A look back at the 2011 Texas Longhorns Offense

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 12:12 AM CDT in Texas Longhorns and Other Football

The Wyoming game is no longer weeks away. Which means it's only a matter of days before Longhorn fans ~~around the globe~~ all across the Grande subscriber area are going to be tempted to render an opinion about how the 2012 offense compares to the one that Texas fielded last year. I'm no different. But I wanted a little context before I started making bold proclamations that might look silly in retrospect. So I took a quick look at the production of the 2011 offense. Here's what I found.

The 2011 Texas Offense Drive Chart

Here’s a chart showing all of Texas’ meaningful offensive drives in 2011. (The chart excludes time-killing drives at the end of halves). The opposing teams are ordered from best to worst defense (according to adjustedstats.com). For those of you who have trouble with numbers, the background has been shaded red, yellow, and green to highlight the elite (top 15), decent (16-60), and subaverage (bottom half)* defenses that Texas faced throughout the season.

I think it would be interesting to look at the chart and reexamine some of the memes that took root last season--about the QBs, the effect of injuries, etc. But I don't want to make this entry too long/controversial, so I'm going to stick to higher level analysis. (Feel free to take up any issue you'd like in the comments section).

Observation #1: There is plenty of room for Texas to improve against elite and decent defenses.To save you from having to count, the Texas offense scored:

3-10 points per game against elite (top 15) defenses;
17-24 ppg against decent (16th-60th) defenses;* and
24-50 pgg against subaverage (bottom 60) defenses.**

To put the 2011 offensive output into perspective, here’s another infographic showing how it measures up against the production of other recent Texas teams.***

(if you can't read the text, click on the picture).

Observation #2: Texas must improve its offensive output against elite and decent defenses.

The 2011 Texas defense surrendered:

0-14 points to subaverage (bottom half) offenses;
10-20 points to decent (16-60) offenses; and
25-34 points to elite (top 15) offenses.****

If you do the math, even as good as the team’s defense is, the Texas offense needs to improve before the team can (A) challenge teams with elite defenses [0 for 2 in 2011; 3 total red zone trips] or (B) consistently beat teams with decent defenses and decent or better offenses [3 for 5 in 2011; 3 to 4 legitimate scoring drives per game].

Observation #3: It will be difficult to tell how much the offense has improved until after week five. The first three teams on the 2012 schedule fielded the 83rd, 114th, and 70th best defenses in the FBS last year, according to adjustedstats.com. And they were 111th, 106th, and 96th best at stopping the run. Then week four is a bye week.

Question for the BC readership: Are you going to watch the first three games with an eye for something specific that you think will indicate whether the Texas offense has improved enough for the team to have a legitimate shot at beating the toughest teams on the schedule? If what you're watching for is easy enough to track with stats or video highlights, I might try to do it. Then, at mid-season, we can all laugh at each other, hand out tote-bags, etc.

Disclaimer: Even though there is math involved, this isn’t supposed to be exact or precise. I’m sure I screwed up a calculation here and there, and ESPN’s drive charts were occasionally wrong. I fixed the ones I caught. I’ll be happy to fix any more that you catch.

* Excluding the Iowa State game, in which the Texas defense gifted the offense four drives that started in or just outside the red zone.

** Note: I rounded UCLA "up" into this group, because their run defense was so poor.

*** Note: I didn’t exclude special teams and defensive scores from the points scored by the earlier Texas teams.

**** These numbers exclude the 2 drives that the Texas offense gifted to RG3 on the 11 and 2 yard lines.

Tweet Comment 41 comments | Add comment | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

That OU chart is especially depressing

When you realize that several of the drives are so short that you can barely tell they’re red for a turnover.

Regarding this season, is there anyway to create a barometer for measuring offensive production relative to the quality of opponent, and then using that to guess about how we might do against the anticipated elite teams? In other words, can you give us a rough extrapolation that 37 points and 230 yards rushing against Wyoming is the likely equivalent of, say, 17 pts and 145 yds against an OU? It might be nice to track week to week development against a hypothetical elite team.

Barring that, could you get me access to the LHN?

