QB1 Quinn "La Joya" Ewers - The Man The Myth The Mullet

[Longhornlove 5180]

3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Best OL

How that go against Georgia?

4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

deepest WR room

How many guys in the rotation?

4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

"huge hit"

Work on your reading comprehension skills, that was reference to the RB room.

 

5 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Matthew Golden has been a revelation for Texas this year. Put some fucking respect on his name. There is an argument that he's had the most consistent season by a WR in Sark's tenure so far.

He has played great lately. Is that because everyone else disappeared or stopped producing. Either way, I'm not disrespecting him but by no means is he Worthy or Mitchell. Are you two fucking? Family, weird reaction. He has been a TD machine, most reliable receiver on the team by far. Maybe I am under appreciating him. He is our best but not the most talented.

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

5 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

How many guys in the rotation?

There are 5 guys in the rotation vs just 3 we had last year. In fact the argument could be made that there was not even a rotation last year.

Edited Thursday at 03:39 PM by BurntOrange&White

[jimmyjazz 47068]

15 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Personally, I think Arch should have started against OU and Georgia1.

Sitting Quinn against OU surely would have helped him be more effective the next week against UGA, too.  I don't think Sark expected us to blow out the Sooners.

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

Sitting Quinn against OU surely would have helped him be more effective the next week against UGA, too.  I don't think Sark expected us to blow out the Sooners.

Quinn definitely didn't look ready to come back the OU game and one more week of rest could probably have done him better. I agree with Dahobbs on that one but maybe not Georgia1.

[Hank Kingsley 21661]

24 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Work on your reading comprehension skills, that was reference to the RB room.

 

My bad, I misread that part. 

I agree that RB room is significantly worse this year. Losing CJ was a real fucking bummer. I think Sark had big plans for him. 

 

[Rex Kramer 1531]

2 hours ago, futureman said:

this didn’t age well.

5th round if he’s lucky. 

Ridiculous. Go scissor Derka

[Red Five 41703]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

My bad, I misread that part. 

I agree that RB room is significantly worse this year. Losing CJ was a real fucking bummer. I think Sark had big plans for him. 

 

We also lost Jonathon Brooks and Keilan Robinson. Blue has been a big disappointment, and Gibson has proven himself to be unplayable. We'd be in a real bad situation there without Wisner. 

[tbone_ 14436]

I’m starting to think this thread should be LAUNCHED INTO THE SUN

…

[texasdago 7764]

This thread... 

[sidis 10011]

i am starting to think that this thread is likely to join keith richards and cockroaches as the only things that survive the nuclear apocalypse.

[cmontexas 3340]

Has anyone given Sark any shit for his "Wingo is as good as Jeremiah Smith and Ryan Williams" take? At what point do the announcers stop bringing it up every game?

Edited Thursday at 04:17 PM by cmontexas

[Longhornlove 5180]

17 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

Has anyone given Sark any shit for his "Wingo is as good as Jeremiah Smith and Ryan Williams" take? At what point do the announcers stop bringing it up every game?

Wrong thread maybe. Not sure of the relevance.

[C-Man 27772]

13 hours ago, Thatguy said:

Lol. You talking about the Helm play? Look at the line of scrimmage and tell me what you see happening. Tell me what he was supposed to do there.

Not sure if he's talking about the near-pick on the Helm throw or the god-awful miss to Bond on the play before, which was far more egregious IMO. On the Helm throw, he just didn't see the defender sitting underneath the throw. I'd like my third-year starter to not make mistakes like that but I know shit happens even to the best of them. The clip immediately prior, where he flat-out couldn't throw a catchable ball to Bond, who'd criss-crossed the defender into falling down and could've walked 65 yards to the endzone was a horrible miss by Ewers. You've got to have those 10 times out of 10.

[C-Man 27772]

14 hours ago, Pimphand said:

 

Joel Klatt says eloquently what many of you tards want to say.

