Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Slacks said:

I'm ok with "big humans" but to me that also means play big, not be big and play small. 

We have some big humans that are small players. 

I give Baker a pass at the moment. He's not supposed to be anywhere near starting at LG right now. 

Brooks is the LG.  Baker is RT.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

I do not agree.  He showed enough in his two starts last season with a better, more experienced line that he would do fine behind a better line.

The offensive problems, as usual, are not the result of one particular issue.  It's a combination of things.  The O-line is young and inexperienced, so it isn't a good line at this point.  Consequently, Arch is under consistent pressure.  There was a graphic on the broadcast of the game yesterday indicating that he's one of the most pressured QBs in the FBS.  And the line is also a big part of the problem with respect to the run game.  No run game puts even more pressure on Arch.  Even experienced college QBs would be having problems operating behind this line.

But Arch has also been missing easy/open throws that he would usually make and which he must make in order for this offense to be good.  He's also missing open reads occasionally.  So he is definitely part of the problem even when he's given time to do what he needs to do.

So both the line and Arch are big parts of the overall problem.  And that isn't even the entire picture.  Playcalling is an element of the problem as well.  Sark's calls and in-game decisions are sometimes headscratchers.  We lack a true gamebreaker at both running back and (at least until Wingo develops or they start using him in accordance with his strengths) WR.  We've had injuries on the O-line that have affected both depth and development.  In sum, the offensive woes are attributable to a whole host of causes.  I haven't even mentioned all of them. 

If you're an optimist, you think, "Both Arch and the line should improve as they gain experience, develop cohesion, etc."  They both looked like they might have turned a corner against OU.  That's one of the big reasons people are so upset about the Kentucky game -- the offense regressed significantly from the week before.  But with young players, development isn't always a linear thing; rather, it often happens in spurts, in "fits and starts."  There will be occasional bouts of regression combined with "Eureka!" moments when development is apparent.  As fans, it's frustrating, but we're going to have to accept the fact that this season is, to a very large degree, a developmental season.  As many on this board previously suggested, the 2026 season is the one in which this team should be a very large problem for opponents.   

I know people think Arch looked better last season. But we saw many of the same things we are seeing this season. He is all or nothing. He can't throw the short or intermediate routes. He can throw deep and that is about it. I do think he fucked up his mechanics over the summer and that is part of why we are getting these dirt balls. I was hopeful he finally got that shit out of his system, but it came back against Kentucky. As long as he is doing that, a better line isn't helping. He has zero touch. None. He can rifle the ball and that is it. He is an extremely limited QB right now.  If we had an all world line and a strong run game, maybe we could get away with a run heavy game plan aiming for 10-15 passes a game. But it would still be bad QB play. 

Posted
2 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Well, I obviously don't know for certain CDC will press this issue. What I do know for certain is that the expectation at Texas are a competent and well run offense and consistency of production.

Hell of an expectation, considering we haven't had it for at least 20 years and Sark has come closest to delivering it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I know people think Arch looked better last season. But we saw many of the same things we are seeing this season. He is all or nothing. He can't throw the short or intermediate routes. He can throw deep and that is about it. I do think he fucked up his mechanics over the summer and that is part of why we are getting these dirt balls. I was hopeful he finally got that shit out of his system, but it came back against Kentucky. As long as he is doing that, a better line isn't helping. He has zero touch. None. He can rifle the ball and that is it. He is an extremely limited QB right now.  If we had an all world line and a strong run game, maybe we could get away with a run heavy game plan aiming for 10-15 passes a game. But it would still be bad QB play. 

Yeah I don't find last years starts inconsistent with what we're seeing today.  He was a bus driver last year and his role was eased by better OL.  But he wasn't trying to run an offense really.

Posted
5 hours ago, Duane Moore said:

Any ideas on what happened to the running game this week? Wisner has his best game of the season and then we give him 14 total touches? Clark has 3 decent carries and then goes on a milk carton for the rest of the game.  If you have a good defense, a plus special teams unit, and a struggling QB, leaning on a running came is a viable plan (that worked very well the previous week) and yet it just got totally ignored all night. Was the defense just showing a heavy box every play that dictated the calls?

The explanation is simple: Sark's a moron. He's got personal problems. Probably not sleeping at night. Can't think straight.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
3 hours ago, scramblyn said:

Have we talked about WTF stoops was thinking when he went for it against this defense and this offense? I mean besides eating a bag of dicks? Yeah Texas FG was near automatic - wait Texas OL says hold my beer - he basically gave the game to us. 

