State of the Union: Texas Tech
17 comments so far
January 30, 2007 by
The seventh in a twelve part series on the state of the Big 12
Mike Leach is an intriguing figure. His pass-happy offense has lead to some big stats and some exciting games but the thrill might be wearing off in Lubbock. The Red Raiders appeared ready to compete for conference supremacy in 2005. After a step backward in 2006, and a weak recruiting class for 2007, you wonder how bad things might get and whether it's the beginning of the end in Lubbock.
The Red Raiders are routinely outrecruited by Texas , Oklahoma, Texas A&M, and Nebraska, but with teams like Oklahoma State turning it up a notch, the Red Raiders are sinking in the Big XII talent pool. The novelty of their offense will probably always win them some games they shouldn't, but their inability to play power football, along with their second-tier talent will likely keep them out of the conference title game for the foreseeable future. Eventually the fans and administration will tire of missing out on the big game and that will be the end of the Mike Leach experiment.
How soon is anyone's guess. Leach has found a way to win seven or eight games each year when you'd think Tech couldn't. But good rather than bad, as my good friend says, can be the enemy of great. Will "good" be good enough for much longer? Time will tell, but great still seems pretty far away.
» Enjoy this article?
Send it to your friend or get Husker news by email!
Related Stories: Big XII, Texas Tech
Post a comment
EETTU Jan 30 07
While I will be the first to admit we had a lackluster season I still have high hopes for the Red Raiders. If only we could pick up and move to south-central Texas. It takes a special football player to move out to the desert to play the game. It seems like we will always at least lose the one game noone in the Big XII should lose, this year it was CU. We lost a few other close ones. I'm not sure our offense would do well with big recruits. The whole idea is to spread the ball around to everyone, a big shot would probably leave for lack of ability to be a team player... that hack of a quarterback is the perfect example... running back to juco because he didn't get playing time... good riddance. We can use all we can get on the lines on both sides of the ball and and in the back on D... I'd love to see it pick up in the next few years, but I haven't set my hopes too high.
doombob Jan 30 07
I'll say one thing, they sure are a team that can capitilize on opponents' mistakes.
darren Jan 30 07
Another solid offering, Steve. A couple of reactions..
I'd have to make an argument that Leach is playing with superior talent than he had when he first arrived. Or, at least talent suited to his style. So, why no major increase in wins or "break through" year? Because coaches adjust.
These guys are professionals who don't like to be shown up by anyone. They adjust and develop schemes to counter what you are trying to do. There is a "book" out on Leach's offense now. How can he counter? That may determine their mid-term future.
And, if you are a TTech fan, booster, player or administrator, Leach's obvious desire for once-vacant Miami job just can't make you feel all that great. Just a reminder of how far you are from the "A list" programs.
Randy Jan 30 07
In the recent past it was pointed out how Leach was capable of getting quarterbacks who stayed with him so long, finally getting the starting nod as 5th year seniors.
He gave Stoops and the Sooners a prolific offense. With their ability to score at TT, I thought it would only be a short time before they were a force.
JMTech Jan 30 07
Unfortunately, I have to agree with Steve. The salt on the wound this year was watching Boise State complete their perfect season. Boise is a team very much like Texas Tech: a second-tier division I-A school with a prolific offense that surely must have a very hard time getting recruits to come to the middle of nowhere. I would gladly take a perfect season even if Tech didn't figure into the national title picture, as happened to Boise.
If Texas Tech wants to step up to the next level, they need to find a Mack Brown type coach who recruits with great football instincts and doesn't just recruit on stats. If they don't go this route, they will never be more than a #2 in the Big XII South. And that only happens with a couple of lucky breaks along the way (take the 2005 game against OU, for instance.)
Christian Jan 31 07
Tech's two main weaknesses, aside from an uphill battle in recruiting, are (in order): a weak defense and a single-pronged offense. The D allows too many points and the O gets figured out by halftime and we have trouble scoring in the 3rd and 4th quarters.
