Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

It seems rather short-sighted to insist a specific player somehow start being able to execute your plans. There would seem to be two better alternatives: (1) replace the player with one who can execute your plan; (2) change your plan to one that your player can actually execute. And/or "why not both?"

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

It seems rather short-sighted to insist a specific player somehow start being able to execute your plans. There would seem to be two better alternatives: (1) replace the player with one who can execute your plan; (2) change your plan to one that your player can actually execute. And/or "why not both?"

Stop being reasonable! There is no room for such behavior here.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

You're incorrect. Against Kentucky we went back to the complex blocking scheme rather than simple down blocking, which given our OL completely fucked our running game. So, knowning we couldn't run, which is key to Sarks offense they started blizting and putting more pressure on Arch. We also ran the WR routes that took longer to develop with a longer drop. Thereby increasing the time for the play to develop while there was less time to do so.

You want to blame a single player. Tony Hills and I know wtf we're talking about, you're a clueless git. 

It amuses the shit out of me that when an entire offense doesn't work for shit, there are 44 yards rushing and a total of 179 yards nearly 1/2 the yards Toledo got 329 yards of offense on Kentucky's D, some idiots want to blame a single player on Texas offensive issues. It's so fucking idiotic. 

You may or may not know what you're talking...what I do know is trying to blame EVERYTHING on a coach who I still think knows his QB isn't doing what's asked of him as of yet, is just as silly as blaming Arch for all the problems(of course it's not all his fault...but he is part of the problem so far)

20 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

It seems rather short-sighted to insist a specific player somehow start being able to execute your plans. There would seem to be two better alternatives: (1) replace the player with one who can execute your plan; (2) change your plan to one that your player can actually execute. And/or "why not both?"

Almost sounds too easy.

15 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Stop being reasonable! There is no room for such behavior here.

Except you're not, you're placing it ALL at sarks feet when it's not that simple, and you know it.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Sark is in control of easy levers to pull that would give us a much more competitive look on offense than what we saw against Florida and Kentucky. Yes, even if he pulls those levers, we will continue to have struggles on offense, due to the personnel we have. But we saw in the second half of the OU game that we are capable of moving the ball better than the looks we gave UF/UK. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, BlackCat said:

Sark is in control of easy levers to pull that would give us a much more competitive look on offense than what we saw against Florida and Kentucky. Yes, even if he pulls those levers, we will continue to have struggles on offense, due to the personnel we have. But we saw in the second half of the OU game that we are capable of moving the ball better than the looks we gave UF/UK. 

I agree that Sark can put them into a better position to make plays than he did against Kentucky, but on our 2nd half scoring drives against OU, we converted 7 3rd downs and most of those were 5+.  Players made plays in that game.  Who knows how that game goes if Arch doesn't convert that 3rd down from inside the 10 (his best play of the season) or Wisner doesn't break a tackle on 3rd and long dump off to convert?  Hell our wide open TD was 3rd and 8 and while it was an easy throw, it was probably "harder" than several similarly wide open shots he missed last week.  Nobody at any position made a fucking play all night against Kentucky and there were still plenty to be had scheme flaws or not.

Edited by Skipper
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

The majority of Arch’s big time throws against OU were off of scrambles. Kentucky did a better job containing Arch but the Oline also did not help him with the shit show they were displaying in pass protection. As it pertains to the passing game against Kentucky, the small sample size of long developing plays actually had some success. The throw to Mosley in the 3rd quarter was nice and I think Moore had one as well. His wtf moments were on the quick, easy to read throws. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

It amuses the shit out of me that when an entire offense doesn't work for shit, there are 44 yards rushing and a total of 179 yards nearly 1/2 the yards Toledo got 329 yards of offense on Kentucky's D, some idiots want to blame a single player on Texas offensive issues. It's so fucking idiotic. 

Our RBs had half the number of carries against Kentucky that they did against OU. Half. Did Sark suddenly discount the running game? Of course not. Kentucky stacked the box, so we attacked them where they were weak - our receivers in single coverage. Arch had the yips and couldn't function at a collegiate level. All of your profanity and ad hominem attacks don't change the truth. 

