sith_horn

Exactly. I'll go a step further and say that if he had been left in the game, no one here can say definitively one way or the other how the game turns out. He may well have been able to adjust to the speed of the game and settle in. That's not me saying he would have, but he might well have been able to make a game of it.

Pretty well sums it up.

That was my whole point.

I commented on this before, perhaps in a different thread when someone posted a tweet with his comment, but it shouldn't be hard to see if there is a difference between how he plays in practice, which we aren't privy to, versus in the last two games. If he's stepping into his throws, showing proper mechanics, completing passes and basically getting the job done in practice, then this is all in his head. If he isn't, I have a hard time understanding why Sark has been playing him. His throwing mechanics were great against Michigan.

I think it's for the season overall, updated with latest info. Incidentally, Beck's receivers didn't help him out as they dropped quite a few in the last game.

At some point we have to play the better player. Manning is a better QB right now and I don’t think it’s particularly close. If Quinn remains in this timid state, then Arch is the right call. But Quinn has been exactly this way in previous seasons coming off of injury, where he regresses and plays scared. He can't focus and execute. Eventually, he gets it together. He was clearly not right throughout the entire OU game, although it was worse in the first half. So there was a strong chance he'd start poorly against Georgia because he hadn't really put it together by the end of OU. It's unfortunate we didn't have a lesser opponent for Quinn to continue rehabilating against following OU. Perfect storm so to speak. He may still regain his composure, and if he does, he's the guy assuming he can do so quickly enough. I agree with Codaxx though, that his leash is short now, and frankly, I'd think so for the remainder of the season even if he plays well against Vandy. He can't afford anymore regression this season IMO and Arch has to be prepared to come in and start at any time.

A whole lot of that would have been mitigated if Quinn played like a third year QB instead of a guy ready to piss his pants every play. There were completions to be made, and if he made them, they wouldn't have been able to tee off as much, or get home to the QB because the damn ball would already have been delivered. Likewise, he would have had more time with some semblance of pocket presence. The run game would also have fared better. When you're getting fuck-all out of the QB, they keep coming.

It isn't hard to see he doesn't plant his front foot and throw with proper mechanics. Seems like it is unlikely he does it in practice but not in games. Would think Sark would be all over that.

Would think if that's the case Sark would have to know. I don't know how he could hide that in practice (footwork/mechanics) and would think Sark is privy to his medical exams footed by the athletic dept? Just have a hard time believing Sark would send him in knowing he can't physically perform and risk aggravating the unhealed injury.

Tried to edit the strike-throughs out on the post above but time ran out. Going to try again here without posting the links which are in the post above or using spoilers. SECTION 18. Encroachment and Offside Encroachment ARTICLE 1. After the ball is ready for play, encroachment occurs when an offensive player is in or beyond the neutral zone after the snapper touches or simulates (hand at or below his knees) touching the ball before the snap (Exception: When the ball is put in play, the snapper is not encroaching when he is in the neutral zone). Offside ARTICLE 2. After the ball is ready for play, offside occurs (Rule 7-1-5) when a defensive player: Is in or beyond the neutral zone when the ball is legally snapped; Contacts an opponent beyond the neutral zone before the ball is snapped; Contacts the ball before it is snapped; Threatens an offensive lineman, causing an immediate reaction, before the ball is snapped (A.R. 7-1-3-V Note); Crosses the neutral zone and charges toward a Team A back (A.R. 7-1-5-III); or Is not behind his restraining line when the ball is legally free-kicked. Offside occurs when one or more players of the kicking team are not behind their restraining line when the ball is legally free-kicked (Exception: The kicker and holder are not offside when they are beyond their restraining line) (Rule 6-1-2). American Football Rules IFAF Approved Ruling 7-1-3:V V. A66, a restricted lineman between the snapper and the player on the end of the line, or A72, a restricted player on the end of the line of scrimmage: Lifts a hand or hands from the ground immediately when threatened by B1, who is in the neutral zone. RULING: Blow the whistle immediately. Team B dead-ball foul, offside. Penalty — Five yards from the succeeding spot. Lifts a hand or hands from the ground upon initial charge by B1, who (a) does not enter the neutral zone or (b) enters the neutral zone but does not threaten the position of A66 or A72. RULING: In both (a) and (b), blow the whistle immediately. Team A dead-ball foul, false start. Penalty — Five yards from the succeeding spot. [Cited by 2-18-2-d, 7-1-2-b-3-a, 7-1-5-a-2] NOTE: Before the snap, a team B player who enters the neutral zone may threaten a maximum of three Team A linemen. If the Team B player enters the neutral zone directly toward a Team A lineman, then that Team A player and the two adjacent linemen are considered to be threatened. If the Team B player enters the neutral zone directly toward a gap between two Team A lineman, then only those two Team A players are considered to be threatened.

