Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
24 minutes ago, fellside said:

#2 Penn State 34-0 FIU (and it was close most of the game)

#3 LSU 23-7 La Tech

#4 Georgia 28-6 Austin Effing Peay

#8 Clemson 27-16 Troy (losing most of the game)

#10 South Carolina 38-10 SC State (They were losing late in the 1st quarter)

There are valid concerns but it's definitely true that Texas had a better day than most of the top 10.

Hey now these sort of rational takes are not allowed here.

I'd add that Georgia barely had a lead most of the game, lsu not much better. 

Call me a regardless but sjst is a better opponent than most of the teams here. 

Are we championship caliber nah , but we're definitely in the playoff mix. 

Take care of the games in front of us and we're in 

Also fuck OU 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Give me continued improvements and lots of rotation through the lineup from here through Florida and I’ll be happy and confident as a fan heading into ou. 

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

Brooks is thought to still be serving a team-enforced suspension after a DUI charge in the spring.

Anyone asked a coach about this? 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Anyone asked a coach about this? 

I’m pretty sure the answer would be it is something being handled internally. Regardless I certainly hope he is better than Baker when he is able to return.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
18 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Sloppy play got our butts beat in the Big 12, too. It will against most P4 opponents.

On the list of things that got us beat in the big 12, sloppy play is pretty far down. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 hours ago, closetojumping said:

Can the bulk of you idiots keep you in-game reactions contained to, you know, the stupid fucking game threads? I’m going to start encouraging neg attacks and reporting you dolts if you don’t. Fuck. 

It’s like none of you watch any other games. You should try that. Texas was first rate compared to most favorites facing non-FCS teams. 

I think you’re just mad that the galloping ghost is asserting his dominance on the college football landscape. 🤓

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Posted

Trying to make sense of the last two games while trying to stay positive.

My takeaway: 

The past two seasons we stated out hot, not just beating but destroying teams like (Sabans) Bama, Michigan, OU but fizzled down the stretch.

This year might be the opposite. We may start off slow/cold, but if it means finishing hot/strong, I think most of us would take that trade any day. Just got to win ugly for now until the team starts to peak and gel. Its always been about peaking at the right time and I think we always peaked early, at least the last two seasons. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

People need to chill. We'll be fine. We saw improvements yesterday, and I don't care about the opponent. Georgia beat Austin Peay 28-6, and I'm pretty sure SJSU would lay 35 on that team. We have two more gimme games, and then that's where we'll see how far we've come. At this point, just make the playoffs, and then go from there. We have a very young team. I was highly encouraged by Livingston, Endries, Lockett, Baxter, and Clark at times. Arch needs to find his rhythm or something. I dunno, I'm not a QB whisperer, and apparently nether is Milwee. 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
12 hours ago, Drifterwood said:

Sure hope Mosley is the truth and gets healthy quick.

This. Sark’s Golden comparison is our only hope that the WR Room is better than league average. If psycho mom was out of the picture, I’d probably trade WR Rooms with MS State. No idea how Sark let it get this bad. 
 

I bet Brooks sits another game and he’s back from Sam. 3 games feels about right for this kind of transgression.

Posted
Trying to make sense of the last two games while trying to stay positive.
My takeaway: 
The past two seasons we stated out hot, not just beating but destroying teams like (Sabans) Bama, Michigan, OU but fizzled down the stretch.
This year might be the opposite. We may start off slow/cold, but if it means finishing hot/strong, I think most of us would take that trade any day. Just got to win ugly for now until the team starts to peak and gel. Its always been about peaking at the right time and I think we always peaked early, at least the last two seasons. 

That's so crazy it just might work.
  • Haha 3
Posted
31 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

People need to chill. We'll be fine. We saw improvements yesterday, and I don't care about the opponent. Georgia beat Austin Peay 28-6, and I'm pretty sure SJSU would lay 35 on that team. We have two more gimme games, and then that's where we'll see how far we've come. At this point, just make the playoffs, and then go from there. We have a very young team. I was highly encouraged by Livingston, Endries, Lockett, Baxter, and Clark at times. Arch needs to find his rhythm or something. I dunno, I'm not a QB whisperer, and apparently nether is Milwee. 

