Codaxx

You can be honest about what we have seen recently from the QB position and appreciate what Quinn has done in the past. We dont have to make this a political issue where you have to pick a side and blindly argue for it no matter what the facts are.

Now let me ask you a question. Do you think the bad version of Quinn the last 2 weeks is substantially better than Arch? This is where I come in on this argument. If Texas is going to go into every game wondering what they will get out of the QB position, then I am in favor of the younger QB with a higher ceiling. The argument should not be that Texas can win despite the QB play. The odds of going 4-0 with inconsistent QB play is not very good. This is a very strange situation, where we have seen the starter fall from top 2/3 in the draft to benched in about 6 weeks. This is really up to Quinn. Vandy is 91st in pts allowed per drive, so he is not going to have a better opportunity the rest of the season to silence the critics

I have no idea how Arch would have fared. Probably would have been similar. People are being critical of Ewers performance, because everyone knows the last thing Sark wanted to do was start a QB controversy by benching Ewers. Perhaps it is just morbid curiosity to see what led Sark to this point. I do not know if the current version of Quinn can go 4-0 vs Vandy, Florida, UK, and Aggy. Just like you do not know if Arch could go 4-0 vs those teams. Your argument loses a lot of power when you say "its a toss up as to which version of Quinn". The whole reason to start Quinn over Arch is for command of the offense and consistency. If he can not deliver on those 2, what is the argument for Quinn? I am not calling for Arch to start the Vandy game. I hope Ewers looks like early season Ewers and throws for 300+ and 3 TDs. I am also in favor of a meritocracy. If Quinn performs anywhere near what we have seen the last 2 weeks, its time for a change. To be fair, if it was any other position on the field there would not be a discussion about it. PFF gave Quinn the lowest score of his career vs Georgia. Yes, worse than OSU and TCU. He also ranks the 230th best Qb in the country and 14th in the SEC by PFF. Maybe that is a bit off, but it is pretty good indication that Quinn is not playing anywhere near where he is capable.

That angle shows you absolutely nothing. You need to look at the end zone angle. At 2:30 Quinn is set, Bolden is breaking at the 28, 11 is on Bond on the crosser, and the CB is yards outside of Banks. Ball should be coming out there. Bolden only needs the 33. He is going to get it. You can see Quinn come off Bolden and look to Bond around 2:31 with Bolden all by himself on the 32 yard line. He gets hit milliseconds later. It’s pretty clear Ewers passed on the slant and went to Bond. Why I don’t know

That isn’t the check down. It certainly isn’t a millisecond before the hit, unless you believe the CB can cover 4-5 yards in a millisecond. Perhaps you should go to the highlights and look at the play seeing how the front side opens up.

I think this is bit simplistic. This is a fvcked up situation. You have Ewers who was projected 1st or 2nd QB after Michigan. He gets hurt and comes back and doesn’t look anything like the QB that started the season. You also have a back-up that has a higher ceiling than Quinn. Quinn playing his best as 3rd year starter ends this discussion, but he isn’t. I doubt even Sark or Quinn know how to fix it, outside playing a shitty defense. I agree the playoffs are less likely with Arch, but a run in the playoffs may be more likely with Arch. The only issue is he would need all the reps to get there. This may be the shittiest QB situation a Texas coach has faced. Sark and most fans are hoping Quinn comes out on Saturday and looks like Tom Brady. If he comes out looking poorly, then we are probably going to see Arch. I am not saying start Arch for Vandy. I am saying that leash on Arch should be short

I put it in there, because it was such a pivotal play in the game. That is 3rd and 6. Hit Bolden and it is a first down at a minimum and it could have been a big play if Bolden makes the LB miss, instead it is 1st and goal for Georgia. If you go through it, you will see Ewers come off Bolden and look at the shallow crosser that is covered right before getting hit. It is 3rd and 6, not sure why he would turn down and easy throw for the 1st down.

WHat? Bolden is wide open. Ewers did not throw it. Ewers would have gotten lit up, but it would have been Bolden vs a LB one on one instead of a fumble. Blocking and free CB have nothing to do with Quinn not hitting a wide open quick slant. Maybe he waiting on Gunnar's break and going deep with it, but that didnt really happen all game.