I agree with JMTech that Boise State had a great season. But, even though they pulled it off against Oklahoma, I still don't think they would have remained undefeated had they been in the Big 12.
RJ Jan 31 07
"Power Lunch", "Power Nap", "Power Lunch". What a lame term used by Steve Hanway, "Power Football". Football hasn't been a game of mere 'power' in decades. Although, some sports writers and coaches still persist in that frame of thought. Anything requiring brains and finesse vs. brawn is a "gimmick".
Tech will never be able to become a powerhouse until they are on a level financial playing field with TEXAS and A&M. And, that just isn't going to happen. So, until then, we will take the underrated and overlooked athletic overachievers and win anyway.
Steve Jan 31 07
RJ,
When it's third or fourth and one and you can't line up with two tight ends and plow ahead for one yard - that's a problem. I call it "power football" but you can call it a legitimate running game between the tackles. Whatever you call it, the better teams have it and I can't remember a Tech team that could do it since Bam Morris played for the Red Raiders.
D Feb 01 07
70 to 10. That's not getting lucky, that is domination and the score of Nebraska's worst loss in school history. Tech followed it up by beating Nebraska at home the next year (enter the Nebraska excuses here.) The Big XII south has at least 4 teams that would win the Big XII north every year if they were in the North. Texas Tech deserves more respect than they get. Just ask Texas A&M who has lost 9 out of the last 12 years. They are the #3 Big XII team. They are in the hunt. That's the State of the Big XII Union.
Steve Feb 01 07
D,
70-10 was a sign of how bad Joe Dailey and Beau Davis were (and most of the 2004 Husker squad), not an indication of how great Tech was. When you are losing (and losing badly) to teams like Texas Tech, Iowa State, and Kansas, it's a sign that there is something wrong with your team, because those teams will never be A-list squads.
When the 2001 Buffs team hung 62 on an 11-0 Nebraska team, that was a sign that the Buffs were for real. Another sign was that CU won the conference that year and played in a BCS bowl. I'm still waiting for Texas Tech to win its division or get invited to a BCS bowl. Nothing in the last year or in their recent recruiting classes shows me that the Red Raiders are getting closer to an appearance in the Big 12 title game or the BCS series. If anything, they seem to be drifting further away.
By the way, both the Coaches in their poll and the AP in their poll cast more votes for OU, Texas, A&M, and Nebraska than Texas Tech. That makes Tech fifth, not third.
MacTTU Feb 15 07
Wow and we still spanked you 70-10 with inferior players. Man if we had a good team you would lose by 100. How has Nebraska done against big 12 south in recent years. 1-3 last year, and 1-2 the previous two years. You've only had one winning season against the south in the last five years. I would worry about your program not ours. In the last five years against the South the "highly touted" Nebraska is 6-10. Tech is 10-5 versus the competition you are playing. Duke would probably be a powerhouse in the North.
Steve Feb 15 07
MacTTU,
I realize that Lubbock isn't necessarily on the cutting edge in many ways, but is it still 2004 there? Or with all of that tech knowledge you've built a time machine? I guess I could jump in and go back to 2000, when Nebraska beat the Red Raiders 56-3 in your building. How is that relevant today?
Yes, Texas Tech has players that are by and large inferior to BCS quality teams. As you point out Nebraska has not been a BCS quality-team in the past five years. I don't think anyone's tried to deny that.
I'll say it again if you've missed it. Losing to Tech is an indication you're not where you want to be, because I've never seen a Tech team good enough to win the Big 12. This year, I saw a Nebraska team outrush and outgain the Sooners but blow the game on turnovers. The talent is coming back to NU, meanwhile Tech is treading water in mediocrity.
jonattu Feb 15 07
Nebraska will not win a big 12 title with Callahan. Saying that you outrushed and outgained a team and to still lose by 14 is pretty impressive. If Tech was in the North they would be in the championship game almost every year. As far as the cutting edge comment goes, how many people in your state even have a computer? Do they have wireless internet in the corn fields? We could bash communities all you want but is Nebraska relly something you want to put your pride towards? The talent pool you have always had is greater than Texas Tech, so whats your excuse for still being mediocre?