Klatt is hands-down the BEST college football analyst in the country. And, yep, this is what most of us are saying WRT to Quinn and the Texas offense. BO&W takes it to another level that I'm not completely comfortable with but he's not wrong in a a lot of what he says. (I definitely stop well short of calling the dude a pussy.)

I hope Klatt is right and that Ewers is working a short leash Saturday. I hope he plays terrific against Clemson and we win convincingly. I hope it continues through the next three rounds and he's drafted in the 1st round. My only ask if he simply can't get it done that Sark will go to Plan B before it's too late.

[Hank Kingsley 21661]

I don't even care about limiting all turnovers with Quinn. Its the kind of INTS or almost picks that drive me crazy. If Quinn threw deep in 1-on-1 coverage and DB makes a great play and picks it off? Hat tip. Shit happens. At least it was an aggressive play on our part, and most likely the other teams doesn't have great field position after. 

It feels like Sark's mantra with our offense is "don't turn the ball over and we win". I prefer "go score 30+ every week and we win". I think Quinn would play better as well. 

 

[Texasborn91 1090]

9 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Klatt is hands-down the BEST college football analyst in the country. And, yep, this is what most of us are saying WRT to Quinn and the Texas offense. BO&W takes it to another level that I'm not completely comfortable with but he's not wrong in a a lot of what he says. (I definitely stop well short of calling the dude a pussy.)

I hope Klatt is right and that Ewers is working a short leash Saturday. I hope he plays terrific against Clemson and we win convincingly. I hope it continues through the next three rounds and he's drafted in the 1st round. My only ask if he simply can't get it done that Sark will go to Plan B before it's too late.

Yeah. If we are waking in mud for a quarter and a half on offense let Arch fuckin work. If you haven’t earned that trust yet then it’s your own fucking fault. 

[BurntEyes 6210]

25 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Klatt is hands-down the BEST college football analyst in the country. And, yep, this is what most of us are saying WRT to Quinn and the Texas offense. BO&W takes it to another level that I'm not completely comfortable with but he's not wrong in a a lot of what he says. (I definitely stop well short of calling the dude a pussy.)

I hope Klatt is right and that Ewers is working a short leash Saturday. I hope he plays terrific against Clemson and we win convincingly. I hope it continues through the next three rounds and he's drafted in the 1st round. My only ask if he simply can't get it done that Sark will go to Plan B before it's too late.

If Sark wasn't going to Plan B in Ousux, Georgia1, aggie and Georgia2 (you know for a CFP bye and SEC championship) he doesn't have Plan B for Clemson or the CFP.

This isn't a failing of Ewers, this is a massive failure by Sark. There were opportunities to give Arch a LOT more real game time reps where it mattered. That would have allowed Arch to develop and built a much more formidable back up/alt plan. 

This is the/my/others main problem. Either Sark didn't see or refused to address the issues some of us have been pointing out and the entire media world has now acknowledged. 

I wish that I, and others that agree with both takes, (Ewers inability/issues and Sarks unwillingness to play Arch) were/are both wrong. However, Sark has absolutely shown an unwillingness to adjust when his plan isn't working. In game and otherwise, specifically at QB. Rather than rotate in Arch a lot more and I dunno, start in in the second half against Georgia1 and Georgia2 he's remained stubborn in his path. 

I don't see it changing and I think we are stuck with what we have seen already for the rest of this run. Which, ultimately, is my biggest issue. This is/was an SEC championship level team for sure, it remains to be see if it's a National Championship level team. I think our offense struggles but wins against Clemson (thanks D). We shall see from there.. 

Edited Thursday at 05:17 PM by BurntEyes

[My display name 17]

Cross posting from the game week thread... 

I only read/posted this article because it was not written by you know who... very interesting take with actual facts. Responses should be fun. Hook 'em.

https://www.burntorangenation.com/2024/12/19/24324822/quinn-ewers-arch-manning-red-zone-texas-longhorns

[Hank Kingsley 21661]

5 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

If Sark wasn't going to Plan B in Ousux, Georgia1, aggie and Georgia2 (you know for a CFP bye and SEC championship) he doesn't have Plan B for Clemson or the CFP.

