Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 25.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
On 4/30/2025 at 6:12 PM, Irish Wrist Watch said:

So, in retrospect, Sark almost pulled off a miracle. His choke in the last series was more egregious than Quinn's. 

Mid season Sark decided that Quinn could get back to 100% or so and take us to the promise land. That never happened. He also decided, perhaps the biggest factor in going with Quinn, was that he owed it to him to help in the NFL draft. We saw how that turned out. I wonder if Sark learned his lesson.

Seems pretty clear now that he should have moved heaven and earth to get Manning more playing time mid-season thru to the end, even if it meant going with two QBs. Manning was the guy to get us past Georgia and OSU. What a team that was. What a defense. What a cinderella season it would have been had a raw Arch Manning brought home the bacon. Can you imagine the impact on recruiting?

Wonder if Sark learned anything from it. Feels like Quinn was so mediocre mid-season that Sark decided to give him maximum snaps at Manning's expense. Big fucking mistake. Oldest mistake in the book - letting your backup sit when he could be getting quality reps. Damn.

IIRC, This was one of the things discussed when Sark came to Texas.

 

the man LOATHES changing QBs. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Was Ewers being pulled against UGA last year the first time Sark has done that here (and he went back in in the third quarter)? I think by the time Casey Thompson came in for Card against Arkansas in 2022 that game was already over.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Was Ewers being pulled against UGA last year the first time Sark has done that here (and he went back in in the third quarter)? I think by the time Casey Thompson came in for Card against Arkansas in 2022 that game was already over.

It was. I remember thinking Quinn had the yips and needed some time to cool off. Spotlight was a bit too bright for Arch though and I understood why Sark put Quinn back out there.

Posted
14 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

IIRC, This was one of the things discussed when Sark came to Texas.

 

the man LOATHES changing QBs. 

Because he was a QB. He knows what getting pulled can do to a guy's confidence and mindset. He isn't going to pull his starter unless he knows either (1) the guy he's replacing the starter with is better, or (2) the guy getting pulled needs a hard reset. He pulled Card against Arkansas because Card lost the job. Thompson was clearly the better QB at that point and that's how it stayed. He pulled Ewers against UGA and when he went back in, Ewers suddenly played better. Ewers needed a hard reset. Those are the two times I can remember Sark pulling the QB at Texas, and it was the right call both times. I can understand the people criticizing Ewers, but the people who think they know better than Sark about which QB to play get a massive Lucille Bluth-style eyeroll from me. 

Sark is fallible just like anyone. Maybe he was too loyal to Ewers or worrying too much about keeping his locker room together. But when I see which posters in this thread are convinced that Sark is wrong, it bolsters my faith in the man. Because those posters are, for the most part, either pathologically miserable or just plain stupid. "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign - that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted

Getting thrown to the wolves too early can permanently destroy a QB'S confidence. It's a far fetched scenario but imagine if you will a 5-star freshman QB having to play meaningful snaps against an elite defense coached by Nick Saban in his prime. Chances are he'd never be the same afterwards and would be lucky to find a starting position at some garbage G5 program.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, Park Gothic said:

Because he was a QB. He knows what getting pulled can do to a guy's confidence and mindset. He isn't going to pull his starter unless he knows either (1) the guy he's replacing the starter with is better, or (2) the guy getting pulled needs a hard reset. He pulled Card against Arkansas because Card lost the job. Thompson was clearly the better QB at that point and that's how it stayed. He pulled Ewers against UGA and when he went back in, Ewers suddenly played better. Ewers needed a hard reset. Those are the two times I can remember Sark pulling the QB at Texas, and it was the right call both times. I can understand the people criticizing Ewers, but the people who think they know better than Sark about which QB to play get a massive Lucille Bluth-style eyeroll from me. 

Sark is fallible just like anyone. Maybe he was too loyal to Ewers or worrying too much about keeping his locker room together. But when I see which posters in this thread are convinced that Sark is wrong, it bolsters my faith in the man. Because those posters are, for the most part, either pathologically miserable or just plain stupid. "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign - that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Posted before, but Klatt’s podcast on the UGA game, right after, said (paraphrase) “There are two reasons to pull a quarterback- to replace him, or to give him a chance to collect himself. Sark’s pulling of Ewers was the latter, but…each of Sark, Ewers and Manning knew that if Manning played well, Ewers wasn’t going back in.”

Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Park Gothic said:

Because he was a QB. He knows what getting pulled can do to a guy's confidence and mindset. He isn't going to pull his starter unless he knows either (1) the guy he's replacing the starter with is better, or (2) the guy getting pulled needs a hard reset. He pulled Card against Arkansas because Card lost the job. Thompson was clearly the better QB at that point and that's how it stayed. He pulled Ewers against UGA and when he went back in, Ewers suddenly played better. Ewers needed a hard reset. Those are the two times I can remember Sark pulling the QB at Texas, and it was the right call both times. I can understand the people criticizing Ewers, but the people who think they know better than Sark about which QB to play get a massive Lucille Bluth-style eyeroll from me. 

Sark is fallible just like anyone. Maybe he was too loyal to Ewers or worrying too much about keeping his locker room together. But when I see which posters in this thread are convinced that Sark is wrong, it bolsters my faith in the man. Because those posters are, for the most part, either pathologically miserable or just plain stupid. "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign - that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

I’m not questioning Sark call of sticking with Quinn, I’m simply saying “this was part of the deal.”

 

 

furthermore, I’m fully on board with Sark. If the dude cut every player tomorrow, I’d shrug and say “Sark knows what he’s doing”.

 

He has soundly proved my initial read of him (as being a middling HC) to be completely incorrect. He’s a damn fine HC. Easily our best since Mack. Win an MNC, and I’ll say he’s better (and despite his massive flaws, I’ll always love Mack). Arguably already the 3rd-4th best HC in Texas history, despite only having been here for 4 seasons so far.

Edited by lilMAC25
Clarity
  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Getting thrown to the wolves too early can permanently destroy a QB'S confidence. It's a far fetched scenario but imagine if you will a 5-star freshman QB having to play meaningful snaps against an elite defense coached by Nick Saban in his prime. Chances are he'd never be the same afterwards and would be lucky to find a starting position at some garbage G5 program.

Nice allusion.  Counterpoint (but in the pros):  Troy Aikman went 1-15 in his first season with the Cowboys.

Not that I disagree that Sark might have been loathe to throw Arch out there, I think that's a big part of his decision, whether Arch was ready or not.

Posted
1 minute ago, statsman said:

Posted before, but Klatt’s podcast on the UGA game, right after, said (paraphrase) “There are two reasons to pull a quarterback- to replace him, or to give him a chance to collect himself. Sark’s pulling of Ewers was the latter, but…each of Sark, Ewers and Manning knew that if Manning played well, Ewers wasn’t going back in.”

I agree with Klatt, with a caveat. I think Sark knew how things were going to go. But I don't think he wastes learning opportunities, and I think pulling Ewers gave him a chance to let Ewers reset but to also show Arch (and the fanbase) that Arch wasn't ready for prime time. That Arch isn't some savior. He's literally saying "let me show you why you're not starting. You don't want this smoke week in and week out." I'm sure he has it in the back of his mind that Arch's legs or deep ball might turn the tide, but that was unlikely and would have been a pretty nice problem to have were it true.

If you remember the spring game a couple of years ago, Sark did the same thing - he put a freshman Manning in against our ones on defense. The deck was stacked against him and Manning struggled, understandably. But it also showed everyone that Arch wasn't going to come in and take the job from Ewers. With Ewers, Murphy, and Manning on the roster, that room could have fallen apart in 2023, but it didn't. I will admit there were times that I wish Sark would pull Ewers - most notably the Kentucky game. But I'm capable of cooling off and letting it go. I might second guess my betters, but you have to be able to move on when they show you they're right. 

Much of this is speculation on my part and I will fully admit that i wear burnt orange glasses. But the guy knows how to manage that room. Scottish timepiece or whatever his name is definitely doesn't. 

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

I think pulling Ewers gave him a chance to let Ewers reset but to also show Arch (and the fanbase) that Arch wasn't ready for prime time. That Arch isn't some savior. He's literally saying "let me show you why you're not starting. You don't want this smoke week in and week out." I'm sure he has it in the back of his mind that Arch's legs or deep ball might turn the tide, but that was unlikely and would have been a pretty nice problem to have were it true.