Numbers are fun; thanks for the post.

by Flipteach on Aug 24, 2025 12:31 AM CDT reply actions

You're going to have to ask Huck about that algorithm

Count on me to create colorful charts and point out obvious patterns.

To your point about turnovers in the OU game, the blog entry above actually started as a meditation on an offense’s ability to get yards that matter. There are a lot of easy yards in a game: 8 yards on 3rd and 18, 5 yards at midfield after the game is decided, etc.

Then there are really hard yards: 19 yards on 3rd and 18 in the red zone when the game is on the line and the other team has a great defense, for example. I was trying to think of ways to “stress test” the offense. (I quickly realized that I wouldn’t be able to pull this all off in a single blog post, but that’s beside the point).

As you point out, the team failed the stress test in the OU game.

I guess that’s the biggest bright spot from the Cal game, for me. Think about this for a second. What reason do we have to believe that the team has gotten drastically better since the Cal game? And you can look at the Cal game drive chart and think it doesn’t look that much different from the OSU or Iowa State games. But I think the difference in the Cal game was that the team was able to get the yards that mattered. And the team was a couple throws too close to the sideline from breaking that game open when the game was close. So, an optimist could look at that and say that Texas was just about to turn the corner on offense last season . . .

If Huck manages to create that algorithm, those of us that aren’t patient enough to wait five weeks can get a preview of how the team will fare against better defenses. In the meantime, I think you have to look to see how the team performs in “stressful” situations.

For example: red zone pass efficiency. According to ESPN, Texas was pretty much dead last in the FBS at red zone passing. That’s something to watch. Ditto obvious passing downs. Yards when the game is in doubt. Watch the yards that count.

BTW, here’s a quick and dirty breakdown I did of the Cal game. The game opened up when we started passing on potential rushing downs and forced Cal to take defenders out of the box (imo).

Thanks for the feedback!

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 1:15 AM CDT up reply actions

And lovely colorful charts they are, too.

Mixing up the run/pass predictability is something I noticed several times last year as well.

I actually think that’s part of the difference between the Cal game and our less successful endeavors against OU and OSU. I don’t think Harsin trusted the QB (usually Ash) to do much, so we ran when everybody knew we would. This usually resulted in a 3rd and 8 or so, and then we couldn’t convert on the obvious passing downs. I distinctly remember yelling at the screen that we needed to at least try a pass on 1st down every now and then. Even if it didn’t work, it would make the next 1st down rushing attempt have a better chance.

Not to criticize Harsin too much, but there seemed to be a few times last year that he felt stymied and allowed us to become predictable (usually in a conservative, risk avoidance way). In the Cal game (sometime after the middle of the second quarter or so), he seemed to reach the conclusion that he’d just have to trust that Ash wouldn’t screw up too badly, and we’d have to go ahead and take a couple of shots.

I’m curious to see how the offense develops this year, particularly in regards to our ability to dictate when we want to run.

Thanks again.

by Flipteach on Aug 24, 2025 2:00 AM CDT up reply actions

Thanks. You and I are on the same page.

I was originally planning on testing the ideas in your second paragraph, but it was probably a little ambitious. Instead, I think it’s something I’m going to look at on a game-by-game basis next year.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions

Doesn't Huck already have something like this?

I am not sure if the posts from the old site are still available, but Huck has a tool where you can test your team against any other team and it would give you predictions of the outcome. I don’t think it showed you what was going on behind the curtain, but I do know the more data you could put into it (meaning the farther it got into the season) the more confidence Huck was placing in it.

by Rickyspub on Aug 24, 2025 9:18 AM CDT up reply actions

Yes, adjustedstats.com

Great site, and you’re right: it gets more accurate as the season goes on. As far as the info behind the curtain, if you click on a team, you can get a ton of adjusted info on the team, for every year going back quite a ways. That’s where I got the info I used in this post.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions

Per rush average in first 3 games primarily.

If it’s not better than 6.0 per rush for the three games inclusive, with 45 rushes per game, we may see trouble against the better defenses. And that average should be without any breakaway runs of 30 yards or more. That should be the “plodding” average against these three teams.