Interesting- I was thoroughly disappointed with Clark yesterday after reading hype during camp. I wish Gibson could hold onto the ball because he looked like our best runner yesterday.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Billy Pilgrim said:

Interesting- I was thoroughly disappointed with Clark yesterday after reading hype during camp. I wish Gibson could hold onto the ball because he looked like our best runner yesterday.

I guess what I meant to say about Clark is you can see the ability, but it was his first game, so I can't really complain. He has the tools with his quickness, but he needs time to process how fast the game is going. As for Gibson, yeah, I don't even know what to say. He must have weak ass arms or something. It seems like if literally anyone touches the ball it comes out, whether that's grabbing it or hitting it. I don't even know where to begin with him. He's a good RB when he's not dropping balls, but so far he's only remembered for his nickname and fumbling. When he fumbled I didn't even make a sound. I just put my hand over my face and shook my head because I couldn't even muster up enough energy to be disappointed. 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Wilcox Cummingtonite said:

What is this thread title? Jesus Christ.

More importantly, do or did you think that name was actually clever?

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)

Arch Manning hurt? Breaking wince-gate wide open - 247

Spoiler

Arch Manning hurt? Breaking wince-gate wide open

During Texas' 38-7 win over San Jose State on Saturday, the ABC broadcast showed Longhorns quarterback Arch Manning grimacing while throwing an incomplete pass, leading online speculation that the UT signal caller is dealing with an injury. We did some digging and that doesn't appear to be the case.

Hank SouthHank South38 minsVIP
 

AUSTIN, Texas — Arch Manning passed for 295 yards and 4 touchdowns, adding in a 20-yard score on the ground, in a 38-7 win over San Jose State on Saturday in Texas' home-opener. The box score reflects a strong outing for the third-year Longhorn, but the conversation coming out of the game has centered around an incomplete pass Manning threw at Ryan Wingo's feet in the first half, one that appeared to suggest Manning may be dealing with an injury to his throwing arm due to a noticeable wince in his face.

Both Steve Sarkisian and Manning were asked about the grimace after the game.

"I don't know," Sarkisian responded. "News to me."

Manning followed up by downplaying a suspected injury.

"No, no," Manning replied. "I got to make that throw. He was open. Ran a good dig route. So got to make that throw."

For reference, here's the throw: 

Concerned fans, social media sleuths and even some college football personalities are not convinced.

Sure it looks like he's laboring on the pass, but is it possible that's simply the face he makes when throwing and/or due to displeasure that he knew it was off-target leaving his hand?

One source close to the situation told Horns247: "He's not injured. I think you can look at every quarterback and they're probably wincing and looking as if they're trying very hard."

Need proof? 

Here are a few photos prior to this season of Manning throwing a football: 

13271228.jpg?fit=bounds&crop=620:320,offset-y0.50&width=620&height=320

Arch Manning throws a pass against UL-Monroe in September of 2024. (Photo: USA TODAY Sports)

13271232.jpg?fit=bounds&crop=620:320,offset-y0.50&width=620&height=320 Arch Manning throws a pass against UL-Monroe in September of 2024. (Photo: USA TODAY Sports)

13271235.jpg?fit=bounds&crop=620:320,offset-y0.50&width=620&height=320 Arch Manning throws a pass in high school. (Photo: USA TODAY Sports)

13271238.jpg?fit=bounds&crop=620:320,offset-y0.50&width=620&height=320 Arch Manning throws a pass in high school. (Photo: USA TODAY Sports)

There's still plenty to dissect about Manning's play two games into the season. Sarkisian noted he wants Manning to play his (Manning's) style of game, something Sarkisian believes we saw more of on Saturday. 

"He extended plays, used his legs, scrambles for a touchdown. That's the style of player that he is," Sarkisian said after the game on Saturday. "And he's very gifted, because he can make all the throws from the pocket. He can make those out of the pocket, but yet he's big and physical enough that he can hurt you with his legs. And so him playing his game and not trying to play it somebody else's style of game, I think is important for him, but it's also important for the guys around him to know how their quarterbacks going to play."

So while Texas continues to clean up its play with two games and a bye-week to go until the team travels to Gainesville to face Florida, fans can put to rest the notion that Manning is dealing with an injury. 

Now, everybody, calm your fucking tits, alright?

Edited by MuellerHorn
Posted

It seems pretty clear the team came in far more sloppy from inexperience than we expected. This seems like a rebuilding year unless they develop very quickly. 