Thought this was worse This is the CB blitz that led to Georgia's first TD. Quinn is looking at a open Bolden. Throw the damn ball

Does it matter? The are ton of post on this subject (I am big part), but the shit is simple. There is no reason to debate the merits of Quinn's games prior to the injury. He does not look like that QB. Quinn needs to pull his head out of ass in a hurry or Arch needs to play.

Not sure I agree with this one. A big part of Quinn's problem is that internal clock is ticking too fast. He is abandoning clean pockets at times (free up rushers) or hitting the check down without giving the play a chance. Arch will sit back there and eat a Po Boy. I dont think it has really hurt him though. The terrible sack was more of a lesson that he can beat HS and G5 LBs to the edge, he cant beat NFL Lbs to the edge. Like most 1st time starters, Arch needs to learn throwing it away can be a good play.

I agree with this. Quinn was bad, but I dont think I would give a C grade to any position group (maybe outside of Helm). OL was not 7 sacks bad, but they were not good either. WRs had velco jerseys on for much of the game and Georgia DBs out-muscled them all game. RBs missed holes and blocks (forgot who it was, but Blue or Wisner got airborne in bad way trying to pass block). This was not a QB friendly environment.

Problem with all of this is we are thinking statically. I dont think anyone would argue that the Quinn that played the first few games is better than Arch. The Quinn we have seen the last 2 weeks is at least worth a discussion. On the flip side you have Quinn bashers running in here pretending the Quinn we saw the last 2 games is the guy we have seen his entire career. That is just stupid. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Quinn wasnt reading the field very well vs Georgia. He turned down several deeper throws for check downs, which makes no sense given the context of the score. Could Arch have played a better 2nd half, than Quinn? I have no idea. It is possible, not probable, but possible. There is a chance he could have adjusted to the speed after halftime. It also possible Georgia would have had his head spinning all game. Truth is nobody really knows how Arch would have played. Right now I am just hoping this discussion doesnt need to be had on Saturday

These 2 posts back to back are fantastic.

I wonder how many snaps Wingo got. I was at the game, so you miss a lot live. There was a lot shitty things going on with the offense. WRs were struggling to get separation especially in the first half. I would have loved to more Wingo. Just think Bond and Wingo on the field together would be a different dynamic

When Baxter went down this was one of games people mentioned that Texas would miss him. This is not a swipe at Blue or Wisner. Baxter pass blocking would have been a huge asset. Assuming camp reports were correct, he would have been a guy to get you the tough yards. Unfortunately, the only RB that is really suited to run inside is a freshman. He can’t pass block, so you won’t see him vs elite defenses.

Why does this keep coming up? Sark has never needed a running QB. Sark’s offense is not predicated on zone read. RPO isn’t based on QB run.

I believe Gibson will get carries in this game. Texas came off playing 2 defenses that can get after the QB. Wisner and Blue have struggled in that area and Gibson is supposedly well behind them in blocking. Until Gibson fixes that area of his game, he is going to see a limited role.

Vandy is not a great defense. It a good match-up for Quinn to get some confidence (in theory). They are not fast in the secondary and they have played like they know that. They play off coverage and concede short throws. Texas should be able to move the ball. Texas should get to 30 pts even if they are mediocre on offense. If they break some tackles underneath, Texas should put up a lot of points. The offense is a huge pain in the ass. They run every formation and every kind of offense imaginable. The whole basis of their offense is to mitigate their talent disadvantage. You have to play assignment sound. You cant let your eyes wonder and try to make plays. Pavia is the offense. 1Q will tell you whether or not to get nervous. If it is like 0-0 after the 1Q, Texas is playing Vanderbilt's game and you should stay away from the game thread.

I think the point is that it seems unlikely that practice Quinn's mechanics look anything like what we are seeing in the last 2 games.

it is much different. QBs dont get hit in practice. Not saying it is or not happening in practice, but it is easy to step into a throw when you know you are not going to get hit. I do agree that it seems more likely that it is in his head, than Sark is a blind donkey and cant see the poor mechanics in practice.

that is the overall season grade, not week 8

I looked at the first 4 series. Texas ran 19 plays by my count. They ran 6 true runs that gained 23 yards. I didnt add up the passing yardage, but given the Texas had less 40 yards for the half, it is probably safe to say that the run game was much more effective. In that back drop you have to ask Sark, why he was calling passes at over a 75% clip. It appears Georgia played Sark tendencies hard. They played the man, not the hand

He is Georgia guy. There is a run play in there where is gushing, but Blackwell fails to read the DL and takes the wrong hole.