I like to think he and Mikey got in a fist fight in the locker room after the game 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I know people think Arch looked better last season. 

That's because he did look better last season.

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

He is all or nothing. He can't throw the short or intermediate routes. He can throw deep and that is about it. I do think he fucked up his mechanics over the summer and that is part of why we are getting these dirt balls. I was hopeful he finally got that shit out of his system, but it came back against Kentucky. As long as he is doing that, a better line isn't helping. He has zero touch. None. He can rifle the ball and that is it. He is an extremely limited QB right now.  If we had an all world line and a strong run game, maybe we could get away with a run heavy game plan aiming for 10-15 passes a game. But it would still be bad QB play. 

I don't agree with much of this.  Arch certainly hasn't played up to expectations, which were built at least in part on what he showed last season.  The accuracy issues are particularly confounding, because he hadn't previously given indications that he had them.  Whether it is a mechanical issue or more of a mental thing, I don't  know -- but it needs to get fixed pronto.

But he's still developing, and I do not agree that he wouldn't be playing better if he had a better line and a viable running game to help him.  Suggesting that he would be the same QB even if he had last year's line in front of him is, IMO, ridiculous and belied by the evidence, because we KNOW what he looked like behind that line in the two games he started.  If you think Arch doesn't have the capability of making intermediate throws, then please take a look at the throw at 3:57 of this video.  That's an NFL-quality intermediate throw.  (And there are other quality short and intermediate throws on just this one video from only one game.)  

   

BTW, do you see any differences between that tape and the Kentucky game from yesterday?  Notice that he often had a clean pocket from which to throw?  And receivers that were consistently open?  Things are a lot different so far this season in those two areas.  

The problem is NOT just Manning.  He's a significant part of the problem, esp. with his accuracy issues, but by no means is it all on him.  The offensive woes are due to a complex combination of several different factors. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
4 hours ago, tokamak said:

What I don’t understand is that our OL is dog shit but we don’t seem to be trying to scheme around that weakness. Our strategy seems to be to just keep on doing the same things and hope they magically get better so we can actually execute. 

something something, about definition of madness. 

Posted
19 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Hell of an expectation, considering we haven't had it for at least 20 years and Sark has come closest to delivering it.

Its actually a completely rational expectation. The insanity is that we haven't, not the expectation that we should. Keeping Mack too long and hiring also rans like Strong and Herman don't help. 

Sark has not, at any point at Texas consistently had good offensive production against quality teams while at Texas nor ever during his HC tenure. He has during his Texas tenure beaten equal or better level talent and coaching exactly once and that was 3 years ago. He squandered maybe the best D Texas has ever had last year while running an offense with 6 NFL players, and didn't make the CFP final. So, you want to love that performance, you're welcome to do so. Want to love a Strong/Swoopes vs ND performance against Kentucky in Sark's 5th year, welcome to do so. Want to keep believing in this inept offensive development and game plan, I fully support your choice to do so.

I don't and won't. Some freedom for choice still exists and I'm glad for it. 

This is entertainment, I dedicate my time and dollars in it's support and reserve the right to expect a decent ROI. 

Posted
3 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Arch isn't the mistake. Sark is and sadly there is no immediate fix. We could bring in an OC mid season but it takes time to fix all the damage Sark has done already. Sooner rather than later is best, imo, will CDC force it after Kentucky, I doubt it. Had we lost, maybe, but the clock is ticking and sadly I think the additional losses we are nearly guaranteed to see are what will ultimately make CDC force Sark to give up control of the offense completely.

Hate that it's that bleak but it's the only answer I see. 

2 #1 rated quarterbacks out of school becoming ho-hum and holee fuck. either all the recruiting services and talent evaluators are circle jerking each other; cfb and nfl is a bunch of retreads, or we have a problem with our oc/qb coach. 

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

2 #1 rated quarterbacks out of school becoming ho-hum and holee fuck. either all the recruiting services and talent evaluators are circle jerking each other; cfb and nfl is a bunch of retreads, or we have a problem with our oc/qb coach. 

That's the catch on the whole, Arch is ass and always was...

Nobody saw this, including our own coaching staff until we played OSU? @Carl Spackler above just pointed out, Arch didn't suck last year.

