5th&Bagby said:

---

If I were Josh Hoover, I wouldn't follow him either.

---

Well whoop-tee-doo.

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

Art was beaten badly on Saturday and has a tough job getting this team on a winning track. It'll be interesting to watch.

---

This. It will be fascinating to keep tabs on, but whew.

---

The college game has changed, and what Art did offensively with so much success over a decade ago doesn't work anymore.

Just look at scores across the country. Defenses have caught up with and are currently ahead of the offenses. And the Art Briles offense, in particular, has been neutered by rule changes and defensive adjustments.

Art will either have to care way more than he ever has about the game's other phases or innovate again to be successful in the modern era. And he's running out of time for innovation.

---

Art had basically a 50/50 run vs pass%, and had 1,000 yard rushers almost every year.

---

What does that have to do with anything I just said?

I never said his offenses were one-dimensional. But they were heavily reliant on a tempo you can't effectively run anymore because of changes in rule interpretation and implementation.

As we saw with both Kendal and Lebby while Art was away, the veer and shoot doesn't work nearly as well when defenses are set and ready with the personnel they want on the field.

College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. It's much more difficult to smoke and mirrors your way to success. If you can't line up and move a set defense off the ball, you're not going to have success running the ball. And when you can't run the ball effectively, passing games lose their effectiveness, especially once the field condenses in the red zone.

It's much more about execution now than it was in Art's heyday, when you could literally get mismatches by running faster than the defense was prepared to go.

---

Didn't you say that Defenses have adjusted to Art's O, and that it doesn't work anymore? I just pointed out that his run game was very good, which shatters your comment. What's with this smoke and mirrors? You take the field and score TD's, period. Doesn't matter how. Did you watch SMU? That is the Briles O.

---

The success of his run game was largely predicated on tempo, too. We could maul middle-of-the-pack defensive fronts, but we struggled to just line up and move the best ones we faced. The best example of that was the Cotton Bowl, but there were others, too.

When we could catch defenses off guard and unprepared, they were helpless. But the rules have basically eliminated that element of the game in college football.

---

Biggest problem in that Cotton bowl is that Art turned the playcalling over to junior, and he wasn't ready for it yet.

Art's biggest problem is how long he has been out of the game. His approach developed not only throughout the season or game to game, but even within the game. It was not a system. It was just an expert tactician staying a step ahead of whoever was across the field. Trying to reduce that down to a system and how it would work today is just small minded. We were watching a guy at his peak. The question is whether he can get back to something like that. It has nothing to do with systems. if you're thinking in terms of systems, you don't understand what was actually happening.

greyhounds at javelinas!

wow!!

epic!!!

- el UF

D!

>>
Pepsi Field at Javelina Stadium

Home to both Javelina football and Javelina track & field, Javelina Stadium has seen some of the all-time greats perform here. With a capacity of 15,000, Javelina Stadium has been the home field for three Pro Football Hall of Fame inductees: Darrell Green, Gene Upshaw and John Randle.

Is the host sight for Texas high school football playoff games and is considered one of the best sites in South Texas for playoff games.

Javelina Stadium has also been the host for the Lone Star Conference outdoor championships and the NCAA Division II national championship for track & field. It is also the home of the 2018 NCAA Division II national champion Javelinas.

The Greyhounds not starting off well.

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

Art was beaten badly on Saturday and has a tough job getting this team on a winning track. It'll be interesting to watch.

---

This. It will be fascinating to keep tabs on, but whew.

---

The college game has changed, and what Art did offensively with so much success over a decade ago doesn't work anymore.

Just look at scores across the country. Defenses have caught up with and are currently ahead of the offenses. And the Art Briles offense, in particular, has been neutered by rule changes and defensive adjustments.

Art will either have to care way more than he ever has about the game's other phases or innovate again to be successful in the modern era. And he's running out of time for innovation.

---

Art had basically a 50/50 run vs pass%, and had 1,000 yard rushers almost every year.

---

What does that have to do with anything I just said?

I never said his offenses were one-dimensional. But they were heavily reliant on a tempo you can't effectively run anymore because of changes in rule interpretation and implementation.

As we saw with both Kendal and Lebby while Art was away, the veer and shoot doesn't work nearly as well when defenses are set and ready with the personnel they want on the field.

College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. It's much more difficult to smoke and mirrors your way to success. If you can't line up and move a set defense off the ball, you're not going to have success running the ball. And when you can't run the ball effectively, passing games lose their effectiveness, especially once the field condenses in the red zone.

