Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

Mmmm gonna have to disagree with you on some of these.

His pocket presence was OK and he didn't self-sack, which was good.  But he did rush several throws and ended up airmailing or throwing them into the dirt.

The long ball shot to Wingo was bad.  It was forced into coverage, it was under thrown, and it was to the inside where the coverage had leverage instead of the boundary where at worst it would have been incomplete.

I thought his pocket presence was already way better than Quinn and this was game 3 in a very difficult environment.

Long ball was a bad decision but accuracy seemed fine. Would've been caught if the second defender wasn't there.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Tex-19 said:

I thought his pocket presence was already way better than Quinn and this was game 3 in a very difficult environment.

Long ball was a bad decision but accuracy seemed fine. Would've been caught if the second defender wasn't there.

For the game or what are you talking about???

Posted
9 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:


Check the footwork and weird side arm on this throw. That is an easy throw, hit him in stride and we have a first down at like the 35 with a chance to tie. The kid was shook 

He side-armed a lot for some reason, I even commented on it to my friends live. That's not how he usually throws is it? And yeah that's bad footwork too

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

I thought his pocket presence was already way better than Quinn and this was game 3 in a very difficult environment.

Long ball was a bad decision but accuracy seemed fine. Would've been caught if the second defender wasn't there.

Are you referring to the 1st one he threw into double coverage, or the 2nd one he threw that got intercepted?

Posted

No doubt his pocket presence is way better, strength to hold the ball when sacked or tackled was way better but he’s got to get some touch on the ball for the short ones and accuracy on all of them or he’s going to have terrible games against great defenses. 

 

1 minute ago, Longboard Horn said:

IMG_4081.jpeg

Ouch that’s a good one 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Derka said:

there was a stretch (i want to say it was on the scoring drive) where three straight plays were quick, one-read plays:

1)end around to wingo

2)TE screen to endreis 

3)qb draw for arch

we played at tempo, the plays were quick hitting, and we weren’t asking arch to stand in the pocket all day trying to throw to his blanketed wrs when we can see that he’s struggling to throw the ball accurately. why we didn’t run offense like that earlier/more often i cannot explain, but it baffles me that people who watched that game think that arch let us down more than sark did.

This is a fine take. But it’s ok to be concerned about both of them. I can only think Sark expected Arch to settle in and find his accuracy and rhythm running what they planned. Clearly blew that call. There’s also the matter of Arch having his success when tOSU’s defense was clearly not fresh, and quite possibly against a shifted late game defensive plan from Patricia, so how much of the success was because of those factors. 

Posted

I didn’t expect Arch to be great and thought he would have a couple of interceptions but he would have a few big plays to offset rookie mistakes.  He was awful. We just don’t seem to develop QBs well with the QB whisperer. 
 

its early and I think he will get better but I’m seeing much better qb play from first time starters across the board. It’s frustrating.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Yes, he missed some throws against one of the best defenses in the country and in maybe the toughest place to play.

He also got it together and made two big throws in the 4th quarter.

Some of y'all need to remember that Colt McCoy set our school record for picks before being a two-time Heisman runner-up.

It takes games to learn how to play at game speed.  Arch will be fine.

Missed some throws? He missed every throw pretty much. I’m not off the Arch bus, but damn he was ass

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
Posted
17 minutes ago, Had Enough said:

Sark needs to re-evaluate. @Thatguy had a legit point last year.  And that 16-yard Jeremiah Smith completion highlights it.  Yes, moving targets enable run after catch.  They also offer opportunities for quick decision, easier throws.  We need more post up options  in this offense.

Sark did a poor job with his screen game.  There are options to take the thinking out of the QB.  When the offense struggles, there are options to get 5+ on 1st down that make the game easier.  Our drives in which we ran the reverse to Wingo and screen to Endries had success.  Surprise.

Yes. I tried to point that out last year but we were too busy hating on Ewers to hear it. Other teams have high completion percentages because their receiver run out and sit down in empty zones creating stationary throws. Sark doesn't like stationary targets and thus lower completion percentages. He needs to draw up more stationary targets and help his qb out. It's not hard. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Thatguy said:

Yes. I tried to point that out last year but we were too busy hating on Ewers to hear it. Other teams have high completion percentages because their receiver run out and sit down in empty zones creating stationary throws. Sark doesn't like stationary targets and thus lower completion percentages. He needs to draw up more stationary targets and help his qb out. It's not hard. 

He literally started the game with a designed pitch and throw, and Arch threw it 10 yards in front of the receiver in the dirt. How do you deal with that inaccuracy as a play caller? Can’t call a screen either as Arch missed that

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

I wouldn’t expect to see that from Arch again. It’s nice there are cupcakes coming for him to get reps at something slightly faster than practice speed.

When you outgain your opponent by 130 yards and have a clear advantage running the ball, you should win.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
46 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

The schedule worked out just fine for Ohio State and their freshman qb.  

Who do you think wins this game if it's played in Austin?

Posted
Just now, Laguna said:

Missed some throws? He missed every throw pretty much. I’m not off the Arch bus, but damn he was ass

That's a little harsh. He had some nice difficult throws too. The TD, the longer Endries play on the last drive, the broken up throw to Livingstone in the end zone (just perfectly covered), a seam to Wingo, and a few more. The problem was that he missed a bunch of the easy ones.

Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:


Check the footwork and weird side arm on this throw. That is an easy throw, hit him in stride and we have a first down at like the 35 with a chance to tie. The kid was shook 

Yes, that and the down before it were simply really bad throws.  He didn't get his feet under him and make a good throw.  Can't run from those throws.  Have to get his feet underneath them.  He was extremely inconsistent, no doubt and he will get better with reps.  

Edited by Patrick Bateman
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

Yes. I tried to point that out last year but we were too busy hating on Ewers to hear it. Other teams have high completion percentages because their receiver run out and sit down in empty zones creating stationary throws. Sark doesn't like stationary targets and thus lower completion percentages. He needs to draw up more stationary targets and help his qb out. It's not hard. 

Obviously I remember.  And believe I agreed at the time. No one is on all the time so you need certain play calls to make life easy.  The screen game can be that to an extent, but we didn’t try it much today.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

While he didn’t self sack like Ewers did, his footwork looked off at times. A couple of times he just threw off his back foot and tried to strong arm it. I’d like to think he’ll correct that with more game experience. On one hand, I definitely expected some struggles with his first road start being on the road in one of the toughest environments in the sport against the defending national champs, but I was still surprised how poor his footwork looked at times and some off his misses were just plain bad.

 

I do wish Sark would’ve mixed in more quick-hitter screens. We had a solid one to Wingo in the 2nd quarter, then went back to long-developing pass plays.

 

To me, it seemed like Sark came in with a very conservative gameplan and thought we just could beat them in a street fight like Michigan did last year.

Posted
20 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

I thought his pocket presence was already way better than Quinn and this was game 3 in a very difficult environment.

Long ball was a bad decision but accuracy seemed fine. Would've been caught if the second defender wasn't there.

This is true. That’s why we have a higher ceiling. His floor was way lower than Quinn’s. 

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

Generational QBs hit wide open receivers less than 10 yards away from them. Good stuff Orlovsky


Exactly. Generational talent usually means you can throw better than me if I were in the game. 

  • Haha 1
Posted

I'm shocked he ended up 17-30.  It looked a lot worse than that.

No way he was living up to the hype; the Heisman candidacy was Trump-level dumb.

You knew he was going to have some bad/wtf games, and the first one against the defending national champion was as likely candidate as any.

I just thought he'd show more, which he started to toward the end.

Posted
28 minutes ago, Had Enough said:

Obviously I remember.  And believe I agreed at the time. No one is on all the time so you need certain play calls to make life easy.  The screen game can be that to an extent, but we didn’t try it much today.

Yeah, we have to make it easy on him. I am of the camp that thinks we make offense hard at times so we are in agreement. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

What is Arch doing when he raises his elbows when he goes on the field, and several times while he's out there?  Is he just loosening up (more than anyone I've ever seen) or is it something he's wearing that feels like it is too tight?  Maybe try putting him in a tank-top ("wifebeater" shirt) and see if that makes him more comfortable?  I noticed him doing that last year too.  Maybe it really is that simple - get him a different undershirt.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, dec3169 said:

What is Arch doing when he raises his elbows when he goes on the field, and several times while he's out there?  Is he just loosening up (more than anyone I've ever seen) or is it something he's wearing that feels like it is too tight?  Maybe try putting him in a tank-top ("wifebeater" shirt) and see if that makes him more comfortable?  I noticed him doing that last year too.  Maybe it really is that simple - get him a different undershirt.

Glasses, undershirt, whatever it takes. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, dec3169 said:

What is Arch doing when he raises his elbows when he goes on the field, and several times while he's out there?  Is he just loosening up (more than anyone I've ever seen) or is it something he's wearing that feels like it is too tight?  Maybe try putting him in a tank-top ("wifebeater" shirt) and see if that makes him more comfortable?  I noticed him doing that last year too.  Maybe it really is that simple - get him a different undershirt.

It’s just a tic. The manning family seems to have a touch of the tisms, and that’s ok

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
  • Haha 4
Posted
1 minute ago, Hank_Hill said:

It’s just a tic. The manning family seems to have a touch of the tisms, and that’s ok

Ah.  When I do that I'm usually trying to pull my shirt up a little if it is tucked in.

Posted
16 minutes ago, DaysOff said:


And threw more over the top. The difference seems noticeable to everyone.

rewatch the tape.  his throwing motion has always been awkward. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Thatguy said:

...teams have high completion percentages because their receiver run out and sit down in empty zones creating stationary throws. Sark doesn't like stationary targets and thus lower completion percentages. He needs to draw up more stationary targets and help his qb out. It's not hard. 

Sark doesn't really need to draw this up. Receivers are coached to sit down on their routes if they see zone vs man.

Posted

what’s weird is that arch looked worse today than he ever has for Texas, and it had nothing to do with tOSU’s defense. he was shitty even when he had a clean pocket and all day to throw. it was just odd looking. i’m hoping we find out that he had a stomach bug or that he slept on his arm wrong or something. really no explanation for him to be that bad after an entire offseason as the guy. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 3
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Thatguy said:

Yes. I tried to point that out last year but we were too busy hating on Ewers to hear it. Other teams have high completion percentages because their receiver run out and sit down in empty zones creating stationary throws. Sark doesn't like stationary targets and thus lower completion percentages. He needs to draw up more stationary targets and help his qb out. It's not hard. 

I just posed this question in the sark dominance thread. He needs to add these for the games like these where either the D is all world or the QB is struggling. It’s fine to base out of routes designed to hit the players in stride but that’s a lot to ask against the elite defenses. Even these tOSU receivers had the benefit of these easier to complete routes. 

  • 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...