Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
31 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said:

The fact people think this Clemson team is comparable to last year's Alabama/Washington and this year's Georgia is how you know they are clueless. 

They are not in the same stratosphere. 

 


2 weeks ago, South Carolina was as hot as any team in the country and Clemson was in position to at least force OT with a chip shot FG but threw a game sealing pick. Clemson didn’t show up against Georgia — shit happens week 1. They controlled the ball but couldn’t finish drives against Louisville (SMU’s best win, mind you) to take their only bad L. 
 

The 2024 Team Talent Composite rankings suggest dismissing this Clemson team as inferior “up and down the roster” is ignorant. Dabo may not have used the portal, he may not be the recruiter he once was, but that’s still a high quality roster that can cause us problems. 

#1 Bama

#2 Georgia 

#3 Ohio State

#4 Texas

#5 Clemson

#6 Oregon

#7 Oklahoma

#8 LSU

#9 Notre Dame

#10 Aggy

https://247sports.com/season/2024-football/collegeteamtalentcomposite/

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, B00M said:


 

The 2024 Team Talent Composite rankings suggest dismissing this Clemson team as inferior “up and down the roster” is ignorant. 

#1 Bama

#2 Georgia 

#3 Ohio State

#4 Texas

#5 Clemson

#6 Oregon

#7 Oklahoma

#8 LSU

#9 Notre Dame

#10 Aggy

https://247sports.com/season/2024-football/collegeteamtalentcomposite/

 

Am I ignorant if I dismiss LSU, OU, and Aggy as "inferior up and down the roster?"

Posted
18 minutes ago, chemHORN said:

While this is true, Sark's offense is predicated on getting players open in Space, and letting them work.  Down in the red area you don't have that space anymore so you have to find another way. Even without a running game you can run PA quick slants instead of just throwing fades into the endzone.  

Rarely is that a championship formula. A lot of great offensive minds have tried to outfox and use short passes as a run. You have to be able to run the ball and stop the run. I don't see that ever changing in football. Even 2019 LSU had a 1,400 yard runner. 

Posted
Just now, B00M said:


2 weeks ago, South Carolina was as hot as any team in the country and Clemson was in position to at least force OT with a chip shot FG but threw a game sealing pick. Clemson didn’t show up against Georgia — shit happens week 1. They controlled the ball but couldn’t finish drives against Louisville (SMU’s best win, mind you) to take their only bad L. 
 

 

Clemson was dominated by Georgia, lost to a good but not great South Carolina team, lost to an unranked Louisville team, probably should have lost to SMU with only a 30.1% win expectancy, and barely beat unranked Pitt by 4 points mainly due from a few terrible calls by the refs.

You can spin however you want. This team is mediocre at best. They weren't even going to sniff the playoffs had they not backed their way into the ACC championship. 

This is a 3 to 5 loss type team that you're comparing to '23 Washington, '23 Bama, and '24 Georgia. Please get a grip. 

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Almost every week lately, except after Florida, I sit on the game week thread and think to myself that surely this week Sark will figure out the offense. There are moments of sheer brilliance, followed by just grinding to a halt. It’s maddening. 

Here I am doing the same thing again this week. This offense should score 40+ every game.  This offense has all of the personnel it needs to make the 2000’s OU offenses look lame. Yet Sark just can’t get it going. The running game bogs down. They throw brilliant intermediate passes, followed by throws into coverage or batted down by defensive linemen. Or they commit a penalty. 

This team lacks discipline. And I don’t mean coaches yelling at players. I mean being able to execute the play with the all of the proper actions: no penalties, not letting defensive linemen bat down passes, not having the QB self sack, not throwing the ball where a defender can get their hand in, not dropping passes, not running the wrong route or play, not missing a block by a pulling left tackle, etc.

At some point, when you see so many mistakes you have to ask why the coaching staff can’t reduce them.