I'll say it again for MAC in case you missed it, any team can be a powerhouse in the North. If your prideful moment of the season is beating the Aggies you are releshing a win we got as well.
Steve Feb 15 07
jonattu,
You'd have to beat Colorado and Missouri to win the Big 12 North. Tell me how Nebraska's talent pool is larger? Texas has about thirteen times the population of Nebraska. If Nebraska has had more talent, it's on the strength of a program that's won five national championships and two Big 12 titles. Recruiting was poor under Solich. He's gone now. Recruiting is mediocre at Texas Tech under Leach and he's still there. He has yet to win his division, let alone the conference.
jonattu Feb 15 07
Steve,
Texas also has 10 division 1 football teams, how many do you compete with in your state? We aren't the premier school in Texas either and yet we can still hang with them along with other BCS teams that come in to Texas and take our athletes. Nebraska competes with nobody in the state of Nebraska. You have the top athletes in the state.
You are right we would have to beat them, to win in the South though you would have to put together a winning record against the south which you haven't done in quite some time. You are right Nebraska recruits better than Tech and I didn't mean talent pool in the state. I meant what actually comes to the university. Those five national championships are impressive, I really wish we had them and thats the God's honest truth. You are the one however that brought up time machine yet you are having to go back quite a ways to do that now aren't you? My point is on less talent we are still beating "top tier" schools which is a testament to Leach's coaching ability. This year we did have a bad and very disappointing year. No Tech fan will argue that but thats not to say that will continue. If you go back four years the recruiting is even weaker. On an off season we still have a better class now opposed to then. If Leach is figured out how do you justify one of the top offenses in the nation statistically....again. You are just adding to my point...THE SOUTH IS A TOUGH PLACE TO WIN. The North is a joke and if we were in it we could dance around like you are about getting to the championship game and getting beat.
Steve Feb 15 07
jonattu,
Thirteen divided by 10 is still greater than 1 (i.e. there's still no argument that Nebraska has a larger base). If Tech can't recruit as well as other Texas schools, they have to look at themselves there.
My point is Tech is not beating Top Tier teams. When you lose to Tech, that's a clear indication that you're NOT a top tier team. Nebraska has had to start from 5-6 to rebuild and is now outrecruiting Tech by a wide margin. We couldn't say that under Frank Solich. And Nebraska isn't the only team in the conference getting better. Meanwhile, Tech appears stuck in neutral.
The North wasn't always a joke (the higher ranked teams were there for most of the first five years of the Big 12) and (as you'd like to ignore) Tech just went 1-2 against the North.
What is it that's supposed to tell an objective observer that Tech is getting better? I see plenty of data telling me other Big 12 schools are, but what about Tech (and you can't throw out 2006).
LT Feb 27 07
"Power football..." Tech "powered" short runs into the Insight Bowl end zone repeatedly. THE most famous Tech finish in recent years, against OU in 2005, was power football--and WAS legit--as shown in the Tech student newspaper series of still shots, even though the replay angle was lacking. A preference for throwing, which covers more real estate and is more entertaining, doesn't mean the short run game is nonexistent (even though it has had its problems).
Steve has missed a key fact about the Tech offense and it's this: Between Graham Harrell (still at Tech) and Chris Todd (who left after not getting the starting job), Tech has now shown it can get the bluest of the blue chip quarterbacks, if you will, to run the offense. And that just happened recently. Nothing is more important in the Tech offense than a great throwing qb. And so now Tech has them, it's time to give Tech CFB under Leach the Last Rites? Tech got the recruiting class it wanted. Harrell will have time to throw, and targets to throw to.
My concern is defense. THAT has been the problem, mostly. Fix that, and hello BCS.