Along with that we must see the passing game used enough to exercise it (20-25 passes per game), not all play action but a variety, with production including: more than one receiver who knows what a football is; no more than one interception thrown (in three games by any one QB) with no INTs from receiver-tipped balls; the type of completions which give us a sense that our QB and receivers are on the same page (hard to define, but you know it when you see it).
Overall ball security. No more than one turnover per game.

by lurkerinthedark on Aug 24, 2025 7:14 AM CDT reply actions

that's a tall order

Will be interesting to see how close the team comes to those stats.

I don’t think we hit those rushing stats in any game last year (maybe Tech).

But you’re right, we should be executing at a high level against the less formidable defenses.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions

Short Yardage/Passing downs

I believe Texas should be capable of running on the first 3 opponents on standard downs. The interesting part will be how Texas runs in short yardage, particularly in the red zone. Texas finished 104th in TD percentage in the red zone last yr and 110th in red zone scoring.

The other is how does Texas perform in passing downs. Last yr Texas’s success rate on passing downs was 99th in the country (defined as 2nd 8 or 3/4th and 5 or greater). Again absolutely brutal.

by codaxx on Aug 24, 2025 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions

Even worse, check out the red zone passing stats

http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/48600/longhorn-issues-start-in-red-zone

last in yards per attempt in the red zone,
111th in pass efficiency,
109th in completion percentage, and
106th in passing touchdowns.

And those #s include shipley’s efforts(!)

The breakdown for the curious:

McCoy:
6 for 17 (35%)
20 yards (1.17 ypa)
3 TD
1 INT
0 first downs

Ash:
5 for 12 (42%)
23 yards (1.91 ypa)
1 TD
1 INT
0 first downs

Shipley
2 for 2 (100%)
9 yards (4.5 ypa)
2 TD
0 INT
468 passer rating

Success on passing downs is definitely something to watch.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions

painfully obvious

that the offense was just not ready to impose its will on opponents with a pulse. Offense was not great on standard downs, but ranked around 61st there. I think the stats highlight the growth needed from the oline.

by codaxx on Aug 24, 2025 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions

yes.

and when you look at those numbers, it’s kind of impressive that the team scored as many points as it did!

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions

Well done, alpha. Thanks.

We were so limited in terms of what we could reasonably do last season by personnel and youth. We started true freshmen at all of the key offensive positions: QB, RB, WR, LT. We had a guard (Hopkins) playing left tackle and a RS-FR coming off injury (Espinosa) at center. We lacked adequate blocking at TE and got inconsistent receiving—key to the Harsin offense. We barely scratched the surface as to what Harsin’s offense can do because of all of those limitations.

It isn’t that the youngsters lacked physical ability. The lack of experience would predictably come most into play in those “important yards” or “yards that matter” situations. This would also predictably be most acute against top defenses. Top defenses typically combine elite physical talent with coaching and experience.

I think Jessie Palmer got it right in announcing the Holiday Bowl when he said Texas will be significantly improved in every offensive position group (OL, RB, QB, WR) inn 2013. That should start to show not only in dominating bottom half defenses but in more success against better ones.

by hh500 on Aug 24, 2025 7:15 AM CDT reply actions

Thanks hh500

And I share your hopes. How much better do you think we are today compared to the Holiday Bowl? Won’t hold you to your prediction, just something I’ve been turning over in my head. . .

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 10:14 AM CDT up reply actions

Considerably. I thnk at a minimum this years team doesn’t lose to Mizzou because we can’t get more than a FG. The line should be at least improved enough that we win that game ugly 19-17, even if we don’t get more than 16/36 for 171 yards and an INT from our combined QBing.

I want to say we beat KState as well because Ash will be more reliable. But I hate ever calling a win agaisnt Kstate.

We played OSU so well, that I think we would have a good shot against them. So I’ll say 1 of 2 against OSU and KState, taking us to 2 more wins against solid teams.

