Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
24 minutes ago, tbone_ said:

I don’t think you can say with 100% certainty it won’t be fixed.

I don't know if you can say anything with 100% certainty, but it is in the VERY high 90s. 

Posted
41 minutes ago, tbone_ said:

I don’t think you can say with 100% certainty it won’t be fixed. The dude is clearly capable of change.

 

But it defiantly hasn’t been fixed yet, that’s for sure. 

Guy is 50 years old and has the best job in football.  What makes you think he’s eager and willing to change.  

12 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Sark is Jimbo Fisher without the NC

Pull up his record vs James franklins

Posted
6 minutes ago, Thermos H. Christ said:

Am I allowed to want Sark to stay even if I think he’ll most likely never win a NC, like most other coaches at most other schools ever since the sport was invented? I mean you can’t totally rule it out either. 

This is still better than the abortion of late Mack, Chuckles and Herman.  Just gotta hope he gets lucky and squeezes 1 title in next 10 years.

Posted
8 minutes ago, Thermos H. Christ said:

Am I allowed to want Sark to stay even if I think he’ll most likely never win a NC, like most other coaches at most other schools ever since the sport was invented? I mean you can’t totally rule it out either. 

Nobody is advocating for a new coach. Sarks public persona is very likable.   A deeper inspection of his coaching record shows he may not be A+ at everything. But I trust CDC 

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

It’s been highly entertaining watching Sark fluctuate between genius and incompetent on this board over the years. 

Over the years?  Based on the knee jerks in this thread it fluctuates wildly between the Dr Pepper commercial and the AFLAC commercial during any given game. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
21 hours ago, troph said:

There are big games where the talent edge is decidedly in our favor and big games where it’s even. Oklahoma state for the big 12 and A&M, arky and a few OU games come to mind. As do the UW, UGA and tOSU games. The only game where the talent was even and we won was at Bama. 

Is argue sark lost a few games where he had more talent 

Posted

I believe in Sark, I just wish he wasn't the play caller and head coach. I keep remembering that Ryan Day would have probably been fired last year had he not won the National Championship. There were big rumblings. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brandywine said:

I believe in Sark, I just wish he wasn't the play caller and head coach. I keep remembering that Ryan Day would have probably been fired last year had he not won the National Championship. There were big rumblings. 

Here's the most frustrating part, as a CEO of the program he's doing fantastic. He brought in one of the best CTO's in the nation in PK. He aligned with the board president CDC on the best CMO and CFO. The VP of HR is excellent at assessing, hiring and keeping the best talent. All of his VPs and middle managers are great. Problem is the COO is, in broad strokes, doing really well on the offense, but the CEO keeps sticking his fingers in the mix and it's messing up specific issues in operations. Namely, the close out sales process with whales, or RZ in football terms. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
21 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Mack won his championship in year 8.

Sark is doing just fine. He's a good head coach and great for Texas. 

Don’t nobody wanna wait no damn 8 years 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

I didn't plan to return here, but I respect your post. You missed some of my earlier statements in the discussion. It's a long, unharmonious thread, so that's totally reasonable.

I used the word stupid in the second quote of mine below which was addressed specifically at an early responder to me. I do not define as stupid anyone who disagrees with me. Many people who found fault with my argument seized on details rather than the overall point.

You:

13 hours ago, dcar00 said:

while I understand the premise, I will use the same argument for Manning that I did for Ewers.  Sark sees practice and Manning is his best chance to win. [See first below]

who is the guy under him that you think can do better? [See second below]

you also are discounting that this could be a Sark QB development problem.

 

20 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I guess coach-hating is addictive. It's absurd to think Manning looked in practice the way he did in the shoe, and Sark decided he was ready. This was not a failure of coach preparation unless you think a coach can prescribe and administer xanax.

It wasn't footwork or mechanics that thwarted Manning. He choked horrifically. All the evidence you need for that is to review his performance in other games where the pressure was low. He was more than competent in those games. Had he played that well in this game, we likely win.

The only difference was pressure. Similarly to his panicky showing against Georgia last year, the moment was too large for him.  He faces pressure from the importance of a game and the expections almost cruelly laid upon him. 

I'll write this game off. He has a couple of cupcakes coming up, then he must face the next test. 