 

I think it all depends on how well the scripted plays to start a game work out.  When they work out we build a nice lead that we then sit on in the 2nd half.  When the script doesn't work, or when we get to the 2nd half and the other team has figured out he script, we continue to beat our head against the door trying to force the script to work.  

Edit: or it also depends on if we shoot ourselves in the foot in the first half when the script is working by committing penalties. 

Edited by chemHORN
Posted

A couple days removed from the Georgia game and I'm much less doom and gloom than I was on Saturday and yesterday. I was pretty much convinced we were not good enough on offense to win a national championship and I think I've come off that opinion. I posted in depth thoughts on the first half in that game thread after a rewatch and never got around to anything more than a dirty rewatch of the second half and the offense looked weirdly lethargic. It just seemed like there was no sense of urgency until the final field goal drive.

But the more I thought about it, I looked at it this way: Texas missed two field goals, got caught off guard by the most obvious fake punt of all time, got fisted by the officials for four quarters, got caught totally off guard by a running quarterback they weren't ready for and played like fucking shit on offense and still should've won the game and won it easily. Georgia showed they're a championship program, Texas has the ability to be a championship team.

I would've hoped that the first Georgia game would've been a wake up call for this team that they are good enough to win a title, but that they need to find an extra gear and it didn't really seem like that was the case. Now they have two weeks to rest, recover and really ask each other are we going to do the little things in our preparation to take our game to the next level. Does Sark have it in him to inspire the offense to improve. Is there a leader in that locker room who is going to step up and set the tone holding himself and his teammates accountable? If they do that, this team can win a title.

The Texas defense is championship worthy. I would ride into battle with those dudes over any other unit in the country on that side of the ball. The real question is going to be will anyone on the other side of the ball step up and help his brothers elevate their game. If that happens, this team can win a championship. It's all for the taking. Let's do it, fellas. Hook Em.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

She seems smart.  I like her.

I don't know who she is. 

She is the only one that even picked us to make the Final.  Surprised at how many people picked Ohio State to beat Oregon and that none of them picked Texas to beat Ohio State who lost to Michigan.

Posted
5 minutes ago, chemHORN said:

... we continue to beat our head against the door trying to force the script to work.  

C'mon guys, let's run one of those horizontal passes again... it's bound to work this time.

By the way, did we ever hear anything about Gibson?

Posted (edited)

To improve on execution, this gif keeps popping up in my head regarding practice for the next two weeks:

image.gif.98c115271fedee08c356bf3d9905d99a.gif

Edited by Dbeasy
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)

Also if we could get more out of Isaiah Bond I think our offense could open up a little more.  The offense was better early in the season when he was more involved.  He hasn't been sharp the last few weeks (when he wasn't injured) but if they can get him right it would go along way to helping fix some of the offensive problems.  

Edited by chemHORN
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

Texas had 6 drops on Saturday after having 10 the entire regular season and the offense was competent enough between the 20s to win the game.

It's certainly kind of funny that Sark has managed to keep the peace in the quarterback room and keep Arch happy even though he could very well be the starter right now and Texas' national title hopes are going to come down to if Sark is really willing to use the things Arch can bring to the offense that Ewers can't.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, ATLLonghorn said:

Texas had 6 drops on Saturday after having 10 the entire regular season and the offense was competent enough between the 20s to win the game.

It's certainly kind of funny that Sark has managed to keep the peace in the quarterback room and keep Arch happy even though he could very well be the starter right now and Texas' national title hopes are going to come down to if Sark is really willing to use the things Arch can bring to the offense that Ewers can't.

I'm as frustrated with the offense as any other Longhorn fan but it's a massive stretch to assert that Texas' national title hopes will come down either to giving Arch Manning more playing time, or replacing Quinn Ewers altogether, which is what it seems you are suggesting. 

Texas was good enough to beat Georgia two days ago with Quinn Ewers being exactly who he is and doing exactly what he does.  And Texas is capable of beating every team in the CFP with Quinn Ewers being exactly who he is and doing exactly what he does.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see Sarkisian using Arch Manning effectively, as he did in that first TD against the ags.  But I also understand that Sarkisian has his own reasons and he knows more about college QBs than every single surly asshole on this site put together.

