Jump to content

This is who Steve Sarkisian is.


lilMAC25

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Allow someone to criticize another for questioning the sobriety of anyone and I won't be a douche bag you fucking nitwit.

It looks like you're dead set on it, so don't let me stand in your way.  Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

To the two people defending that playcall, please just count the fucking players on the play side of the ball and tell me how we were supposed to score on that play. It is that fucking simple. 

My guy

The play is designed to take advantage of the safety hesitating or crashing down because they think it’s a run. Caleb Downs read the play immediately and he’s one of the fastest safeties in football and made a great play. Two defenders were blocked and the pulling guard was on his way to block the other defender. The safety was never gonna be blocked

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hookem48 said:

you'd hope Ewers would call a timeout there but it didn't happen.

Sure. The play will be picked apart to death and once again we'll play the what if game. It was just a bad call and Sark has got to get some help with goalline and red zone play calling. Maybe Arch is the key because his skill set is so much better.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I would have done something unexpected like run play-action on 1st down with a bootleg for Quinn to either find Helm, tuck it a run, or throw it through the back of the end zone. Then if that didn't work, pound it the next 3.

That’s my complaint.

 

 

that and Quinn not being able to hit wide open WRs.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

Against blOU in 23 he ran it up the middle 4 times and then tried a quick out to worthy. People bitched that he wasn’t “creative enough” and was too predictable. Now yall are bitching that he didn’t run up the gut 4 times. The play call was fine, the blocking and execution was dogshit

Actually, funny enough, I bitched about a really stupid second down toss call that set the rest of the series back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you’re goal there is to get outside than why pitch it 9 yards behind the line of scrimmage. I love Wisner but he was not getting the edge all night long. I think you need to insert Blue, have him line up to the left of Ewers and do a simple quick toss. He’s going to at least get to the LOS. A run to the outside shouldn’t have been called even with Sarks explanation of what they saw on film. I think rushing for 59 yards during the game throws out whatever advantage you found scouting earlier in the week.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hondo said:

It looks like you're dead set on it, so don't let me stand in your way.  Carry on.

Your troll attempts are amusing. BO&W says Sark's sobriety is his problem.  I take issue with that notion. You defend him saying he wasn't. I clearly illustrate he was via his post. You claim you were trying to be polite.

Here we are a day later and you're still on about it calling me names and arguing and otherwise providing zero input on the thread topic. 

Okay hondo doesn't get much trollier than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RockyMountainHighHorn said:

We wouldn’t have sark if he still battled his alcoholism so be very thankful for it. Fucking shitting on someone’s recovery. Not cool at all 

That dumbfuck you're responding to should take a few months' break from this place. What a piece of shit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We weren't going to score running it into the middle. We weren't going to score running it wide. We weren't going to score throwing it from the 1.

We should have taken 4 delay of game penalties and ran the wheel route to Blue 4 times in a row. CALL THE FOURS!!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I would have done something unexpected like run play-action on 1st down with a bootleg for Quinn to either find Helm, tuck it an run, or throw it through the back of the end zone. Then if that didn't work, pound it the next 3.

If Ewers fakes the pitch and boots it, I think he runs in untouched.  Especially if we have a backside TE pass option that freezes the one defender that was remaining on that side.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

late to this trying to figure out what to run business.  

Assume, a. Arch is out-concussion b. we don't like to take the snap from center, but we can do that and c. QE is healthy enough to execute a run-pass option. 

I would have done the old-fashioned, take the snap from center, run play action, and had QE rollout and do run-pass option.  The key would be the surprise.  Do it on a down they don't expect, I guess 1st down?  looks like I'm agreeing with Kel. Or once you get to third or fourth down show a shotgun look, but rush to the line and do a quick-count QB sneak?

One thing, I am glad I don't get paid to think of the things that would work down there when my team is not having the great night needed at the OL positions. 

The OL had no room for error.  They needed to play out-of-their minds great and it didn't happen. But coaches too, they needed to be great.  Perfection was the order of the day and it nobody was perfect last night, except maybe the secondary guys covering the top two Ohio St. WRs. 

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beyond the play calling, our clock management the last 5 minutes was also unforgivable. Down 7 points we needed to score twice to win and should have been possession maxing at that point instead of running into the line on 1st downs to keep the clock moving.

Sark was content to run all the time off and tie the game to go into OT or lose

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

Beyond the play calling, our clock management the last 5 minutes was also unforgivable. Down 7 points we needed to score twice to win and should have been possession maxing at that point instead of running into the line on 1st downs to keep the clock moving.

