Nitpicking Lincoln Riley

[Phaeded]

On our true last possession of the first half (we ran out the clock when we got it back with 30-some seconds) and the first two possessions of the 2nd half (3rd Q) we had this:
* 4 sacks
* 2 field-goals on 3 red zone possessions. (that's 6 points out of a possible 21, excluding 2 point tries)

Is it unfair to expect even more out of your HC/OC than 62 points? Yes (obviously) and no - regarding the 'no': Riley needs to cover the opponents points (otherwise it's called 'losing'), until he does something about his DC and we don't need half a hundred (I don't care about the innuendo about Riley having to take Mike - it is officially his DC: do something about it, like insist on changes on that side.).

Until the DC problem is resolved (hopefully $#!t-canned), we can't turn into a crappy red zone team late in the year - not against TCU nor a playoff caliber team (should we make it). These are unique times for OU, calling for as many scores as we can squeeze out of our Heisman-led offense.

So, on to the problems:

REDZONE SACKS: Who better to suck an overzealous DL or blitz way upfield, only to loft it over their heads to a set up RB screen than our mobile Houdini QB? Why don't we do this, especially with one of our quicker backs (anyone but Sermon, who is a bit slow out of the blocks but a beast to take down)?

TDs vs FGs in the Redzone: All I know is dropping straight back in the redzone and waiting for something to open up in the endzone were absolute drive-killers on those 4 sacks. And the wildcat reared its head again (thankfully only once) and runs up the gut were stuffed. Surely Riley has got more creativity than this - Flowers seems to always get open, why not him on a short fly/buttonhook in the end zone? It just seems that with a short field, Riley has butt-puckered of late.

If I were Riley I'd have the offense almost focus exclusively on redzone sets...and on the D side I would insist they practice corralling the cut-back run (how many times do we have to see no backside containment or a player there who can't tackle?). And replace Jordan Thomas already - what do we have to lose by replacing him with a true frosh? My eyes are tired of eating toast on D....

 

[AbsoluteZer0]

This kind of sums up the problem with Mike: https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...-keep-it-out-of-the-college-football-playoff/

 

[tjc8214]

Not saying you're wrong or making excuses for Riley but Mayfield made the comment that they keyed on Flowers all game and that was why Brown had such a big game. That could be why there were no passes thrown his way in the red zone. Also the one interception on the goal line was in the area Flowers or Andrews usually make a killing. Their linebackers were sitting on that route.

 

[Schoonerman]

This kind of sums up the problem with Mike: https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...-keep-it-out-of-the-college-football-playoff/

The stats clearly point out how poorly the OU D has played this year. I'm stating the obvious, but I believe we have recruited well and have outstanding players on defense, but clearly, Mike Stoops' scheme is no longer effective and could cost OU a chance to play for the Big 12, much less the CFP. Scary thought.

 

[BillyRay]

If OU is left out again due to the defense, then I really don't know how Riley can go forward without making some sort of change. Whether OU fans agree with the committee or not over knocking OU due to the defense is irrelevant. It's an issue that needs to be addressed.

 

[JConXtsy]

Because I like numbers, I compiled a list of the offenses that show up on BOTH Top 50 lists of Total Offense (yds) and TOP. I feel like it's a combination of both of these stats that shows how really good your offense is. You might see a trend in this list, especially if you restrict it to Power 5 Conferences.

Here is the list weighted equally for each, Total Offense and Time of Possession (and ranking summation).

1. Toledo (25)
2. Washington State (28) - Mike Leach, go figure
3. Navy (29)
4. Oklahoma (32)
5. Wisconsin (38)
6. Georgia (42)
7. South Florida (45)
8. Alabama (45)
9. Air Force (49)
10. Colorado St (52)
11. Louisville (53)
12. UTSA (55)
13. Mississippi St (57)
14. Auburn (61)
15. Virginia Tech (63)
16. TCU (64)
17. NC State (64)
18. Hawaii (65)
19. Syracuse (71)
20. Southern Miss (87)
21. UNLV (91)
22. Appalachian St (95)

Reordered for Power 5 with Playoff Ranking Next to them

Washington State (19)
Oklahoma (5)
Wisconsin (8)
Georgia (1)
Alabama (2)
Colorado St (NR)
Louisville (NR)
Miss St (16)
Auburn (10)
Virginia Tech (17)
TCU (6)
NC State (23)
Syracuse (NR)
Southern Miss (NR)

 

[Oklabama]

Because I like numbers, I compiled a list of the offenses that show up on BOTH Top 50 lists of Total Offense (yds) and TOP. I feel like it's a combination of both of these stats that shows how really good your offense is. You might see a trend in this list, especially if you restrict it to Power 5 Conferences.

Here is the list weighted equally for each, Total Offense and Time of Possession (and ranking summation).