In all the eyes on him, in his entire career through HS and playing last year for Texas in 2 games, he never showed issues until the OSU game? 

That's the crazy pill I'm supposed to swallow? And... if Sark and company couldn't in 3 years and 2 starts identify these issues with Arch, we trust these same idiots to have QBs riding pine that are both superior talent wise and have been better coached?

That's rational thought? 

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

That's the catch on the whole, Arch is ass and always was...

Nobody saw this, including our own coaching staff until we played OSU? @Carl Spackler above just pointed out, Arch didn't suck last year.

In all the eyes on him, in his entire career through HS and playing last year for Texas in 2 games, he never showed issues until the OSU game? 

That's the crazy pill I'm supposed to swallow? And... if Sark and company couldn't in 3 years and 2 starts identify these issues with Arch, we trust these same idiots to have QBs riding pine that are both superior talent wise and have been better coached?

That's rational thought? 

the eyes see, but the mind doesnt want to believe. with the constant knob schlobbing by media of offensive genius, qb whisperer. its 2019/20 at bama the rest of the resume is very meh. yes the issue at usc is not strictly football but you get a 200k/year body guard who smashes your drinks when you have had too much, cos its gonna cost you millions and did. 

Posted
16 hours ago, Irish Wrist Watch said:

There's some young players out there. Sark shoulda called timeout and told the whole team to not go out of bounds. He's the fucking problem. \

There's something wrong with Sark

He was busy calling plays. Can’t also do head coach things at the same time.
 

A head coach would have adjusted the gameplan after it looked like the Florida game. Playcaller was busy calling plays, didn’t have time for that. 

Posted
39 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

That's because he did look better last season.

I don't agree with much of this.  Arch certainly hasn't played up to expectations, which were built at least in part on what he showed last season.  The accuracy issues are particularly confounding, because he hadn't previously given indications that he had them.  Whether it is a mechanical issue or more of a mental thing, I don't  know -- but it needs to get fixed pronto.

But he's still developing, and I do not agree that he wouldn't be playing better if he had a better line and a viable running game to help him.  Suggesting that he would be the same QB even if he had last year's line in front of him is, IMO, ridiculous and belied by the evidence, because we KNOW what he looked like behind that line in the two games he started.  If you think Arch doesn't have the capability of making intermediate throws, then please take a look at the throw at 3:57 of this video.  That's an NFL-quality intermediate throw.  (And there are other quality short and intermediate throws on just this one video from only one game.)  

   

BTW, do you see any differences between that tape and the Kentucky game from yesterday?  Notice that he often had a clean pocket from which to throw?  And receivers that were consistently open?  Things are a lot different so far this season in those two areas.  

The problem is NOT just Manning.  He's a significant part of the problem, esp. with his accuracy issues, but by no means is it all on him.  The offensive woes are due to a complex combination of several different factors. 

You're wrong. He didn't hit the short stuff well last season either. He lacked touch, but could hit the deep ball. He isn't just the problem. But he is absolutely a problem and not playable division 1 QB right now. Whether he can learn or not, I don't know. He was marginally better last year because we didn't see the balls in the dirt. But his issues with short and intermediate throws were still there. He was throwing screens the same way he does now. I had hoped he would learn with starter reps, but it hasn't happened. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

You're wrong. He didn't hit the short stuff well last season either. He lacked touch, but could hit the deep ball. He isn't just the problem. But he is absolutely a problem and not playable division 1 QB right now. Whether he can learn or not, I don't know. He was marginally better last year because we didn't see the balls in the dirt. But his issues with short and intermediate throws were still there. He was throwing screens the same way he does now. I had hoped he would learn with starter reps, but it hasn't happened. 

We're gonna have to agree to disagree re: whether Manning would be better with a better line in front of him and whether he can make short/intermediate throws.  But I've got the tape from his two starts last season to back me up, whereas you have . . . your faulty recollection.  In that regard, I notice that you didn't bother to address the throw from last year's MSU game that I specifically called out.  That was a beautiful throw, and it's proof positive that he has the ability to do more than simply (as you contend) throw it deep.

The two aspects of your post with which I can agree are your statements that "[h]e isn't just the problem" and that "he is absolutely a problem . . ."       