This is crazy talk. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, statsman said:

Posted before, but Klatt’s podcast on the UGA game, right after, said (paraphrase) “There are two reasons to pull a quarterback- to replace him, or to give him a chance to collect himself. Sark’s pulling of Ewers was the latter, but…each of Sark, Ewers and Manning knew that if Manning played well, Ewers wasn’t going back in.”

I agree 100%. If you are in the camp that Manning should have become the starter last year, Sark gave him that opportunity. Sure, it was under extremely challenging circumstances, but the door was opened.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Getting thrown to the wolves too early can permanently destroy a QB'S confidence. It's a far fetched scenario but imagine if you will a 5-star freshman QB having to play meaningful snaps against an elite defense coached by Nick Saban in his prime. Chances are he'd never be the same afterwards and would be lucky to find a starting position at some garbage G5 program.

Counterpoint: Trevor Lawrence. He played very well as a freshman and then went on to beat Bama in the National Championship game the following year. I think it's old school to think that the freshman QBs can't handle the pressure. If they are as talented as Arch and the QB1 is holding the team back, I think it makes sense to give the freshman an accelerated development plan.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

I agree 100%. If you are in the camp that Manning should have become the starter last year, Sark gave him that opportunity. Sure, it was under extremely challenging circumstances, but the door was opened.  

Sure. In a similar situation, 20 years earlier, in an ESPN gameday bout with peak KSU, RS freshman VY came in and did just enough to lead the Horns to victory (along with an excellent defense). I was there- Texas didn’t light up the scoreboard, but the offense was clearly better with VY in than with Mock at QB, even though it was clearly a more limited offense. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Counterpoint: Trevor Lawrence. He played very well as a freshman and then went on to beat Bama in the National Championship game the following year. I think it's old school to think that the freshman QBs can't handle the pressure. If they are as talented as Arch and the QB1 is holding the team back, I think it makes sense to give the freshman an accelerated development plan.

I think Quinn Ewers is quite a bit better than Kelly Bryant was.

Posted
1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Imagine thinking Sark put Arch in to teach him and the fanbase a lesson. 

1) People do things for multiple reasons. Sometimes you do something that will accomplish an desired outcome and maybe achieves secondary and tertiary desired outcomes, despite being less likely. As I noted, the man has done it before in other situations. 

2) I fully admit that I am speculating and wearing my Bevo-lenses. Don't miss the forest for the trees. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, statsman said:

Sure. In a similar situation, 20 years earlier, in an ESPN gameday bout with peak KSU, RS freshman VY came in and did just enough to lead the Horns to victory (along with an excellent defense). I was there- Texas didn’t light up the scoreboard, but the offense was clearly better with VY in than with Mock at QB, even though it was clearly a more limited offense. 

I was there too.  I remember Vince twisting his ankle and it looked Gumby-esque.  He ended up running for something like 75 yards.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, statsman said:

Sure. In a similar situation, 20 years earlier, in an ESPN gameday bout with peak KSU, RS freshman VY came in and did just enough to lead the Horns to victory (along with an excellent defense). I was there- Texas didn’t light up the scoreboard, but the offense was clearly better with VY in than with Mock at QB, even though it was clearly a more limited offense. 

I remember it well.  The complexity of the offense doesn't mean much when the other team can't really stop it.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

I think Quinn Ewers is quite a bit better than Kelly Bryant was.

Kelly Bryant led Clemson to a 12-2 record and a playoff berth, similar to what Quinn did for us. Both of them benefited from a strong team around them, not the other way around. It was bold of Dabo to replace an experienced Bryant with an unproven freshman. Saban did the same with Tua. That's why these two coaches had so much success.

Posted
38 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

I agree 100%. If you are in the camp that Manning should have become the starter last year, Sark gave him that opportunity. Sure, it was under extremely challenging circumstances, but the door was opened.  

It was a real, real short window.

When he did have a full game Arch performed great. Putting someone in for 2 series against a top competitor, isn’t much of an opportunity.

And the person Sark replaced him with in the 3rd, didn't end up prevailing that time or the next. 

So.. I have and continue to maintain, at the time and now, Sark chose for a lot of different reason to sacrifice the longer term future of the program for short term reasons. 

There are a ton of factors involved in Sark's choice. We will never know all of those reasons, but he is responsible for that choice and other choices not to use Arch in more developmental ways post Georgia1. I honestly put way more of the blame on Sark than Ewers, and I would hope most would understand why.