It's much more about execution now than it was in Art's heyday, when you could literally get mismatches by running faster than the defense was prepared to go.

---

Didn't you say that Defenses have adjusted to Art's O, and that it doesn't work anymore? I just pointed out that his run game was very good, which shatters your comment. What's with this smoke and mirrors? You take the field and score TD's, period. Doesn't matter how. Did you watch SMU? That is the Briles O.

---

The success of his run game was largely predicated on tempo, too. We could maul middle-of-the-pack defensive fronts, but we struggled to just line up and move the best ones we faced. The best example of that was the Cotton Bowl, but there were others, too.

When we could catch defenses off guard and unprepared, they were helpless. But the rules have basically eliminated that element of the game in college football.

---

Biggest problem in that Cotton bowl is that Art turned the playcalling over to junior, and he wasn't ready for it yet.

Art's biggest problem is how long he has been out of the game. His approach developed not only throughout the season or game to game, but even within the game. It was not a system. It was just an expert tactician staying a step ahead of whoever was across the field. Trying to reduce that down to a system and how it would work today is just small minded. We were watching a guy at his peak. The question is whether he can get back to something like that. It has nothing to do with systems. if you're thinking in terms of systems, you don't understand what was actually happening.

---

It was absolutely a system, and saying so isn't a knock on Briles. He built a really damn good one that broke football for a stretch. He even had Nick Saban worried/whining about it for a while.

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

Art was really good at finding undervalued one-trick players and plugging them into a scheme that exploited the hell out of that one trick.

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

Art was beaten badly on Saturday and has a tough job getting this team on a winning track. It'll be interesting to watch.

---

This. It will be fascinating to keep tabs on, but whew.

---

The college game has changed, and what Art did offensively with so much success over a decade ago doesn't work anymore.

Just look at scores across the country. Defenses have caught up with and are currently ahead of the offenses. And the Art Briles offense, in particular, has been neutered by rule changes and defensive adjustments.

Art will either have to care way more than he ever has about the game's other phases or innovate again to be successful in the modern era. And he's running out of time for innovation.

---

Art had basically a 50/50 run vs pass%, and had 1,000 yard rushers almost every year.

---

What does that have to do with anything I just said?

I never said his offenses were one-dimensional. But they were heavily reliant on a tempo you can't effectively run anymore because of changes in rule interpretation and implementation.

As we saw with both Kendal and Lebby while Art was away, the veer and shoot doesn't work nearly as well when defenses are set and ready with the personnel they want on the field.

College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. It's much more difficult to smoke and mirrors your way to success. If you can't line up and move a set defense off the ball, you're not going to have success running the ball. And when you can't run the ball effectively, passing games lose their effectiveness, especially once the field condenses in the red zone.

It's much more about execution now than it was in Art's heyday, when you could literally get mismatches by running faster than the defense was prepared to go.

---

Didn't you say that Defenses have adjusted to Art's O, and that it doesn't work anymore? I just pointed out that his run game was very good, which shatters your comment. What's with this smoke and mirrors? You take the field and score TD's, period. Doesn't matter how. Did you watch SMU? That is the Briles O.

---

The success of his run game was largely predicated on tempo, too. We could maul middle-of-the-pack defensive fronts, but we struggled to just line up and move the best ones we faced. The best example of that was the Cotton Bowl, but there were others, too.

When we could catch defenses off guard and unprepared, they were helpless. But the rules have basically eliminated that element of the game in college football.

---

Biggest problem in that Cotton bowl is that Art turned the playcalling over to junior, and he wasn't ready for it yet.

Art's biggest problem is how long he has been out of the game. His approach developed not only throughout the season or game to game, but even within the game. It was not a system. It was just an expert tactician staying a step ahead of whoever was across the field. Trying to reduce that down to a system and how it would work today is just small minded. We were watching a guy at his peak. The question is whether he can get back to something like that. It has nothing to do with systems. if you're thinking in terms of systems, you don't understand what was actually happening.

---

It was absolutely a system, and saying so isn't a knock on Briles. He built a really damn good one that broke football for a stretch. He even had Nick Saban worried/whining about it for a while.

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

Art was really good at finding undervalued one-trick players and plugging them into a scheme that exploited the hell out of that one trick.

---

I suppose that it's fine to call it a system, but that oversimplifies what was happening. It was changing all the time. And if he was still sitting there working the controls, it would have continued to change in different ways as defenses responded to it. No telling what it would look like if that had continued to take place.

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

Art was beaten badly on Saturday and has a tough job getting this team on a winning track. It'll be interesting to watch.