1. Toledo (25)
2. Washington State (28) - Mike Leach, go figure
3. Navy (29)
4. Oklahoma (32)
5. Wisconsin (38)
6. Georgia (42)
7. South Florida (45)
8. Alabama (45)
9. Air Force (49)
10. Colorado St (52)
11. Louisville (53)
12. UTSA (55)
13. Mississippi St (57)
14. Auburn (61)
15. Virginia Tech (63)
16. TCU (64)
17. NC State (64)
18. Hawaii (65)
19. Syracuse (71)
20. Southern Miss (87)
21. UNLV (91)
22. Appalachian St (95)

Reordered for Power 5 with Playoff Ranking Next to them

Washington State (19)
Oklahoma (5)
Wisconsin (8)
Georgia (1)
Alabama (2)
Colorado St (NR)
Louisville (NR)
Miss St (16)
Auburn (10)
Virginia Tech (17)
TCU (6)
NC State (23)
Syracuse (NR)
Southern Miss (NR)

JCon, do you think Leach will still be at Washington State next year. Nebraska maybe??

 

[WhyNotaSooner]

So what you're saying is that to insure a win we need to "Hang three quarters of a hunerd on them".

 

[AbsoluteZer0]

The stats clearly point out how poorly the OU D has played this year. I'm stating the obvious, but I believe we have recruited well and have outstanding players on defense, but clearly, Mike Stoops' scheme is no longer effective and could cost OU a chance to play for the Big 12, much less the CFP. Scary thought.

And I don't buy the "we play in the B12" crap. Look at what TCU has done in the B12. They play defense and that after 7 years we can't figure out how this is done is not acceptable.

The only constant during 7 years is not recruits, it's not changes in how the league plays...the constant is Mike Stoops. He does not work here and needs to be gone right now. I will say that I promoted the guy when Venerables left, but was wrong. The guy is the Les Miles of defense, the game has passed him by in this league.

Disagree if you like, but please provide evidence as to why you feel the way you do.

 

[OUSOONER67]

And I don't buy the "we play in the B12" crap. Look at what TCU has done in the B12. They play defense and that after 7 years we can't figure out how this is done is not acceptable.

The only constant during 7 years is not recruits, it's not changes in how the league plays...the constant is Mike Stoops. He does not work here and needs to be gone right now. I will say that I promoted the guy when Venerables left, but was wrong. The guy is the Les Miles of defense, the game has passed him by in this league.

Disagree if you like, but please provide evidence as to why you feel the way you do.

He should have left with Bob. I appreciate what they did for OU Football, Mike and Bob but when a regime has run its course its time to move on and most times that means most if not all of the previous head coaches staff is not retained. Pull the trigger Riley at seasons end if you want to make your own mark at OU. If you are a true offensive guru surely you can see how inept our DC is.

 

[ac.slater]

his defense sucks plain and simple. I f you dont agree you either
1. dont actually watch the games
2. want to give him the benefit of the doubt because of his last name
3. dont understand football and how his scheme puts players in really bad situations too often
4. cant see that we are not taught to tackle (yes I blame that on coaching and he is the head of the defense)
5. all of the above

 

[humblesooner]

And I don't buy the "we play in the B12" crap. Look at what TCU has done in the B12. They play defense and that after 7 years we can't figure out how this is done is not acceptable.

The only constant during 7 years is not recruits, it's not changes in how the league plays...the constant is Mike Stoops. He does not work here and needs to be gone right now. I will say that I promoted the guy when Venerables left, but was wrong. The guy is the Les Miles of defense, the game has passed him by in this league.

Disagree if you like, but please provide evidence as to why you feel the way you do.

I've said this many times. Texas held OSU to below 20% of the point total that OU did, They held ISU to below 20% of the point total that OU did. The Whorns and the Whorny Toads seem to be able to play defense in the B12.
I want to puke every time Mike is in the post-game press conference and tells us all how difficult it is to play defense in the B12.

 

[JConXtsy]

JCon, do you think Leach will still be at Washington State next year. Nebraska maybe??

Unfortunately, no. I don't ever see Mike Leach at a blue blood program. I think that's unfortunate, because I really believe he could win at national championship with elite recruiting classes. His legacy essentially did so at OU.

I think Leach is too "weird" for any blue blood program to take a risk. None of these programs will want to risk the face of their organization on someone they can't understand and control. He's doomed to these mid-level P5 conference teams that see value in taking that risk for the chance at a few years of football glory.

 

[Oklabama]

Unfortunately, no. I don't ever see Mike Leach at a blue blood program. I think that's unfortunate, because I really believe he could win at national championship with elite recruiting classes. His legacy essentially did so at OU.

I think Leach is too "weird" for any blue blood program to take a risk. None of these programs will want to risk the face of their organization on someone they can't understand and control. He's doomed to these mid-level P5 conference teams that see value in taking that risk for the chance at a few years of football glory.

Maybe Kansas then. Actually the reason I asked is some sportscaster predicted Nebraska would hire Leach and I thought that would be weird. No pun intended. I agree with you for all the reasons you named.

 

[ac.slater]

Why would he go there? He is in a better situation where he is.

 

[JConXtsy]

Why would he go there? He is in a better situation where he is.

I think he has enough prestige to attract high level offensive recruits anywhere he goes. He'd recruit better at Nebraska than anyone else they've had since Solich.