This isn't a failing of Ewers, this is a massive failure by Sark. There were opportunities to give Arch a LOT more real game time reps where it mattered. That would have allowed Arch to develop and built a much more formidable back up/alt plan. 

This is the my main problem. Either Sark didn't or refused to address the issues some of us and now the entire media world has now acknowledged. 

I wish that I, and others that agree with both takes, (Ewers inability/issues and Sarks unwillingness to play Arch) were/are both wrong. However, Sark has absolutely shown an unwillingness to adjust when his plan isn't working. In game and otherwise, specifically at QB. Rather than rotate in Arch a lot more and I dunno, start in in the second half against Georgia1 and Georgia2 he's remained stubborn in his path. 

I don't see it changing and I think we are stuck with what we have seen already for the rest of this run. Which, ultimately, is my biggest issue. The was an SEC championship level team for sure, it remains to be see if it's a National Championship level team. I think our offense struggles but wins against Clemson (thanks D). We shall see from there.. 

Agreed, our HC deserves a lot of the criticism here. 

It's interesting that when we initially hired Sark, even a doubter was thinking "well, our offense should be awesome'. Four years later, he is maybe the best off the field HC in the country. Program building, coaching staff hires, strength and conditioning, recruiting, player development, portal....chef's kiss. He's been phenomenal. I love Sark. 

But the one thing we expected to be dominant has been our weakness in a NC contending year. Hopefully we turn it on starting Saturday, but if our season ends with another offensive dud, I think Sark should consider restructuring some responsibilities off the field and on game day. 

 

[Longhornlove 5180]

"First, Arch Manning will not be the magic fix for all the red-zone problems. Second, the recent struggles have roots that go far deeper than Quinn Ewers. And lastly, it’s time to stop placing the blame for the red zone failures — or the entire offense — on his shoulders. 

Enough is enough."

14 minutes ago, My display name said:

Cross posting from the game week thread... 

I only read/posted this article because it was not written by you know who... very interesting take with actual facts. Responses should be fun. Hook 'em.

https://www.burntorangenation.com/2024/12/19/24324822/quinn-ewers-arch-manning-red-zone-texas-longhorns

Excellent article, my sentiments exactly.

[Hank Kingsley 21661]

11 minutes ago, My display name said:

Cross posting from the game week thread... 

I only read/posted this article because it was not written by you know who... very interesting take with actual facts. Responses should be fun. Hook 'em.

https://www.burntorangenation.com/2024/12/19/24324822/quinn-ewers-arch-manning-red-zone-texas-longhorns

Stopped reading right at this line: Expecting Manning to jump in and execute the offense seamlessly, in the College Football Playoff, is laughable.

No one is expecting that. In fact, acknowledging that the offense is imperfect is why one would've liked to see more of Arch. The fact that the offense has to be executed "seamlessly" to score points in the problem. 

 

 

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

2 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

"First, Arch Manning will not be the magic fix for all the red-zone problems. Second, the recent struggles have roots that go far deeper than Quinn Ewers. And lastly, it’s time to stop placing the blame for the red zone failures — or the entire offense — on his shoulders. 

Enough is enough."

Excellent article, my sentiments exactly.

So the plan is to do nothing and accept status quo? Sounds like a good plan! 

 

 

Having a QB who can run the ball 100% makes a difference in the redzone, especially with a running game that is struggling.

[Dahobbs 18239]

39 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Not sure if he's talking about the near-pick on the Helm throw or the god-awful miss to Bond on the play before, which was far more egregious IMO. On the Helm throw, he just didn't see the defender sitting underneath the throw. I'd like my third-year starter to not make mistakes like that but I know shit happens even to the best of them. The clip immediately prior, where he flat-out couldn't throw a catchable ball to Bond, who'd criss-crossed the defender into falling down and could've walked 65 yards to the endzone was a horrible miss by Ewers. You've got to have those 10 times out of 10.

