Jump to content

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


Coach pop a bitch

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I added some extra information in there in terms of total targets and a few more guys. 

These guys are all very young and the sample sizes are all pretty small to take much from this. We dont when these happened, if there is a trend, or what type of talent they made the catches against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

Are we still shitting on Ewers or have we moved on to Wingo?

I don’t want to look like an idiot here.

 

Depends, I choose to spread the blame around and not lay it all at the feet of the starting QB.

Although we have a talented receiver room, we have exactly one of those guys to meet or exceed expectations. The two most explosive playmakers on the offense have either been hurt or a non factor(turnover machine) for the toughest stretch of the schedule. But, but but the QB. Many might argue that Baxter would have been another potentially explosive playmaker but we haven't seen him either. If people would take a step back and actually analyze the root causes and contributing factors they will find and admit that this isn't just a QB problem.

Funny how people want Arch to come in in RZ because he is a run threat. That alone should give them the clue they are looking for. The statistics for the run game in losses and RZ for the entire year tell you where the problem lies. It's up to the HC/OC to figure it out. Based on what I saw against Clemson, I think he did but some of you probably didn't even realize what changes were made.

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

14 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Depends, I choose to spread the blame around and not lay it all at the feet of the starting QB.

Although we have a talented receiver room, we have exactly one of those guys to meet or exceed expectations. The two most explosive playmakers on the offense have either been hurt or a non factor(turnover machine) for the toughest stretch of the schedule. But, but but the QB. Many might argue that Baxter would have been another potentially explosive playmaker but we haven't seen him either. If people would take a step back and actually analyze the root causes and contributing factors they will find and admit that this isn't just a QB problem.

Funny how people want Arch to come in in RZ because he is a run threat. That alone should give them the clue they are looking for. The statistics for the run game in losses and RZ for the entire year tell you where the problem lies. It's up to the HC/OC to figure it out. Based on what I saw against Clemson, I think he did but some of you probably didn't even realize what changes were made.

Damn right and dead on. Sometimes we wanna run it and can't. Sometimes we wanna catch it but can't throw it. Sometimes we throw it and can't catch it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kennythetiger said:

We’re grown men throwing personal insults at each other over teenage boys and boys barely out of their teenage years. 

Fuck you Kenny! This observationally accurate post clearly doesn't come down on pro or anti Ewers. This a binary thread where you're for or against. As such your noncommittal take doesn't fit in this thread. Take that bullshit to the football board. (Just not the Sark, FUPM or Deion threads)

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Depends, I choose to spread the blame around and not lay it all at the feet of the starting QB.

Although we have a talented receiver room, we have exactly one of those guys to meet or exceed expectations. The two most explosive playmakers on the offense have either been hurt or a non factor(turnover machine) for the toughest stretch of the schedule. But, but but the QB. Many might argue that Baxter would have been another potentially explosive playmaker but we haven't seen him either. If people would take a step back and actually analyze the root causes and contributing factors they will find and admit that this isn't just a QB problem.

Funny how people want Arch to come in in RZ because he is a run threat. That alone should give them the clue they are looking for. The statistics for the run game in losses and RZ for the entire year tell you where the problem lies. It's up to the HC/OC to figure it out. Based on what I saw against Clemson, I think he did but some of you probably didn't even realize what changes were made.

Gotcha.
More of a potpourri of blame.

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Funny how people want Arch to come in in RZ because he is a run threat. That alone should give them the clue they are looking for. The statistics for the run game in losses and RZ for the entire year tell you where the problem lies. It's up to the HC/OC to figure it out. Based on what I saw against Clemson, I think he did but some of you probably didn't even realize what changes were made.

People wanted Arch in because we were having trouble scoring TDs in the RZ, not because we wanted him to exclusively run the ball. 

I don't think anyone wants to see Arch treated like Alex Orji. I would rather him not play at all if he's just a battering ram. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

People wanted Arch in because we were having trouble scoring TDs in the RZ, not because we wanted him to exclusively run the ball. 

I don't think anyone wants to see Arch treated like Alex Orji. I would rather him not play at all if he's just a battering ram. 

 

No one is expecting Arch to come in and sling it. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it, the lack of run game in. the RZ has caused people to want Arch to get more play time specifically in the RZ. Why? Because he is a run threat. What have they done with him? Run him. This isn't complicated.

Once again, the lack of run game in the RZ isn't a QB problem when you run a pro style offense with a pocket passer QB. Just say it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Longhornlove said:

No one is expecting Arch to come in and sling it. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it, the lack of run game in. the RZ has caused people to want Arch to get more play time specifically in the RZ. Why? Because he is a run threat. What have they done with him? Run him. This isn't complicated.

Once again, the lack of run game in the RZ isn't a QB problem when you run a pro style offense with a pocket passer QB. Just say it.

