Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 26.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
I have no idea if this is true or not, but it feels like so many more than that. 

Are we only calling them batted if the are slapped to the ground at the line of scrimmage? Or tipped and affected as well?
Posted
How are you tracking this stuff? Or are you Rain Man and just know it offhand. 

I mean, he could be just making it up and we’d never know. The guys that hate Quinn will neg him and say he’s full of shit, the guys that love Quinn will rep him and say he’s exactly right and it’s all someone else’s fault.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

Phillip rivers is 4 inches taller than Quinn Ewers. Even with a lower release he still releases higher than Quinn. 

 

 


 

 

 

His footwork and throw mechanics outside of delivery is superior to Ewers who can't consistently have good footwork to generate what he needs to throw with power, accuracy, and distance.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
1 hour ago, Texasborn91 said:

Arch is the truth

Based on what empirical evidence? Because Quinn sucks? All the people in here that think Arch is a better option right now are fucking morons. There is zero evidence but tons of emotion. Some are the worst fucking fans, they should go hide because they should be embarrassed. 

Posted
Just now, Longhornlove said:

Based on what empirical evidence? Because Quinn sucks? All the people in here that think Arch is a better option right now are fucking morons. There is zero evidence but tons of emotion. Some are the worst fucking fans, they should go hide because they should be embarrassed. 

He's an alpha chad, not a beta cuck like Quinn.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Based on what empirical evidence? Because Quinn sucks? All the people in here that think Arch is a better option right now are fucking morons. There is zero evidence but tons of emotion. Some are the worst fucking fans, they should go hide because they should be embarrassed. 

LOL Arch was a 1.000 recruit!

Wait . . .

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Ricky Butler said:

I feel like you were a drama major. 

Hits close to home. Miz Long followed up her Drama Majority with Law School. Well, and then back to Drama School with leading performer Gerry Spence.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Longhornlove said:

Based on what empirical evidence? Because Quinn sucks? All the people in here that think Arch is a better option right now are fucking morons. There is zero evidence but tons of emotion. Some are the worst fucking fans, they should go hide because they should be embarrassed. 

Bc he’s responsible for 13 TDS as the backup. Half as many as the starter. His HC thought he had a better chance to beat UGA than Quinn. He unlocks the deep ball in sarks offesne and isn’t just a screen merchant. Got a couple others but I’m good. 
 

The data is not in your favor. Emotion is where you live right now. 12-2 matters. But that’s on the back of an all time Texas defense. Quinn turns it over too much, has shitty footwork mechanics, and has a downfield hit rate that rivals that of a storm trooper with a blaster rifle. 

Edited by Texasborn91
  • Haha 2
Posted
15 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

Hits close to home. Miz Long followed up her Drama Majority with Law School. Well, and then back to Drama School with leading performer Gerry Spence.

Hey, not knocking it. I’m in the storytelling business. 
 

Just poking fun at the heavy handed Quinn analysis. 

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

Hey, not knocking it. I’m in the storytelling business. 
 

Just poking fun at the heavy handed Quinn analysis. 

Not taken as a knock. Image of Real Life imo.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

HC thought he had a better chance to beat UGA than Quinn

That isn't true for obvious reasons. If the coach believed that Arch would have finished out the game and been the starter the rest of the season. So, you think Sark is the holdup now, not Quinn. Interesting.

7 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

He unlocks the deep ball in sarks offesne and isn’t just a screen merchant. Got a couple others but I’m good. 

And has a propensity to throw into double and triple coverage

 

8 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

The data is not in your favor

Show your work, that isn't true at all. There is only speculation that Arch gives Texas a better chance to win any game that Quinn can't.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

That isn't true for obvious reasons. If the coach believed that Arch would have finished out the game and been the starter the rest of the season. So, you think Sark is the holdup now, not Quinn. Interesting.

And has a propensity to throw into double and triple coverage

 

Show your work, that isn't true at all. There is only speculation that Arch gives Texas a better chance to win any game that Quinn can't.

By stating he has half as many TDs as the starter, being more mobile, and having a demonstrably better deep ball proves my point. What game do we drop if arch is the starter the whole season? We overpowered Michigan. Quinn did his best to keep Aggie in the game. He over powered a hobbled Florida secondary. Arkansas was in the 100’s as a pass defense and Quinn did nothing to take advantage of it. In the SEC champ game Quinn should have thrown at least 2 more picks. Goes on and on. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If he was he'd be drafted in the 1st round like his peers in that category unlike Quinn. 

Way to miss the fucking point for the 1,000th time.  Think harder.

Posted
1 minute ago, Texasborn91 said:

By stating he has half as many TDs as the starter

Against whom and when has those TDs come against. Facts matter. Get ahold of yourself. Arch has a similar turnover rate to Quinn with a higher interceptable throw percentage.

Posted
26 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

His HC thought he had a better chance to beat UGA than Quinn.

How do you arrive at this conclusion?  A small part of one quarter is not the equivalent of the rest of the game.

Posted
26 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

Bc he’s responsible for 13 TDS as the backup. Half as many as the starter. His HC thought he had a better chance to beat UGA than Quinn. He unlocks the deep ball in sarks offesne and isn’t just a screen merchant. Got a couple others but I’m good. 
 

The data is not in your favor. Emotion is where you live right now. 12-2 matters. But that’s on the back of an all time Texas defense. Quinn turns it over too much, has shitty footwork mechanics, and has a downfield hit rate that rivals that of a storm trooper with a blaster rifle. 