---

This. It will be fascinating to keep tabs on, but whew.

---

The college game has changed, and what Art did offensively with so much success over a decade ago doesn't work anymore.

Just look at scores across the country. Defenses have caught up with and are currently ahead of the offenses. And the Art Briles offense, in particular, has been neutered by rule changes and defensive adjustments.

Art will either have to care way more than he ever has about the game's other phases or innovate again to be successful in the modern era. And he's running out of time for innovation.

---

Art had basically a 50/50 run vs pass%, and had 1,000 yard rushers almost every year.

---

What does that have to do with anything I just said?

I never said his offenses were one-dimensional. But they were heavily reliant on a tempo you can't effectively run anymore because of changes in rule interpretation and implementation.

As we saw with both Kendal and Lebby while Art was away, the veer and shoot doesn't work nearly as well when defenses are set and ready with the personnel they want on the field.

College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. It's much more difficult to smoke and mirrors your way to success. If you can't line up and move a set defense off the ball, you're not going to have success running the ball. And when you can't run the ball effectively, passing games lose their effectiveness, especially once the field condenses in the red zone.

It's much more about execution now than it was in Art's heyday, when you could literally get mismatches by running faster than the defense was prepared to go.

---

Didn't you say that Defenses have adjusted to Art's O, and that it doesn't work anymore? I just pointed out that his run game was very good, which shatters your comment. What's with this smoke and mirrors? You take the field and score TD's, period. Doesn't matter how. Did you watch SMU? That is the Briles O.

---

The success of his run game was largely predicated on tempo, too. We could maul middle-of-the-pack defensive fronts, but we struggled to just line up and move the best ones we faced. The best example of that was the Cotton Bowl, but there were others, too.

When we could catch defenses off guard and unprepared, they were helpless. But the rules have basically eliminated that element of the game in college football.

---

Biggest problem in that Cotton bowl is that Art turned the playcalling over to junior, and he wasn't ready for it yet.

Art's biggest problem is how long he has been out of the game. His approach developed not only throughout the season or game to game, but even within the game. It was not a system. It was just an expert tactician staying a step ahead of whoever was across the field. Trying to reduce that down to a system and how it would work today is just small minded. We were watching a guy at his peak. The question is whether he can get back to something like that. It has nothing to do with systems. if you're thinking in terms of systems, you don't understand what was actually happening.

---

It was absolutely a system, and saying so isn't a knock on Briles. He built a really damn good one that broke football for a stretch. He even had Nick Saban worried/whining about it for a while.

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

Art was really good at finding undervalued one-trick players and plugging them into a scheme that exploited the hell out of that one trick.

---

I suppose that it's fine to call it a system, but that oversimplifies what was happening. It was changing all the time. And if he was still sitting there working the controls, it would have continued to change in different ways as defenses responded to it. No telling what it would look like if that had continued to take place.

---

It probably would have looked like a slightly more successful version of what we've seen from Kendal and Lebby in his absence.

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

Art was beaten badly on Saturday and has a tough job getting this team on a winning track. It'll be interesting to watch.

---

This. It will be fascinating to keep tabs on, but whew.

---

The college game has changed, and what Art did offensively with so much success over a decade ago doesn't work anymore.

Just look at scores across the country. Defenses have caught up with and are currently ahead of the offenses. And the Art Briles offense, in particular, has been neutered by rule changes and defensive adjustments.

Art will either have to care way more than he ever has about the game's other phases or innovate again to be successful in the modern era. And he's running out of time for innovation.

---

Art had basically a 50/50 run vs pass%, and had 1,000 yard rushers almost every year.

---

What does that have to do with anything I just said?

I never said his offenses were one-dimensional. But they were heavily reliant on a tempo you can't effectively run anymore because of changes in rule interpretation and implementation.

As we saw with both Kendal and Lebby while Art was away, the veer and shoot doesn't work nearly as well when defenses are set and ready with the personnel they want on the field.

College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. It's much more difficult to smoke and mirrors your way to success. If you can't line up and move a set defense off the ball, you're not going to have success running the ball. And when you can't run the ball effectively, passing games lose their effectiveness, especially once the field condenses in the red zone.

It's much more about execution now than it was in Art's heyday, when you could literally get mismatches by running faster than the defense was prepared to go.

---

Didn't you say that Defenses have adjusted to Art's O, and that it doesn't work anymore? I just pointed out that his run game was very good, which shatters your comment. What's with this smoke and mirrors? You take the field and score TD's, period. Doesn't matter how. Did you watch SMU? That is the Briles O.