This is all assuming our players stay health, of course.

by UT_BKC on Aug 24, 2025 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions

knock on wood.

i think you and i are basically in the same ballpark.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions

What I want to see from the offense in the first few games:

Better QB recognition at the LOS, with audibles into better plays when appropriate

Improved blocking from the tight ends and Roberson

Mack’s oft-discussed run/pass balance; I hope that Harsin chooses to get into the meat of the playbook against all three teams instead of picking one major flaw and exploiting it all day long/treating the game like a scrimmage (i.e. “Okay boys, who’s on the schedule today? Oh, okay, it’s New Mexico. Hmm… I feel good about most of the playbook but I think we’ll try to get a lot of reps working on the perimeter passing game this evening”)

Not that Harsin would do that, but you know how the internet loves hyperbole.

I want to see what the red-zone offensive game plan is. Hopefully there’s a lot more to it than fades to the corners and partially-installed wild formations.

After the first few games, as the season progresses, I’ll want to see Ash showing improved split-second decision making regarding which receiver is the best to throw to. Not just who is open, but which throw is best situationally.

by HawkHorn on Aug 24, 2025 9:48 AM CDT reply actions

this is all great stuff, and I agree

I guess it’s why I’m also thinking we might be a year away on offense. But maybe we can see a lot more of the stuff you identified by the end of the season knock on wood

Most of that stuff is tough to track with stats, but I think I may be able to put together some highlights that showcase how we’re doing in those areas. And I’m sure LonghornScott will address the blocking and some of the playcalling.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions

I have to keep telling myself that all these things

continue to be a work in progress. The kool aid is delicious and I have been drinking a lot of it, so I’m especially appreciative for posts like this one that calmly and rationally demonstrate our weaknesses.

P.S. Thanks for all your stuff on YouTube (I assume that you’re alphahydro15?) I’ve watched a bunch of those videos more times than I care to admit.

by HawkHorn on Aug 24, 2025 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions

Sure thing

and yep, that’s me. Apparently, there is another alphahydro out there. (who knew?) so I had to add the 15 at the end.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 11:23 AM CDT up reply actions

My big takeaway is Observation #2

Folks offering that we can have a big year so long as our offense “doesn’t turn it over” and “is just adequate” because our defense is so good are missing the bigger picture. That approach can work to beat poor and average teams, but it makes our toughest 3-4 games (say: OU, KSU, WVU, bowl game) tough sledding if we can’t put points on the board, stake leads, and do something beyond punt.

I also had no idea that Missouri played such good adjusted defense last year. Good stuff, alphahydro.

by Scipio Tex on Aug 24, 2025 10:03 AM CDT reply actions

Having 8-4 or 9-3 as a starting point with the offense treading water isn't so bad. Late 2000's NU comes to mind.

If the run game actually is productive, which it really should be, it raises the ceiling.

If we can put 3-4 extended scoring drives together per game and win the turnover battle, 10-2 or 11-1 become distinct possibilities.

by notsofst on Aug 24, 2025 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions

Thanks Scipio

I was going to spend more time on observation #2, but I couldn’t think of a good way to represent it visually. Here are some outtakes.

Chart 1 (left side of the bar = worst case scenario: poor outing from offense and defense; right side of bar = vice versa) :

Chart 2 (lighter colors = points allowed by defense; darker colors = points scored by offense):

Basically, against a team that is elite on one side of the ball and decent on the other, assuming no improvement over last year, we need great games from both the offense and the defense just to tie. So basically, to win we’d need great games from the offense and defense, plus some additional scoring from the defense or special teams. Against a team that is merely decent on both sides of the ball, we can still lose if we don’t have a particularly good day on offense or defense. This is all ballpark, of course.

