Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
10 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I think it's fair to believe that Sark is just stubborn. He has had a succession plan at QB with Ewers ---> Arch and as long as we're winning, he's gonna stick with it. 

I think it's a Mack Brown scares you death situation.

  • Replies 26.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
On 11/21/2024 at 10:07 AM, Longhornlove said:

What is amazing is people think starting a RS Freshman over a RS Junior with 3 years experience who won you the first conference title in forever and a playoff birth last year is what is going to get us over the top. You can't make this shit up.

You have bent over backwards to do the exact opposite, what is your excuse?

Yeah, I think playing Arch just trades one set of problems for another.  Arch may indeed be better, but he may also play like a freshman.

And, as Derka said, I have always suspected that "the deal" with the Manning family is that Arch would not start until next year, as everyone in on that deal is sold on the RS-Fr development curve that was standard before the portal.

Posted

No coach in the NCAA is going to bench a 3-year starter for a road game at a big rival with the conference championship game on the line unless that starter is physically unable to play the game. I’m not repping for Quinn and I have grave doubts about us winning with him in College Station, but Sark is doing what any other coach would do. Arch is mature beyond his years and our future, but no coach is going to put him in that position unless there is no choice. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

At this point Sark has had two years to get Arch, by almost all accounts 5-star material, ready. If he isn't ready, that is quite an indictment of our supposed QB-guru HFBC. Much more of an indictment than the inability to keep a freshly re-injured starter as the guy. Is Arch such a huge recruiting and development miss that he can't outplay an injured pocket passer who lacked a credible long-ball threat before getting hurt? Don't let the CCG or CFP be Arch's first tough start.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

I didn’t say he was struggling in practice. I said “maybe”. I didn’t say he shouldn’t play. I simply refuted your point that sark is being stubborn. Maybe he is maybe he isn’t. You said he definitely is. You’re the only one trying drawing a firm conclusion about the situation with no clear evidence. I’m not. 

We have some evidence of Sark being stubborn. I think the majority of Texas fans thought Ewers looked almost unplayable at one point yesterday due to his injury and expected Arch to at least give him a spell. But he stuck with Quinn for every single snap. He doesn't want any controversy. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
20 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

However, those generally asking for Arch over Ewers regardless of injury have no idea what Sark is seeing in practice from Arch. For all we know he’s really not ready. Maybe that’s why he didn’t put in Arch. 

I’ve been critical of Quinn, but we are at the point where if he is healthy enough to play, he is the starter. If Quinn is hurt but Arch can’t start because he’s “not ready” then what the fuck is Sark doing with his QBs? If Arch isn’t ready after 2 years in Sark’s system while Quinn is regressing in Year 3, what the hell is Sark teaching his guys in practice? 

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

We have some evidence of Sark being stubborn. I think the majority of Texas fans thought Ewers looked almost unplayable at one point yesterday due to his injury and expected Arch to at least give him a spell. But he stuck with Quinn for every single snap. He doesn't want any controversy. 

I actually agree with you that it seems like he was being stubborn. I was begging for Arch to come in during the game. But that’s why I’m saying maybe there’s something we aren’t seeing. To your point, when Arch was in games earlier this year, he looked generally pretty good, but did have a few spaz moments. Maybe Sark is seeing more of those spaz moments in practice. I don’t know. It was really weird that he didn’t put him in for at least a series. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, MrBig said:

I’ve been critical of Quinn, but we are at the point where if he is healthy enough to play, he is the starter. If Quinn is hurt but Arch can’t start because he’s “not ready” then what the fuck is Sark doing with his QBs? If Arch isn’t ready after 2 years in Sark’s system while Quinn is regressing in Year 3, what the hell is Sark teaching his guys in practice? 

Exactly.   Quinn and arch were both unanimous 5 stars.   Can’t throw card or Thompson under the bus now sark

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

I think it's fair to believe that Sark is just stubborn. He has had a succession plan at QB with Ewers ---> Arch and as long as we're winning, he's gonna stick with it. 

I have this suspicion, unprovable, that Sark develops expectations of players from practice, etc.  I think he becomes incredibly frustrated when they don't perform to his expectations.

That's probably not uncommon among coaches.  There are two alternatives when that happens, sit the player, or hope and help that they settle in and begin to perform to expectations.  Sark is clearly of the latter school of thought.

One of Quinn's shortcomings is that injuries seem to unduly affect him.  Compare him with Ehlinger, for example.  He doesn't seem to be of the "If I don't mind it don't matter" school of thought and it affects not just the particular thing his injury affects (throwing or running), but seemingly his whole mental makeup:  everything goes to shit.

And I think Sark's thinking, in keeping with the second, "play through it" option, is that Quinn really needs to learn to play through injuries.  For his own sake as QB1 and as a potential NFL prospect.