 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
46 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Am I ignorant if I dismiss LSU, OU, and Aggy as "inferior up and down the roster?"

LSU is probably more complicated, but Aggy and OU both missed on (or failed to develop?) and benched their 5 star QBs. Nothing will hide talent like bad QB play. As bad as the UGA beating was, Clemson only trailed 6-0 at half time. 

Posted

The lack of Arch usage boils down to 3 possibilities: 

1) Arch is not capable of giving our offense a spark.

2) Arch is capable of providing a spark, but Sark is too stupid to use him more.

3) Arch is capable, and Sark has been saving it for the playoffs. 
 

I don’t think anyone on this board is brain-dead enough to think it’s 1, so it comes down to 2 or 3. I know there are people on here that think it’s 2, but I for one think (and hope) it’s 3. Sark has taken our program from being a complete joke to back-to-back playoff appearances in the span of 4 years, he gets paid more money than most of us will ever see to make smart decisions, AND he’s still widely respected by non-biased analysts as one of the best offensive minds in college football. I think it’s reasonable to have a little faith and count on us using Arch in a much larger capacity moving forward. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted

It's crazy Clemson is even in this position. This Pitt vs Clemson game was one of the worst officiated games I've ever seen. Legit cost Pitt 10-14 points in a 4 point loss. 

Same shit happened in this game where Pittsburgh fans went insane after a missed call and the refs overturned it (not this play but another one). I thought Pitt fans were going to attack the refs in this one. 

 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, TexasPride10 said:

The lack of Arch usage boils down to 3 possibilities: 

1) Arch is not capable of giving our offense a spark.

2) Arch is capable of providing a spark, but Sark is too stupid to use him more.

3) Arch is capable, and Sark has been saving it for the playoffs. 
 

I don’t think anyone on this board is brain-dead enough to think it’s 1, so it comes down to 2 or 3. I know there are people on here that think it’s 2, but I for one think (and hope) it’s 3. Sark has taken our program from being a complete joke to back-to-back playoff appearances in the span of 4 years, he gets paid more money than most of us will ever see to make smart decisions, AND he’s still widely respected by non-biased analysts as one of the best offensive minds in college football. I think it’s reasonable to have a little faith and count on us using Arch in a much larger capacity moving forward. 

If it’s 3 wouldn’t the SEC Championship Game be a good time to start using Arch?

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
27 minutes ago, utee94 said:

I'm as frustrated with the offense as any other Longhorn fan but it's a massive stretch to assert that Texas' national title hopes will come down either to giving Arch Manning more playing time, or replacing Quinn Ewers altogether, which is what it seems you are suggesting. 

Texas was good enough to beat Georgia two days ago with Quinn Ewers being exactly who he is and doing exactly what he does.  And Texas is capable of beating every team in the CFP with Quinn Ewers being exactly who he is and doing exactly what he does.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see Sarkisian using Arch Manning effectively, as he did in that first TD against the ags.  But I also understand that Sarkisian has his own reasons and he knows more about college QBs than every single surly asshole on this site put together.

 

From weeks 1-6 Texas ranked 7th in the country in points per opportunity with 5.08 PPO

From weeks 7-14 Texas ranked 97th in the country in points per opportunity with 3.48 PPO

The Texas offense with Quinn Ewers at the helm has simply not gotten the job done well enough in the redzone the second half of the season. That's not entirely on him, but he's the piece that you can most easily change to try and spark things in the redzone. It's not making a change for the sake of making a change. You have a player in Arch who brings a different skill set to the table than Ewers and that can help the offense. They need to use him and not half ass it. They need to have a decent package of runs, passes and RPOs available to run and use Arch to run them.

I'm not suggesting that Arch should be the starting quarterback, but it's inarguable to say that the redzone offense is good enough and that they shouldn't use Arch.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, MotownHorn said:

If it’s 3 wouldn’t the SEC Championship Game be a good time to start using Arch?

