[CTcard]

Someone please convince me why this makes sense...

Play Walker Little at RT against Rice with first unit.
Play him as an extra OL against U$C.
Start him at LT against SDSU.

Well, nobody other than the coaches can tell you exactly what they were thinking, and they won't do so unless you are actually a drinking buddy of theirs. But, it's not too hard to guess the likely thought process.

The choices aren't specifically about where to put Little so much as who will be in our starting OL. And there was only one change, between $C and SDSU. Little played a single series with the starters vs Rice, the fifth of the game (and the only one that didn't end with points, though I don't think that had anything to do with Little). By that point, the outcome was not in doubt, and the coaches were clearly experimenting to see how Little would do under fire. Against $C the game was always in doubt (well, at least marginally, until $C scored their final TD), so there was no experimenting.

It seems obvious that in reviewing the $C game tapes, the coaches were not happy with Fanaika. Presumably, between what they had seen in practice and the first two games, they thought Little was ready to step in - or at least was a better option than keeping Fanaika. Since they were replacing a guard with a tackle, a lot of shuffling had to take place. However, there are really only two interesting decisions after the primary one to do the swap. Those were that they apparently think Herbig is more comfortable than Bright switching over to the right side, and that they didn't want to swap sides with Hall so that Little went to the left side.
The only one of those two side switches that kind of surprises me is Herbig to RG to accommodate Bright at LG (not necessarily concerned, but surprised). 

[CTcard]

Someone please convince me why this makes sense...

Play Walker Little at RT against Rice with first unit.
Play him as an extra OL against U$C.
Start him at LT against SDSU.

Well, nobody other than the coaches can tell you exactly what they were thinking, and they won't do so unless you are actually a drinking buddy of theirs. But, it's not too hard to guess the likely thought process.

The choices aren't specifically about where to put Little so much as who will be in our starting OL. And there was only one change, between $C and SDSU. Little played a single series with the starters vs Rice, the fifth of the game (and the only one that didn't end with points, though I don't think that had anything to do with Little). By that point, the outcome was not in doubt, and the coaches were clearly experimenting to see how Little would do under fire. Against $C the game was always in doubt (well, at least marginally, until $C scored their final TD), so there was no experimenting.

It seems obvious that in reviewing the $C game tapes, the coaches were not happy with Fanaika. Presumably, between what they had seen in practice and the first two games, they thought Little was ready to step in - or at least was a better option than keeping Fanaika. Since they were replacing a guard with a tackle, a lot of shuffling had to take place. However, there are really only two interesting decisions after the primary one to do the swap. Those were that they apparently think Herbig is more comfortable than Bright switching over to the right side, and that they didn't want to swap sides with Hall so that Little went to the left side.
The only one of those two side switches that kind of surprises me is Herbig to RG to accommodate Bright at LG (not necessarily concerned, but surprised).