Posted
1 hour ago, Vertigo said:

It is probably as simple as: We know Arch is better than Quinn, but Arch wasn't ready last season. 

I think in hindsight it's a legitimate question that if Ewers had gone to the draft, and Arch was QB from the day after the loss to Washington, we would have been a better team overall by the end of the season. 

But you can't blame Sark for sticking with Ewers. That's a 3rd year starter you're expecting to take the next step. The problem was he is just never able to regain his early season level after his early season injury. 3 straight years it didn't happen. 

Easy to see in hindsight, tough to forecast that. 

Posted
37 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

The difference between Kelly Bryant and Quinn Ewers is about 26 picks.

Josep_Maria_Garc%C3%ADa.jpg

I was ready to jump on you about this, but you're not that far off. Kelly Bryant threw only 10 fewer picks than Ewers, but that was also in fewer attempts and more seasons at QB. So your point is valid. 

Kelly Bryant - 14 picks / 762 attempts (5 seasons)

Quinn Ewers - 24 picks / 737 attempts (3 seasons)

Posted
Just now, Park Gothic said:

Josep_Maria_Garc%C3%ADa.jpg

I was ready to jump on you about this, but you're not that far off. Kelly Bryant threw only 10 fewer picks than Ewers, but that was also in fewer attempts and more seasons at QB. So your point is valid. 

Kelly Bryant - 14 picks / 762 attempts (5 seasons)

Quinn Ewers - 24 picks / 737 attempts (3 seasons)

Image of I told Worm you can't lose what you don't put in the middle.

Image of - Deal 'em. - But you can't win much either.

76 total TD's to 48 total TD's.  Stupid comparison by stupid posters.  Run of the mill football board dipshittery. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

You dumbass retards talking about interceptions. 

If your joke was that Bryant didn't get drafted, then I regret giving you too much credit. 

That's on me. I should have known better. 

Posted
3 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

There are a ton of factors involved in Sark's choice. We will never know all of those reasons, but he is responsible for that choice and other choices not to use Arch in more developmental ways post Georgia1. I honestly put way more of the blame on Sark than Ewers, and I would hope most would understand why.

Sark didn’t want the attention that came with Arch being the starter. It’s a safer bet to let Quinn play out the rest of the season if him and Arch seemed comparable in their skill level. Especially with Quinn being a 3rd year starter with CFP experience. It keeps the media focused on the Quinn vs Arch debate and away from Sark’s personal life with Ms. Loreal. They decided to divorce prior to the season starting and then reconciled and had a baby in April without the public noticing she was pregnant. Sark didn’t want the extra spotlight on him plus the added scrutiny on Quinn if he was pulled for Arch. In hindsight it just seemed easier to let Quinn play out the rest of the season, let Sark pull his personal life together behind the scenes, then let Arch and the team have their coming out party start in the offseason once Quinn officially moved on to the NFL. 

  • Drool 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Sark didn’t want the attention that came with Arch being the starter. It’s a safer bet to let Quinn play out the rest of the season if him and Arch seemed comparable in their skill level. Especially with Quinn being a 3rd year starter with CFP experience. It keeps the media focused on the Quinn vs Arch debate and away from Sark’s personal life with Ms. Loreal. They decided to divorce prior to the season starting and then reconciled and had a baby in April without the public noticing she was pregnant. Sark didn’t want the extra spotlight on him plus the added scrutiny on Quinn if he was pulled for Arch. In hindsight it just seemed easier to let Quinn play out the rest of the season, let Sark pull his personal life together behind the scenes, then let Arch and the team have their coming out party start in the offseason once Quinn officially moved on to the NFL. 

Do you actually know any of this? Otherwise, I gotta say, it sounds like knitting-circle speculation.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

What game was it that was essentially over and Ewers was still playing bobbling around on one good leg? Yeah Sark really really did not want to make that switch. Especially late in the season.

  • Like 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, mwaadeeb said:

Do you actually know any of this? Otherwise, I gotta say, it sounds like knitting-circle speculation.

The couple publicly announced they were jointly filing for divorce in July 2024, they reconciled in November 2024, then she announced she had a baby in April 2025 and the public had no clue she was pregnant. 

