AZ Longhorn

Big time! Not only a sharp start after last weeks not-so-sharp start, but there's a big dropoff in danger after their 2-3-4, and they won't be up again for a while!

I like your thinking. Unfortunately, for non-con, as Jeff said above the default is for run rule in effect, so it takes the opposing coach to agree to remove it as well. And it would be understandable that the red meat we bring in might not agree to overriding the run rule. But we can't control their decision—I just wish Jim would make it clear that from our side we always want to play 9.

I'm excited for this weekend. A step up in competition (including UTRGV on Tuesday). What I'm hoping for: Mostly, more of the same! A great start. Better 1st and 2nd innings. Cleaner defense. (Bunt defense, quicker turns on double plays, better tracking of fly balls) Borba and Livingston starting to produce, or else I'll be hoping for a batting order change. Tinney is a golden spikes watchlist guy, and we've seen what he can do when he gets pitches to hit. Have to find a way to punish teams if they try to avoid him like UCD did. The Jonah wildcard, obviously. Getting to know the depth better—please no run rules. Ideally Crossland, Leffew, Walls, and McKernan all get some outs. For LF - more Monsour, hopefully a look at Pendergrass, maybe even Ermis? And for 1B/DH - hopefully more Ermis, and maybe another AB or two for Courville. Exciting stuff! Hook em!

Fantastic stuff, @Jeff Howe, thank you! On the run rule: can you clarify whether, in non-con play, the run rule is the default (and both coaches have to agree to change that and play all 9) or vice versa? (Either way, I don't understand Jim talking about it in terms of choosing "the recommendation from our conference." Don't offload responsibility for that decision. That's a choice, and your duty is to your team and university, not to a conference's non-binding "recommendation" smh. That justification shouldn't fly—ever, but especially not when the run rule has been all downside for us (1) this early in the season and (2) with this deep a staff we need to get to know.) On a different note, so relieved to hear Pack is fine. Obviously it started as a transient cramp, but I was worried he injured himself by trying to play through it and taking swings. Whew!

Yeah, from personal experience, the schloss quote had me thinking hamstring (again). Weird how "Ft Knox" everyone is being about it. Thanks for posting the update though! Jonah is the biggest wildcard for this team's ceiling, and anything is better than nothing for inquiring minds who want to know wtf is up 😆

No question. Elite physical tools, elite makeup, elite bloodlines (his brother Nick was a longtime MLB vet who now runs a training facility for pros in the offseason... Jonah has grown up around big leaguers), tantalizing production as a freshman in the SEC without the same level of investment other guys put in... Absolutely first-round potential. Potential being the operative word for the whole frustrating Jonah-in-Austin experience so far.

Ehh, you don't gain 11 pounds of muscle in 4-5 weeks, if that's what you mean. (Without... "chemical assistance" at least).

Thanks for the update. What was the injury?

Wow! Didn't know Robbins has that kind of pop!!

Looking better and better. 48 pitches through 3 IP is not bad for how it started. Any idea of a pitch count number for Riojas today?

96-97, with life, and commanding it to the top of the zone. That's an impressive weapon. Only thing he has going right now tho. No feel for any other pitch (or even location of the fb elsewhere)

This has been simple for a while. Consider us the 35-40th best team in the nation (a lot of advanced ratings have us around there). That itself is close to getting in at large. Not a lock, admittedly. But close. What is a lock is getting to 9 SEC wins (and even 8 is 50/50 odds IMO, projecting from where we are now) If we just play to "chalk" the rest of the season against those rankings, we get there easy. We have shown the ability to "play down" and that Miss St. loss still hurts, but we also have the ability to "play up" and beat almost anybody (except Florida IMO). So call it a wash if we lose one we shouldn't and win one we shouldn't. A LOT of evidence at this point says we are between 35-40 nationally... just be who we are — a frustrating but tantalizing team who averages out to around 35-40th in the nation — and beat who we're supposed to beat on the rest of our schedule (according to those advanced rankings) and we get to the magic number of SEC wins to get that tourney bid. Since about 4-5 weeks ago, when the rankings really started to stabilize and we've gotten to know who the rest of our scheduled teams are, I haven't understood the doom and gloom that says we won't make the tournament. I'm 75% sure we will🤘

I've got my eye on Burns and Higgins. Burns is the "pro-style closer" option with top shelf electricity in that arm. But he had control/command and mental toughness issues last year; we'll see how he's grown there. Higgins is more the "college-style closer" option... and has some similarities to Volantis as a composed lefty who is better than his stuff would indicate. Higgins has also gotten some recent preseason honors recognition, which tells me those outlets think he's gonna be our closer (rare for a middle reliever / stopper to get preseason first team picks). We can quibble about whether we have a top-end starter to match up eye-to-eye with the Casan Evans, Hunter Elliots, Gabe Gaeckles, Cam Flukeys, and Dax Whitneys of our title competitors (we don't IMO), but we have as much if not more pitching depth than anyone! It's up to Schloss and Weiner to strategize to our strengths.