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

Our RBs had half the number of carries against Kentucky that they did against OU. Half. Did Sark suddenly discount the running game? Of course not. Kentucky stacked the box, so we attacked them where they were weak - our receivers in single coverage. Arch had the yips and couldn't function at a collegiate level. All of your profanity and ad hominem attacks don't change the truth. 

You are directing your frustration a one player of 11. We didn't run the ball against Kentucky because early efforts were failing due to Sark using the complex blocking scheme and belief that he could return to the scheme that he had used all year prior to OU. 

The blame of your frustration is incorrectly placed on a single player. It should correctly be placed on the person deciding the scheme and plays which has already been clearly determined not to work. Arch can't execute the plan our head coach is demanding he play. Repeated efforts to force him to attempt to do so is not the players fault. That you're unable to grasp this simple reality makes it clear discussion with you on the topic is absolutely pointless, so I won't anymore. 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

Our RBs had half the number of carries against Kentucky that they did against OU. Half. Did Sark suddenly discount the running game? Of course not. Kentucky stacked the box, so we attacked them where they were weak - our receivers in single coverage. Arch had the yips and couldn't function at a collegiate level. All of your profanity and ad hominem attacks don't change the truth. 

Everyone gets a Trophy - Sark and his staff challenges

Start listening at 4:40. Paul Wadlington is laughing at you for this bad take. Are you breaking down film? If you disagree with him, feel free to show your work.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

Our RBs had half the number of carries against Kentucky that they did against OU. Half. Did Sark suddenly discount the running game? Of course not. Kentucky stacked the box, so we attacked them where they were weak - our receivers in single coverage. Arch had the yips and couldn't function at a collegiate level. All of your profanity and ad hominem attacks don't change the truth. 

You should listen to Tony Hills' rant.  While it made sense from a numbers stand point to pass against UK, the run game can't be abandoned.  He explains it way better than I can, but suffice to say, it needs to be part of Texas identity as a team that isn't afraid to be physical with the run game that hammers at the DL for 4 quarters, whether they stack the box or not.

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

Our RBs had half the number of carries against Kentucky that they did against OU. Half. Did Sark suddenly discount the running game? Of course not. Kentucky stacked the box, so we attacked them where they were weak - our receivers in single coverage. Arch had the yips and couldn't function at a collegiate level. All of your profanity and ad hominem attacks don't change the truth. 

Completely asinine. Texas had 2 runs to RBs in the first 18 plays. 

Outside zone can crease teams blitzing and stunting, like OU. You had this play which should have been a big winner, if not a TD. Clark misses a huge gain.

image.png.edd07603f87cd5d272e067af2af49136.png

 

image.png.471c6c80d52243a4ea911134abf28ebe.png

image.png.cba1344cfc09880149c661c2a0c72389.png

Clark cuts it up here, if he follows outside and cuts up off Robertson's ass this is a huge  play. Campbell would have 7 pinned inside. At that point it would have been Clark vs a Safety 1 on 1.. No reason to abandon the run. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

Our RBs had half the number of carries against Kentucky that they did against OU. Half. Did Sark suddenly discount the running game? Of course not. Kentucky stacked the box, so we attacked them where they were weak - our receivers in single coverage. Arch had the yips and couldn't function at a collegiate level. All of your profanity and ad hominem attacks don't change the truth. 

 Y'all need to listen to this man. Sark told you who he is as a playcaller and you aren't listening to what the coach is saying. @Josef Pwag isn't the enemy. He is telling you what the coach did and why he did it. If you disagree with this then send your complaints to Bellmont. Sark is a numbers dude and he will almost always take what the defense is giving him. Kentucky is primarily a zone team and they primarily played man to increase numbers in the run game. Again, I don't know why y'all are going after the poster. He is just telling you what happened. 

 

 

Edited by Thatguy
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

Completely asinine. Texas had 2 runs to RBs in the first 18 plays. 

