divide by 7 (2002 season through 2008 season) to discover how many wins the team would average over that span. Let's compare Tech with Baylor here: 

22.88 X 2.27= 51.9376 
51.9376 / 7 = 7.41965.... 

Even with we had BAYLOR'S talent level from 2002-2008, we would have theoretically still averaged 7 wins a season!!!!!  

If this does not indicate what a wonderful, outstanding, remarkable, incredible job our staff does working with and developing our players, than I truly do not know what does. This also shows that our guys are FULL of heart and are willing to be taught from this great staff and work hard to reach what many people don't think is possible from them. I hope anyone who reads all this can appreciate it as much as I did, because I now have even MORE respect for my football team!

Sorry to make such a short fanpost like this during a time when seemingly every contributor on this site is coming out with extremely well thought-out and informative posts, but I was just wondering what can even happen to these evil men that we have become all too familiar with lately? To be more clear:

1) If they were to get fired, who would do the firing?

I have thought about this a lot, and it doesn't seem possible for them to get fired by anyone. Are they not filling the most authoritative positions at the school? Are they even in a position to be fired? Can we get Obama on them just like how the Gov't did with GM (kidding)? 

2) How is it even possible for them to resign on their own?

I have thought about this a lot, too. What would have to happen for these men to resign? Would they not have to realize that Texas Tech was taking MASSIVE financial hits because of their actions regarding Leach? Would the university have to approach bankruptcy? If they have the audacity to railroad Leach, surely nothing anyone says can force them to resign...Will their homes and other properties need to be destroyed, and will their safety as Lubbock residents need re-evaluation on their part? I just don't see what could ever force these guys to resign.

Maybe I am just extremely naive to everything I am attempting to explain to myself, and perhaps the answer to these questions is easier to figure than I realize. But I just don't see how any of these guys could be forced to leave Tech or get fired. It's as if they are the CEO's of Texas Tech, and there is no one in a position powerful enough to fire them. It seems as though the only thing that could get them out is anarchy on the part of the Texas Tech students, which, judging by the outrage concerning that group, seems like a fairly probable occurrence. 

Can someone explain this to me? Are we really stuck with these pigs forever? Or can someone do something to somehow get them away from our great university so we are not forced to deal with their incompetency that has already tarnished the great Double-T logo?

If you are currently a student at Tech or have a child that is a student at Texas Tech or know anyone who has a child at Texas Tech, please encourage them to request the University to remove tuition fees for football games. After the latest development with Mike Leach, I believe this is the best way to express how betrayed and forsaken we as fans feel because of Gerald Myers, Guy Bailey, and the rest of the administration. Please call 806-742-2011 to reach the front office and take all necessary steps to eliminate tuition money paid for football games. WE ALL NEED TO DO THIS! THIS IS THE ONE WAY WE CAN GET BACK AT THE JOKE OF AN "ADMINISTRATION" WE HAVE. THEY HAVE NOT ONLY CHANGED LEACH'S LIFE, BUT ANY RECRUIT BOTH ON THE TEAM AND WHO WAS EXCITED TO PLAY FOR LEACH!!!!!

I was just over at the tech rivals site and on the front page it says we are expected to have one of our commitments announce his decommitment over the next several weeks. Does anyone have any speculation as to who they could be reffering to? I wonder if this has to do with the miserable A&M "performance." You hate to hear something like this...I just hope it's not one of the big-timers.

Amidst all the talk about fat little girlfriends and lack of discipline that Leach has had so much fun with lately at press conferences, I thought it would be interesting to see if there is something to this theory. Well, shockingly, after searching online for a little while, I was unable to find any information supporting the statement that fat little girlfriends, media types, or any other external voices were directly connected to Leach- coached teams having a general lack of discipline. What I did find, however, was a consistent inability of our head coach to learn how to teach the concepts of discipline and accountability on a team with regard one of the easiest things to avoid in football: PENALTIES!!!!!!  Since Leach's first season in 2000, Texas Tech has consistently been among the nation's most penalized teams. I even found this a bit shocking (this was from a site ranking fewest yards penalized per game):

Year                  yds. penalized/game                         rank

2000                         76.58                                             104

2001                        61.27                                               63

2002                        Year not available on website for some reason

2003                       51.00                                               34

2004                       74.08                                                109

2005                       75.00                                                109 

2006                       83.42                                                117 (dead last that season)

2007                       64.92                                                112

2008                       71.77                                                115

2009                       60.23                                                 96

Links:

2000              http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2000&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2001              http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2001&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2003              http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2002&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2004              http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2003&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2005              http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2004&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2006             http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2005&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2007             http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2006&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2008             http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2007&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

2009            http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2008&div=4&rpt=IA_teamyardspenalized&site=org

Other than a solid, relatively penalty-free season in 2003 (which just so happened to be the best offensive system in Leach's tenure, not-so coincidentally) the rest of the statistics are quite simply ridiculous. Of the nine teams listed, six...(SIX!!!!!!!!!) of them finished 104th or worse in the nation in yards penalized per game. In the 9 years listed, we have average a 95th place finish and averaged 68.70 yards penalized PER GAME!!!!!