And we weren’t close last year to being able to beat a team that was elite on both sides of the ball.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions

That's a great chart.

by Scipio Tex on Aug 24, 2025 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions

thx.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions

I disagree

with that conclusion a bit. I think the defense was quite good. The issue vs elite teams was the offense getting out-classed. Take OU for an example. Taking out defense and special team scores the final was 34-10. OU possessed the ball for almost 40 minutes. A move to effective, but not spectacular offense and that game is a 7-10 pt game. Now also realize OU scored on drives of 26 and 33 yds. That is another 10 pts, so effectively the Texas offense spotted OU 31 pts. Baylor was not as obvious, but take away a 2 yd drive for a TD, now Texas is leadign at half. Then there is another 11 yd drive for TD. All of a sudden it is 38 – 24 and Texas is forced to pass the ball and good night.

by codaxx on Aug 24, 2025 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions

Baylor was 95th in adjusted defense

We actually should have beaten them (on paper), according to my oversimplified green/yellow/red analysis. Playing reasonably well, our team was good enough to outscore a team with an elite offense and subaverage defense.

And if you look at the drive chart, we stalled in the red zone 3 times (21 points); plus, as you mentioned, we gifted them 14 points. That pretty much explains why McCoy got yanked after the game, imo.

I was talking about teams that were elite on both sides of the ball. OU is the only team we faced in that category. And even if you take out OU’s defensive scores, take another look at the drive chart. While the game was in doubt, we had 3 points and zero trips to the red zone (I think we scored the touchdown when the game was 48-10.) Against a team that is forecasted to score 25-34 points, that’s not going to do it.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions

my argument

was against we need great games on both sides of the ball. Some of this could be about the definition of great. I am saying that an effective offense in OU game makes that game close. Instead that game was an implosion. I do not think Texas needs great games on both side of the ball to win RRS. I think an effective offense can turn that game into a coin flip. Defense last yr was very good. AY (yards available) rank was 11th. Yet, Texas defense was 33 in pts allowed. That would be a reflection of turnovers and playing with poor field position.

by codaxx on Aug 24, 2025 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions

Got it

I thought the conclusion you disagreed with was, “And we weren’t close last year to being able to beat a team that was elite on both sides of the ball.”

Was just pointing out that Baylor wasn’t in that category.

By great I just meant near or at our best performance of the year against that caliber of defense. In other words, if our best outing against a decent defense was 24 points, we’d need to score about 24 points, because the fewest points our defense held an elite offense to all year was 25 points. If last year’s offense had an off-day (relative to its track record against other defenses of similar quality—as it did against say Baylor and K-State), we would be in trouble against a team with an elite offense and decent defense.

And so I didn’t mean “great” objectively, just great for last year’s team, compared to the other games they played against similar competition.

Not sure if that’s all that clear.

I definitely think it’s a whole different argument about how Texas would have faired against OU with say A&M;’s offense or K-State’s offense.

Here’s the question I was honing in on:

Would the OU game have been a coinflip if we played them with the offense that showed up against Cal? If not, how much do you think we can expect that the offense has improved since the holiday bowl? and next, what can we look for in the first three games of the season to test that hypothesis? not really arguing one way or another, just think it’s interesting to ponder.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions

it is not enough

I do not think that was a particularly efficient offense vs Cal. Texas had 11 drives in that game, excluding end of half drives. 7 of those were 3 and out. So 36% of the drives resulted in a score or a first down. The is gross. What changed is TExas got some explosive plays that masked the futility. 35 carries for 109 yards are not going to get it done vs OU. Texas does not need 40 pts out of its offense to win games, but it needs some first downs. Texas can win games by controlling the time of possession and scoring in the 20s vs good teams. Last yr 38% of drives resulted in 1 first down. That puts a ton of stress on a defense. 60th best team in FD rate was at 67% last yr (South Carolina, too lazy to do average/mean). I am thinking Kansas State (Nickel Rover should love this), when I say effective. They ranked 29th in efficiency , but 101st in total yds (bama 11th and 31st).

by codaxx on Aug 24, 2025 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions

I pretty much agree

My original idea for this post was to try to unearth the value of sustaining drives vs. explosive plays, explore what killed our drives, etc. Hence all the work on the drive chart.

But I scrapped that for a variety of reasons (time, ability, etc) and just focused on points, because it was much easier to research and present.

But you’re definitely onto something. I like it. Maybe LonghornScott can chime in with some insight into Harsin’s offense/playcalling and whether it’s about sustaining drives or hunting for/setting up explosive plays.