Whether that strategy is wholly valid or not is another question, but I think there's method to the madness.  Or the stubbornness, as it were.

Add in the Manning family "bargain" and it's that much worse.

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

No coach in the NCAA is going to bench a 3-year starter for a road game at a big rival with the conference championship game on the line unless that starter is physically unable to play the game. I’m not repping for Quinn and I have grave doubts about us winning with him in College Station, but Sark is doing what any other coach would do. Arch is mature beyond his years and our future, but no coach is going to put him in that position unless there is no choice. 

Counterpoint: Second half Quinn from yesterday is unplayable. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, MrBig said:

I’ve been critical of Quinn, but we are at the point where if he is healthy enough to play, he is the starter. If Quinn is hurt but Arch can’t start because he’s “not ready” then what the fuck is Sark doing with his QBs? 

Perhaps it's not a question of Arch not being ready, but rather just that he's not as ready as Quinn, long ball be damned.  There are a lot of moving parts to Sark's passing game, even if it's mostly screens and short/intermediate throws, many of which are physically demanding.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Not in the deep ball. He just doesn’t have a good feel for it. The intermediate throw down the middle of the field looked more like last year, that was one of the better signs from Quinn’s game yesterday 

Yeah. I was not asserting at all any improvement in the deep passes at all. Specifically I just saw some difference in the intermediate stuff, willingness to throw over the middle a lot more and a bit more poise/movement in the pocket.
Posted
4 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Counterpoint: Second half Quinn from yesterday is unplayable. 

I would have pulled him yesterday. Bobby speculated that Sark thought Quinn would be better able to get them lined up correctly for the running plays, and as long as the run was working, he could keep Quinn in. Turned out it worked for him/us. 
 

Next week is a different story. If there is any chance that Quinn can be an effective passer, Sark will give him the start. I expect Arch will get a lot of reps in practice this week, but if Quinn is at least 60% at game time, Sark will start him. 

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

The fact that Sark didn't bring in Arch when Quinn was clearly hurt yesterday is a very strong sign that he wants Quinn to start next week. 

 

Ehh.. Sark called a roll out with Quinn, so I am not sure Sark thought Quinn was that injured. DJ Campbell was limping around the 2nd half and the run game was fine. That said he may have already decided to end the game running and wanted give Quinn the ball in what may be his last start. 

Edited by Codaxx
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I think the bye is critical.  Plus, much hilarity would ensue if Texas, a program clearly not ready for the SEC meat grinder, won the conference in year 1.

Yes I still want to win, just saying for CFP it won't matter. We will need Ewers healthy

Posted
12 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Perhaps it's not a question of Arch not being ready, but rather just that he's not as ready as Quinn, long ball be damned.  There are a lot of moving parts to Sark's passing game, even if it's mostly screens and short/intermediate throws, many of which are physically demanding.

I understand what you’re trying to say. My point is that if a hobbled up 2nd half Quinn is still a better option than Arch to manage the game, that doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence about Arch’s development going into next year. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

If QE can’t go you just go full RPO with the added twist of Arch being able to pull ball and run it himself. 
 

I hope QE is ok but I would be getting Arch ready to go regardless as aggy loves the cheap shot on qb move. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, MrBig said:

I understand what you’re trying to say. My point is that if a hobbled up 2nd half Quinn is still a better option than Arch to manage the game, that doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence about Arch’s development going into next year. 

He's not. We've seen enough from Arch to know this. Sark is just being stubborn. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, BrazilHorn said:

If QE can’t go you just go full RPO with the added twist of Arch being able to pull ball and run it himself. 
 

I hope QE is ok but I would be getting Arch ready to go regardless as aggy loves the cheap shot on qb move. 

The injury may force Sark to have 2 game plans and split the QB work this week. By 2 game plans , I mean constructing game plans that highlight what each QB does well.. I would assume more play action shots with Arch. More quick game with A&M 

Posted
9 hours ago, Irish Wrist Watch said:

We've been waiting for Quinn the bounce back for about 4 weeks now. Manning combined with an opportunistic defense woulda put up fifty points against KY today. Right now it's "All Gas and One Flat Tire."

All gas, paraplegic driver

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

per OB:

 

Texas quarterback Quinn Ewers will undergo a precautionary MRI on Sunday after injuring his ankle against Kentucky, according to my sources. Everyone close to the situation is cautiously optimistic Ewers does not have any structural damage and will only need ankle treatment this week.

I like Quinn.  I am not in the camp that he sucks and is the liability from our being the shoe in CFP title winner.  But, given his injury, I don’t understand why Sark trotted him out in the 4th quarter.  We had a 15 play, 8 minute drive, every one of them a run.  Yeah, I know it is an easy job Quinn did on that drive.  But, Arch could have handed the ball off 15 teams and have Quinn prop his ankle up on the sidelines.

