Quinn gave us his best. I would criticize him for one thing only- if (and it is “if”, because none of us know) before the 2024 OU game, he overstated his health and readiness to play to Sark. That was the biggest decision to seal him as the 2024 QB, over Arch, but Sark was the one that made it.
And I don’t really fault Sark. OU only had one loss, and you knew Venables was going to bring some crazy defensive looks, to take advantage of a freshman starter in a high pressure situation. At the time, we didn’t appreciate yet how awful OU’s offense was with Hawkins at QB (he was undefeated, 1-0, in conference). I understand why he would want to start the experienced guy in that situation.
The next major decision point was the UGA game. We all know how disastrous that started. Klatt described it well- Ewers was rattled and Sark pulled him, to give him a chance to collect himself, but also knowing (as did Arch and Quinn) that if Arch played well, Quinn wasn’t going back in. Arch didn’t play well, and Quinn played a little better when he came back for the second half.
At that point, Texas was 6-1, and needed to finish strong and make the CFP. No changes would be made unless there were injury or Ewers’ play falling off a cliff.
A lot of people seem to be upset with Quinn for Sark’s decisions. I don’t blame anyone; they’re games and all I ask of players and coaches is that they do their best.
Why aren’t more people upset that Bond kept his starting job so long after he stopped making good plays and effort? That, arguably, cost us the SEC CG and Cotton Bowl.