Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Talking diamonds, webcams and Gabbert
By ESPN.com staff
Thanks for coming by today's chat. Didn't get your questions answered? Send it to my mailbag and we'll get to it later this week.
Sam in Normanville asked: Would you agree that Brent Venables is the obvious successor to Bill Snyder at K State? Or at least the front runner? I know it's early to say since Snyder is still there.
DU: I actually talked about this on a podcast I did last week with a Kansas State blog, but no, I don't think so. Venables has waited around and fostered a pretty great reputation for his work at Oklahoma. We all saw where Will Muschamp landed for his first job. It's not impossible, but I think Venables, when he chooses to leave, could get a much better job.
Kevin in Orange County, Calif., asked: If K-State is the "dark horse" at #7 in the power rankings to potentially surprise the Big XIIish, who is the team to potentially fall & disappoint the conference?
DU: Said it a couple times, but definitely Oklahoma State. They've got a tough schedule, are replacing a lot of guys on defense and a new playcaller. Entirely possible that the Cowboys win eight games or so. Not an awful season, but well short of what's expected. It's equally plausible that they win the Big 12, but of the top four or five teams in this league, they've got the most potential for a big drop.
Phillip in a stadium near you asked: David, with the explosive offense that Baylor should have, if the defense can step up, how bout Baylor over TCU on September 2nd?
DU: Very, very possible. TCU has so many new faces and Baylor's offense is so refined, it sets up nicely for them, especially getting a chance to host the Frogs.
Tony in Richmond, Va., asked: Is there something more, behind the scenes, going on with the Tyler Gabbert transfer? Or is this simply the case of a player being upset about not winning the starting job?
DU: Couple things. One, I'm not sure it's fair to categorize Gabbert as "upset." Disappointed he didn't win the job, I'm sure, but "upset' isn't a great word in this case. I do think there's something else going on behind the scenes, considering his father said exactly that, but I don't think it's anything sinister or something that would get Missouri in trouble. Just something that, for whatever reason, the Gabbert's don't want public.
Drying paint in Omaha wrote: Which should I be watching more, KSU's turf webcam or ISU's scoreboard cam? My computer can't handle that much intensity at the same time.
DU: I'm working on getting a webcam of me typing blog entries set up. That tickle your fancy?
Uncle Pennybags on the Boardwalk wrote: Going with the idea of KSU's and ISU's webcams, should the Longhorns install a counter like the National Debt Counter to show their growing bank account? Of course, the Longhorns counter will be in the positive, unlike the fed government's.
DU: Ha. I'm sure the rest of the league would love that, right before ribbing Dan Beebe for having it as his screen saver.
Mack in Austin wrote: How would you stop the Sonners diamond formation and how affective will it be without Murry (man glad he is gone)
DU: It all comes down to assignment football. There's so much misdirection in that formation, guys have to stay in position and not overplay anything, while also winning some one-on-ones to get to the ballcarrier. There's no secret, but new wrinkles like that, and the Wildcat when it was first re-introduced a few years back, are tough on defensive coordinators.
Adrian "All Day" Peterson in the Twin Cities wrote: I think the comparisons of Malcolm Brown to me are unwarranted and will likely prove untrue. BUT, he wins, hands-down, in the A.D. doppelganger contest. Have you seen a frame by frame comparison of us?
DU: There's no doubt in my mind Brown doesn't have the top end speed Peterson had. We'll see what that means for his future, but Brown seems to me like much more of a grinder, a guy who can handle a ton of touches. As for looks? I'll have to check that out. Haven't really looked at it. (I looked it up after the chat. Meh, hardly a doppelganger.)