Do you think Texas fans only want Arch in to run the ball when he's in the game? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

No one is expecting Arch to come in and sling it. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it, the lack of run game in. the RZ has caused people to want Arch to get more play time specifically in the RZ. Why? Because he is a run threat. What have they done with him? Run him. This isn't complicated.

Once again, the lack of run game in the RZ isn't a QB problem when you run a pro style offense with a pocket passer QB. Just say it.

We stopped throwing in the RZ the issue is the dumb dumb playcaller.

In 2020 when he was only the OC he was fine. Now he is the HC and playcaller he gets overwhelmed. He is either going to figure that out and dominate the sport or he won't and we will continue to flub games against the top 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pimphand said:

We stopped throwing in the RZ the issue is the dumb dumb playcaller.

In 2020 when he was only the OC he was fine. Now he is the HC and playcaller he gets overwhelmed. He is either going to figure that out and dominate the sport or he won't and we will continue to flub games against the top 5.

Slow developing plays in condensed sets in a condensed field are not a good, combination especially when Jonathan Brooks, RoJo and Bijan are no longer in the backfield. Our RZ offense is predictable. We need to break tendencies and we aren't, haven't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Longhornlove said:

What some Texas fans want is irrelevant and counter productive to solving the actual problems with the RZ offense that we have been having the second half of the season.

 It was never considered strictly a running game issue in the RZ. You're making that up. 

There are two reasons the "play Arch" talk has died down this week, including from me. 1. We had more success vs. Clemson, and play an average ASU D this week and 2. No one wants to see Arch exclusively used as a runner.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 It was never considered strictly a running game issue in the RZ. You're making that up. 

That is factually incorrect and supported by statistics that I have posted on multiple occasions.

image.thumb.png.ff2c79e19c2c04977d2c6dfd30b00395.png

Here is 2022 with RoJo and Bijan

image.thumb.png.98ce1483f69f6f875663aeb0bda8c8ac.png

Here is Passing in 2024, notice in Blue, wow, look at the QB rating in the RZ, that is pretty high isn't it. I think it is the highest rating out of all isn't it?

image.thumb.png.a9a9604c14dbd4bd59cb014d7b3b4b8b.png

Tell me again where the problem in the RZ is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point in the season the stats don't lie. We are what we are in the RZ. It is a Fact that we have struggled to run the football in the RZ. Most teams do struggle but not as bad as we have this year. Historically speaker in previous years we are above 3 yards per carry in the RZ. We were below 2 until last game and still barely above it.

Here is the link https://cfbstats.com/2022/team/703/passing/offense/situational.html 

feel free to look at our past and other teams performances. 

Fun little fact. We are noticeably better in the RZ at passing this year than years past. I know that is hard to believe because QE bad and all but the stats are there. The numbers don't lie. Could he have been better, sure, so can the run game. Should be drastically better.

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

36 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

That is factually incorrect and supported by statistics that I have posted on multiple occasions.

image.thumb.png.ff2c79e19c2c04977d2c6dfd30b00395.png

Here is 2022 with RoJo and Bijan

image.thumb.png.98ce1483f69f6f875663aeb0bda8c8ac.png

Here is Passing in 2024, notice in Blue, wow, look at the QB rating in the RZ, that is pretty high isn't it. I think it is the highest rating out of all isn't it?

image.thumb.png.a9a9604c14dbd4bd59cb014d7b3b4b8b.png

Tell me again where the problem in the RZ is?

Your argument is the RZ running game is hurting the team (2.03 ypc) and Quinn’s RZ passer rating (192.96) is pretty high, so Quinn is not the problem in the red zone. Is this correct? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

At this point in the season the stats don't lie. We are what we are in the RZ. It is a Fact that we have struggled to run the football in the RZ. Most teams do struggle but not as bad as we have this year. Historically speaker in previous years we are above 3 yards per carry in the RZ. We were below 2 until last game and still barely above it.

Here is the link https://cfbstats.com/2022/team/703/passing/offense/situational.html 

feel free to look at our past and other teams performances. 

Fun little fact. We are noticeably better in the RZ at passing this year than years past. I know that is hard to believe because QE bad and all but the stats are there. The numbers don't lie. Could he have been better, sure, so can the run game. Should be drastically better.

Props for bringing stats to support your argument, but they never tell the whole story. We started the season strong in the RZ, and struggled later in the year. The struggles vs. A&M and UGA were noticeable. We rank near the bottom in RZ %, that is a team issue. Never said it was all on Quinn, but he is part of it. 

That said, ASU is a favorable matchup for Ewers and our offense overall. I think we'll have a lot of success this week. 

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

7 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Your argument is the RZ running game is hurting the team (2.03 ypc) and Quinn’s RZ passer rating (192.96) is pretty high, so Quinn is not the problem in the red zone. Is this correct? 

those are for both. Arch Redzone rating is 266.46 (5 TDs, 0 ints) vs 177.8 for Ewers.

Edited by Codaxx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

those are for both. Arch Redzone rating is 266.46 (5 TDs, 0 ints) vs 177.8 for Ewers.