Bond runs an out, Quinn appears to expect him to keep going. That is a timing throw where QB and receiver have to be on the same page. I don't think Quinn misses it in the sense that he just fucks up the throw. I think either he expected a deeper out or expected Bond to keep going up field. We'd have to know our route options and reads there to know who messed up. Again, I think this is another example of lack of reps our receivers and QB have together. People are really underestimating the effect that has had on our offense this year. 

[jimmyjazz 47068]

5 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

But the one thing we expected to be dominant has been our weakness in a NC contending year. 

Moreover, he stuck with PK who in turn has built one of the most dominant defenses in college football.  In year 1, the general sentiment was that Sark didn't value defense, as if he was some sort of John Mackovic clone.

We didn't understand his true strengths, which start at culture and also touch on staff consistency and player development.

[My display name 17]

3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So the plan is to do nothing and accept status quo? Sounds like a good plan! 

 

 

Having a QB who can run the ball 100% makes a difference in the redzone, especially with a running game that is struggling.

Status quo is obviously not the answer - agreed. But why not shift some of the focus to the OL? We all know the field gets shorter in the RZ, but the OL is struggling to displace DL when it's needed most. Is it scheme? Execution? Both or something else? Point of the article was how shitty the run game becomes in the RZ. Is adding an extra runner (Arch) the answer with the OL not moving people?  

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

This sounds positive from CJ

 

– Steve Sarkisian mentioned this week that QB Quinn Ewers was out of the ankle brace. Take this for what it is worth, but I was told this is the healthiest Ewers has looked in a week of practice in a couple of months. 

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So the plan is to do nothing and accept status quo? Sounds like a good plan! 

 

 

Having a QB who can run the ball 100% makes a difference in the redzone, especially with a running game that is struggling.

That is apparently Sark's plan.

[Longhornlove 5180]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So the plan is to do nothing and accept status quo? Sounds like a good plan! 

 

 

Having a QB who can run the ball 100% makes a difference in the redzone, especially with a running game that is struggling.

Fix the root of the problem and that doesn't include rotating in a freshman backup QB. No one rotates in backup QBs with success at this or higher levels. You people are wanting Sark top do something that essentially has no precedent. Certainly isn't in his past. The evidence is right in your face and your emotions are preventing you from acknowledging it. This is a lack of being able to run the football problem which is blocking, play calling, execution and personnel problem, not a QB problem. You are asking Arch to solve a problem that Quinn isn't even accountable for.

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

13 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Fix the root of the problem and that doesn't include rotating in a freshman backup QB. No one rotates in backup QBs with success at this or higher levels. You people are wanting Sark top do something that essentially has no precedent. Certainly isn't in his past. The evidence is right in your face and your emotions are preventing you from acknowledging it. This is a lack of being able to run the football problem which is blocking, play calling, execution and personnel problem, not a QB problem. You are asking Arch to solve a problem that Quinn isn't even accountable for.

"Root problem" isn't getting fixed this late in the season going into playoffs. That's asking a zebra to change it's stripes. With "lack of being able to run the football problem" even though we LITERALLY ran the fucking football down aggies throats and still fucking sucked in the redzone(Arch scored the touchdown with his legs). It's almost like a mobile QB who can run makes your woes a lot better because they can do something the other cannot with their legs. 

 

Florida won a national championship rotating a backup QB in when they're in the redzone. 

 

Alabama won a national championship trophy doing it and even benching their starter in the semi-final. 

Edited Thursday at 05:56 PM by BurntOrange&White

[Longhornlove 5180]

2 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

"Root problem" isn't getting fixed this late in the season going into playoffs

It actually can, will it, who knows. I think we are fine outside of Georgias front 7.

My point stands, there is no precedent for Sark to do what you are asking him to do. Manning isn't Tim Tebow and never will be. His is a mobile pocket passer with size and athletic ability far beyond that of QE. You are asking for the Arch to come in and solve the RZ run game as a pocket passer. Brilliant I'm sure. I'm also sure it won't happen.