Sark was content to run all the time off and tie the game to go into OT or lose

The Golden PI to put the ball on the 2 happened with exactly 4:00 left. The drive started at 6:58.

Your goal is to score the damn touchdown, not maximize possessions. We are on the 2 yard line.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Your troll attempts are amusing. BO&W says Sark's sobriety is his problem.  I take issue with that notion. You defend him saying he wasn't. I clearly illustrate he was via his post. You claim you were trying to be polite.

Here we are a day later and you're still on about it calling me names and arguing and otherwise providing zero input on the thread topic. 

Okay hondo doesn't get much trollier than that.

No, he said "His recovery history from alcoholism is his biggest problem. He’s too lenient and forgiving when it comes to second chances because of how he got his second chance.." and you latched onto that phrasing ("problem"), I'm guessing, because of some emotional reaction.  You've repeated "questioning someone's/Sark's sobriety" multiple times, so that's clearly your anchor.

I said I didn't read/take it that way.  I think your "questioning Sark's sobriety" is a straw man that you've latched onto.  

"The problem with/my biggest problem..." is pretty commonly used phrasing that doesn't actually mean the subject is a problem (in the negative sense).

"The problem with spending the holidays with family is that I eat way too much."  "My biggest problem with the holidays is I spend it with family and eat way too much."  Does that mean that spending time with family is a problem?  Is it a critique of family Thanksgiving/Christmas?  Of course not.

You overcommitted to what I think is a straw man, then you doubled down by acting like a douche, and now you can't gracefully back out of it.  I offered a polite "agree to disagree" and you couldn't even take that; you had to come back with a snarky comment.

You're a lightweight and that's what lightweights do.  

I was polite, you didn't take the olive branch, so now I'm not going to be polite anymore.  I've got a flight to catch, but if you want me to slap you around a little bit more, I've got a few minutes.

Edited by Hondo
Edited for accuracy; I paraphrased
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jkwellborn said:


Really? I wasn’t paying attention obviously. I was thinking it was in the middle closer to the left hash. It was a dumb ass call either way.

We were shotgun then tossed another 2 yards back. At first I was like “wtf is this a rb pass”. But nope it was a -9 yard toss from the 2. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

The Golden PI to put the ball on the 2 happened with exactly 4:00 left. The drive started at 6:58.

Your goal is to score the damn touchdown, not maximize possessions. We are on the 2 yard line.

A winner would have run the plays as quickly as possible with the goal of stopping the other team, getting the ball back and scoring to win the game in regulation

Worst case scenario we kick a FG with about 3:30 left and have 2 timeouts plus the 2 minute stoppage down 4. I would trust our defense in that situation and give Day the opportunity to turtle.

Winners play the end of games a certain way. Watch Mahomes and the Chiefs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

A winner would have run the plays as quickly as possible with the goal of stopping the other team, getting the ball back and scoring to win the game in regulation

Worst case scenario we kick a FG with about 3:30 left and have 2 timeouts plus the 2 minute stoppage down 4. I would trust our defense in that situation and give Day the opportunity to turtle.

Winners play the end of games a certain way. Watch Mahomes and the Chiefs 

This is a weird hill to die on. A winner would have focused on scoring a touchdown from the 2 because that is what would be required to even give yourself a chance at winning.

We were never kicking a FG in that situation. Ever. We were on the one yard line. Keeping a one TD game a one TD game?

Edited by Hookem2147
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lingering comments:

I've seen that Philly crawl used a couple of times. It looks unstoppable. Why isn't every team using it? and why is it still legal? We sure coulda used it right there.

If Arch wasn't concussed, he absolutely shoulda been in there, under center. In short ydg situations, give me a qb under center, a big ass fullback and a halfback behind him. Wouldn't have minded seeing the play we used where they snapped it thru Arch's legs directly to the RB. Also, how many times have we seen a tall, agile QB take half a step back, jump over the scrum and extend the ball with his arms into the end zone. Arch is tall - and quick. Coulda made that play and pulled it back in before fumbling. 

Bootleg right was the best call on first down. RPO. You need a quick QB, but Quinn probably coulda pulled it off. Worst case scenario, he throws the ball away.

Ewers definitely shoulda called time out on that second and one. It could indeed be one of the worst plays in UT history.

