Leave Quinn Ewers alone

[Basil 754]

Don't gaslight me. The game thread was full of posters talking shit on Quinn. 

The game thread is always full of bitches no matter what is going on on the field absent a 49-0 beat down.

Don't gaslight me. The game thread was full of posters talking shit on Quinn. 

The game thread is always full of bitches no matter what is going on on the field absent a 49-0 beat down.

[Rex Kramer 1333]

13 hours ago, Drew said:

I’m sorry it’s kind of funny. 

who gives a fuck really? 

Shut the fuck up Drew. 

13 hours ago, GreenspointTexas said:

So if he was still injured today, he’s almost guaranteed to be still injured next week, no?

You’re the male nurse. Why don’t you tell us. 

[Rex Kramer 1333]

“I have 40k rep through being a loud mouthed attention-whoring, bel-welching douche”. lol. 

[Drew 2403]

God rex is still a douchebag.  Surprise surprise.

[BurntEyes 5958]

1 hour ago, troph said:

No prob with disagreement. More interested in faulty logic to support it. Quinn did not play his best game the last two years against OU yet both were more than adequate. This time the D was legit. He might not play better next week but I’d bet on he does.

I also think Quinn is the best qb since Colt and I’m here to enjoy it not parse it or criticize it.

That's fine you want to enjoy it. It's also fine if some choose to critique it. Both are reasonable and logical choices based on yesterday's performance.

I am curious of the faulty logic I bolded above in your statement. Are you accusing ME of faulty logic?

Are you debating me on the quality of the defense we played? Are you arguing it is a good defense? If so please define good defense. 

NCAA Stats

Before the game Ousux was ranked 43 after 48 out of 133 in that ranking system.

That's below the top 30% or.. below a C average. AKA failing grade.

Maybe that's good to you. Failing grades don't qualify in my world.

Edited October 13 by BurntEyes

[CurlyDumps 4466]

I've heard from the postgame 995ers that OU threw out some kitchen sink looks to confuse Ewers. Also sounds like OU played back with light boxes to limit the passing game.

He was also probably gunshy because he didn't want to commit multiple turnovers like last year. The first pick probably got in his head. 

[troph 24781]

21 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

That's fine you want to enjoy it. It's also fine if some choose to critique it. Both are reasonable and logical choices based on yesterday's performance.

I am curious of the faulty logic I bolded above in your statement. Are you accusing ME of faulty logic?

Are you debating me on the quality of the defense we played? Are you arguing it is a good defense? If so please define good defense. 

NCAA Stats

Before the game Ousux was ranked 43 after 48 out of 133 in that ranking system.

That's below the top 30% or.. below a C average. AKA failing grade.

Maybe that's good to you. Failing grades don't qualify in my world.

No not you at all. Game thread peeps and folks talking about play calls or choices within a progression without pointing to better options he failed to see, acknowledging the defensive strategy, or acknowledging 2-4th quarters were much different than the 1st.

I will say with the exception of maybe Michigan I don’t think this team has put together a complete game against anyone yet. And that’s acknowledging some pretty decent outcomes like yesterday.  

Edited October 13 by troph

[troph 24781]

24 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

That's fine you want to enjoy it. It's also fine if some choose to critique it. Both are reasonable and logical choices based on yesterday's performance.

I am curious of the faulty logic I bolded above in your statement. Are you accusing ME of faulty logic?

Are you debating me on the quality of the defense we played? Are you arguing it is a good defense? If so please define good defense. 

NCAA Stats

Before the game Ousux was ranked 43 after 48 out of 133 in that ranking system.

That's below the top 30% or.. below a C average. AKA failing grade.

Maybe that's good to you. Failing grades don't qualify in my world.

But I don’t understand your point about OUs defense. They aren’t great? I agree. They have been opportunistic, they do have good coaches and schemes but they are not the same OU defenses of the past. Doesn’t mean they didn’t choose a game plan that required a methodical performance with few true passing highlights to rack up 34 points. 

Edited October 13 by troph

[troph 24781]

2 hours ago, bullet said:

Arch should have been in there.  But don't criticize his body language.  That's just Ewers.  He was really rusty Saturday.

When shoulda arch been put in? 

[Pato del Muerto 52485]

1 minute ago, troph said:

But I don’t understand your point about OUs defense. They aren’t great? I agree. They have been opportunistic, they do have good coaches and schemes but they are not the same OU defenses of the past. Doesn’t mean they didn’t choose a game plan that required a methodical performance with few true passing highlights to rack up 34 points. 