I think all of this discussion is a little moot in the sense that it’s very possible that we see a fairly different looking offense next season. With improved QB play, Harsin might be able to focus more on sustaining drives and less on chicanery. knock on wood

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions

Things I'm watching in the first games

Defense:
First half shut outs. I’d be happy if we surrender less than 50 yards in the first half each game for our first three games. We kept Cal to 80 yards and 3 points in the first half in the Holiday Bowl, I think we should be able to do as good or better against Wyoming, NM, and Ole Miss.

Offense:
Score on the first drive.
How good are we at maintaining extended drives and 3rd down?
How good are we in the Red Zone?

Your data points out the obvious, which is our offense struggled against better defenses, but I also want to point out that our offense struggled, especially running the ball, against mediocre and even bad defenses in 2010 and 2009 even.

I feel like we at least took a step in the right direction last year, and now we’re wondering if we continued to improve.

If everything improves and we score against top tier defenses as well as we scored against middle tier defenses in 2011, I think that’s all we’re looking for. If we can put on the offensive performance against OU that we did against Cal, that’s a big step forward.

by notsofst on Aug 24, 2025 10:33 AM CDT reply actions

something to chew on

OK, I was too lazy to take out scores by special teams/defense, but the team’s lowest point total from 2007 to 2009 (ie all three years combined) against elite defenses was higher than the highest point total by the 2011 squad against elite defenses. (and if you subtract in the points that OU scored against our offense, there is even more of a discrepancy).

And this is pretty crazy: the 2005 output against elite defenses is comparable to the 2011 output against subaverage defenses.

So it’s not just that we were better against weak defenses last year, it’s about how good we were against each type of defense compared to say 2007 or 2009. Not trying to be a negative nancy for next year. It’s possible that, over the summer, Ash and McCoy crossed the threshold to the point where Harsin can open up the playbook/trust them earlier in the series, etc., and that could pay huge dividends. It’s also possible that our offensive line will be significantly better. Etc.

Not so much forecasting as pointing out that it’s definitely something I’m going to watch. . .

I definitely agree that 3rd down, extended drives, and red zone performance are things to watch. I wish there was an easy way for me to track adjusted down and distance performance. . .

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions

I don't find any of that too surprising

You also have to factor in that in 2011 we went through 3 quarterbacks and spent a good 2-3 games with Fozzy, Shipley, Brown, and Bergeron all injured.

That’s all just crazy.

We don’t actually have results from our 2012 roster playing against elite defenses, because when we were facing them we either were a huge ? under center or had 3-4 of our best offensive play makers on the sideline.

Between staying healthy, knowing who is playing where, and limiting turnovers by the QB’s, I think we’ll see a big jump in offensive results.

I think that’s the reason for optimism. I feel like we at least should be able to jump up to the “decent” offensive category.

by notsofst on Aug 24, 2025 5:41 PM CDT up reply actions

I definitely hope you're right

and your points about the injuries are well taken.

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Fantastic!

by Quigley on Aug 24, 2025 5:42 PM CDT reply actions

Thanks!

by Alphahydro on Aug 24, 2025 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Good stuff

First, thank you for making such high quality vids. I enjoy/share them all, and am looking forward to next year’s.

What I will be watching closely on offense the first few games is the offensive line, especially in the run game. Can Texas seal the edges consistently? Will the TEs be competent blockers? Before last year I got so frustrated watching defenders swarming around the edges, basically untouched on run plays. It improved last season, and I want to see if they continue that trend.

I love watching the unit as a whole and seeing the surge. How do the inside guys look when pulling? Are they getting to the next level when they peel? If so, are they laying blocks? How effective is the blocking once they are out there?

I want to see more big dudes running deep down the field, near the sidelines, trampling LBs and DBs.

I want to see a bunch of opponents DL with their hands on their hips as early as the 2nd quarter, lugging themselves to the LOS with a depressed look on their face that says “Here we go again…”

Of course I am excited about watching the skill position players too, but I have always thought the difference between bad/mediocre/good/great teams has always been OL play.

Oh, and Gray.

by MaxATX on Aug 24, 2025 6:10 PM CDT reply actions