Good news is almost every other top team in the country looks that way too. OSU's offense wasnt anything great. Georgia looks pedestrian. Alabama looked like trash. Oregon looks great but haven't played anyone. 

This season may be a race to see who develops the best over the season. 

RB room looks like a problem. Baxter won't be back to fully explosive form for a while. Clark looks slow and indecisive. Wisner is good but nothing special. Gibson looked like the most explosive back but still cant hold on to the ball. 

The RB room being so mediocre plus Arch being nowhere near as developed as we expected for a 3rd year in the program guy has lowered my expectations a lot for this season. Sucks for an elite defense that may be let down by an underperforming offense for the 2nd straight season. 

There needs to be serious consideration to replacing Milwee if Arch doesn't completely turn it around this season. 

Posted
23 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

It seems pretty clear the team came in far more sloppy from inexperience than we expected. This seems like a rebuilding year unless they develop very quickly. 

Good news is almost every other top team in the country looks that way too. OSU's offense wasnt anything great. Georgia looks pedestrian. Alabama looked like trash. Oregon looks great but haven't played anyone. 

This season may be a race to see who develops the best over the season. 

RB room looks like a problem. Baxter won't be back to fully explosive form for a while. Clark looks slow and indecisive. Wisner is good but nothing special. Gibson looked like the most explosive back but still cant hold on to the ball. 

The RB room being so mediocre plus Arch being nowhere near as developed as we expected for a 3rd year in the program guy has lowered my expectations a lot for this season. Sucks for an elite defense that may be let down by an underperforming offense for the 2nd straight season. 

There needs to be serious consideration to replacing Milwee if Arch doesn't completely turn it around this season. 

OSU’s offense wasn’t great lol?   660 yards of offense and 70 points with near perfect passing sounds pretty great to me.  Even if it was against lower tier school 3 penalties and pure domination from all fronts. UGA was dog shit. But Oregon was also a machine and basically got gundy fired lol if they keep him they deserve him 

Posted
1 hour ago, D3zii said:

Trying to make sense of the last two games while trying to stay positive.

My takeaway: 

The past two seasons we stated out hot, not just beating but destroying teams like (Sabans) Bama, Michigan, OU but fizzled down the stretch.

This year might be the opposite. We may start off slow/cold, but if it means finishing hot/strong, I think most of us would take that trade any day. Just got to win ugly for now until the team starts to peak and gel. Its always been about peaking at the right time and I think we always peaked early, at least the last two seasons. 

When you say we "fizzled" basically it means we lost, and nothing else matters. We had a chance against both Washington and Ohio State late in the game. I wouldn't say that was fizzling. A couple of plays here and there and we win both of those. We didn't, and I understand that's important. But it's not like we played like complete crap. The other team simply played better. It happens. 

I'd argue something similar happened against Ohio State. Both teams need to improve from their season opener. Ohio State hardly looked like a finished product. But they had a couple of plays go their way and Texas failed to execute on a couple of plays on their end, and that was the difference in the game. In the second game we likely could have just run it down their throats and dominated the game, but it was a glorified exhibition to help work on things. Lots of rotations. Lots of players coming in. A chance for the OL to gel more. And most of all, a chance for Manning to get further down the line in his development - which proved to be a bit of a mixed bag. 

I know everyone has their opinion on the Ewers/Manning dichotomy, and I'm certainly among them. My feeling with Ewers is that he was a finished product for the most part. What you saw is what you got. I had my frustrations, but I also had quite a bit of gratitude around what he did well. It's my opinion his strengths were constantly taken for granted by people who wanted him to be more than what he was. With Manning, my hope and expectation is there's an upside he hasn't found yet. That's pretty common for a first year starter. But maybe that's not the case? I don't know. Maybe what we have in Manning is a bad mechanics quarterback who is completely unreliable in terms of whether he's going to dot his receivers with incredible throws or he's going to skip the ball to them or completely overthrow them. I understand there are other aspects of the team that need improvement, but Manning is going to be a critical piece for the rest of the season, just like any quarterback would be. Without any insider knowledge, it felt like Sarkisian wanted Manning to stay in the pocket, go through his progressions, and use the game to get more comfortable and confident with more game time reps. Mission accomplished? I don't know. That's not how I feel after that game. I also feel like you can't exactly flip a switch. If utilizing Manning's legs as a bigger part of the offense - not just designed runs but taking off when the opportunity is there - is important, then you should probably do that, rather than waiting for the opportune moment. But we'll see. 