Make the early fg and take the other one and it’s 40. 

[Your Mom 4805]

I was told to throw out all the stats and rankings for this game. In fact, I think I’ve been told that for about 30 years straight.  But by all means, prove your point with stats and rankings.

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

10 minutes ago, troph said:

When shoulda arch been put in? 

Feels like game thread is leaking out into the world. 

Texas just covered by two touchdowns against OU and people want to bitch. Are there things to improve? Always. Is pulling your starting QB a couple of drives into his return game while things are still well in hand a good idea? It’s abject idiocy, frankly. 

Edited October 13 by Doc Daneeka

[52-80 19147]

There was a post on the game thread saying that benching him would hurt his draft stock. I dont know man having an inconsistent deep ball, being injury prone, playing gun shy, and having random regressions is kinda bad for your draft stock too. 

[mdmost 42999]

9 minutes ago, troph said:

When shoulda arch been put in? 

I thought if Quinn hadn't broken through on the 4th series and we had to punt again that Sark might've made the switch. Then he hit the crossing route to Moore and there was no looking back

[n64ra 1080]

I'm on the Ewers hype train.

[BurntEyes 5958]

12 minutes ago, troph said:

But I don’t understand your point about OUs defense. They aren’t great? I agree. They have been opportunistic, they do have good coaches and schemes but they are not the same OU defenses of the past. Doesn’t mean they didn’t choose a game plan that required a methodical performance with few true passing highlights to rack up 34 points. 

Okay, it's just semantics between us. I think they are very mediocre, not good and certainly not great. 

They're game plan WAS good, and for 1/4 Quinn floundered, BUT he was coming off a injury and error corrected. HOWEVER, it's not the first time.

So, now I'm going in circles which means the world is back in balance and this has truly gone full internet sport board disagreement. Always super productive and valuable. 

[BurntEyes 5958]

2 minutes ago, mdmost said:

I thought if Quinn hadn't broken through on the 4th series and we had to punt again that Sark might've made the switch. Then he hit the crossing route to Moore and there was no looking back

Given Sarks propensity to be "right" particularly with his script... and that Quinn had been playing poorly to that point..

I agree. I think Sark's finger was on the trigger. 

Whether I think it should have been is a different discussion I'm sure we'll cover soon. 

[troph 24781]

1 minute ago, BurntEyes said:

Okay, it's just semantics between us. I think they are very mediocre, not good and certainly not great. 

They're game plan WAS good, and for 1/4 Quinn floundered, BUT he was coming off a injury and error corrected. HOWEVER, it's not the first time.

So, now I'm going in circles which means the world is back in balance and this has truly gone full internet sport board disagreement. Always super productive and valuable. 

Read some of the parallel posts - utter nonsense. Yeah not directed at you. 

[BurntEyes 5958]

17 minutes ago, troph said:

Read some of the parallel posts - utter nonsense. Yeah not directed at you. 

I usually skip over a poster if I see 2 or 3 stupid posts in a row. I only went as long as I did on this one because you're usually very reasonable, a good poster, I like you and frankly I think you're a smoke show.

😘

Edited October 13 by BurntEyes

[troph 24781]

2 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I usually skip over a poster if I see 2 or 3 stupid posts in a row. I only went as long as I did on this one because you're usually very reasonable, a good poster, I like you and frankly I think you're a smoke show.

😘

Aw shucks. 

[troph 24781]

@BurntEyes I’ll tell you where we probably agree, if (when) this team plays a string of complete games late in the year, it’s going to be very difficult to beat us. And I guess I shouldn’t care but when it happens, I hope the numbskulls here can actually enjoy it.

[Dbeasy 15042]

5 hours ago, Hookem2147 said:

Venables is a good defensive coach and they threw out a ton of different looks in that first quarter. They aren’t very good at certain spots (CB) but they have several guys who will be playing on Sundays and a good coach coordinating them.

Regardless of where their scoring or total defense ranks, my overall point stands. Ewers isn’t the first NFL QB hopeful to have a poor game. This isn’t 2022 OSU where he had very little goodwill built up. The guy has played a lot of football the last 2 years and played well in big games. The same NFL that continually overdrafts QBs year after year isn’t overreacting to one bad performance.

 

4 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Again, I agree with your point that Venables threw up a good game plan defensively, and is a good defensive coach. I don't disagree with your points on Ewer's NFL reaction to a single game.