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

He didn’t throw one deep ball after his injury. He did throw his best pass after the injury though (Helm TD). 

And he fumbled snaps all over the place.

But I'm sure that had zero to do with the pain he was in.  Not a chance.

Posted
The fact that Sark didn't bring in Arch when Quinn was clearly hurt yesterday is a very strong sign that he wants Quinn to start next week. 
 

There’s no doubt at this point that Sark wants Quinn to be successful. Plus, it was SR night and Quinn went out. Possibly his last game at DKR. I think part of it is Sark being stubborn too.
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Cajun said:

And he fumbled snaps all over the place.

But I'm sure that had zero to do with the pain he was in.  Not a chance.

Either  Sark is the biggest moron in college football or you are projecting too much. I guess we will find out 

Edited by Codaxx
Posted
1 minute ago, 89Horn said:

I like Quinn.  I am not in the camp that he sucks and is the liability from our being the shoe in CFP title winner.  But, given his injury, I don’t understand why Sark trotted him out in the 4th quarter.  We had a 15 play, 8 minute drive, every one of them a run.  Yeah, I know it is an easy job Quinn did on that drive.  But, Arch could have handed the ball off 15 teams and have Quinn prop his ankle up on the sidelines.

I think Sark is very aware of the outside noise and wanted to make it very clear he doesn't want a QB controversy.

Also I believe @TwiceHorn made a good observation. Quinn needs to be able to play dinged up and tough it out. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
Just now, Codaxx said:

Either  Sark is the biggest moron in college football or you are projecting too much. I guess we will find out 

False dichotomies are so much fun aren't they?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, utexas8 said:

Arch is not going to start unless Quinn is really hurt or he shits the bed again.

Well, Quinn was objectively two of two yesterday.  He was playing decent, got hobbled in the 2nd quarter, then shit all over himself and really lathered it up in the 2nd half.  We just have a good enough defense and running game to not lose against a 4-7 team.

I’m not saying Arch should start if Quinn is healthy, but we aren’t winning another game if our offensive game plan is limited to what we were capable of in the 4th quarter yesterday.

Posted
22 minutes ago, mwaadeeb said:

I always laugh at "the deal" people think the Mannings negotiated with Sark about Arch's timeline. That's some silly shit.

you are wildly delusional if you don’t think that the manning family has been heavily involved with Sark in mapping out Arch’s timeline at Texas. arguably the main reason Arch chose Texas is the Manning family relationship with/trust in Sark. if you don’t think that the family and Sark have a game plan mapped out then you are absolutely the silly one.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
37 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

If there is any chance that Quinn can be an effective passer, Sark will start him.  I expect Arch will get a lot of reps in practice this week, but if Quinn is at least 60% at game time, Sark will start him. 

Yeah, with Ewers' banged up ankle, gotta get Arch ready to possibly start... 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Derka said:

you are wildly delusional if you don’t think that the manning family has been heavily involved with Sark in mapping out Arch’s timeline at Texas. arguably the main reason Arch chose Texas is the Manning family relationship with/trust in Sark. if you don’t think that the family and Sark have a game plan mapped out then you are absolutely the silly one.

You just said it yourself, Derk. "Trust." You don't hand over your kid, trusting the coach, and then say oh by the way this is when and how we want him to play. Silly.

At least I don't see rational parents like his doing it. I'm sure there's plenty of dickhead helicopter parents who try.

Edited by mwaadeeb
Posted
3 minutes ago, Cajun said:

False dichotomies are so much fun aren't they?

You just said Quinn was fumbling snaps all over the place, because of the pain. I didn’t see that in the game I watched, but if that was accurate Sark would be really stupid to play that Quinn 

Posted
59 minutes ago, BB65 said:

Sark refuses to have QB controversy. That is where the stubbornness begins and ends. He is NFL light. If the starter can play he’s the QB. 

As it should be.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I think Sark is very aware of the outside noise and wanted to make it very clear he doesn't want a QB controversy.

Also I believe @TwiceHorn made a good observation. Quinn needs to be able to play dinged up and tough it out. 

I can see that if the score was 21-20 and Kentucky had the ball on our 20 yard line driving to score a TD to take the lead.  Instead the D stopped them at our 43 at 4th and 20.  We took over running the ball after that.  
 

I think it is an overstatement to say a QB controversy would ensue if Arch came in for the 4th quarter.  And, playing dinged up is one thing.  Taking the chance of fucking up the ankle worse and risking not playing against your biggest rival for the chance to play in the SEC title game is quite another thing.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, mwaadeeb said:

You just said it yourself, Derk. "Trust." You don't hand over your kid, trusting the coach, and then say oh by the way this is when and how we want him to play.