Look guys, I love Mike Leach just as much as the next guy, and while the fat little girlfriends comment definitely rubbed me the wrong way, I LOVE that he will say whatever he is thinking and doesn't pander to everyone like every other coach in America does. I wouldn't have it any other way. I also love that he practices tough love on his players (making Britton study in the snow---hilarious). But one thing I have noticed about Leach is that he rarely will blame himself a lot of the times and is not afraid to throw his players under the bus (I do recall after the 2006 TCU game he called himself the "worst coach in America).

What bothers me the most about the fat little girlfriend comment isn't that it can be construed as offensive (though it certainly could), but rather that Leach seems to blame things that are really out of his players' control as reasons why his teams are not succeeding. As Texas Tech football players, these guys are gonna get attention from the media, fans, girls (fat or skinny) and what not. Is part of dealing with that the maturity of the players? Hell ya! But it looks like (at least to me) the one who has the problem isn't the players or the fat girls, but the Coach poking fun at them. Over his entire tenure, he has not been able to teach a team to limit penalties. I know we don't recruit troublesome and less than stand-up guys to play for our program, so for all the problems to be blamed on the players all the time is ridiculous. Part of this problem has to do with Leach's overall lazy style and approach at times, but you would think by now he would have successfully lessened the amount of yards we are penalized ever year. At this rate, it looks like we will continue to be one of the most penalized teams in the nation...if not THE most.

I hope Leach uses last week's game (which also included several penalty-induced meltdowns) as more of a learning moment for HIM instead of only for his players. He has a brilliant offensive philosophy, but he clearly stands in his own way when he neglects to teach his players discipline.

After the UH debacle, I have noticed an interesting trend among many bloggers on this site.

I remember prior to this season that everyone who participates on this site took great issue with the fact that many sports wirters and other media types were claiming that we wouldn't be as good this year due to the loss of so many players, namely Harrell and Crabtree.

Of course, well all refuted this ridiculous notion, pointing out that our Offense is always good and Leach just plugs in the next QB. We also noted how the talent level has increased each year on this team, and that a 10 or 11 win season would be a totally realistic expectation.

However, our offense has been out of sync, to say the least, and this is mainly due to inconsistent performance from our QB. I know he is new to being a starter, but he learned from one of the best in Tech history and has had plenty of time to perfect his accuracy and smarts, especially watching Graham. I am wondering how long we are expected to wait for him to develop. Half a season? A full season? Silly things like throwing off your back foot shouldn't still be a problem, but it is. That is the kind of habit you break as a high school QB. I fully believe that if Junior year GH played against UH last night, we would have won. So much for being able to plug in the next QB. Obviosuly Harrell meant a lot to this team.

Well, after the dust has settled and our team returned home with the UH loss, it seems all of this confidence and raised expectations have disappeared. It seems that everyone is just writing this loss of due to "inexperience" and what not. Well I, for one, am tired of it. I'm tired of having that be our excuse for everything. At some point, our players just need to get over that they aren't experienced (even though they have been around for a while, they just haven't started). They practice every day, don't they? Aren't they confident in what they are doing? I truly believed that after seeing the success we had last year, this year's team would know how to handle the type of situation they found themselves in during the UH game. I thought we had a new mindset after last year. I thought we had learned to aviod the bad loss, which is exemplified by the UH loss (I know they were ranked and what not, but the performance was terrible and we should have won). If we want to become an elite team we cannot make excuses for losing to Houston. It just shouldn't happen. I don't care if they are ranked 17 or 117, we are a Big-12 team and we shouldn't be losing to them. I also thought we had moved past the proverbial "9-win season" that had plagued us in the past, but that looks more and more likely to happen once again.