However, OU does NOT have a good defense. That was a center point of the first post I quoted. I've re-quoted it below. It's fine to make the other points but don't weaken you own point by using statements that aren't factually correct. Data is data and the data clearly indicates that OUsux defense is NOT good. It's going to look worse that 43 after our ass pounding of them is added to the data.

The fact is Quinn had a really bad first quarter. He ended up having a decent game. There were issues with his performance and it wasn't against a good defense. It likely has very little effect on his NFL draft status unless it continues, but the fact is this isn't the first time it's happened. 

Yeah but what about this one bad game?!?!?!?! I don’t think NFL teams have ever drafted a QB who played poorly against a good defense before.

Sports talk radio during the week, and at one point during the TV broadcast, they referenced OU’s defense being ranked 4th in the country. I don’t know what measures that was based upon, but they aren’t a bad defense. 

I think people way understate the challenge of knowing where to go with the ball when your defensive opponent either switches up coverages a lot, or sits back with multiple safeties and dares you to run, which is what OU did a lot yesterday. 

Ewers wasn’t sharp and he continues to struggle downfield, but his ability to read the defense is very good, and for the most part short and intermediate route accuracy is very good. 

Texas still isn’t playing their best ball and is winning comfortably. If they can put it together this week they can spank Georgia. 

[BurntEyes 5958]

12 minutes ago, troph said:

@BurntEyes I’ll tell you where we probably agree, if (when) this team plays a string of complete games late in the year, it’s going to be very difficult to beat us. And I guess I shouldn’t care but when it happens, I hope the numbskulls here can actually enjoy it.

I actually booked a hotel room in Atlanta for both the SEC and National championship games. I've not done that since 2005 and Pasadena.

This team has no glaring weaknesses. My primary concern is actually Sark's unwillingness to adjust his script in game to opponent schemes and UT player performance.

So.. yeah but idiots are always going to idiot.

Edited October 13 by BurntEyes

[troph 24781]

7 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I actually booked a hotel room in Atlanta for both the SEC and National championship games. I've not done that since 2005 and Pasadena.

This team has no glaring weaknesses. My primary concern is actually Sark's unwillingness to adjust his script in game to opponent schemes and UT player performance.

So.. yeah but idiots are always going to idiot.

Any chance we play in the rose and is it on or about Jan 1? I need to get my mom to the rose bowl she’s 76 and is the biggest Texas fan there ever was. 

[BurntEyes 5958]

12 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

 

Sports talk radio during the week, and at one point during the TV broadcast, they referenced OU’s defense being ranked 4th in the country. I don’t know what measures that was based upon, but they aren’t a bad defense. 

I think people way understate the challenge of knowing where to go with the ball when your defensive opponent either switches up coverages a lot, or sits back with multiple safeties and dares you to run, which is what OU did a lot yesterday. 

Ewers wasn’t sharp and he continues to struggle downfield, but his ability to read the defense is very good, and for the most part short and intermediate route accuracy is very good. 

Texas still isn’t playing their best ball and is winning comfortably. If they can put it together this week they can spank Georgia. 

There is no metric upon which Ou's defense is ranked 4th in the nation that I'm aware of currently. None, but show me data and change my mind.

Talking heads say stupid shit.

48th of 133 isn't good by most measures and defintions. But that's semantics which I've covered.

I've already agreed multiple times the OU D scheme was good. 

I don't disagree with your points on the difficulty reading coverages nor your broad assessment of Quinn. However, a Heisman level QB on an NC contender should not struggle with that difficulty for a quarter.

Not sure what you're debating me about.

Edited October 13 by BurntEyes

[Sir Ulrich 5187]

14 hours ago, Victor Lazlo said:

I applaud the sentiment, but what if I told you that it was actually 76 points? That would seem even gooder, wouldn’t it?

 

Yep. That's on me lol. 

[BurntEyes 5958]

5 minutes ago, troph said:

Any chance we play in the rose and is it on or about Jan 1? I need to get my mom to the rose bowl she’s 76 and is the biggest Texas fan there ever was. 

Gonna have to look at it... but i recollect it as a possibility. Let me get back to you if someone else doesn't prior. I won't make that one.. My time and money have limits. The NC game, should it happen, will put me at my limits.

[troph 24781]

Just now, BurntEyes said:

Gonna have to look at it... but i recollect it as a possibility. Let me get back to you if someone else doesn't prior. I won't make that one.. My time and money have limits. The NC game, should it happen, will put me at my limits.