 

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

1 minute ago, Longhornlove said:

It actually can, will it, who knows. I think we are fine outside of Georgias front 7.

My point stands, there is no precedent for Sark to do what you are asking him to do. Manning isn't Tim Tebow and never will be. His is a mobile pocket passer with size and athletic ability far beyond that of QE. You are asking for the Arch to come in and solve the RZ run game as a pocket passer. Brilliant I'm sure. I'm also sure it won't happen.

 

There are two examples of precedent. You sticking your head in the sand and ignoring it is your own fault. 

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

 

 

[Dahobbs 18239]

8 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

It actually can, will it, who knows. I think we are fine outside of Georgias front 7.

My point stands, there is no precedent for Sark to do what you are asking him to do. Manning isn't Tim Tebow and never will be. His is a mobile pocket passer with size and athletic ability far beyond that of QE. You are asking for the Arch to come in and solve the RZ run game as a pocket passer. Brilliant I'm sure. I'm also sure it won't happen.

 

Rotating Arch in the redzone is almost certainly a good idea. We aren't fixing the problems with our interior line or our inside run game. It is a personnel problem (they aren't bad, but not suited to what we are asking them to do there). A run threat at QB stresses the defense and should alleviate some of our problems there. Quinn isn't necessarily causing our redzone woes, but he also doesn't have any treatment for them. Arch can at least act a band aid until we can make larger personnel or schematic changes. 

Edited Thursday at 06:05 PM by Dahobbs

[Longhornlove 5180]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

They need to move the chains, finish drives and not turn it over. This isn't rocket science.

[Longhornlove 5180]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Rotating Arch in the redzone is almost certainly a good idea. We aren't fixing the problems with our interior line or our inside run game. It is a personnel problem (they aren't bad, but not suited to what we are asking them to do there). A run threat at QB stresses the defense and should alleviate some of our problems there. Quinn isn't necessarily causing our redzone woes, but he also doesn't have any treatment for them. Arch can at least act a band aid until we can mark larger personnel or schematic changes. 

I don't disagree with that totally. I personally think the issue has been schematically as much as it has been blocking. A combination of the two. I am also saying Sark has NEVER done that in his career and I doubt he starts in the first ever 12 team playoff. People clamoring for him to do something out of character is just silly. He didn't get where is is today by doing something like that.

[jimmyjazz 47068]

I wouldn't mind scenarios specifically optimized for Arch.  The game has changed.  It used to be "if you have two QBs you have no QB" (see 'bama, tOSU).  I'm not sure that's true any more.  My only concern is that Arch is possibly behind QE on some of the passing situations which might limit the offense in a similar way that his legs help the offense.  I'm not at practice, I have no idea, I can only watch games and surmise what might be going on.

[Jkwellborn 7026]

He has played great lately. Is that because everyone else disappeared or stopped producing. Either way, I'm not disrespecting him but by no means is he Worthy or Mitchell. Are you two fucking? Family, weird reaction. He has been a TD machine, most reliable receiver on the team by far. Maybe I am under appreciating him. He is our best but not the most talented.

It feels like he’s been more targeted since Bonds injury.

[Longhornlove 5180]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I wouldn't mind scenarios specifically optimized for Arch.  The game has changed.  It used to be "if you have two QBs you have no QB" (see 'bama, tOSU).  I'm not sure that's true any more.  My only concern is that Arch is possibly behind QE on some of the passing situations which might limit the offense in a similar way that his legs help the offense.  I'm not at practice, I have no idea, I can only watch games and surmise what might be going on.

Now that you made me think about it, maybe giving Sark dumbed down play call sheet would help him get way from some of those dumb, long developing plays that keep putting us behind the chains.