No, because we didn’t have to win that game. Plus, my option 3 literally said “saving it for the playoffs.”

Edited by TexasPride10
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

How many Bobby and Gerry sock accounts are there on here? 

Jesus. We're going to fucking win by 2+ TD's. Klubnik is ass, my dude. Those idiots missed Miami, Duke, GT, BC, Syracuse. They lost to their rival USCe, too. Won by 4 against a 7-5 Pitt, lost by 4 against unranked at the time Louisville(ended up 8-4), won by 10 against a 6-6 VT, and got absolutely mudholed 34-3 by Georgia. 

Yeah, we should be suuuuper worried about this Clemson team that avoided most of the top of their conference. 

Edited by Funk Doctor Spock
  • Haha 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, ATLLonghorn said:

From weeks 1-6 Texas ranked 7th in the country in points per opportunity with 5.08 PPO

From weeks 7-14 Texas ranked 97th in the country in points per opportunity with 3.48 PPO

The Texas offense with Quinn Ewers at the helm has simply not gotten the job done well enough in the redzone the second half of the season. That's not entirely on him, but he's the piece that you can most easily change to try and spark things in the redzone. It's not making a change for the sake of making a change. You have a player in Arch who brings a different skill set to the table than Ewers and that can help the offense. They need to use him and not half ass it. They need to have a decent package of runs, passes and RPOs available to run and use Arch to run them.

I'm not suggesting that Arch should be the starting quarterback, but it's inarguable to say that the redzone offense is good enough and that they shouldn't use Arch.

We started playing better teams and defenses.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
56 minutes ago, TexasPride10 said:

The lack of Arch usage boils down to 3 possibilities: 

1) Arch is not capable of giving our offense a spark.

2) Arch is capable of providing a spark, but Sark is too stupid to use him more.

3) Arch is capable, and Sark has been saving it for the playoffs. 
 

I don’t think anyone on this board is brain-dead enough to think it’s 1, so it comes down to 2 or 3. I know there are people on here that think it’s 2, but I for one think (and hope) it’s 3. Sark has taken our program from being a complete joke to back-to-back playoff appearances in the span of 4 years, he gets paid more money than most of us will ever see to make smart decisions, AND he’s still widely respected by non-biased analysts as one of the best offensive minds in college football. I think it’s reasonable to have a little faith and count on us using Arch in a much larger capacity moving forward. 

Put me down in the 2 camp, but instead of stupidity I believe it’s arrogance. Sark believes he can “fix” Ewers, even with only a couple games left in his Texas career. Sark has proven over these four years at Texas that he is unwilling to change his playcalling style, even to the detriment of the team. He refuses to budge from his philosophy even when it’s clear the opponent has figured things out. We see the same slow developing play calls called week after week that don’t work out more than they fail. Too many drives stall out in fg tries instead of touchdowns. Yes, we were better the first half of the season, but things have really fallen off the second half. 

On top of arrogance I think Sark simply refuses to start a QB controversy with so few games left in Ewers’ Texas career. I think more than arrogance, this is what will eventually cost us a title. He was on the fucking sidelines when Saban pulled Hurts for Tua and it’s maddening that Sark hasn’t given Arch more of a look before now and gotten him in game reps given the way Ewers has struggled the last 6 games or so. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, ATLLonghorn said:

Jesus Christ some of you are so fucking stupid.

Look in the mirror, kiddo. Express yourself better to avoid misinterpretation if you have an actual point to make.

Posted
2 hours ago, chemHORN said:

She is the only one that even picked us to make the Final.  Surprised at how many people picked Ohio State to beat Oregon and that none of them picked Texas to beat Ohio State who lost to Michigan.

That is odd. I don’t mind the OSU match-up.. Their OL is not great. They don’t run the ball particularly well. Texas defense matches up well there. OSU has a CB problem, which can be hit or miss for the Texas offense, but should provide enough points. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, Atticus said:

Look in the mirror, kiddo. Express yourself better to avoid misinterpretation if you have an actual point to make.