The best play Ewers made all year was probably that 4th and 13 last week. Outside of that, it was Washinigton 2.0 in the Red Zone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beyond the play calling, our clock management the last 5 minutes was also unforgivable. Down 7 points we needed to score twice to win and should have been possession maxing at that point instead of running into the line on 1st downs to keep the clock moving.
Sark was content to run all the time off and tie the game to go into OT or lose

That’s who he is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beyond the play calling, our clock management the last 5 minutes was also unforgivable. Down 7 points we needed to score twice to win and should have been possession maxing at that point instead of running into the line on 1st downs to keep the clock moving.
Sark was content to run all the time off and tie the game to go into OT or lose

That’s who he is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

This is a weird hill to die on. A winner would have focused on scoring a touchdown from the 2 because that is what would be required to even give yourself a chance at winning.

We were never kicking a FG in that situation. Ever. Keeping a one TD game a one TD game?

If there was still 3 and a half minutes left when we faced 4th and goal from the 8 yard line, taking the 3 and playing defense would have been the better play. As it was, we let it run down to 2:20 and it was no longer am option. Poor clock management 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Yep

Aside from the numbers advantage they also are starting outside shaded on everyone one of our guys. How was a wide toss ever supposed to work unless Wisner was supposed to catch it on the move and make a 90 degree cut straight up field. It’s horrible that we didn’t check out of this or call timeout.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mdmost said:

In no world were we ever kicking a FG down 7 with 3:30 left. Sark was always going to go 4 downs in that situation. 

Yeah, Sark would never. Sark is also the kind of coach if we were down 10 with time running out, would spend all the available clock chasing the TD to cut it to 3 so the final score looks closer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

If there was still 3 and a half minutes left when we faced 4th and goal from the 8 yard line, taking the 3 and playing defense would have been the better play. As it was, we let it run down to 2:20 and it was no longer am option. Poor clock management 

You are on the 8 yard line. Turning a 7 point game into a 4 point game where you would still need to drive the length again and score is moronic.

You aren’t guaranteed addition possessions at that point of the game. Especially against the offense we were facing.

Edited by Hookem2147
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Aside from the numbers advantage they also are starting outside shaded on everyone one of our guys. How was a wide toss ever supposed to work unless Wisner was supposed to catch it on the move and make a 90 degree cut straight up field. It’s horrible that we didn’t check out of this or call timeout.

I agree with someone else that Quinn should've faked a toss and booted to the right. It probably doesn't work but he could've throw it away and not taken a loss. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Aside from the numbers advantage they also are starting outside shaded on everyone one of our guys. How was a wide toss ever supposed to work unless Wisner was supposed to catch it on the move and make a 90 degree cut straight up field. It’s horrible that we didn’t check out of this or call timeout.

The only way I would have run a toss and even then I do not believe in a toss from the 1, I would have gone under center and ran toss and let the o-line block down the line allowing a possible cut back for wisner. But going big once then changing up the formation and running the ball off tackle or a misdirection is better than ever calling a shotgun toss play. Just mind blowing. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

You are on the 8 yard line. Turning a 7 point game into a 4 point game where you would still need to drive the length again and score is moronic.

You aren’t guaranteed addition possessions at that point of the game. Especially against the offense we were facing.

We needed 2 scores to win the game. We only needed a TD to send the game to overtime, where it's 50/50 but we could at least hang our hats on making it to overtime. We didn't chase the win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mdmost said:

I agree with someone else that Quinn should've faked a toss and booted to the right. It probably doesn't work but he could've throw it away and not taken a loss. 

We had a better shot at overloading the left side and running at the weak side of the defense and running an option off that to the corner with wisner than what we called. We had the numbers in our advantage in the screen shot from above to run a quick option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

Allow someone to criticize another for questioning the sobriety of anyone and I won't be a douche bag you fucking nitwit.

 

27 minutes ago, Hondo said:

No, he said "His recovery history from alcoholism is his biggest problem. He’s too lenient and forgiving when it comes to second chances because of how he got his second chance.." and you latched onto that phrasing ("problem"), I'm guessing, because of some emotional reaction.  You've repeated "questioning someone's/Sark's sobriety" multiple times, so that's clearly your anchor.

I said I didn't read/take it that way.  I think your "questioning Sark's sobriety" is a straw man that you've latched onto.  

"The problem with/my biggest problem..." is pretty commonly used phrasing that doesn't actually mean the subject is a problem (in the negative sense).