---

The success of his run game was largely predicated on tempo, too. We could maul middle-of-the-pack defensive fronts, but we struggled to just line up and move the best ones we faced. The best example of that was the Cotton Bowl, but there were others, too.

When we could catch defenses off guard and unprepared, they were helpless. But the rules have basically eliminated that element of the game in college football.

---

Biggest problem in that Cotton bowl is that Art turned the playcalling over to junior, and he wasn't ready for it yet.

Art's biggest problem is how long he has been out of the game. His approach developed not only throughout the season or game to game, but even within the game. It was not a system. It was just an expert tactician staying a step ahead of whoever was across the field. Trying to reduce that down to a system and how it would work today is just small minded. We were watching a guy at his peak. The question is whether he can get back to something like that. It has nothing to do with systems. if you're thinking in terms of systems, you don't understand what was actually happening.

---

It was absolutely a system, and saying so isn't a knock on Briles. He built a really damn good one that broke football for a stretch. He even had Nick Saban worried/whining about it for a while.

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

Art was really good at finding undervalued one-trick players and plugging them into a scheme that exploited the hell out of that one trick.

---

I suppose that it's fine to call it a system, but that oversimplifies what was happening. It was changing all the time. And if he was still sitting there working the controls, it would have continued to change in different ways as defenses responded to it. No telling what it would look like if that had continued to take place.

---

It probably would have looked like a slightly more successful version of what we've seen from Kendal and Lebby in his absence.

---

I don't think so. The adjustments he made at half time of the Texas game that carried over into the UNC bowl game were essentially a revamped and reinvented on the fly offense. I think our rushing yards in the UNC bowl game are still a bowl record. The guy was a savant on offense.

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

/Art was beaten badly on Saturday and has a tough job getting this team on a winning track. It'll be interesting to watch.

---

This. It will be fascinating to keep tabs on, but whew.

---

The college game has changed, and what Art did offensively with so much success over a decade ago doesn't work anymore.

Just look at scores across the country. Defenses have caught up with and are currently ahead of the offenses. And the Art Briles offense, in particular, has been neutered by rule changes and defensive adjustments.

Art will either have to care way more than he ever has about the game's other phases or innovate again to be successful in the modern era. And he's running out of time for innovation.

---

Art had basically a 50/50 run vs pass%, and had 1,000 yard rushers almost every year.

---

What does that have to do with anything I just said?

I never said his offenses were one-dimensional. But they were heavily reliant on a tempo you can't effectively run anymore because of changes in rule interpretation and implementation.

As we saw with both Kendal and Lebby while Art was away, the veer and shoot doesn't work nearly as well when defenses are set and ready with the personnel they want on the field.

College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. It's much more difficult to smoke and mirrors your way to success. If you can't line up and move a set defense off the ball, you're not going to have success running the ball. And when you can't run the ball effectively, passing games lose their effectiveness, especially once the field condenses in the red zone.

It's much more about execution now than it was in Art's heyday, when you could literally get mismatches by running faster than the defense was prepared to go.

---

Didn't you say that Defenses have adjusted to Art's O, and that it doesn't work anymore? I just pointed out that his run game was very good, which shatters your comment. What's with this smoke and mirrors? You take the field and score TD's, period. Doesn't matter how. Did you watch SMU? That is the Briles O.

---

The success of his run game was largely predicated on tempo, too. We could maul middle-of-the-pack defensive fronts, but we struggled to just line up and move the best ones we faced. The best example of that was the Cotton Bowl, but there were others, too.

When we could catch defenses off guard and unprepared, they were helpless. But the rules have basically eliminated that element of the game in college football.

---

Biggest problem in that Cotton bowl is that Art turned the playcalling over to junior, and he wasn't ready for it yet.

Art's biggest problem is how long he has been out of the game. His approach developed not only throughout the season or game to game, but even within the game. It was not a system. It was just an expert tactician staying a step ahead of whoever was across the field. Trying to reduce that down to a system and how it would work today is just small minded. We were watching a guy at his peak. The question is whether he can get back to something like that. It has nothing to do with systems. if you're thinking in terms of systems, you don't understand what was actually happening.

---

It was absolutely a system, and saying so isn't a knock on Briles. He built a really damn good one that broke football for a stretch. He even had Nick Saban worried/whining about it for a while.

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

Art was really good at finding undervalued one-trick players and plugging them into a scheme that exploited the hell out of that one trick.