I have not given up on this team in the least. I still think they can be great and contend for a Big-12 title, because, after all, UH is not Big 12. I still think we can win the rest of our games, but after seeing the UH game, we can also lose almost all of them too. The main thing I am sick of is the fact that we lost this game. If we want to make progress every year and not just be good every 5 years when we have tons of returning players, we need to win these kinds of games. Potts does not need to be benched, but the running game needs to be relied on more this year. Potts needs to be more accurate though and become a better leader.

I know that the UH loss cannot be totally put on Potts, but I think it is finally clear what is missing from our team this year. LEADERSHIP. We all knew going in to this season that Potts was not going to be a "vocal" leader, but this is worse than I expected. One thing that I loved about Harrell is that he was not afraid to yell at, motivate, and encourage his teammates. He seemed much more passionate and into the game than Potts does. Harrell also knew the game much better, being a coach's son. From a physical ability standpoint, Graham was also much, much, MUCH more accurate than Potts and it is clear that accuracy is much more important than the supposed "Arm-strength" Potts has. As many other bloggers on this site have mentioned, Graham's release was also much smoother and faster which also contributed to his success probably more than most of us would give him credit for.

As far as the UH game, I know Leach usually gives the QB total control to change the play at the line of scrimmage. If this is the case, than the UH loss can be blamed on Leach and Potts collectively. Leach should not allow Potts to change the play when we are running so well, and Potts should not change the play when we are running so well. Whichever person caused more damage is irrelevant, as either person could have chosen to make the right decision.

Potts still has a long LONG way to go. His accuracy is actually terrible and his leadership leaves much to be desired. He better get it together quick.

I guess we should all be biting our tongues for being so fascinated by "Arm-strength" and realize that Graham was truly unique to this school and is by far the greatest quarterback we have ever had.

Boy, do I miss Graham Harrell.

I'm sure most of us are pretty confident that the North Dakota game will be a blowout on saturday, but I thought rivals.com's take on this game was particularly funny and mabye a bit extreme. The link is below for the predictions to all of the weekends games:

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=983628

North Dakota at Texas Tech, 7 p.m.
THE BUZZ: Oh, my. This is North Dakota's second season as a transitional FCS member - and this is the first game in school history against an FBS foe.
THE LINE: No line. THE PICK: Texas Tech 84-20.

I just read a story on ESPN that said Batch has been participating in full-contact drills. I guess we can assume he will be ready for the season opener now?? Has anyone heard anything else about him? I'm thinking the staff might still keep him out of the first game just for precautionary reasons. Here is the link if anyone is interested:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4406659

Your FanPost couldn't be published.

•  Your FanPost must be at least 75 words long. Right now it's only 74 words long. If you just have a quote, link, video or photo you'd like to share with the community, trycreating a FanShot instead.

I had a lot of time on my hands, so I decided to try and figure out a way to truly examine the performances of every Big 12 team since 2002 in such a way that it took each program's advantages or disadvantages from a recruiting standpoint into consideration and could give a real number to gauge their productivity relative to the type of recruit they get. In this calculation, teams are rewarded for acquiring wins while having lesser recruits, while teams are punished for failing to acquire wins while having greater recruits. As we all know, Tech has been able to massively overachieve given the current pecking order in recruiting that exists in the Big 12, while schools such as, o I dunno, Texas A&M maybe, have managed to massively underachieve despite having what many "experts" (from rivals.com) declare great recruits/recruiting classes. 

The information that I came up with resulted in each team earning what I call a "Power Score" in that it is a great indication of how much "boom for your buck," if you will, each team gets per recruit based on how many wins they earn with said recruits. This score consists of the amount of wins earned by each team beginning with the 2002 season and ending with the 2008 season (both total wins and conference wins) divided by the average star rating of a recruit their team signed, according to rivals.com, beginning with the class of 2002 and ending with the class of 2008. By doing this, every possible signee who could have contributed in any way to any teams' total win number over this time period is included in the calculation. Below is a table displaying the results:

Team               Wins from '02-'08 (Conference Wins)  Avg. Stars per player ('02-'08)   Power Score (Conf. Power Score)

Baylor                               25 (10)                                                           2.27                                              11.01 (4.41)

Colorado                          42 (27)                                                           2.86                                              14.69 (9.44)

Iowa State                        32 (15)                                                           2.49                                              12.85 (6.02)

Kansas                             45 (22)                                                           2.66                                              16.92 (8.27)

Kansas State                   48 (26)                                                          2.85                                               16.84 (9.12)

Missouri                           55 (29)                                                           2.86                                               19.23 (10.14)