With this defense constantly giving the ball right back to the offense, and with the best OL in probably 20 years, and the skill talent, in Sark's offense.... the numbers should be video game numbers. They ain't. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

Against whom and when has those TDs come against. Facts matter. Get ahold of yourself. Arch has a similar turnover rate to Quinn with a higher interceptable throw percentage.

9-2 vs 25-9? Your math doesn’t math right

Edited by Texasborn91
Posted
23 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

He missed his chance to get drafted high. His stock went down, and if he returns (hopefully at another school) it will only drop more.

Disagree.  If he finishes these last three games strong and plays like he did against Michigan for most of them - he's going to get drafted in Round 2-3.    There is a staggering amount of incompetence at evaluating QB's at the GM level in the NFL.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
23 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

How do you arrive at this conclusion?  A small part of one quarter is not the equivalent of the rest of the game.

I’ve already argued this with you. The fact it happened at all is the proof. Why argue anything different 

Posted
7 minutes ago, Texasborn91 said:

9-2 vs 25-9? Your math doesn’t math right

Two starts against shitty, shitty teams for one. Now go look up and calculate the % of interceptions per attempt. You decide to use TD to INT ratio, where did that come from?

Posted
1 hour ago, Texasborn91 said:

His HC thought he had a better chance to beat UGA than Quinn.

A lot of really dumb things have been said by Texas fans in this manufactured saga but this might take the cake.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Longhornlove said:

Based on what empirical evidence? Because Quinn sucks? All the people in here that think Arch is a better option right now are fucking morons. There is zero evidence but tons of emotion. Some are the worst fucking fans, they should go hide because they should be embarrassed. 

Holy projection, Batman. 

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

All the people in here that think Arch is a better option right now are fucking morons.

We have been struggling at the QB position off and on for most of the season. Right now, Arch Manning is the betting favorite to win the 2025 Heisman. It is an extremely defensible position to think we'd be better on offense right now with Arch. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Texasborn91 said:

I’ve already argued this with you. The fact it happened at all is the proof. Why argue anything different 

I'm sorry, I don't remember discussing anything with you.  If Sark's benching of Quinn for less than half a quarter is evidence that he thought Quinn couldn't win the game, what does the fact that he benched Arch say about his thoughts on Arch?

I mean, this is really simple stuff you are failing to grasp.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
30 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Right now, Arch Manning is the betting favorite to win the 2025 Heisman. It is an extremely defensible position to think we'd be better on offense right now with Arch. 

So Arch is Quinn 2024?

Great.  Now you tell us.

  • Haha 2
Posted
33 minutes ago, Red Five said:

We have been struggling at the QB position off and on for most of the season. Right now, Arch Manning is the betting favorite to win the 2025 Heisman. It is an extremely defensible position to think we'd be better on offense right now with Arch. 

How many first time starting QBs have won that award? The Manning name carries a lot of weight. What other evidence do they have to support that, none other than degenerate gamblers doing what they do, betting on shit. Doesn't mean he won't, doesn't mean he won't be a good QB next year. Where is the evidence Sark has played players that he thought didn't give us the best chance to win. Let me guess, the only evidence is Quinn playing with a sprained ankle with the game firmly in control. 

Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

How many first time starting QBs have won that award? The Manning name carries a lot of weight. What other evidence do they have to support that, none other than degenerate gamblers doing what they do, betting on shit. Doesn't mean he won't, doesn't mean he won't be a good QB next year. Where is the evidence Sark has played players that he thought didn't give us the best chance to win. Let me guess, the only evidence is Quinn playing with a sprained ankle with the game firmly in control. 

Cam Newton

johnny manziel

bryce young

Kyler Murray 

 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Cam Newton

johnny manziel

bryce young

Kyler Murray 

 

Now how many were heisman favorites the season before they were starters? Thanks for helping me prove another one of my points.

Posted
1 minute ago, Longhornlove said:

Now how many were heisman favorites the season before they were starters? Thanks for helping me prove another one of my points.

That would be hard to find as idk what gambling sites existed back then to find preseason odds. But if manning throws for around 4k yards and 30 touchdowns with some rushing touchdowns to show his last name will carry on the hype machine. But I was just answering the question of first year starters winning Heisman. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

That would be hard to find as idk what gambling sites existed back then to find preseason odds. But if manning throws for around 4k yards and 30 touchdowns with some rushing touchdowns to show his last name will carry on the hype machine. But I was just answering the question of first year starters winning Heisman. 

That's good, I wasn't being negative, literally thanks for giving that list. My point is out of those names, I'm 99% positive none of them were even pre-season favorites. I can't imagine any were even close. Bryce Young might have been on a short list but no way was he a favorite.

Posted

Point being, it's not like we've got people demanding Cole Lourd get all of Ewers' snaps. Wanting Manning to play more at this stage is entirely defensible, and you probably shouldn't be calling people "fucking morons" for thinking that.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

 and you probably shouldn't be calling people "fucking morons" for thinking that.

To be the starter yes, to play situational, no. If he gives us a better chance to win he would have been the starter a long time ago.

Posted
7 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Wanting Manning to play more at this stage is entirely defensible,

By the way, no need to imply that I said something that I didn't. My comment was as a starter. Pretty sure you knew exactly what I was talking about.

Posted
Just now, Longhornlove said:

By the way, no need to imply that I said something that I didn't. My comment was as a starter. Pretty sure you knew exactly what I was talking about.

Fine. Starter. Whatever, the point is the exact same. 

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...