Look, either Manning improves this year and becomes more consistent and more effective, and this team has a chance to go deep in the playoffs and win the whole thing, or he doesn't, and we're potentially looking at a 9-3 season or worse. Which would be something of a disaster from my point of view. But Manning needs to improve. That's all there is to it. Not that other aspects of the team don't need improvement as well, but I'm not sure how much the rest of it matters if he doesn't get right, while there's a lot of other deficiencies that can be overcome if Manning starts balling out on a consistent basis. 

I guess my main issue is that the flaws we're seeing in his mechanics when he's throwing his wtf passes seems so fundamental, my question becomes, why is that even there after all the years of high level coaching he's received, and why should I have the expectation it's going to miraculously improve this season? I guess there's a thought if he becomes more of a dual threat - which he obviously has the potential of being - that will ameliorate some of my other concerns. Possibly. 

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

It seems pretty clear the team came in far more sloppy from inexperience than we expected. This seems like a rebuilding year unless they develop very quickly. 

RB room looks like a problem. Baxter won't be back to fully explosive form for a while. Clark looks slow and indecisive. Wisner is good but nothing special. Gibson looked like the most explosive back but still cant hold on to the ball. 

I think you're taking far too much from this game. Or said another way, wait a few more games before trying to draw any conclusions. For instance, this was Clark's first live reps. The coaches were substituting in multiple players on the depth chart to get them used to playing under the lights in a real game. Baxter and Clark are both on a progression. Their ceilings are yet unkown and the OL was also inconsistent. Wisner is not 100% either. Gibson looked good, except of course for the fumble. Hopefully, he doesn't continue that theme, and no, I'm not ignoring his issue with it last season, but I'm unwilling to write off the team or a player based on a single fumble or game this season.

Posted
2 minutes ago, sith_horn said:

I think you're taking far too much from this game. Or said another way, wait a few more games before trying to draw any conclusions. For instance, this was Clark's first live reps. The coaches were substituting in multiple players on the depth chart to get them used to playing under the lights in a real game. Baxter and Clark are both on a progression. Their ceilings are yet unkown and the OL was also inconsistent. Wisner is not 100% either. Gibson looked good, except of course for the fumble. Hopefully, he doesn't continue that theme, and no, I'm not ignoring his issue with it last season, but I'm unwilling to write off the team or a player based on a single fumble or game this season.

I'm just wondering what it would take for Gibson to earn snaps in a critical moment with this staff when he lost time last year for fumbling, and after an entire offseason his first series carrying the ball fumbles it again. You don't necessarily want to write any human being off, but the things we do - or don't do - matter.  I just see transfer portal candidate written all over him. Which is not to try to convince you of my point of view. I feel like your's is the right way to think in all kinds of ways. I'm just not sure I feel like it meshes with reality. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, sith_horn said:

I think you're taking far too much from this game. Or said another way, wait a few more games before trying to draw any conclusions. For instance, this was Clark's first live reps. The coaches were substituting in multiple players on the depth chart to get them used to playing under the lights in a real game. Baxter and Clark are both on a progression. Their ceilings are yet unkown and the OL was also inconsistent. Wisner is not 100% either. Gibson looked good, except of course for the fumble. Hopefully, he doesn't continue that theme, and no, I'm not ignoring his issue with it last season, but I'm unwilling to write off the team or a player based on a single fumble or game this season.

It's a 2 game sample size of an offense that is not close to ready to compete for a championship. I can't use any data points from the future, so I'm using the available data set. They're just too raw at too many positions, including QB, to be in that conversation for title contention right now. 

So I've revised my season expectations for this team from title contender, possibly even favorite, to rebuilding the offense and special teams. Based on this 2 game sample a 9-3 season would be a positive achievement and show a lot of growth. 

Posted
29 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

When you say we "fizzled" basically it means we lost, and nothing else matters. We had a chance against both Washington and Ohio State late in the game. I wouldn't say that was fizzling. A couple of plays here and there and we win both of those. We didn't, and I understand that's important. But it's not like we played like complete crap. The other team simply played better. It happens. 