Nebraska                         53 (28)                                                           3.13                                               16.93 (8.95)

Oklahoma                        78 (53)                                                           3.64                                                21.43 (14.56)

Oklahoma State             51 (27)                                                            2.88                                                17.71 (9.38)

Texas A&M                      42 (24)                                                           3.09                                                13.60 (7.77)

Texas                                77 (47)                                                          3.66                                                 21.04 (12.84)

Texas Tech                      62 (35)                                                          2.71                                                 22.88 (12.92)

As I mentioned before, as Tech fans we all know our team regularly overachieves, but I found this result to be pretty surprising! Your Texas Tech Red Raiders have the #1 power score in the overall wins category, and the #2 power score in the conference wins category! Below is the complete rankings list:

OVERALL:

#1 Texas Tech - 22.88

#2 Oklahoma - 21.43

#3 Texas - 21.04

#4 Missouri - 19.23

#5 Oklahoma State - 17.71

#6 Nebraska - 16.93

#7 Kansas - 16.92

#8 Kansas State - 16.84

#9 Colorado - 14.69

#10 Texas A&M - 13.60

#11 Iowa State - 12.85

#12 Baylor - 11.01

CONFERENCE:

#1 Oklahoma - 14.56***

#2 Texas Tech - 12.92

#3 Texas - 12.84

#4 Missouri - 10.14

#5 Colorado - 9.44

#6 Oklahoma State - 9.38

#7 Kansas State - 9.12

#8 Nebraska - 8.95

#9 Kansas - 8.27

#10 Texas A&M - 7.77

#11 Iowa State - 6.02

#12 Baylor - 4.41

***OU's conference power level is particularly high because Big 12 championships accounted for extra wins against conference foes, thus further rewarding their performance.  

Unsurprisingly, Baylor and Iowa State finished 12th and 11th respectively in both lists, because they quite simply could not accumulate wins. Also unsurprisingly, the Aggies, one of only 4 teams in the conference to have an average star rating above 3, finished 10th in overall wins and conference wins despite having what would seem like a considerable advantage as far as recruiting is concerned compared to most teams. Texas Tech, on the other hand, had only the 9th highest average star rating, but was able to finish very high on both lists. What else does these calculations tell us though? These observations are fairly obvious and do not require calculations to agree upon, only common sense. What may surprise you, however, lies ahead. Consider this: 

For Texas Tech, you can multiply their power score (22.88) and their average star rating (2.71) and you will come up with an answer of 62.0048, or 62, the number of wins Tech had from 2002 to 2008. What really makes this table interesting is that you can apply this formula to any team and see how they would perform with another team's talent. For comparison's sake, let's see how our team would have fared from this time period if they had the talent level of UT:

22.88 (Tech's power level) X 3.66 (UT's avg. star rating) = 83.7408 

WOW! What a whopping number! If we had the same talent level as UT over the same time period based on the information presented in the table, we would have achieved 84 wins (if we round up) compared to UT's 77 wins that were actually accumulated over that time!  Even with A&M's talent level we theoretically achieve about 71 wins compared to their 42 over the same time period! Of course, these calculations must be taken with a massive grain of salt, as they do not factor in uncontrollable variables of football such as turnovers, injuries, etc. But from simply a comparison of performance standpoint based on past trends acquired strictly from the information presented in the table, they are a great indicator of how much production a team gets, or would have got, out of their, or another team's players!  

You can also multiply the power level of a team by the avg. star rating of a team to get the total wins the team would acquire, and then divide by 7 (2002 season through 2008 season) to discover how many wins the team would average over that span. Let's compare Tech with Baylor here: 

22.88 X 2.27= 51.9376 
51.9376 / 7 = 7.41965.... 

Even with we had BAYLOR'S talent level from 2002-2008, we would have theoretically still averaged 7 wins a season!!!!!  

If this does not indicate what a wonderful, outstanding, remarkable, incredible job our staff does working with and developing our players, than I truly do not know what does. This also shows that our guys are FULL of heart and are willing to be taught from this great staff and work hard to reach what many people don't think is possible from them. I hope anyone who reads all this can appreciate it as much as I did, because I now have even MORE respect for my football team!

After seeing the new practice jerseys our boys can be seen wearing in some of the clips and remembering hearing several rumors that their could be newly remodeled jerseys, I was wondering if there is anyone that can confirm or has heard anything about the possibility of the team having a new look next season. I am basing this theory on pure speculation, but it would seem that if we got new practice jerseys we may have gotten new gameday jerseys as well...just a thought. Does anyone know anything about this, or is my brain just inventing new Tech football related topics in a subconscious effort to keep from going insane during the offseason?