It's profoundly stupid to blame Manning's performance on Sarkisian. Fourth downs are another matter altogether.

We're seemingly in agreement. We see Sark's decision making on starting Manning in the same way as you describe Ewers. My main point was addressing the blame placed on Sark for Manning's preparation. As you assert, Manning did not play in practice as he did in the actual game.

 

Now, for whom to insert in his stead. From my discussion in this thread with @troph whose post I pos-repped:

Quote

Actually, I think your characterization vindicates Sark more than condemns him. [Manning's] performance was so spectacularly bad (I agree with your description), that it's difficult to imagine what  a coach could have done about it [during the game]. 

Manning did not belong on the field in the role of QB. I'm not hating. I want him to work out. 

Leaving Manning in the game was the only decisive choice, IMHO, that falls on Sark. I can't even name our second team QB, but he would have been better. If there were no other factors such as Manning's psychological strength and merciless public opinion, Manning should have been pulled.

The only reason you don't bench him is because you feel he is your best chance for a great season and that benching him would damage him and the hopes of a great season.

If we get into conference play and Manning plays nearly as poorly as yesterday, I say pull him. 

I don't think leaving Manning in this game was definitively bad. We were close. He's shown great play before, so you hope that version re-emerges. Some here believe that version did re-emerge in the fourth quarter. Maybe it did. We almost tied the game. He still didn't look great nor was his decision making notable.

I recognize Manning is a special case due to unprecedented attention and ballyhoo just because of his last name. I don't advocate a decision about replacing him until conference play. Frankly, I expect him to bounce back. If he doesn't, his fate by then should be the same as any other struggling QB even if benching him would be classic tragedy that I'd rather not see. 

Arch Manning presents as a great young man who I love representing my university. I keenly want him to succeed and believe he will. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
18 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The criticisms are eerily similar.

Your right!!! 
 

and the worse part about it is, like Mack Sark has had teams that should have won it all. I hate thinking about the what ifs but that 2023 team should’ve won it 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I didn't plan to return here, but I respect your post. You missed some of my earlier statements in the discussion. It's a long, unharmonious thread, so that's totally reasonable.

I used the word stupid in the second quote of mine below which was addressed specifically at an early responder to me. I do not define as stupid anyone who disagrees with me. Many people who found fault with my argument seized on details rather than the overall point.

You:

 

We're seemingly in agreement. We see Sark's decision making on starting Manning in the same way as you describe Ewers. My main point was addressing the blame placed on Sark for Manning's preparation. As you assert, Manning did not play in practice as he did in the actual game.

 

Now, for whom to insert in his stead. From my discussion in this thread with @troph whose post I pos-repped:

I don't think leaving Manning in this game was definitively bad. We were close. He's shown great play before, so you hope that version re-emerges. Some here believe that version did re-emerge in the fourth quarter. Maybe it did. We almost tied the game. He still didn't look great nor was his decision making notable.

I recognize Manning is a special case due to unprecedented attention and ballyhoo just because of his last name. I don't advocate a decision about replacing him until conference play. Frankly, I expect him to bounce back. If he doesn't, his fate by then should be the same as any other struggling QB even if benching him would be classic tragedy that I'd rather not see. 

Arch Manning presents as a great young man who I love representing my university. I keenly want him to succeed and believe he will. 

OK, but there is no way to know that the backup would have been better.  he could have thrown pick 6's, fumbled on sacks, all kinds of stuff.

first we have Ewers and now we have Arch, are you absolutely sure it isn't a QB development problem with Sark?  development is as much mental as it is physical.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

 

I noticed a comment from Sark in post-game PC (5:20 mark) about sitting with Arch at halftime to look at the tape/coverages. 

My questions are this: 

- Is there any coach communicating with our QB during the game on the sidelines? 

- Are we actually waiting until halftime to discuss tape/coverages? 

Edited by Hank Kingsley
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

OK, but there is no way to know that the backup would have been better.  he could have thrown pick 6's, fumbled on sacks, all kinds of stuff.

first we have Ewers and now we have Arch, are you absolutely sure it isn't a QB development problem with Sark?  development is as much mental as it is physical.