We’d probably go to a quarterfinal only - if that.

[UTEE97 3512]

I don't get the jihad mentality against anyone pointing out that Quinn didn't have a great game. Whatever the reasons were, his passes were sailing and one of his errand passes got Bond injured. We were lucky that OU was unable to capitalize on them. If we played a better offense, we would have a lot more heartburn.

I hope this game helps Quinn get back in form because I would hate to see him playing like this next week and keep us from reaching our full potential this season.

[ChickenNuggets 1623]

This thread....

 

....

 

[Dbeasy 15042]

19 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

There is no metric upon which Ou's defense is ranked 4th in the nation that I'm aware of currently.

48th of 133 isn't good by most measures and defintions. But that's semantics which I've covered.

I've already agreed multiple times the OU D scheme was good. 

They were fourth in the country in turnovers forced. They were 19th in points. While they were 27th in rushing defense, they were 5th in yards per rush. They are likely significantly better than the overall yardage defense ranking would indicate because they are saddled with an absolute garbage offense, one of the worst in the country.  Are they elite? No. But they are pretty good. 

[BurntEyes 5958]

1 minute ago, Dbeasy said:

They were fourth in the country in turnovers forced. They were 19th in points. While they were 27th in rushing defense, they were 5th in yards per rush. They are likely significantly better than the overall yardage defense ranking would indicate because they are saddled with an absolute garbage offense, one of the worst in the country.  Are they elite? No. But they are pretty good. 

All fine and dandy but they are 48 out of 133 in total defense. Don't go FULL Graham on me, you don't have the chops or street cred.

If you call a D grade pretty good, well, you're bad at math or your verbiage sucks.

[Rex Kramer 1333]

2 hours ago, Drew said:

God rex is still a douchebag.  Surprise surprise.

See you in the Cowboys thread, repeating your insufferable Dak dick sucking schtick. 

[TejasPedro 1857]

Arch would have hung a hundo on that bunch.

 

[Magus Ossis 2797]

Total defense is not a statistically penetrating tool. Any model can lead one astray, but total D is particularly unhelpful. ESPN FPI defensive efficiency, e.g., rates OU #10. Not elite, but not a failing grade. Or, you could use statistics that are more affected by their bad offense, like total D. You do you.

[South Austin 52452]

1 minute ago, Magus Ossis said:

Total defense is not a statistically penetrating tool.

Now This knows a thing or two about penetrating tools.

[UTEE97 3512]

8 minutes ago, TejasPedro said:

Arch would have hung a hundo on that bunch.

 

Arch took just one game to fix most of his mistakes and Quinn is still making some of the same mistakes he made in his freshman year. I can't wait to see Arch lead us next year.

[Dilligas 666]

5 hours ago, allsups in tulia said:

post your pay stub

If you’re not a nurse you’re way outta you league 

[jdhorn92 1545]

Not overly concerned with QE.  He looked to be playing really tight early.  The pick was a bad pass and it sailed.  He was clearly rusty.  The deep in to Bond....Bond slipped a bit on his break, but it was still bad footwork on QE, again rust and nerves.  Let's face it , OU game is another level of pressure, I dont fault him one bit.  He'll play lights out Saturday night , i have no doubt.  He appears to like the quick outs, short passing early in games to get warmed up.

[Kennythetiger 9375]

32 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Arch took just one game to fix most of his mistakes and Quinn is still making some of the same mistakes he made in his freshman year. I can't wait to see Arch lead us next year.

What if Ewers comes back next year?  

[Thatguy 8678]

50 minutes ago, TejasPedro said:

Arch would have hung a hundo on that bunch.

 

 

39 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Arch took just one game to fix most of his mistakes and Quinn is still making some of the same mistakes he made in his freshman year. I can't wait to see Arch lead us next year.

Arch holds the ball a long long time. He threw over the top of Miss St, but besides that he struggled with short and intermediate throws. Those are young guy issues and he surely will get better. Right now QE is the better player for what we are trying to do. You blitz him and he gets the ball out to the right guy. Go back and look at the plays we hit on. The Wingo slant a guy came completely free up the middle and the ball is out before the blitzer gets to his 3rd step. Same thing with the Helm sideline play. OU's gameplan is way way more aggressive if Arch is in there. With QE the defense is much more passive and that allows us to get to the second level in the run game too.