I know a lot of the College Football magazines that have been released to this point have decided that we are going to have a down year next year, and up until now, it didn't surprise me. What I did find surprising though, was just how much this particular magazine thinks we will slide from last year's success. For as much as this magazine was all over us last year (it actually predicted our regular season perfectly), they are coming down hard this year. The magazine predicts that we lose 5 (!!!!!) games, including against Houston. That game might be close, but I really don't see us losing it unless we are woefully unprepared. In Conference play, DC's says we lose to UT, NU, OSU, and OU. Personally, I can understand these four being predicted as losses, but in reality I think we go at least 2-2 in those 4 games. Anyway, just thought ya'll might find this a little interesting. September just cannot get here fast enough. 

[Note by Seth C, 06/14/09 7:27 AM CDT ]  Promoted to the font page.  Excellent.

With the start of the 2009 football campaign slowly approaching, I find myself getting more and more anxious by the minute to watch some Texas Tech football. To add to the excitement that always seems to kick up at about this time of year, I thought it might be interesting to briefly evaluate each opponent Texas Tech will face on the gridiron next season and predict the final score of each game within reason. I hope  this can get everyone's blood flowing even more and facilitate some great discussion. I will try to finish part two as soon as possible.

Sept. 5, 2009 VS. North Dakota

Analysis: After posting a 6-4 record in 2008, the Fighting Sioux return only 7 total starters from last year's team (players not specified on web site), from an offense that averaged 391.4 yards a game. This team prefers to pass the ball, having thrown for 2,683 and while rushing for 1,124 yards, giving the young Tech secondary a chance to showcase their abilities in the first game of the year. The Fighting Sioux defense was not particularly stingy, allowing an average of 313.6 yards a game. There is not too much information offered on the team's site, nor is there much to say about this game, as North Dakota appears to be overmatched both scheme and talent-wise in this contest. Expect a blowout and a chance for Potts to throw quite a few passes and the rest of the offense to tune things up while the defense learns more about themselves in a warm-up game. I expect 420-460 yards passing with an additional 120-150 yards rushing from the offense and the defense to allow under 280 yards total.

Final score: Texas Tech 62, North Dakota 14

Sept. 12, 2009 VS. Rice

Analysis: After a breakout 10-3 season in 2008, the Owls appear to be in rebuilding mode, at least offensively, as they return 5 starters, but lose the dynamite tandem of Jarrett Dillard and Dual-threat QB Chase Clement. The Rice offense was very productive last season, averaging 471 yards a game, 327 passing. This season, however, one would assume that they will have a considerably big drop-off in production, as they lose their first string QB, RB, and WR. To add insult to injury, Rice only returns 2 starting offensive lineman. Defensively, the owls return 8 starters from a squad that surrendered a very pedestrian 452.2 yards a game, ranking 111th nationally. Though the amount of experience returning provides a glimmer of hope, the Rice defense has consistenly been porous in recent seasons, and even considerable improvement will still leave this side of the ball as a glaring weakness. The Tech D should be pretty stout this game, and though the Rice defense may be better next season, I still expect Tech to be explosive on offense. This one should be another blowout.

Final score: Texas Tech 45, Rice 14

Sept. 19, 2009 AT Texas

Analysis: And suddenly the schedule just got a LOT harder. The Horns were fairly suprising last season in that they were initially considered by many to have a down year. Obviously, that did not happen, and barring perhaps the play of the century made by one certain former Texas Tech wide receiver, UT would have played for the national championship with a heisman winner on their team. Isn't it great to know that? Anyway, I digress. UT returns a ton of experience, including 7 starters on both offense and defense. The only possible "weakness" on the team is perhaps the D-line, though it is extremely talented and should be just fine with more playing time. Golden boy McCoy comes back with revenge on his mind in this game, and looks to repeat or better his performance from last year, where his offense ranked 9th in total yardage at 475.8 yards a game. Tech has a history of playing UT close, but not winning. In 2007, in Austin, UT won in a 59-43 barnburner. Despite their talent level on defense, UT has not been able to stop the pass very well in recent seasons, and allowed 259.4 ypg last year passing, good for 104th in the nation. The defense ranked 51st overall, but looks to improve greatly under second year coordinator Will Muschamp and a lot of returning starters in the secondary. Unless the offense is already clicking on all cyclinders and the defense can step up big in this one (which I HIGHLY doubt), I don't give us much of a chance in Austin, especially having this as our first road game of the season. We might keep it close for a few quarters, but UT is out for revenge during a primetime game, and this one could get ugly.