Thanks for the ratings breakdown between QBs. Is there any stat for RZ efficiency that measures the percentage of RZ trips converted successfully into scored TDs (and not including FGs)? I’m just trying to get a picture of how often the offense coverts RZ trips into TDs without having an RZ efficiency stat that is influenced by the kicker as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Thanks for the ratings breakdown between QBs. Is there any stat for RZ efficiency that measures the percentage of RZ trips converted successfully into scored TDs (and not including FGs)? I’m just trying to get a picture of how often the offense coverts RZ trips into TDs without having an RZ efficiency stat that is influenced by the kicker as well.

just straight vanilla red zone TD%, Texas is 48th

 

https://cfbstats.com/2024/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category27/sort05.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Thanks for the ratings breakdown between QBs. Is there any stat for RZ efficiency that measures the percentage of RZ trips converted successfully into scored TDs (and not including FGs)? I’m just trying to get a picture of how often the offense coverts RZ trips into TDs without having an RZ efficiency stat that is influenced by the kicker as well.

image.png.689417c775cab11c7ca3d0dc294ad998.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Your argument is the RZ running game is hurting the team (2.03 ypc) and Quinn’s RZ passer rating (192.96) is pretty high, so Quinn is not the problem in the red zone. Is this correct? 

It wasn't Quinn , that of course was both QBs. The RZ rushing numbers are terrible. There is no debating that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brock Purdy was Mr irrelevant in the draft and has become a starter in the league even if he might lose his job next year. Quinn is going to the draft and he’ll be ok or flame out regardless of draft position. If he stays and transfers someone named future man will fist himself I’m sure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

         REC    YDS    AVG    TD    LNG
TEX 2023   8    136    17.0    0    51
TEX 2024   8    137    17.1    2    40
Career    16    273    17.1    2    51

 

are those the stats of the guy that is talking shit.....because if they are he seems like he sucks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he transfers and plays better next year, that would be an indictment on Sark's offense and QB development. If Texas plays better with Arch and Quinn continues to play like how he has played since his injury, that should settle the argument (I hope but it's Surly so who knows?). That said, I wish the guy best of luck wherever he plays.

I just don't understand Sark's handling of Arch this year. The guy threw really well in the first two games he started and showed remarkable improvement on protecting the ball from game one to two, but then Sark doesn't want to let him throw the ball any more. I feel like this is hurting his development. I don't know if there was a better way to handle the two QBs but Sark's handling of the situation doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

If he transfers and plays better next year, that would be an indictment on Sark's offense and QB development. If Texas plays better with Arch and Quinn continues to play like how he has played since his injury, that should settle the argument (I hope but it's Surly so who knows?). That said, I wish the guy best of luck wherever he plays.

I just don't understand Sark's handling of Arch this year. The guy threw really well in the first two games he started and showed remarkable improvement on protecting the ball from game one to two, but then Sark doesn't want to let him throw the ball any more. I feel like this is hurting his development. I don't know if there was a better way to handle the two QBs but Sark's handling of the situation doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

His #1 concern is winning and not Arch's development.  

He seems to be doing OK so far in that regard, but we shall see the rest of the way.

IMHO - I understand the delicate balance he has to maintain not to end up in a bigger QB controversy than exists in this thread, but I will never understand failing to play Manning more against Georgia when we were ineffective running the ball and they handled King so poorly the week before.  
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So 18 days ago, Quinn's agent tweeted "fake news" about a report that Ewers was considering one more year of CFB. But the rumors continue to ramp up and seem like an unnecessary distraction for Quinn heading into the playoff quarterfinals. Silence from his agent since Dec. 13th. Bobby Burton said Quinn to the NFL was a done deal three weeks ago. He doesn't seem as confident now and is going off that weeks old update. Quinn's agent is probably his source.

Hard not to be cynical and think his agent is now pushing these $4-$6 million rumors to create leverage if his NFL stock has truly fallen.  Maybe Quinn will thrive in this situation, I don't know. Hopefully not a distraction for the rest of the team. 

 

 

 

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

1 hour ago, deech said:

His #1 concern is winning and not Arch's development.  

He seems to be doing OK so far in that regard, but we shall see the rest of the way.

IMHO - I understand the delicate balance he has to maintain not to end up in a bigger QB controversy than exists in this thread, but I will never understand failing to play Manning more against Georgia when we were ineffective running the ball and they handled King so poorly the week before.  
 

 

If you don't develop Arch, there won't be much winning in the next few years and the broader repercussions of not developing a Manning and two #1 rated QBs in a row would be far greater. It's not just about winning this year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

If you don't develop Arch, there won't be much winning in the next few years and the broader repercussions of not developing a Manning and two #1 rated QBs in a row would be far greater. It's not just about winning this year.

Seems like you're not aware that players develop in practice. Strange but true.

  • Hook 'Em 6
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...