….yes you do. are you joking and i’m failing to pick up on it or something? Arch Manning was the third ever 1.000 QB and is seen as the pied piper by many of his peers. he could have gone to any school he wanted to, do you seriously think that he and his family had zero input on how the coach plans to utilize him, particularly *this* family? the Mannings have always wanted Arch to redshirt, backup quinn for a year, and then take over in 2025. it’s not like this is even speculation, this is known. but that seems silly to you? the royal family of quarterbacks has the no.1 qb recruit in the nation heading for college and you think its silly that they would have input on how Arch gets used?

it’s like every day someone tries to set a new bar for most bizarre take in this thread

Edited by Derka
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Derka said:

….yes you do. what are you even talking about? Arch Manning was the third ever 1.000 QB and is seen as the pied piper by many of his peers. he could have gone to any school he wanted to, do you seriously think that he and his family had zero input on how the coach plans to utilize him, particularly *this* family? the Mannings have always wanted Arch to redshirt, backup quinn for a year, and then take over in 2025. it’s not like this is even speculation, this is known. 

it’s like every day someone tries to set a new bar for most bizarre take in this thread

Settle down kid. Did I say "zero input?" 

Posted
5 minutes ago, mwaadeeb said:

You just said it yourself, Derk. "Trust." You don't hand over your kid, trusting the coach, and then say oh by the way this is when and how we want him to play. Silly.

At least I don't see rational parents like his doing it. I'm sure there's plenty of dickhead helicopter parents who try.

Imagine this family telling an NFL franchise not to draft one of them, because they wouldn't come there and take the $55MM contact as a rookie. Would that be silly?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Codaxx said:

You just said Quinn was fumbling snaps all over the place, because of the pain. I didn’t see that in the game I watched, but if that was accurate Sark would be really stupid to play that Quinn 

I think it is possible the fumbled/bobbled snaps were not directly because of pain but, because he couldn't move as quickly, he was getting ahead of himself.  he started turning his head before he had the ball.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

I think it is possible the fumbled/bobbled snaps were not directly because of pain but, because he couldn't move as quickly, he was getting ahead of himself.  he started turning his head before he had the ball.

He had one dropped snap. He hurt himself late 1Q/early 2Q.. Probably stiffened up at half, but 1 fumbled snap in like 40-50 snaps isn’t “all over the place”. The hyperbole is reaching peak Surly levels early this morning 

Edited by Codaxx
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

I think it is possible the fumbled/bobbled snaps were not directly because of pain but, because he couldn't move as quickly, he was getting ahead of himself.  he started turning his head before he had the ball.

Yeah and if he had been a bit lighter on his feet on that strip/score, he might have sidestepped the guy that tipped the ball when he had it low.  He went kind of nuts after that overthinking everything.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Slacks said:

Imagine this family telling an NFL franchise not to draft one of them, because they wouldn't come there and take the $55MM contact as a rookie. Would that be silly?

It'd be less silly than demanding input after they drafted him.

Posted
1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

This is an excellent point. If we don't need to win in Collie Station for CFP purposes, I might even go so far as to argue that it letting Arch start would be worth it for the dividends it will pay next season.

Built in excuse if we lose. “Texas played without their starting QB”

lulz 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Codaxx said:

He had one dropped snap. He hurt himself late 1Q/early 2Q.. Probably stiffened up at half, but 1 fumbled snap in like 40-50 snaps isn’t “all over the place”. 

I wasnt commenting on the all over the place just why I think it happened a few times.

Posted
7 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

I think it is possible the fumbled/bobbled snaps were not directly because of pain but, because he couldn't move as quickly, he was getting ahead of himself.  he started turning his head before he had the ball.

It appears as if Quinn doesn't handle things like adversity and change very well. Get him off schedule and he becomes a different QB. 

But hey, when he's 100% and has clean pockets with plenty of time to throw and open receivers downfield, he's really good. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
….yes you do. are you joking and i’m failing to pick up on it or something? Arch Manning was the third ever 1.000 QB and is seen as the pied piper by many of his peers.


No, he wasn’t. He wasn’t even the #1 QB in his class. (Please note that I agree with you on th rest of this matter.)
Posted
7 minutes ago, mwaadeeb said:

It'd be less silly than demanding input after they drafted him.

every single recruit who has ever been recruited to any school ever has mapped out a plan for how they will be used by the HC/team. this has never been more true than when Arch Manning, the heir to the Manning Dynasty, chose his college and his college head coach. to think that that family is just sitting at home with their fingers crossed, oblivious to what Sark’s plans are for Arch is wild. a huge part of us landing Arch was our ability and willingness to go along with what the Manning family wants for Arch.

again, this is truly one of the most bizarre takes i’ve ever seen.

  • Hook 'Em 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...