isn't that type of shift illegal now? Sark was all over the officials on it and we even burned a TO because of it. I'm probably not the best at sorting out legalese, but here is what I could find: SECTION 18. Encroachment and Offside - NCAA Football Rules Online Not 100% sure this next link is the correct one for A.R. 7-1-3-V Note) American Football Rules IFAF Approved Ruling 7-1-3:V - sportscollaboration.com

I would have preferred that they kept it to really, really loud dissent and not throwing anything on the field. Did the lobbed missiles make the difference? I don't know, but sustained, really loud volume may have done the trick. Kirby did a masterful job preparing his team for this coup on the road, but he is also a classless ass. There were huge recruiting stakes involved though. Difficult to predict to what degree it negatively impacts us, but Georgia only helped themselves with how it played out. Us, not so much. Onward we march, one game at a time is all we can do.

Quinn played really well against Bama last season. And he also played really well against OU last season, but only after an abysmal start. He started out dazed and confused just like this season against OU, but he regained his composure and finished strong. It wasn't enough to overcome the bad start though. We had no business losing that game. I totally get why Sark prefers to let him play through it, because when he finally gets it together, he's damn good and you don't want to further undermine his confidence. Likewise, it sends the message to QB recruits that they will be given every chance to develop themselves when playing through adversity. It's difficult to predict exactly when, or whether, Quinn will right his ship in a game, or going forward. And, of course, you have no guarantee the backup will fare better. So I don't have a problem whatsoever with Sark showing patience with it. It's a matter of when do you make the call to bring in the backup QB. That is subjective but to me it's when do you think another opposing score is too deep of a hole to get out of with no indication of improvement. It's also not uncommon or wrong, to put a backup QB into a game just to see if it will give a spark to the offense and/or figuratively splash some cold water in the starter's face. The coach has to be able to manage that situation and have the backbone to make the call regardless of how the media spins it or perceived reactions. It's his team and locker-room.

Ewers is only a statue when he's playing scared. He freezes, gets tunnel vision and hesitates whether he needs to throw, adjust his pocket position or flee. He has shown that he can decently scramble when he is playing confidently. It's about pocket presence and decisiveness. Arch is obviously faster and more athletic, but good Ewers is fine.

I feel like there was a tight shot of a clear hold right as golden ran through the line. Wasn’t on 24 who they called, though. I don't know if anyone else held, but Roberson screwed the pooch twice on holding last night. It was clear on the two replays I saw. Banks jumped his ass on the sideline for it after the first one and damned if he didn't do it again. It was absolutely stupid and as is often the case, not needed. His initial block was enough to clear the way for the return. Zero situational awareness.

Agreed. They got away with a lot of holding that exceeded the threshold of what one would call ticky tacky. Most of it was on the edges. Now whether that was intentional bias, don't know, but it's infuriating. I don't expect every call to be made, but some semblance of equity needs to be there and also acknowledge that on occasion, we get away with some too. I do think that fans often don't understand how easy it is for an official to miss something going on in real time though. The game is played fast and they are only human with a lot going on around them.

They are still cleaning his vaginal discharge off the field.

Same was true of the Big 12.

He was in a fragile state of mind throughout all of OU and UGA, ridiculously so in the first half of OU. Certainly the blindside sack rattled him but only because of his fragility. It only exacerbated the state of mind that was already there. Totally unacceptable for a third year starter playing D1 football, not the game pattycake. Having said that, I'd have liked to see the OL match UGA's intensity and play with some pride and backbone. Horrible timing for them to play like that.

Taylor Gaspar is an idiot.

Sark needs to pull a Saban and make practice a week of beatings and eating shotgun shells. So that's the winning recipe, not runny eggs and burnt toast. No wonder Herman failed ...

Agreed, but he demonstrated earlier this year he can be pretty mobile when he wants to. Better than he showed this game. He's too unwilling to risk it now. Sark may also dscourage it as well, but he's hesitant in everything he does right now.

Agreed. And it’s sad because it’s not fair to Arch to throw him out there unprepared. Even his own family probably doesn’t want that. Broken implies irreparable. I'm not sure that's the case, but he's fragile and needs more continuity to get him into peak form. It would have helped greatly if the OL didn't get whipped so badly tonight. It doesn't excuse Ewer's shortcomings, but better protection was needed for him to regain composure. He's no Sam Ehlinger when it comes to moxy.

And he’s too big of a pussy to deliver the ball and take a hit Avatar and such-n-so... :grin:

That happens a whole lot in the game week threads too. No criticisms, no matter how well supported, will be tolerated of a player or unit. Granted, there's a way to go about doing it and early chicken little fodder posted in game threads is stupid, but valid concerns brought up during game week threads is poo poo'd as pussy dripping and attacked by the burnt orange goggle wearing bitch pack. Or likewise, in game threads noting poor play without overreaction, is also immediately attacked as defeatist with no attempt to discern the difference between bitchy panic and valid observations.