I'd argue something similar happened against Ohio State. Both teams need to improve from their season opener. Ohio State hardly looked like a finished product. But they had a couple of plays go their way and Texas failed to execute on a couple of plays on their end, and that was the difference in the game. In the second game we likely could have just run it down their throats and dominated the game, but it was a glorified exhibition to help work on things. Lots of rotations. Lots of players coming in. A chance for the OL to gel more. And most of all, a chance for Manning to get further down the line in his development - which proved to be a bit of a mixed bag. 

I know everyone has their opinion on the Ewers/Manning dichotomy, and I'm certainly among them. My feeling with Ewers is that he was a finished product for the most part. What you saw is what you got. I had my frustrations, but I also had quite a bit of gratitude around what he did well. It's my opinion his strengths were constantly taken for granted by people who wanted him to be more than what he was. With Manning, my hope and expectation is there's an upside he hasn't found yet. That's pretty common for a first year starter. But maybe that's not the case? I don't know. Maybe what we have in Manning is a bad mechanics quarterback who is completely unreliable in terms of whether he's going to dot his receivers with incredible throws or he's going to skip the ball to them or completely overthrow them. I understand there are other aspects of the team that need improvement, but Manning is going to be a critical piece for the rest of the season, just like any quarterback would be. Without any insider knowledge, it felt like Sarkisian wanted Manning to stay in the pocket, go through his progressions, and use the game to get more comfortable and confident with more game time reps. Mission accomplished? I don't know. That's not how I feel after that game. I also feel like you can't exactly flip a switch. If utilizing Manning's legs as a bigger part of the offense - not just designed runs but taking off when the opportunity is there - is important, then you should probably do that, rather than waiting for the opportune moment. But we'll see. 

Look, either Manning improves this year and becomes more consistent and more effective, and this team has a chance to go deep in the playoffs and win the whole thing, or he doesn't, and we're potentially looking at a 9-3 season or worse. Which would be something of a disaster from my point of view. But Manning needs to improve. That's all there is to it. Not that other aspects of the team don't need improvement as well, but I'm not sure how much the rest of it matters if he doesn't get right, while there's a lot of other deficiencies that can be overcome if Manning starts balling out on a consistent basis. 

I guess my main issue is that the flaws we're seeing in his mechanics when he's throwing his wtf passes seems so fundamental, my question becomes, why is that even there after all the years of high level coaching he's received, and why should I have the expectation it's going to miraculously improve this season? I guess there's a thought if he becomes more of a dual threat - which he obviously has the potential of being - that will ameliorate some of my other concerns. Possibly. 

To save folks time, I asked AI to summarize this post in a sentence:

"The writer argues that while Texas narrowly lost to top teams and showed promise, the season’s success hinges on quarterback Arch Manning improving his consistency and mechanics, as his development is critical to overcoming other team deficiencies and making a serious playoff run."

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 6
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 hours ago, DaysOff said:


That's so crazy it just might work.

 

2 hours ago, YChang said:

Why not, let's try something different. 

[In my best Barry Corbin voice]

Hell, I’d piss on a spark plug if I’d thought it’d help!

  • closetojumping changed the title to Texas Football 2025 - Playing With Our Food
Posted

Not sure I get the complaints regarding the run game. I mean yeah they aren’t Jamaal Charles, Bijan Robinson or even Brooks, but most teams don’t have one of them either. They been steady and very low on the list regarding issues on offense.

I think this team is really missing a Keilan  Robinson type of player though, which is odd because I thought Sark but a focus on recruiting speed. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, SarkAfterDark said:

Not sure I get the complaints regarding the run game. I mean yeah they aren’t Jamaal Charles, Bijan Robinson or even Brooks, but most teams don’t have one of them either. They been steady and very low on the list regarding issues on offense.

I think this team is really missing a Keilan  Robinson type of player though, which is odd because I thought Sark but a focus on recruiting speed. 

I like what I see out of Baxter. What are the complaints about him, exactly?

He's coming off a serious knee injury, which he wasn't even expected to be getting as many carries as he has been. If he was in situation where he was carrying the ball 20 to 25 times a game I think we'd be pleased with the result. I didn't think of Jamaal Charles or Jonathon Brooks as being as special as they ended up being, but they showed early promise.

Bijan was Bijan from the moment he stepped on campus, so I got nothing there. I wish he had played on better teams.

  • 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...