I made my point. It was a good one. 

But here, let me explain something to you since you're a fucking moron: going from 7th to 97th and decreasing 1.5 points per opportunity is fucking pathetic regardless of how much more difficult the level of competition is. The redzone offense has sucked for two months. It's not the level of competition they're playing.

Hope that helps.

Posted
1 minute ago, ATLLonghorn said:

I made my point. It was a good one. 

But here, let me explain something to you since you're a fucking moron: going from 7th to 97th and decreasing 1.5 points per opportunity is fucking pathetic regardless of how much more difficult the level of competition is. The redzone offense has sucked for two months. It's not the level of competition they're playing.

Hope that helps.

Your quick anger shows your immaturity. Your point is debatable, I stated the obvious that you failed to mention. 

No worries, kiddo. You'll get the next one.

  • Fuck You 1
Posted (edited)

The thing that stands out with Clemson is they've only played 3 top 30 offenses per FEI. 

Georgia (34 points and 447 yards)

Louisville (33 points and 336 yards)

SMU (31 points and 458 yards)

Their defense is not good. 

Edited by Rickylovesweed
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TexasPride10 said:

The lack of Arch usage boils down to 3 possibilities: 

1) Arch is not capable of giving our offense a spark.

2) Arch is capable of providing a spark, but Sark is too stupid to use him more.

3) Arch is capable, and Sark has been saving it for the playoffs. 
 

I don’t think anyone on this board is brain-dead enough to think it’s 1, so it comes down to 2 or 3. I know there are people on here that think it’s 2, but I for one think (and hope) it’s 3. Sark has taken our program from being a complete joke to back-to-back playoff appearances in the span of 4 years, he gets paid more money than most of us will ever see to make smart decisions, AND he’s still widely respected by non-biased analysts as one of the best offensive minds in college football. I think it’s reasonable to have a little faith and count on us using Arch in a much larger capacity moving forward. 

Put me down for no. 2.

This whole "Sark has just been ssving him for the CFP" is  stupid. Like the SEC CCG isn't a big deal, let's just leave Arch on the bench so we can get the 5 seed rather than get a bye. 

See how stupid that logic is? I just think Sark is stupid in this regard with Arch. He's just a stubborn moron. Maybe he got hit in the head and he thinks if he uses Arch more than 4 times he loses his Rs frosh season. 

Edited by Funk Doctor Spock
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 1
Posted

We can certainly play down to the level of our opponents. Let's go back to our basics. All gas no brakes, to take out Clemson at home. If we're kicking field goals and the game is close at the half, be ready for pain and disappointment. Up by 10+ at the half and our D is going to slowly suck the life out of our opponent (as stated by another poster)

Posted

Brad Crawford at 247 picked us to win it all and his reasoning is we might not have to play an elite D until the title game. 

We will avoid the elite Ds in the bracket if Oregon beats Tennessee or Ohio State. There are some other elite Ds on the other side of the bracket. I don't think it's terrible reasoning. 

If we can score 25 points we have a shot to beat anybody. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

The offense has sucked shit through a straw for weeks. Two weeks for Dabo to prep to startle Ewers is a major problem for this game. 

Defense can win games but when the offense gives away balls and missed FGs and has short punts it’s a different animal. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, The Ace of Aces said:

The offense has sucked shit through a straw for weeks. Two weeks for Dabo to prep to startle Ewers is a major problem for this game. 

 

Dabo doesn’t have the horses on DL that he used to or a generational QB. He’s pretty mids given that. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
11 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said:

Brad Crawford at 247 picked us to win it all and his reasoning is we might not have to play an elite D until the title game. 

We will avoid the elite Ds in the bracket if Oregon beats Tennessee or Ohio State. There are some other elite Ds on the other side of the bracket. I don't think it's terrible reasoning. 

If we can score 25 points we have a shot to beat anybody. 

it might take 2 OTs to get there

  • Haha 2

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...