Posted
Just now, MrBig said:

The couple publicly announced they were jointly filing for divorce in July 2024, they reconciled in November 2024, then she announced she had a baby in April 2025 and the public had no clue she was pregnant. 

I think his question was less about the beat-by-beat facts and more about the idea that Sark was milking the QB controversy to avoid public scrutiny on his personal life.

Because that was the part that sounded a little kooky to me. No judgment though. Plenty of other people in this thread have had worse opinions. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Imagine the meltdown if arch took over after Georgia and lost a couple more games because of freshman mistakes and we missed the playoffs. With are badass defense btw. The fallout of that would have been crazy.  Would this thread be better or worse now that I think about it 

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

I think his question was less about the beat-by-beat facts and more about the idea that Sark was milking the QB controversy to avoid public scrutiny on his personal life.

I’m not saying “Sark was milking the QB controversy” I’m just saying that Quinn wasn’t so bad to the point where he had to absolutely be pulled for Arch and then all of the spotlight is immediately on Sark and Texas because Arch is the new starting QB.

I believe Sark was cautious and let his 3rd year guy do his thing even though people like me were bitching about his performance because we wanted Quinn to be better. It wasn’t worth the risk to Quinn’s career and position on the team plus the added spotlight it would bring on Sark’s personal life to have Arch be the guy when Quinn helped get us near the top of the mountain two years in a row. In hindsight it seems better that Sark decided to start fresh with Arch as QB this year instead of the whirlwind it would cause replacing Quinn as a starter mid-season.

Posted

1.  I seriously doubt Sark's marital status had anything to do with who he went with as starting QB

2. Quinn had yet to get us "near the top of the mountain" the second time when this decision was being made

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Hookem10 said:

Imagine the meltdown if arch took over after Georgia and lost a couple more games because of freshman mistakes and we missed the playoffs. With are badass defense btw. The fallout of that would have been crazy.  Would this thread be better or worse now that I think about it 

That would have largely required multiple TDs by the opponents defense while the offense never scored more.  For multiple games.

From a 2nd year guy that has been educated on football his entire life.  On a team with an overall talent/experience advantage.

I’m not sure I’ve ever seen that.

Posted
1 hour ago, MrBig said:

The couple publicly announced they were jointly filing for divorce in July 2024, they reconciled in November 2024, then she announced she had a baby in April 2025 and the public had no clue she was pregnant. 

April babies conceived in July. Maybe some hate fuck in there somewhere? Come November, oops, pregnant... reconciliation starts. 

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

1.  I seriously doubt Sark's marital status had anything to do with who he went with as starting QB

Maybe Arch is Sark's wife's baby daddy?

  • Haha 1
Posted
7 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I was there too.  I remember Vince twisting his ankle and it looked Gumby-esque.  He ended up running for something like 75 yards.

i did not want to revisit the memory of that ankle twist

  • Like 1
Posted
I agree 100%. If you are in the camp that Manning should have become the starter last year, Sark gave him that opportunity. Sure, it was under extremely challenging circumstances, but the door was opened.  

If you think the bullshit snaps against Georgia were the opportunity, well, I’m not sure what to say. It’s not like he had snaps with the ones or a full week of prep as the starter.
Posted
14 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Nice allusion.  Counterpoint (but in the pros):  Troy Aikman went 1-15 in his first season with the Cowboys.

Not that I disagree that Sark might have been loathe to throw Arch out there, I think that's a big part of his decision, whether Arch was ready or not.

Troy Aikman didn’t win a fucking game his rookie year. He was pure trash.

When Troy wasn’t staring at his first option and probably throwing an interception, he was standing tall in the pocket and getting his shit packed and leaving the game with a concussion.

Steve Walsh won the one game that year and always looked more NFL ready than Troy. Walsh was obviously smarter and the game wasn’t too fast for him, but he didn’t have the physical attributes to be a top NFL QB.

If the Cowboys hadn’t brought in Norv Turner in 1991, Troy would never have been a Hall of Fame QB. Turner changed the offense to limit the damage of Troy’s weaknesses and highlight those strengths.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 hours ago, Napoleon said:

Troy Aikman didn’t win a fucking game his rookie year. He was pure trash.

The point is, it didn't destroy his career.  Some guys can deal with it, some can't.  How you tell beforehand, I don't know.  (Thanks for the correction on Troy's record.)

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...