You're correct, there is no way to know. I honestly have a hard time thinking of a performance any worse than Manning's yesterday. But you're right. I think I may be right, but that it's in the question tells us something, no? Part of my reason to mention an unnamed QB was to illustrate my opinion of Manning's game yesterday.

I'm not sure I see how Ewers was poorly developed. Before he got hurt each season, if I'm not mistaken, he was rather brilliant. Perhaps I attribute too much to the injuries. I'm a football idiot compared to the guys around here who clearly know shit. I thought Arch might be better than Ewers last year, but things other than the way they played kept Ewers on the field. I was way off on that one.

Politics has shown me what a miserable predictor I can be. I'm better at football but not by much.

Posted
59 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

This.

 

It’s been a while since Texas lost to a lesser talented team.

There are plenty of rankings and so called experts that were saying Texas has more talent than OSU. And the ESPN power index had Texas at 53%, and that's on the road. It would've been nearly 60% at home. How many people posting here picked OSU? I think myself and about 2 others, that's it. In fact someone posted that something like 98% of Texas fans picked Texas, but only 90% of OSU fans so that means Texas has the better chance to win.

To be honest, I'm not sure at this point if I could pick who has the most talent, but I'm pretty damn sure who has the better coaching staff. Thank God at least we have coach K. 

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

I noticed a comment from Sark in post-game PC (5:20 mark) about sitting with Arch at halftime to look at the tape/coverages. 

My questions are this: 

- Is there any coach communicating with our QB during the game on the sidelines? 

- Are we actually waiting until halftime to discuss tape/coverages? 

Very important questions that need to be answered. I’ll be waiting for one of our phenomenal beat writers to ask at his next press conference. 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Haha 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

I noticed a comment from Sark in post-game PC (5:20 mark) about sitting with Arch at halftime to look at the tape/coverages. 

My questions are this: 

- Is there any coach communicating with our QB during the game on the sidelines? 

- Are we actually waiting until halftime to discuss tape/coverages? 

he looks at the ipad with Milwee after every series. so no, but solving the problem is a different question. tOSU was ready and we had no real tape on them (new DC). play 8 quarters (endurance aside) and maybe it's different but no doubt we did not solve the coverage problem on the fly.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Hard Times said:

There are plenty of rankings and so called experts that were saying Texas has more talent than OSU. And the ESPN power index had Texas at 53%, and that's on the road. It would've been nearly 60% at home. How many people posting here picked OSU? I think myself and about 2 others, that's it. In fact someone posted that something like 98% of Texas fans picked Texas, but only 90% of OSU fans so that means Texas has the better chance to win.

To be honest, I'm not sure at this point if I could pick who has the most talent, but I'm pretty damn sure who has the better coaching staff. Thank God at least we have coach K. 

that's splitting hairs. no reasonable person is calling Saturday an upset by a less talented team.

1 minute ago, 6th Street said:

Milwee is ass

I don't have a retort to that.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

arch was so inconsistent - and that means he threw some nice balls too - that made it impossible to take him out. you think at some point he starts turning the corner in a one score game.  I think Saturday sucked ass but I'm coming around to the fact that we just had way to high of an expectation for him. granted plenty of young inexperienced QBs did fine this weekend, but honestly I do think the intensity of the expectations on Arch and Caleb Downs and this mysterious man with a woman's name for his last name with no film on them made it extra difficult.

So I am going to suspend my judgment re all things Arch until after Fla (which assumes complete annihilation the next three weeks). However, I continue to think Sark is a fucking knucklehead on Fourth and Go For It and Redzone Offense. 

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, westexhorn said:

This is still better than the abortion of late Mack, Chuckles and Herman.  Just gotta hope he gets lucky and squeezes 1 title in next 10 years.

Guys, Herman was a genius.  He was on the cover of Texas Football drawing up plays.  He was “building culture” at Texas, as some fanboy on this board said when he started a thread about it. 
 

Live long enough, and not be from Alabama, and you will quit acting as though coaches are the Messiah. 
 

Bum Phillips was right about there only being two kinds of coaches. 

Posted
34 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

OK, but there is no way to know that the backup would have been better.  he could have thrown pick 6's, fumbled on sacks, all kinds of stuff.

first we have Ewers and now we have Arch, are you absolutely sure it isn't a QB development problem with Sark?  development is as much mental as it is physical.