[hobbes2702 13393]

32 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Fix the root of the problem and that doesn't include rotating in a freshman backup QB. No one rotates in backup QBs with success at this or higher levels. You people are wanting Sark top do something that essentially has no precedent. Certainly isn't in his past. The evidence is right in your face and your emotions are preventing you from acknowledging it. This is a lack of being able to run the football problem which is blocking, play calling, execution and personnel problem, not a QB problem. You are asking Arch to solve a problem that Quinn isn't even accountable for.

Alabama literally won a NC with a backup QB they rotated in.

[Hank Kingsley 21661]

1 minute ago, Longhornlove said:

I don't disagree with that totally. I personally think the issue has been schematically as much as it has been blocking. A combination of the two. I am also saying Sark has NEVER done that in his career and I doubt he starts in the first ever 12 team playoff. People clamoring for him to do something out of character is just silly. He didn't get where is is today by doing something like that.

To be fair, he benched Ewers for three straight series in the 2nd quarter of the first UGA game. Even I thought it was a panic move at the time (would have preferred letting Ewers finish the 1st half and make QB decision at halftime), but he opened the door himself to all this bullshit. Sark did something out of character, which invites people to think he might do it again. 

 

[Longhornlove 5180]

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

To be fair, he benched Ewers for three straight series in the 2nd quarter of the first UGA game. Even I thought it was a panic move at the time (would have preferred letting Ewers finish the 1st half and make QB decision at halftime), but he opened the door himself to all this bullshit. Sark did something out of character, which invites people to think he might do it again. 

 

Classic, the guy that hates on QE says he shouldn't have benched but now wants him benched because the Coach benched him when he didn't want him benched.

[hook me 2163]

2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

There is at least 9 NFL players on offense, stfu.

 

He's no where close to as good as last year even when healthy. 

I think the bigger issue with "what we lost last year" has more to do with chemistry & experience in the offense than with outright talent like some have argued. 2 years with Worthy, Whittington, Sanders. Brooks had 3 years in the offensive system so you're really only talking about AD being the complete new guy last year. Compare that with every receiver being new to both the offense & with QE and I think there's something to be argued. Moore is the only exception among the WRs and he hardly played last year. I think that's why QE & Helm have been the most consistent connection since Helm is in his 3rd year in the offense & played some last year. Bond has been down with injury since OU so consider he & QE have missed or played injured 3/4 of the season and it's no shocker that they don't seem to have much of a connection. It looks like Golden & Ewers are getting on the same page finally & Bolden has been making a big catch every game so that's nice. QE going down with injury during what should have been the games where the offense really found its groove, and then coming back against the 2 best defenses we faced while his #1 WR got hurt really threw a wrench into his season. 

That's not to excuse all the WTF moments QE has had since returning by any means. The a&m INT & fumble really stick out to me as mistakes that QE simply can't make but seemingly does every game (even if he gets away with them every now and then). I've been disappointed with QE overall but have been mostly satisfied by the season as a whole so it's hard for me to complain too much. He'll be remembered most by what he does in these playoffs. If he leads us to the championship then there will be nothing but praise and happiness from me, if he comes out and loses us the game vs. any remaining opponent then he'll slot in somewhere just under Sam on my list of UT QBs & I'll succumb to bitching about all the offensive talent that we managed to waste while he was starting while sitting on my couch drinking beer knowing full well my arm would fall off if I tried to throw a ball more than 10 yards.

[Longhornlove 5180]

2 minutes ago, hook me said:

I think the bigger issue with "what we lost last year" has more to do with chemistry & experience in the offense than with outright talent like some have argued. 2 years with Worthy, Whittington, Sanders. Brooks had 3 years in the offensive system so you're really only talking about AD being the complete new guy last year. Compare that with every receiver being new to both the offense & with QE and I think there's something to be argued. Moore is the only exception among the WRs and he hardly played last year. I think that's why QE & Helm have been the most consistent connection since Helm is in his 3rd year in the offense & played some last year. Bond has been down with injury since OU so consider he & QE have missed or played injured 3/4 of the season and it's no shocker that they don't seem to have much of a connection. It looks like Golden & Ewers are getting on the same page finally & Bolden has been making a big catch every game so that's nice. QE going down with injury during what should have been the games where the offense really found its groove, and then coming back against the 2 best defenses we faced while his #1 WR got hurt really threw a wrench into his season. 