Outside zone can crease teams blitzing and stunting, like OU. You had this play which should have been a big winner, if not a TD. Clark misses a huge gain.

image.png.edd07603f87cd5d272e067af2af49136.png

 

image.png.471c6c80d52243a4ea911134abf28ebe.png

image.png.cba1344cfc09880149c661c2a0c72389.png

Clark cuts it up here, if he follows outside and cuts up off Robertson's ass this is a huge  play. Campbell would have 7 pinned inside. At that point it would have been Clark vs a Safety 1 on 1.. No reason to abandon the run. 

What's most frustrating is we didn't abandon the run, Sark just didn't put running the ball in his script. Mind blowing. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

What's most frustrating is we didn't abandon the run, Sark just didn't put running the ball in his script. Mind blowing. 

Correct. Any gameplan that features a one-dimensional offense is putting the offense in a position to fail. This is the worst pass blocking unit in the P4 based on the numbers. Arch has a 87.8 PFF grade from a clean pocket. Unfortunately, he doesnt see many clean pockets. Getting 1 dimensional is a great way to ensure there are not clean pockets. 

Edited by Codaxx
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

What's most frustrating is we didn't abandon the run, Sark just didn't put running the ball in his script. Mind blowing. 

Some of us were of the thought Sark had a pitch count on Wisner and that's why the early part of the game was called the way it was. Sark's circle of trust is small, and I don't think he wants other dudes touching the ball. It's weird as hell but supported by him only running a select few receivers when he has highly touted ones on the bench. He is a weirdo about that. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

Some of us were of the thought Sark had a pitch count on Wisner and that's why the early part of the game was called the way it was. Sark's circle of trust is small, and I don't think he wants other dudes touching the ball. It's weird as hell but supported by him only running a select few receivers when he has highly touted ones on the bench. He is a weirdo about that. 

 

giphy-downsized.gif

  • Haha 1
Posted

“I want us to play free, go play football the way we know how to play,” said Sarkisian. “We need to execute better than we have in the run game and the pass game, but we need to play cohesively as a unit. Remember when you’d go to Grandma’s house, and her Christmas tree would light up, and there would be one blinking light on the tree that you couldn’t get your eyes off of. Let’s make sure all our lights are on, and let’s not be that blinking light on Saturday.”

10-4 good buddy! Clark is way ahead of ya. 

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
13 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

“I want us to play free, go play football the way we know how to play,” said Sarkisian. “We need to execute better than we have in the run game and the pass game, but we need to play cohesively as a unit. Remember when you’d go to Grandma’s house, and her Christmas tree would light up, and there would be one blinking light on the tree that you couldn’t get your eyes off of. Let’s make sure all our lights are on, and let’s not be that blinking light on Saturday.”10-4 good buddy! Clark is way ahead of ya

Which blinking light is the most troublesome? LG, C, or QB?

  • Haha 2
Posted
52 minutes ago, Irish Wrist Watch said:

Don't coaches look at game films anymore? Sounds like UK had a lot of weaknesses, none of which we were capable of exploiting. Sark's on thin ice, and I think he knows it. Look for a dramatic improvement in the offense tomorrow.

I Hope Please GIF

Posted
1 hour ago, CurlyDumps said:

Everyone gets a Trophy - Sark and his staff challenges

Start listening at 4:40. Paul Wadlington is laughing at you for this bad take. Are you breaking down film? If you disagree with him, feel free to show your work.

This was worth listening too, thank you.  I have no idea why after first year we went after and got very good high rated OL.  Back-up plan was mostly 3* JAGS. That is on Flood. PK needed a year to get players then his unit is greatness. Sark is a offense genius right? His unit has not been good.  The BS of not portal for OL is beyond stupid. If we don't portal OL end of year - fire every offensive coach. 

Flood and Milwee (what the hell does he do?) should be replaced. Get a real OC and OL line coach. The big human shouldn't mean the tall fatass project with low talent. We are Texas and I'd trade our OL for many lower level schools. It's terrible. 

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...