Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
24 minutes ago, Drew said:

Here's what you continue to not only miss, but also misconstrue.  No one, except a few idiots, has come even close to saying anthing this stupid.

You completely missing the point that some make about "hey someone might be able to hit those simple fucking passes a little easier than Arch" is absolutely mind boggling.

 

It's actually a lot of idiots.

And given the already high percentage of idiots on this website, I can sympathize with someone who assumes the inmates are running the asylum. Just look at the "Sark to the NFL" thread. 

Posted
2 hours ago, Park Gothic said:

I think we agree about limiting expectations for Caldwell, but I'm not signing off on this whole "QBs regress under Sark" thing. There could be some validity to it, but I disagree with the evidence people have used. First, Ewers looked a lot fucking better in 2023 than he did in 2022. And although he took a step back in 2024, that may be attributable to a nagging injury. That's what Ewers has said and it makes as much sense to me as the idea that he regressed under Sark. As to Manning? We barely saw him play before this season, and most of his snaps against good competition were as a wildcat QB. I don't think he threw a pass against a P4 opponent outside of MSU. And Arch looked good in 2024, but how much of that was Sark keeping things simple for him / playing poor competition / having better WR and OL? 

There's too many variables that could explain the apparent "regression" of Ewers and Manning for me to pin it on Sark. 

Well, what we do know, based on data is that we had 2 QBs in a row who were 5* recruits and had been productive earlier in their careers than later in their careers. We also know one of the 2 was at another school prior to coming to Sark. 

Now, if you don't want to blame Sark for this decrease in production and accuracy fine. What nobody can deny is that both performed better when the standard script Sark prefers (complex blocking, 5 step drops, long WR routes) is dropped for a simpler one (moving the QB, shorter WR routes, quicker crossing patterns, less complex blocking and designed QB runs). There are multiple examples for both QBs that when allowed to play to their strengths rather than forcing them into Sark's preferred offense both QBs showed demonstrable and statistical improvement in their play. 

I'm not sure how you logic around consistently refusing to script a game plan that aligns to the strengths of your players isn't the fault of the person calling the plays. Further, because of the continued issues, opposing defensive coordinators know exactly what sort of defensive scheme to run to be slow or absolutely stop the Texas offense all together. Florida and Kentucky are clear examples. So not only is the QB forced to play an offensive game plan that doesn't align well to their strengths and comforts, they face defensive plans that know exactly how to disrupt that based on the Texas QB, OL and RB skill sets.

Not sure how you logic around not blaming that on the HC and head play caller. 

Posted
28 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Well, what we do know, based on data is that we had 2 QBs in a row who were 5* recruits and had been productive earlier in their careers than later in their careers. We also know one of the 2 was at another school prior to coming to Sark. 

Now, if you don't want to blame Sark for this decrease in production and accuracy fine. What nobody can deny is that both performed better when the standard script Sark prefers (complex blocking, 5 step drops, long WR routes) is dropped for a simpler one (moving the QB, shorter WR routes, quicker crossing patterns, less complex blocking and designed QB runs). There are multiple examples for both QBs that when allowed to play to their strengths rather than forcing them into Sark's preferred offense both QBs showed demonstrable and statistical improvement in their play. 

I'm not sure how you logic around consistently refusing to script a game plan that aligns to the strengths of your players isn't the fault of the person calling the plays. Further, because of the continued issues, opposing defensive coordinators know exactly what sort of defensive scheme to run to be slow or absolutely stop the Texas offense all together. Florida and Kentucky are clear examples. So not only is the QB forced to play an offensive game plan that doesn't align well to their strengths and comforts, they face defensive plans that know exactly how to disrupt that based on the Texas QB, OL and RB skill sets.

Not sure how you logic around not blaming that on the HC and head play caller. 

I was talking about QB development and you went off on a tangent about playcalling. I wish Sark would call plays that focus on the strengths of our offense and roster, but that's a separate issue. 

At any rate, people don't get better at a job by just doing the parts of it they find easy. They get better by doing the hard things. If I were trying to justify Sark's playcalling - which I'm not - I would say that he calls a prostyle offense to get players ready for the NFL, and that was probably discussed as part of their recruitment. The spread offense is popular in high school and college because it's easy to run by less talented and experienced players. It's not nearly as popular in the NFL because of the massive jump in talent, especially among the DBs. Surely you've heard the term "system QB" as a disparagement for productive college QBs when they go in the draft? That's what it's about. 

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

I was talking about QB development and you went off on a tangent about playcalling. I wish Sark would call plays that focus on the strengths of our offense and roster, but that's a separate issue. 

At any rate, people don't get better at a job by just doing the parts of it they find easy. They get better by doing the hard things. If I were trying to justify Sark's playcalling - which I'm not - I would say that he calls a prostyle offense to get players ready for the NFL, and that was probably discussed as part of their recruitment. The spread offense is popular in high school and college because it's easy to run by less talented and experienced players. It's not nearly as popular in the NFL because of the massive jump in talent, especially among the DBs. Surely you've heard the term "system QB" as a disparagement for productive college QBs when they go in the draft? That's what it's about. 