Final score: Texas Tech 28, Texas 52

Sept. 26, 2009 AT Houston

Analysis: Though the cougars are no UT, this is another pretty big road test for the Red Raiders. Houston had an unbelievable offense last year, averaging a ridiculous 562.8 ypg. What could be even scarier is that the Cougs return 7 starters on offense, including stud QB Case Keenum and explosive running back Bryce Beall. The defense was almost as bad as the offense was good, allowing 413.5 ypg. It only returns 4 starters, so I look for Tech to have a pretty good day offensively. Last year, UH lost to OSU 59-37 at home but in doing so rolled up a ton of yards on offense. This could happen again against Tech, and if the D is not ready, we could very well lose this game in a wild shootout. This game is a bit scary, but I think the overall talent level of Tech will prevail, and I also believe part of the reason UH was so successful on offense last year was due to the very weak defenses that C-USA teams consistently field. Tech should be able to run or pass at will against Houston, and if the Tech D even slightly steps up, the team should manage a win. This will be yet another huge test for the young secondary.

Final score: Texas Tech 59, Houston 31 

Oct. 3, 2009 VS. New Mexico

Analysis: Breaking in a new coach is usually difficult for a team like New Mexico, and only having 5 returning starters on offense and 3 on defense will most likely make the transition that much harder. On the bright side, UNM does have a good spread offense QB in dual threat Daniel Porterie as they move away from being a very basic run first power team. Unfortunately, the former starter for the Lobos will have very little experience to work with around him. The UNM defense performed relatively well last season, finishing with a 45th ranking nationally. Fortunately for Tech, their pass defense finished 70th, and the Mountain West is not a very pass-happy league outside of BYU,  suggesting there is more than meets the eye here, and that their pass defense is perhaps worse than what it seems statistically. This game shouldn't be close at all, and Tech should roll on offense and defense. In fact, the D may even pitch a shutout in this game.

Final score: Texas Tech 42, New Mexico 10

Oct. 10, 2009 VS. Kansas State

Analysis: Big 8/Big 12/Kansas State legend Bill Snyder returns to Manhattan and hopes to work his magic once again with the Wildcats. This hire never made sense to me, as I believed Ron Prince was doing an adequate job and did not receive enough time to fully implement his system and develop his players, and Bill Snyder did not enjoy much success at the end of his first go around with K-State. Next year should be a pretty rough one for K-state as they only return 11 starters, 4 on offense and 7 on defense. As everyone on this site is well aware, QB Josh Freeman was (somehow) a first round draft pick in 09 and leaves the job to Junior Chase Coffman, the brother of former Missouri TE Chase Coffman. Explosive mini-WR Brandon Banks returns, but other than that, the Cats do not have much going for them on offense. If the Tech D struggles in this one, especially against a team learning a new offense, it might be time to start worrying. Defensively, the Cats allowed 479.1 ypg last year and ranked 117th out of 119 teams. Folks, that's what I call a poor defense. Even with a good amount of starters returning, Kansas State will struggle again on defense in this game, and the first conference home game should be an easy "W." The Tech offense stalled a few times last year in Manhattan, and K-state scored a pointless special teams TD near the end of the game. Last year's game could have easily wound up being 66-21 in favor of Tech. In 2009 in the Jones, I think we see this type of end result, and unlike last year, the game will never be close.

Final score: Texas Tech: 52, Kansas State 17  

I don't know about the rest of you, but reading this story about a walk-on receiver that may replace Crabtree next year surprised me. As a Tech student, I have been able to go to several practices, and I have not seen this kid perform on the field at all and if I did, I didn't recognize him and assumed he was just another back-up walk-on type player. Apparently, however, he has real talent and Leach loves him. Does anyone have anymore info on him? I just find it kind of strange that our replacement for Crabtree is supposedly going to come in the form of a walk-on who was originally going to play for Air Force...???