Here is the 1st Quintrevion big play. 3 man front, and their second level, out of respect for QE's RPO game, is frozen in place waiting to see if the give is legit.

 

 

By the time they start reacting Banks and crew have set the edge, walling off any pursuit.

 

 

They reach everyone leaving only one player to make a play on Wisner in the open field.

 

 

Same thing on the other play he busted below. Legit 3-3-5 flyover. Supposedly QE's Achilles" heel. This is a 1st down too. Against our O-line you are going to get mauled in the running game here and they did.

 

Edited October 13 by Thatguy

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

1 hour ago, UTEE97 said:

I don't get the jihad mentality against anyone pointing out that Quinn didn't have a great game. Whatever the reasons were, his passes were sailing and one of his errand passes got Bond injured. We were lucky that OU was unable to capitalize on them. If we played a better offense, we would have a lot more heartburn.

I hope this game helps Quinn get back in form because I would hate to see him playing like this next week and keep us from reaching our full potential this season.

Is the jihad mentality in the room with you now?

[The Ace of Aces 5175]

4 hours ago, Slacks said:

I thought he played like was still feeling a bit of pain / soreness.

Today he'll know if he's good to go.

He to me was playing like he was afraid of contact. Rushing throws, bailing on reads. After he scrambled for a first in the 2nd he calmed down a bit and then Sark went vanilla with offense because OU wasn’t scoring 10+ points. 

[Hank_Hill 18793]

1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

Don't go FULL Graham on me, you don't have the chops or street cred.

 

Lmao what a douche

[Royale with cheese 1466]

1 hour ago, TejasPedro said:

Arch would have hung a hundo on that bunch.

 

Nattie, tuddie, hundo, jawja . . .

[Magabro 171]

Arch holds the ball a long long time. He threw over the top of Miss St, but besides that he struggled with short and intermediate throws. Those are young guy issues and he surely will get better. Right now QE is the better player for what we are trying to do. You blitz him and he gets the ball out to the right guy. Go back and look at the plays we hit on. The Wingo slant a guy came completely free up the middle and the ball is out before the blitzer gets to his 3rd step. Same thing with the Helm sideline play. OU's gameplan is way way more aggressive if Arch is in there. With QE the defense is much more passive and that allows us to get to the second level in the run game too.
Here is the 1st Quintrevion big play. 3 man front, and their second level, out of respect for QE's RPO game, is frozen in place waiting to see if the give is legit.
 

 
By the time they start reacting Banks and crew have set the edge, walling off any pursuit.
 

 
They reach everyone leaving only one player to make a play on Wisner in the open field.
 

 
Same thing on the other play he busted below. Legit 3-3-5 flyover. Supposedly QE's Achilles" heel. This is a 1st down too. Against our O-line you are going to get mauled in the running game here and they did.
 

User name checks out

[scottsins 1966]

Because Ewers couldn't hit a barn in the first quarter and was a little off after that.  Most of the yards were due to some really good tough running by our receivers.  And some of those easy passes were really high.  He had a tendency to overthrow Saturday.

Sooo…Sark needs to fired then, I presume? There’s no way I would support a coach who either can’t make the right evaluation of his QBs OR deliberately chooses one that he doesn’t think gives him the best chance to win the game.

This isn’t MBTF.

[Alien Octopus 516]

4 hours ago, troph said:

No not you at all. Game thread peeps and folks talking about play calls or choices within a progression without pointing to better options he failed to see, acknowledging the defensive strategy, or acknowledging 2-4th quarters were much different than the 1st.

I will say with the exception of maybe Michigan I don’t think this team has put together a complete game against anyone yet. And that’s acknowledging some pretty decent outcomes like yesterday.  

Coaching did not give him better options until they did when they finally called a crossing route the field opened up. Not sure what took so fing long. Also, the difference between Quinn and Colt is that Quinn hardly calls a hot route. Established Colt did. Maybe that is how Sark wants it? 
 

Edited October 13 by Alien Octopus
English no good

[scottsins 1966]

All fine and dandy but they are 48 out of 133 in total defense. Don't go FULL Graham on me, you don't have the chops or street cred.
If you call a D grade pretty good, well, you're bad at math or your verbiage sucks.

Maybe the reason we ran for eleventy million yards on the ground is because a lackluster defense basically sold out to take away the medium/long passing game?

[Your Mom 4805]

2 hours ago, Kennythetiger said:

What if Ewers comes back next year?  

He’s not holding off Arch another year. He has to know that. No way he stays.