That's not to excuse all the WTF moments QE has had since returning by any means. The a&m INT & fumble really stick out to me as mistakes that QE simply can't make but seemingly does every game (even if he gets away with them every now and then). I've been disappointed with QE overall but have been mostly satisfied by the season as a whole so it's hard for me to complain too much. He'll be remembered most by what he does in these playoffs. If he leads us to the championship then there will be nothing but praise and happiness from me, if he comes out and loses us the game vs. any remaining opponent then he'll slot in somewhere just under Sam on my list of UT QBs & I'll succumb to bitching about all the offensive talent that we managed to waste while he was starting while sitting on my couch drinking beer knowing full well my arm would fall off if I tried to throw a ball more than 10 yards.

I agree with everything here except for the QE fumble against A&M, that was a strip sack when he was trying to evade a rush and make a throw. I refuse to chalk that up as a dumb play.

[Hank Kingsley 21661]

Just now, Longhornlove said:

Classic, the guy that hates on QE says he shouldn't have benched but now wants him benched because the Coach benched him when he didn't want him benched.

I have no problem with changing QBs, I thought the in-game timing was poor. I wasn't at the stadium, but a buddy texted me that Arch was starting to warm up on the sidelines. One minute later on TV he's trotting on to the field. Did it not feel like a panic move to you at the time? 

One of the many lucky breaks for UGA in the second game was the timing of Beck getting hurt. Last play of the first half. That gave their backup QB and team 20 minutes to mentally prepare. I doubt Stockton looks as good or calm out there if he was forced to go straight in earlier in the game. 

 

 

[BurntOrange&White 41840]

4 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

I agree with everything here except for the QE fumble against A&M, that was a strip sack when he was trying to evade a rush and make a throw. I refuse to chalk that up as a dumb play.

You can't even argue the play correctly, he wasn't trying to make a throw. He took off running and tried to go down and was stripped of the ball.

[C-Man 27772]

1 hour ago, My display name said:

Cross posting from the game week thread... 

I only read/posted this article because it was not written by you know who... very interesting take with actual facts. Responses should be fun. Hook 'em.

https://www.burntorangenation.com/2024/12/19/24324822/quinn-ewers-arch-manning-red-zone-texas-longhorns

Author of that piece is trying way too hard to polish a turd IMO. There's a lot I'd quibble with in that article but I pretty much stopped at:

Ewers has thrown a high volume of red-zone passes with success in most metrics other than yards and completion percentage.

Um ...

 

47 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Stopped reading right at this line: Expecting Manning to jump in and execute the offense seamlessly, in the College Football Playoff, is laughable.

No one is expecting that. In fact, acknowledging that the offense is imperfect is why one would've liked to see more of Arch. The fact that the offense has to be executed "seamlessly" to score points in the problem. 

 

 

Do I think Manning would show better than a clearly-hobbled Ewers in our past three games? Maybe. I would've liked to have seen him come on with a 24-7 lead vs Kentucky and let Quinn rest. Have him get a few more snaps against aggy. Play some in the SEC Championship Game. It's OK to acknowledge Quinn isn't 100% healthy and that's why you're mixing in the kid, offering a change of pace without upsetting the #1-#2 QB hierarchy. Sark has all the political cover he needs at that point -- and shields Quinn a bit by admitting he's not 100% healthy.

 

46 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So the plan is to do nothing and accept status quo? Sounds like a good plan! 

 

 

Having a QB who can run the ball 100% makes a difference in the redzone, especially with a running game that is struggling.