Here is the link to the article:

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/big12/0-9-58/Walk-on-Torres-blossoms-as-another-key-Tech-receiver.html 

Having just gotten home from Tech for the summer, I have been pretty bored lately. I decided to do some research on all these "NFL-type" throws that require "Great arm-strength" in order to be successful in a "Pro-style" offense and compare them to the throws that Harrell completed throughout his college career. As I watched many of these highlights, I was amazed at how similar a lot of the routes, formations, and throws were to the ones Harrell often made. What do ya'll think? Am I totally out of line here, or are there really 32 incompetent franchises that are too dumb to give Graham a chance based on his college performance? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvRhHuCohPc

---As for this highlight film, I feel like I'm essentially watching Harrell play in a Patriots uniform. Except for MAYBE the one deep ball at the end, I know for a fact that Harrell can and would make all the same throws that Brady does (though I think he would complete the deep ball too). A lot of the throws are short crossing routes (sound familiar Tech fans), that Harrell could make in his sleep and that don't require a "Rocket" arm. Also, there are a lot of shotgun formations being used, but no matter, Harrell is a system QB that was in the shotgun too much, right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJMkDKBMpGE

----The throw that Brees makes at the 25 second mark in the video is an exact replica of the one Harrell made to Britton in the first quarter of the OSU game***.Great timing, accuracy, and touch. In fact, most of the throws he makes in that game look a lot like the one Brady is making against the Cowboys in the first highlight. As with the last video, there are many intermediate routes that Harrell could easily complete.  The lone knock on Brees besides his height is that he doesn't have a "rocket arm" either.

***Watch the 1:02 mark of this clip to see what i mean http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMCo1FI7NK8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ySmg1f8ZSM&feature=channel_page

---Now, here is a Crabtree highlight video in which, obviously, Harrell is completing all of the passes. I see several very similar routes in this highlight that I do in the Brees and Brady highlights. Basically every throw that Brees and Brady make, Harrell does too. Harrell even completes several deep posts (2:30 mark in the highlight)   go routes, and back shoulder fades and also takes several snaps from center and completes passes from this formation, thus revealing that he does, in fact, have at least a reasonably strong arm. He also zips the ball to Crabtree on several slant routes by the end zone...a play that every NFL team runs at many different places on the field AND in the red zone, again revealing his apparent arm strength. 

There you have it, two of the NFL's best quarterbacks can be easily compared to Harrell. When it comes down to it, you can look at highlights of any NFL QB and realize that a lot of these statements scouts make about needing a great arm just don't apply as often to the game as they think it does. Sure, every so often Brett Favre or Jay Cutler launch a ball to someone, but I would bet that about 75% of the throws they make don't need to be zipped in all the time. I just don't see where the Texas Tech offense is so radically different from a lot of what the NFL does. It would appear that the "great-arm" aspect of a QB has far too much emphasis placed on it and only comes in to play in an actual game every so often. These scouts act as if every throw requires an amazing arm and what not, when in reality a lot of these throws are extremely similar, if not identical to, the ones that Graham Harrell made in college.  

---------------

Thoughts?

If you can bare to read the ridiculous statements on this post, you will find that most of them are just misinformed. I really hate it when people try to act like experts on things they know nothing about. Just read this for yourself and try not to get extremely upset.

http://www.silverandblackpride.com/2009/4/25/853975/raider-fans-relax#14797477

TEXAS TECH FOOTBALL TEXAS TECH FOOTBALL TEXAS TECH FOOTBALL TEXAS TECH FOOTBALL TEXAS TECH FOOTBALL TEXAS TECH FOOTBALL

I was wondering if anyone knew what time the football team starts practice everyday and where you would need to go to watch. I am really excited about this team and would love to see them in person before the spring game, so if anyone knows when the team practices each day I would really appreciate that info. On a side note, is that Twitter thing really Mike Leach? Because if so, that is awesome.

I don't know how many of you guys ever visit the other SB nation websites, but today I was bored and looked at rockchalktalk and found some pretty interesting input on the KU vs. Tech game in Lubbock next year. Apparently, getting beat 63-21 on your homecoming is no reason to think that you wouldn't beat that same team in their stadium the next year. Call me crazy, but I wouldn't be as confident as a lot of these Jayhawk fans who view our game with them as a win or a likely win. Interesting.

As fans of Texas Tech football, what can we do, if anything, to make sure Leach stays? I actually somewhat understand the position of the administration but when you consider all the things that Leach has accomplished for us it really doesn't make any sense to let him go. What can we do to make sure he stays here for many years to come?? Public demonstrations? Phone calls? e-mails? Picket signs? Surely with enough complaint about the situation the people in charge can and will do something about it. I know I should probably just sit back and wait to see what happens friday, but thinking about that makes me uneasy.

