Gator's Bayou Wonderings: Looking back to Kingsbury's first game vs. SMU

Wonderings are brought to you every week by our good friends at Gator's Bayou. If you're looking for a real, authentic Cajun restaurant in Lubbock complete with a fun, Louisiana-style atmosphere, Gator's Bayou is the place to go!

Oh, and get the Dirty Bird. You can thank me later.

THIS WEEK'S WONDERINGS: A review and analysis of Kingsbury's head coaching opener against SMU. What's changed? What hasn't?

In just over two weeks, Texas Tech football will kick off their 2017 season against Eastern Washington, the fifth year of Kliff Kingsbury's tenure as the head coach of the Red Raiders.

What that also means is that we're now quickly approaching the fourth anniversary of Kingsbury's career opening contest against SMU, a Friday showdown in late August that took place in Dallas on what was an absolute boiler of a night. In fact, I don't think I've ever sat through a hotter game than that one.

Weather aside, I happened to stumble upon a full copy of that game this week, so I decided to take the trip down memory lane and relive that contest one more time...

-There was so much energy in that stadium that night, and not from the SMU faithful. Red Raiders showed up in droves to support Kingsbury as the favored son returning home to lead the program. You can feel the excitement from an overwhelmingly Tech-centric crowd that night.

-You often forget that the weeks leading up to the contest were ripe with drama under center. In early August, Michael Brewer's back injury came to light, meaning a true freshman was going to take the reins in Kliff's first game as head coach. No pressure or anything, right?

-It was essentially a complete blindside when everyone learned that some walk-on named Baker Mayfield was going to start over Davis Webb, a guy who was an Elite 11 finalist and looked to be the future signal caller of the program. Little did we know then that Mayfield would end up in Norman, Webb would end up in Berkeley, and some high school commit named Patrick Mahomes would end up the most talented quarterback to ever play for your program.

-The thing that sticks out the most to me is just how differently the offense operated then compared to now. Yes, the bare bones staple concepts are the same with short routes, screens, zone running, and the such. But the way that Kliff built that offense to run - to me anyway -is vastly different than how Mahomes ran it in 2016.

-In particular, Kingsbury made things really, really simple for Mayfield, as you'd expect for a true freshman. The gameplan becomes apparent on the first drive: Get the ball out of your hand really, really quickly. Slants, sticks, screens, short routes, and passing to tailbacks out of the backfield was the bread and butter for that offense that night. And with a young, inexperienced offensive line that was extremely thin on depth and age, the gameplan made sense.

-The biggest difference that sticks out like a sore thumb with that offense is the sheer number of QB draws that Kliff whipped up. Mayfield carried the ball on what felt like almost double digit called QB run plays, something I'd totally forgotten about from the gameplan for that season. It made sense with his ability to run it, though. And those plays almost always got you some yardage.

-What this game is a reminder of to me is just how good Kliff is at building his offense around the assembled talent. Some coaches try to fit square pegs into round holes and are hell bent on running their systems a certain way, but not Kingsbury. He tailored this offense very specifically to what he had personnel-wise: A young, but mobile, quarterback, a thin and inexperienced offensive line, two good pass-catching tailbacks in Williams and Washington, and a receiving corps that wasn't deep but had four high quality starters across the board, particularly an Abrams tank with a super charged engine named Jace Amaro. Compare that to 2015 and 2016 with Mahomes running the show. In 2015 in particular, you had a veteran O-line, a stud running back, a few gamebreakers at receiver, and a big, athletic QB with a howitzer for an arm. So, you introduced a ton of play-action, pistol, downfield concepts, bootlegs, option plays, and more of the sort to fit that personnel. Kingsbury is so, so good at adapting to and making the most out of whatever ingredients he has on hand.

-Strangely enough, this 2013 offense had the most balanced receiving corps of Kingsbury's tenure so far. Yes, Amaro was the centerpiece in the passing game, but with Jakeem Grant as a young X factor in the slot that few knew about, a wily veteran at X on the outside in Eric Ward, and a guy that could win a big number of one-on-ones in Bradley Marquez at Z, this receiving corps created threats everywhere on the field at all times. That was such a great boost for Mayfield and Webb to have as true freshmen. It really, really makes me wonder what could've been that year had Michael Brewer been healthy.

-Defensively, you had some real playmakers on that team: Tre Porter, Terrance Bullitt, Will Smith, Bruce Jones, JJ Gaines, Kerry Hyder, Dartwan Bush, Sam Eguavoen, young Pete Robertson and Brandon Jackson. This defense, when healthy, was much, much better than people remember, too. They could tackle in the open field, they got pressure on the quarterback, and they flat out made plays. In fact, this defense didn't give up more than 23 points in the first half of the season. Your problem is, however, that Bullitt, Porter, Gaines, and Bush were all on the shelf for most of the second half of the year. Not coincidentally, your D fell apart a bit in the final six games of the regular season as a result. But then once everyone was healthy again for the bowl game, they shut down a potent Arizona State offense. This was a defense that was very good on the surface level, but they had zero depth. As a result, they really, really underachieved by the end of the year. Some of that may also have to do with Matt Wallerstedt and the way he tried to out chess-match opponents too much, too.