Ding, ding, ding. We're down to our preseason 3rd-string RB because of injury. We knew that wasn't going to change. Things would look a lot different with Baxter in the backfield. But it is what it is. Arch gives you a dynamic that you just don't have with Quinn but you have to commit to using it. Defenses have to account for his ability to get ouf of the pocket and make plays with his legs, which Quinn simply cannot do in his current physical condition (at least from the KY ankle injury forward). Let him throw a time or two when you bring him in. And it also works better if you've been using it throughout the season and not waiting until Game #14 to unleash it (if he even does this week).

 

39 minutes ago, My display name said:

Status quo is obviously not the answer - agreed. But why not shift some of the focus to the OL? We all know the field gets shorter in the RZ, but the OL is struggling to displace DL when it's needed most. Is it scheme? Execution? Both or something else? Point of the article was how shitty the run game becomes in the RZ. Is adding an extra runner (Arch) the answer with the OL not moving people?  

The reason the run game is shitty in the RZ is a combination of things, yes. Most of it being that the guys running the ball were backups or third-strings until injuries forced them into bigger roles. Having a QB who can an element of running can help keep defenses honest.

 

37 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Fix the root of the problem and that doesn't include rotating in a freshman backup QB. No one rotates in backup QBs with success at this or higher levels. You people are wanting Sark top do something that essentially has no precedent. Certainly isn't in his past. The evidence is right in your face and your emotions are preventing you from acknowledging it. This is a lack of being able to run the football problem which is blocking, play calling, execution and personnel problem, not a QB problem. You are asking Arch to solve a problem that Quinn isn't even accountable for.

It can work -- and has worked. We're not asking Arch to take over as #1 right now. We know Sark isn't making that move now because he hadn't done it when it made more sense than it does this week.

 

14 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Rotating Arch in the redzone is almost certainly a good idea. We aren't fixing the problems with our interior line or our inside run game. It is a personnel problem (they aren't bad, but not suited to what we are asking them to do there). A run threat at QB stresses the defense and should alleviate some of our problems there. Quinn isn't necessarily causing our redzone woes, but he also doesn't have any treatment for them. Arch can at least act a band aid until we can make larger personnel or schematic changes. 

Perfectly said. 10/10, would read again.

 

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I wouldn't mind scenarios specifically optimized for Arch.  The game has changed.  It used to be "if you have two QBs you have no QB" (see 'bama, tOSU).  I'm not sure that's true any more.  My only concern is that Arch is possibly behind QE on some of the passing situations which might limit the offense in a similar way that his legs help the offense.  I'm not at practice, I have no idea, I can only watch games and surmise what might be going on.

Agree totally with this too.

[89Horn 1736]

22 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

Ok, let’s finish off this narrative - 

. . . and Texas lost only one of those games when being outscored in the third quarter (Georgia in the SEC CG).  Of interesting note, Texas outscored Georgia 15-0 in the third quarter of their first meeting in Austin in October.  What does all this mean?  The trend is that Texas typically builds a lead in the first half against its opponents and then hangs on to win in the second half with a bounce back in the fourth quarter.

There.  Done.

 

 

[Longhornlove 5180]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Did it not feel like a panic move to you at the time? 

I didn't think he should have been pulled from the game. He should have let him stick it out. The way that D was playing I knew Arch was being put in a impossible position and I was right. I even posted as such on social media but I can't prove it without doxing myself.

[Tex Long 4660]

13 hours ago, Pimphand said:

I think his ATS picks were like 62% this year so nah he ain't that traded brah 😉

Assuming "ain't that traded" means shitty, you're innumerate and/or ungamblifying.

ATS bets are pretty much all 11-10  and they show that as -110, meaning you win $100 or lose $110. At that level 53% is your breakeven. You get to 62%? You can go ahead and quit your day job. 

[Longhornlove 5180]

2 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

You can't even argue the play correctly, he wasn't trying to make a throw. He took off running and tried to go down and was stripped of the ball.

My bad, I confused that with the Kentucky strip sack but same same. Good play by A&M, should have protected the ball better but that was a forced fumble.