Even after reading all the e-mails and all the new information that continues to develop concerning coach Leach and the administrastion, I sitll find myself somewhat optimistic that he will re-sign. I think that Coach Leach is a good and unselfish guy deep down. My whole family was in town for the UT game this year and after it was over we got to take a picture with him, and he was more than happy to do that for us. I also have some photos of him having beer with some fans after a game...pretty unique thing for a the head coach of a top 10 team to do, don't you think? For some reason I cant imagine stoops or brown doing that. Basically, I am just curious to know what the members of this website think about the whole situation. On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most, how optimistic are you that Leach will sign the extension and stay at Tech and why?

After reading this article, I have given a little though to re-evaluating  my position on Leach, though I do still think we could do without the post-season interviewing. Maybe this will change some minds... 

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=910840

Now this is what I like to see! ESPN is finally taking notice of what we are doing on the recruiting trail, and while I think they could have given us a higher overall grade, I liked what they had to say about our recruiting efforts!

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/football/news/story?id=3885147

This is my preseason poll for 2009 and I have Tech at #19, which I think is perfectly fair, if not a bit too low (some early polls actually have the audacity to not rank Tech at all). What do ya'll think?

1. Florida

2. Oklahoma

3. Texas

4. Alabama

5. USC

6. Penn State

7. Ohio State

8. Boise State

9. Cal

10. Ole Miss

11. Georgia Tech

12. Oklahoma State

13. Utah

14. Oregon

15. TCU

16. Virginia Tech

17. Iowa

18. Florida State

19. Texas Tech

20. BYU

21. Georgia

22. LSU

23. Kansas

24. Oregon State

25. Notre Dame

I thought this article was ridiculous and SLAMMED Tech after a great season. It's funny how they seem to praise Penn State for achieving the exact same record, yet when we do well it means nothing.

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=898638

After having my thoughts confirmed mainly because of the horrific Cotton Bowl meltdown but also partly from the Baylor "performance", I am convinced that the Texas Tech Football team of 2008 not only picked up a 1 in the loss column after their trip to Norman, but lost any sort of enthusiasm or competitiveness that they may have had before it as well. That was more than just a loss. That kind of beating took away this team's fire. And I can't really say that I blame them either. They were making history by the week, taking away their loyal fans breath with each win, be it a last second win against Texas or a thorough beatdown of a top-10 (though apparently overrated) OSU. Everything that they as players and we as fans had always dreamed of was happening before our eyes...Tech was finally breaking through the 9-win ceiling! Their confidence was building by the minute, the nation loved their story, and they were gaining the respect of their conference peers, FINALLY. Everything was on the line in that game in Norman, and everything disappeared before they knew what had hit them. Their goals were not only taken away by that loss, but quite simply shattered. All they had to look forward to after that game was a Cotton bowl appearance, which they could have earned with three losses. I think that as much as this team would like to believe that they gave their best effort every time out, they quite simply couldn't. That ability had been taken from them by the Sooners, and they may have thought they were trying, but subconciously weren't. They just couldn't muster up the same enthusiasm for Baylor and Ole Miss that they did for Texas, OSU, or Kansas. As much as I hate to make excuses for their performance the past two games, I have no other opinion as to how the poor play could have happened, because I have seen what this team can do when they are focused and playing with energy. If the team that showed up against Kansas, UT, or OSU showed up in the cotton bowl, the game would not have been close. I am convinced that if the OU game was a close loss, this team is playing in the Fiesta bowl and winning easily against Ohio State. I have heard many times that "A loss, is a loss, is a loss." As simple as that sounds, it is simply untrue, and Texas Tech vs. Oklahoma in 2008 proves it.

Has anyone else seen the graphic across the bottom of the screen during any ESPN show that displays the percentage of voters who think Tech will win the cotton bowl? I found it shocking that 92.4% think Tech will win! I don't want to seem like im being negative or pessimistic, but I find that a little shocking considering how we have looked our last two games. Maybe people are remembering Kansas, OSU, and UT when they are voting for us...

I have not heard anything in a long time, and I remember hearing Leach was supposed to sign by Monday of this week. Obviously, that has yet to happen. Does anyone know what is going on with Leach and the program right now? Why is this taking SOOO long to get done? I am beginning to think Leach just wants to leave the offer on the table and once his contract is up, leave Tech all together.

I don't know about everyone else, but I personally LOVED the jerseys the team wore for the game against Baylor. I think we should wear those ones for every home game, as they are a great color combination and represent our school colors (scarlet and black) as opposed to the all black or white and black. I also like the all red, but the red and black looked great. What do you guys (or girls) think?