"The problem with spending the holidays with family is that I eat way too much."  "My biggest problem with the holidays is I spend it with family and eat way too much."  Does that mean that spending time with family is a problem?  Is it a critique of family Thanksgiving/Christmas?  Of course not.

You overcommitted to what I think is a straw man, then you doubled down by acting like a douche, and now you can't gracefully back out of it.  I offered a polite "agree to disagree" and you couldn't even take that; you had to come back with a snarky comment.

You're a lightweight and that's what lightweights do.  

I was polite, you didn't take the olive branch, so now I'm not going to be polite anymore.  I've got a flight to catch, but if you want me to slap you around a little bit more, I've got a few minutes.

 

11 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

 

I quote and underlined his exact statement. Saying someone's sobriety is "Their biggest problem", is questioning their sobriety.

Read his quote and tell me how you perceived it as a positive. 

He then goes on to say that what he learned in sobriety won't cut it if you want to win titles.

I don't know how the hell you consider that not questioning his sobriety.

 

11 hours ago, Hondo said:

We disagree.  But who cares?  It's the internet.

 

11 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

There are something that aren't okay on the internet. You don't get a blind pass because you're anonymous.

 

11 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Then simply stop quoting me and move on.

@Hondo

Here is the history of our dispute over someone else's comments. 

I tried to opt out of the conversation many times and you kept coming back over and over. 

The funniest part is we are two idiots arguing over the interpretation of another posters comments.

It's regarded, and honestly we both are for having gone on this long.

We disagree on what BO&W intended. We aren't going to agree at any point.

You can have the last word.

Edited by BurntEyes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something else just eating a hole in me is sark had two extended windows to talk and think thru the goal line series with the pi stoppages, plus timeouts. This wasn’t sugar bowl rush job. And that bullshit was his dead level best. 
 

and it also wasn’t a situation where we’d already run through our short yardage playbook in the game, besides the silly snap between helms legs we hadn’t shown shit on short yardage. 
 

speaking of, run that same set but have helm take the damn snap for a sneak. 

Edited by bluto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

My guy

The play is designed to take advantage of the safety hesitating or crashing down because they think it’s a run. Caleb Downs read the play immediately and he’s one of the fastest safeties in football and made a great play. Two defenders were blocked and the pulling guard was on his way to block the other defender. The safety was never gonna be blocked

No shit the safety was never gonna get blocked. That’s the god damn point. You’re leaving one of the best safeties in the country unblocked and giving him 8 yards of downhill space to attack. It’s like you’re telling us all the reasons it’s a terrible playcall but still saying it wasn’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Irish Wrist Watch said:

Lingering comments:

I've seen that Philly crawl used a couple of times. It looks unstoppable. Why isn't every team using it? and why is it still legal? We sure coulda used it right there.

If Arch wasn't concussed, he absolutely shoulda been in there, under center. In short ydg situations, give me a qb under center, a big ass fullback and a halfback behind him. Wouldn't have minded seeing the play we used where they snapped it thru Arch's legs directly to the RB. Also, how many times have we seen a tall, agile QB take half a step back, jump over the scrum and extend the ball with his arms into the end zone. Arch is tall - and quick. Coulda made that play and pulled it back in before fumbling. 

Bootleg right was the best call on first down. RPO. You need a quick QB, but Quinn probably coulda pulled it off. Worst case scenario, he throws the ball away.

Ewers definitely shoulda called time out on that second and one. It could indeed be one of the worst plays in UT history.

The best play Ewers made all year was probably that 4th and 13 last week. Outside of that, it was Washinigton 2.0 in the Red Zone.

I know it was Conner at center but didn't Arch fumble the snap the only time he was under center this year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

That doesn’t at all address my statement? 
 

Let’s say we QB sneak twice, we get stopped twice. Are we really gonna be ok with trying it again?

Over a qb toss sweep? 100% of the time. Hell that was a perfect time to do one of his slow ass play actions to that side and pivot to a pass to the field side. I would have been much more ok with that failing. At least you don’t lose yards. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

 

 

 

 

 

@Hondo

Here is the history of our dispute over someone else's comments. 

I tried to opt out of the conversation many times and you kept coming back over and over. 

The funniest part is we are two idiots arguing over the interpretation of another posters comments.

It's regarded, and honestly we both are for having gone on this long.

We disagree on what BO&W intended. We aren't going to agree at any point.

You can have the last word.

You left out a few posts, but all good.

I will assume this is an olive branch and I accept.  Enjoy your weekend, whatever that entails.  Here's to next season.  Cheers.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...