---

I suppose that it's fine to call it a system, but that oversimplifies what was happening. It was changing all the time. And if he was still sitting there working the controls, it would have continued to change in different ways as defenses responded to it. No telling what it would look like if that had continued to take place.

---

It probably would have looked like a slightly more successful version of what we've seen from Kendal and Lebby in his absence.

---

I think the skill gap between Art and Kendal/Lebby was not slight.

bear2be2 said:

---

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

---

I claim to be the biggest Art Briles fan anywhere but what you posted above is proof that we have never competed at the level some on here would believe.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

---

I claim to be the biggest Art Briles fan anywhere but what you posted above is proof that we have never competed at the level some on here would believe.

---

It's so Baylor to follow successful players of Art's, and then disparage them during their pro days. Who cares about the pros? Was Art paid to win college games? Yes. Did he win college games. Hell yes. More than any Baylor Head coach ever has or ever will in an 8 year span at Baylor. It kills 2be2 but it happened regardless of his efforts to diminish it.

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Timbear said:

---

Art was beaten badly on Saturday and has a tough job getting this team on a winning track. It'll be interesting to watch.

---

This. It will be fascinating to keep tabs on, but whew.

---

The college game has changed, and what Art did offensively with so much success over a decade ago doesn't work anymore.

Just look at scores across the country. Defenses have caught up with and are currently ahead of the offenses. And the Art Briles offense, in particular, has been neutered by rule changes and defensive adjustments.

Art will either have to care way more than he ever has about the game's other phases or innovate again to be successful in the modern era. And he's running out of time for innovation.

---

Art had basically a 50/50 run vs pass%, and had 1,000 yard rushers almost every year.

---

What does that have to do with anything I just said?

I never said his offenses were one-dimensional. But they were heavily reliant on a tempo you can't effectively run anymore because of changes in rule interpretation and implementation.

As we saw with both Kendal and Lebby while Art was away, the veer and shoot doesn't work nearly as well when defenses are set and ready with the personnel they want on the field.

College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. It's much more difficult to smoke and mirrors your way to success. If you can't line up and move a set defense off the ball, you're not going to have success running the ball. And when you can't run the ball effectively, passing games lose their effectiveness, especially once the field condenses in the red zone.

It's much more about execution now than it was in Art's heyday, when you could literally get mismatches by running faster than the defense was prepared to go.

---

Didn't you say that Defenses have adjusted to Art's O, and that it doesn't work anymore? I just pointed out that his run game was very good, which shatters your comment. What's with this smoke and mirrors? You take the field and score TD's, period. Doesn't matter how. Did you watch SMU? That is the Briles O.

---

The success of his run game was largely predicated on tempo, too. We could maul middle-of-the-pack defensive fronts, but we struggled to just line up and move the best ones we faced. The best example of that was the Cotton Bowl, but there were others, too.

When we could catch defenses off guard and unprepared, they were helpless. But the rules have basically eliminated that element of the game in college football.

---

Biggest problem in that Cotton bowl is that Art turned the playcalling over to junior, and he wasn't ready for it yet.

Art's biggest problem is how long he has been out of the game. His approach developed not only throughout the season or game to game, but even within the game. It was not a system. It was just an expert tactician staying a step ahead of whoever was across the field. Trying to reduce that down to a system and how it would work today is just small minded. We were watching a guy at his peak. The question is whether he can get back to something like that. It has nothing to do with systems. if you're thinking in terms of systems, you don't understand what was actually happening.

---

It was absolutely a system, and saying so isn't a knock on Briles. He built a really damn good one that broke football for a stretch. He even had Nick Saban worried/whining about it for a while.

But the fact that almost all of the offensive players we had drafted during that era -- both skill guys and linemen -- were total failures in the NFL tells you that it was a system.

Art was really good at finding undervalued one-trick players and plugging them into a scheme that exploited the hell out of that one trick.

---

I suppose that it's fine to call it a system, but that oversimplifies what was happening. It was changing all the time. And if he was still sitting there working the controls, it would have continued to change in different ways as defenses responded to it. No telling what it would look like if that had continued to take place.

---

It probably would have looked like a slightly more successful version of what we've seen from Kendal and Lebby in his absence.

---

I actually think it'd be a slightly more successful version of what Heupel has been running at Tennessee. Heupel's version of the offense is probably the truest version of the run-first inverted veer that Briles popularized. Kendall falls in love with the bubble screen and the vertical passing game too much, and Lebby runs a lot more Air Raid concepts interspersed.

Heupel has had good offenses, but nothing Earth-shattering. I think Briles would probably be in that vein.