I'm going to speculate that Quinn and Arch have a similar psychological makeup. They want to do well so bad the pressure overwhelms them causing them to freeze up, and just the opposite happens because their body is shaking. Some people have issues developed as children that 15-20 years to overcome even with counseling. It takes time and I don't blame Sark for that, IF it is an issue.

A precision game requires total relaxation, just like golfing. Playing QB not like playing OL where you just just go all out physically and try to knock the other guy on his ass. Something is amiss because we know Arch has the arm talent, he's shown it. I think once Arch has some success and gains confidence he will be fine. And, as Sark said, he does better after he's been hit. Getting hit definitely knocks off some nerves. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, Hard Times said:

There are plenty of rankings and so called experts that were saying Texas has more talent than OSU. And the ESPN power index had Texas at 53%, and that's on the road. It would've been nearly 60% at home. How many people posting here picked OSU? I think myself and about 2 others, that's it. In fact someone posted that something like 98% of Texas fans picked Texas, but only 90% of OSU fans so that means Texas has the better chance to win.

To be honest, I'm not sure at this point if I could pick who has the most talent, but I'm pretty damn sure who has the better coaching staff. Thank God at least we have coach K. 

I’d say tOSU is one of the 10 or so in D1 with equal talent to Texas.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Park Gothic said:

There’s a lot of dumb posts in this thread, but you win the prize today. 

I truly don’t understand why people have to hate on a jimbo comparison. Sark as a head coach has 1 conference title. 0 national titles. Jimbo as a head coach has 1 national title and 3 conference titles. Jimbo has a much worse personality compared to sark. People only cared about his personality once he stopped winning. Only winning matters. We’d all hop on sabans dick today if he throttled our media, fans and players while he was winning here

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Hard Times said:

There are plenty of rankings and so called experts that were saying Texas has more talent than OSU. And the ESPN power index had Texas at 53%, and that's on the road. It would've been nearly 60% at home. How many people posting here picked OSU? I think myself and about 2 others, that's it. In fact someone posted that something like 98% of Texas fans picked Texas, but only 90% of OSU fans so that means Texas has the better chance to win.

To be honest, I'm not sure at this point if I could pick who has the most talent, but I'm pretty damn sure who has the better coaching staff. Thank God at least we have coach K. 

I think a lot of that was predicated on Arch looking like he did last year in the limited reps everyone saw. His performance completely changed the analysis. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Sure Arch was awful but the garbage 4th and goal QB sneak was Sark. Big game requires your best play, the one your team practiced in the off-season, the one your player enjoy running because it's deceptive etc. Chris Petersen had them John Mackovik had one and many others but apparently not Sark the so called offensive guru 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Rockethorn1978 said:

Did milwee get arch to the side arm quick sling? Feels like ewers did that a lot last season too? 

Hey Arch, throw it like a spaz into the dirt here. Yeah great work bud 

  • Haha 3
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, chitown bevo said:

Sure Arch was awful but the garbage 4th and goal QB sneak was Sark. Big game requires your best play, the one your team practiced in the off-season, the one your player enjoy running because it's deceptive etc. Chris Petersen had them John Mackovik had one and many others but apparently not Sark the so called offensive guru 

What was going through my mind, that QB sneak could have got Arch hurt.  He hadn't played great the whole game and was obviously nervous.  

Edited by Brandywine
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

To put it simply, I don't want to see another QB sneak at the goal line again this year. Yeah, it will probably work against shit competition, but it won't when it matters. 

We've got a month to work on a jumbo package handoff to a RB. Figure it out. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

To put it simply, I don't want to see another QB sneak at the goal line again this year. Yeah, it will probably work against shit competition, but it won't when it matters. 

We've got a month to work on a jumbo package handoff to a RB. Figure it out. 

 

I cannot for the life of me understand why every team isn’t putting together a tush push package. 

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

Arch Manning is big enough and we've recruited well enough at O line to where we should be able to sneak it in inside the 1. 

Sure. But when you have 5 guys overtop of your center and your run into that. Defense wins every time. They completely sold out there any other play and satya could have scored 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1

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...