-Speaking of Wally, it's wild looking back at this coaching staff. Sonny Cumbie is right next to Kliff going over what to do offensively, and everyone else on the staff from 2013 outside of Eric Morris is now gone, even with quite a bit of the support staff. It's radically different now than it was then.

-You know what else I noticed from this game? Everyone was having fun. A whole lot of it. The fans, the players, the coaches. Everyone was having a BLAST on this night. You could tell too that Kingsbury was wound up and wanted to win this game so, so badly. Seeing his passion, which even now you'll see after big plays, is so much fun, and it makes it so easy to root for him. You know why? Because he cares. He REALLY cares. That's on full display in this game.

So, what does this all mean in comparison to what I expect from 2017? A few things...

*First, this offense may be the one that's the most similarly built to the 2013 unit. Like that year, you have a balanced wide receiving corps that's littered with veterans, but you also have a young and inexperienced O-line that may not be able to run block consistently. It's not quite as young, green, or thin, but it is a group that lacks age and simply has to be much better in 2017.

*What's different, however, is that you have a fifth year senior signal caller running the show. You also don't have staple tailbacks that are excellent flats receivers quite like Williams or Washington were. Stockton is, but we don't know about the rest of the group quite yet.

*And while Tech's WR corps is balanced like it was in 2013, it's actually much deeper and more talented as a whole now than it was then. The outside receivers are also much, much bigger. Think about this: They didn't use a receiver at X or Z that was over six-foot-one that year. They're much bigger now, and you have guys that can win some major downfield one-on-ones, whether with speed, size, or both. They simply were not nearly as explosive overall at receiver, really across the board, then as they are now.

*The play-style I expect is a blend of what we saw in 2015 and 2016 with 2013. With a senior QB like Shimonek, I think you'll see a decisive distributor that lets his skill players handle the lion's share of the work. He'll go through reads while getting the ball out quickly. That's where the 2013 similarities come in. However, with a much deeper and more explosive group of skill players, I think this offense will still use play-action and will still throw the ball downfield to Willies, Cantrell, Shorts, Vasher, Coutee, Batson, and the rest. Unlike with 2015 and 16 with Mahomes, however, I think you'll see less QB run game in the form of options and bootlegs.

*How this running game ultimately grows will factor into what we see, too. If it's tough sledding, it will look more like 2013 with screens and short routes to tailbacks out of motion to supplement the running game. If you can get it going and find some physicality on the ground, however, you'll see more downhill running and play-action like you did in 2015.

*Defensively, you're wildly different now than you were then. You've gone through entire defensive staffs at this point. Frankly, the 2014-2016 defenses flat out had very little talent on them, the late sins of Tuberville and Wally in recruiting coming back to bite you very, very hard. Now, in 2017, I think this is the closest you've been back to a defensive roster that more resembles what you had in 2013 and 2012 from two defenses that I frankly believe underachieved. You have real depth now at basically every position, particularly on the defensive line and in the secondary. You also have real playmakers in Jordyn Brooks, Dakota Allen, Jah'Shawn Johnson, Douglas Coleman, Joe Wallace, Broderick Washington, and I believe Octavious Morgan, Eli Howard, and Lonzell GIlmore. This is a group that out of the gates I think can show real improvement. I do not expect them to be world beaters, but I think you're better, which is saying something. This roster finally resembles what David Gibbs at least mostly wants it to. Yes, you still obviously want more talent and depth, but you at the very least look like a Big 12 defense finally.

*And while Kingsbury is still just as potent, sharp, and impressive of an offensive mind as he was in 2013, he's changed a lot in these last four years. He's visibly more involved with his defense. He's pulled back a little bit emotionally on the sidelines. He's changed his staff to better fit what his program needs. He's evolved as a manager of his program. But honestly, if you sit back and think about it, wouldn't you expect that for a guy going from being a first year head coach to a fifth year one?

*So what does this mean for 2017? I think you're going to win more games than some expect, but does that mean six? Does that mean eight? That's yet to be determined, and much of that will ultimately fall on what improvements your defense has really made and if this offensive line can get it going in the right direction. Yes, I'm fully aware that this is Kool-Aid season, and everyone wants a taste. But from what I've seen, I just don't think this is a four or five win team. I could end up looking like a fool, but with what this roster has on it now, and with how Kingsbury has continued to evolve as a head coach, I think you're in for a better year than some expect.

And I think everyone would be thrilled to embrace Kingsbury again like they did on that night in Dallas in 2013.