I mean he clearly projects there but... to start the season? Given the weekend starters announced, Tuesday has gotta be Flores, right? Obviously things could change if one of those guys doesn't perform as a starter. But it wouldn't be the worst thing for our stud freshmen arms to follow the strategy LSU used with Casan Evans last year: start in the pen, then get some midweek starts, and — who knows — by the end of the season, they might just prove to be ace-type material like Evans and be the piece that puts you over the top for a natty. Freshmen arms just tend to wear down with a full season of starting; bring them along slowly, don't overload them with expectations or innings, and let it happen organically. Obviously I don't see practice haha! But given everything we've heard about Flores' holistic development, combined with all that other context, I would be shocked if he isn't the starter this Tuesday.

Re: Riojas over Flores, Schloss subscribes to the philosophy of giving the veteran a chance. If he swims, great. If he sinks, he's got a more talented youngster ready... and, crucially, that youngster is seen as a (potential) solution to the subpar performance they'd been getting from the vet, rather than having to deal with fan and locker room expectations out of the gate as The Guy). I think this philosophy is absolutely the way to go for multiple reasons. Personally, I will be surprised if Riojas is still a top 3 starter for us come postseason time. But if he is, he'll have found more consistency and have earned it. If not, we have a stable of other options (with Grubbs setting a high floor, and Flores — or even Cozart or Crossland — raising a high ceiling).

Correct on the graphic—home states, not college commitments. I find it hard to get excited about baseball HS class rankings until after the draft signing period, but that's the jilted fan PTSD talking and it's better than not having top guys interested in your program. "Better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all"?! 😂

Interesting — I hadn't made the connection between his hand injury and his defensive development. But duh, haha! I am still not sold that he can hold down short: not just hands and arm strength (potential hand injury impacts) but athleticism and feel and command. I feel Beccera is better there, but you make accommodations for your stars and give him a chance to grow into an even better draft eval.

Thanks y'all! Position player preseason depth question. These seem like the locks for expected contributors: OF: Robbins, Pack, Larson, and Williams MIF: Rodriguez and Mendoza Corners: Beccera, Borba, Livingston C - Tinney Who are the next few guys who we could see? I'll start it off with my non-expert expectations, but please chime in! Most likely to DH or pinch hit, not listed above: Ermis? Backup C - Ermis Fourth OF: already covered above. Strong 4-deep. MIF depth: Beccera (over Duplantier) Pinch runner: Pendergrass (over Duplantier) @Blake Munroe @CJ Vogel @Jeff Howe

Any Longhorns in these winter games? (Probably not but just checking!)

One of my main takeaways from the *alumni game: remembering just how lively his arm is. Absolutely electric, and categorically "just different" even from guys pumping 95. In 40-degree weather, no less.

I love a conditional prediction! Heck yeah. It is difficult though: consider the Oregon at Penn St game in Week 5... even that far into the season, we thought that Oregon win at Happy Valley meant one thing... but it meant something very different by the end of the season. And that was Week 5. Much less Week 2. Obviously pumped for the game, but cautious about hanging such a bold conditional on one result that early into a season when we won't truly know how to interpret the result. TLDR: I do think your prediction is quite "bold"!

It's a tough schedule, and we will likely have to be ranked top 10 to qualify. Very plausible that the '26 team is significantly "better" than the '25 team but also misses the playoffs and has a similar (or even worse) final record. Not a take I consider "bold" (not here to police, just sharing my opinion) but an under-discussed observation. I'd put the chances we make the playoffs next year at 65%.

Timing and character shout-out points to the plane crash tragedy. I think these kinds of posts are mostly self-serving. But I do hope that Sark is doing his part in being light and love for those impacted.

Thanks for the numbers! Do you think this kind of turnover makes it easier or harder (than pre-portal era) to predict how good teams will be? First instinct is it's harder, just with all the new faces. But on the other hand: in the old days, your unknowns were your own backups from the previous year(s), and you'd known their *names* and heard "we really like this guy", but didn't have any actual *college game experience or tape*. In this portal era, when we're talking about the top of the sport, teams' new faces likely already have real college experience and tape. So, perhaps there's more data now, to project how the top of the sport will perform, than in the pre-portal days. Thoughts?

IT WAS INEVITABLE! God I love Beck's consistent inconsistency hahaha