Well, QB development ultimately should culminate in being drafted by the NFL. If a college coach is running an offense that is not allowing his QB to flourish because it's not to his strengths or confidences (yet) and worse decreases his draft status I would say it is poor development. Either that coach needs to develop the player to be capable of running the offense he calls or align his offense to the capability of that QB. How is forcing a player to run a system he's not confident nor is the talent capable of not a QB development issues? Similarly, that he is NOT capable of running the offense the coach is calling is a clear indicator that the coach didn't properly develop that player for that offense. I don't see how you keep missing this point. 

I'll add that if the player isnt capable of running the offense being calling and there isn't anyone who is capable on the team... isn't that also a player evaluation AND development issue?

Posted
2 hours ago, Park Gothic said:

It's actually a lot of idiots.

And given the already high percentage of idiots on this website, I can sympathize with someone who assumes the inmates are running the asylum. Just look at the "Sark to the NFL" thread. 

You want to go back and read what I was actually responding to chief?  He was claiming people are acting like Caldwell is the 2nd coming of Vince Young.  There are 2 extremes and most of  us aren't on either side there...even the ones who think Arch has been mostly mediocre to bad for the most part outside of a few instances and want to just see another QB who can make passes.  If it doesn't work fine, at least we'd know.

The arch we saw in the 4th is the one we want to see most of the time.  Not when they're down 14 to OSU and Florida or down 17 to Miss St. That's all.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

Does anyone think Sark will call a gameplan that utilizes the middle of the field, short, quick throws, slants and things? I hope Caldwell starts and does good. Like someone said, him not playing has kept him clock from being sped up to the point that he can’t throw.

Posted
7 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Well, what we do know, based on data is that we had 2 QBs in a row who were 5* recruits and had been productive earlier in their careers than later in their careers. We also know one of the 2 was at another school prior to coming to Sark. 

Now, if you don't want to blame Sark for this decrease in production and accuracy fine. What nobody can deny is that both performed better when the standard script Sark prefers (complex blocking, 5 step drops, long WR routes) is dropped for a simpler one (moving the QB, shorter WR routes, quicker crossing patterns, less complex blocking and designed QB runs). There are multiple examples for both QBs that when allowed to play to their strengths rather than forcing them into Sark's preferred offense both QBs showed demonstrable and statistical improvement in their play. 

I'm not sure how you logic around consistently refusing to script a game plan that aligns to the strengths of your players isn't the fault of the person calling the plays. Further, because of the continued issues, opposing defensive coordinators know exactly what sort of defensive scheme to run to be slow or absolutely stop the Texas offense all together. Florida and Kentucky are clear examples. So not only is the QB forced to play an offensive game plan that doesn't align well to their strengths and comforts, they face defensive plans that know exactly how to disrupt that based on the Texas QB, OL and RB skill sets.

Not sure how you logic around not blaming that on the HC and head play caller. 

I always just assumed the qbs and play caller get figured out as they play more games. Great defensive minds will slow them down as more tape comes out. 

Posted
33 minutes ago, Hookem10 said:

I always just assumed the qbs and play caller get figured out as they play more games. Great defensive minds will slow them down as more tape comes out. 

Well, that's typically true but requires that all the base level functionality has to be operating well for the first step, blocking being the most fundamental. Good offensive coaches adjust the strategy according to the talent and ability they have available. Have a mobile QB who's good at improvisation outside a standard pocket, move the pocket more and get the QB into space. Have deficiencies at OL, run a simpler blocking scheme and look for quick throws that allow the QB to get rid of the ball faster. Have a world class RB, run the ball a lot using different plays to utilize him as best you can. I note all these as there are specific examples I can think of for each that various HCs and OCs are using even this year. 

Beyond that, if a DC schemes up a game plan that slows the one being used, altering the game plan to use the gaps/hole left by the DCs game plan is standard for great OCs. Take what the D gives you is a well known, over used term for a reason. Its accurate. 

Problem for us is the Texas offense has had running issues for 2 years now, but it's gotten markedly worse this year. That's due to both not having a premier RB (no hate on Wisner as he is a very good college RB) and an OL that had difficulties with the more complex blocking scheme Sark deploys. 

The biggest issue is Sark's consistent reliance on similar game plans, and an unwillingness to move away from them. He's predictable and many here often call series of plays he runs. Series of plays often. If we can do it, I assure you a college DC can too. Add on top of that refusing to simplify the blocking scheme and align to a plan which better fits the skill positions and OL is just not something Sark likes to do until absolutely forces. See MSU and OU game for examples. 

Posted (edited)

I’ve heard a lot, in this thread and others on the board, on podcasts, etc., that we have to protect Caldwell and can’t call too many runs else we have Karle Lacey, Jr. in the game. To that I say, “fuck that.”

We need to play to win the damn game. We can’t play afraid. Let Caldwell get settled with some zone reads in the first half if it’s there. He’s only averaging like 35 yards a rush this year. 

If Lacey has to come in, so be it. Been saying we still have everything on the table. Let’s play like it dammit.

Edited by I Plead Da Fif
Derp
  • 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...