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

We're gonna have to agree to disagree re: whether Manning would be better with a better line in front of him and whether he can make short/intermediate throws.  But I've got the tape from his two starts last season to back me up, whereas you have . . . your faulty recollection.  In that regard, I notice that you didn't bother to address the throw from last year's MSU game that I specifically called out.  That was a beautiful throw, and it's proof positive that he has the ability to do more than simply (as you contend) throw it deep.

The two aspects of your post with which I can agree are your statements that "[h]e isn't just the problem" and that "he is absolutely a problem . . ."       

Well, guess you're right with the proof there.  He did look better.  But part of that is he was getting the ball out quicker than he seems to be capable of doing now.

The problems are multifarious, since we're law dogs, and OL is certainly a big one.  

I just don't understand what the hell is going on with him.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
16 hours ago, TheBryMan81 said:

That's 100% exactly what I was thinking. I could be a college football coach apparently.

Is there any other profession where you can have no discernible talent, be an absolute moron and get paid millions of dollars?  Pro athletes are dumb as shit for the most part, but at least they have incredible athletic ability.

Posted
17 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, guess you're right with the proof there.  He did look better.  But part of that is he was getting the ball out quicker than he seems to be capable of doing now.

The problems are multifarious, since we're law dogs, and OL is certainly a big one.  

I just don't understand what the hell is going on with him.

Sark

Occum's razor. Simplest explanation is usually correct.

Sark doesn't run an offense that aligns with his players talent.

And/or

Sark doesn't align his offensive game plan the the defense he's playing against.

And/or

Sark is really bad at player development specifically QB but also OL, RB and WR.

And/or

Sark is epically, historically and uniquely bad at player evaluation. 

Or all of the above. Choose your own adventure.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Holy shit. 

 

So below 70 is failing right? Our OL might need to be in special needs classes.

Oh wait... Kentucky D is special needs.

Shit!

Posted
1 hour ago, Carl Spackler said:

We're gonna have to agree to disagree re: whether Manning would be better with a better line in front of him and whether he can make short/intermediate throws.  But I've got the tape from his two starts last season to back me up, whereas you have . . . your faulty recollection.  In that regard, I notice that you didn't bother to address the throw from last year's MSU game that I specifically called out.  That was a beautiful throw, and it's proof positive that he has the ability to do more than simply (as you contend) throw it deep.

The two aspects of your post with which I can agree are your statements that "[h]e isn't just the problem" and that "he is absolutely a problem . . ."       

He absolutely can make beautiful + level throws. He usually has a few of them every game. The physical talent is there. He just has no consistency. He makes throws like that and then follows them up with absolute clunkers on what should be give mes. That's what so perplexing about his play generally. If you watch last year's tape, you'll see the same problems. He makes the plus throws but fucks up the easy screens and short game stuff. He holds the ball really long looking for the home run shot. We thought that was just something he would learn to work through. But unfortunately there is very little sign of progress in that regard. That's what has been surprising to me. But it is what it is at this point. Unfortunately a few amazing throws a game doesn't offset the inability to consistently move the ball with the simple stuff. It is bad QB play. And that is what Arch has been and continues to be. I really hope he grows out of it. The potential is there. But right now it doesn't matter what the line does if he can't find the ability to consistently do the easy stuff. The offense would be better with a better line. But Arch would still be a bad QB unless/until he gets over his issues. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Is there any other profession where you can have no discernible talent, be an absolute moron and get paid millions of dollars?  Pro athletes are dumb as shit for the most part, but at least they have incredible athletic ability.

Podcaster, broadcaster, actor, etc..

Posted
7 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

This is what gets me, in the second half last week we were absolutely blowing OU off the LOS. We all figured getting Stroh out of the lineup had unlocked the o-line cheat code and we would be at least half ass average going forward.  What the fuck happened since then?

We  had a different center?!

Posted
6 hours ago, BurdineBandit said:

I can't believe how disappointing Endries has been this year. He's getting replaced by Washington as the season wears on. Mosley is hurt. I'll give him another couple games to prove his worth...... But, it doesn't really matter if the o line can't block. Aggy has the benefit of a veteran O line, like we had last year. If we had gotten the guys they got, they'd by just as frustrated with our o line and QBs inconsistent performance. They wouldn't be performing as well in this shit show of an offense. 

But I do agree about Wingo. Those 5-stars and Wingo's 5 stars were not made the same. They got receivers, we got an athlete.

Moseley isn't hurt, he played last night and caught a 31 yard pass. His only target. 

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...