Alamo Bowl Game Thread: UT v UW

Discussion in 'On The Field' started by Dionysus, Dec 29, 2022.

  1. Creek

    Creek 1,000+ Posts

    I heard about this from people asking me what was the deal….very bizarre and now Sark is officially losing it…
     
    • poop poop x 2
  2. Pomspoms

    Pomspoms 5,000+ Posts

    well,
    "opening holes is hard"
     
  3. theiioftx

    theiioftx Sponsor Deputy

    C’mon man. Edith Royal wasn’t on the field, but she was a part of the program. Let Sark be Sark to see what he can do. We didn’t lose last night because his wife was on the sidelines.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Pomspoms

    Pomspoms 5,000+ Posts

    most of the post was good except the part that we should give Sark credit for 8-5. Give Sark credit for 8-5 when he made some decisions or non-decisions that cost us games?! Hell no. He cost us at least 3 games and you could make a case for all 5.
    I do give Sark credit for raising the talent level and breaking the poor morale that had developed and bringing in good coaches.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • poop poop x 1
  5. wadster

    wadster 5,000+ Posts

    We lost TT because they went 6/8 on 4th down. It's that simple. If they just go 4/8 we win pretty easily. We lost to Bama because well, Bryce Young is better than Ryan Watts, refs missed a face mask, refs screwed the intentional grounding, oh and can I say refs suck. and we missed a FG from the 3 yard line.

    Other 3 I'd agree with. I'm not sold on Sark, I'm giving him 4 years to turn it around. Culture was in the ditch when he got here. But he's done a better job than .500 which is the post I was responding to. I really like this incoming class (QB, WR, RB, LB, DBs). Loved the OLine class we got last year. He's earned the right to get 4 years. If we're not winning 10 games in year 4, I'd be pretty disappointed. Like another poster, I'm in my 60's and don't have a lot of decades left to wander in the wilderness. Now let's beat the hell out of OU tomorrow. That we can all agree on.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. theiioftx

    theiioftx Sponsor Deputy

    Okay we disagree. I love your passion for the Horns.
     
  7. Your Wrong

    Your Wrong 500+ Posts

    2nd pass thru watching the game.

    You run a flea flicker on play 1 that tells me you’re serious about winning. Then you go on 4th and short twice including in your own territory and that reinforces it.

    So I’ve trekked about 3 sites. All 3 are anti-Worthy. Something is off. Some of it doesn’t make sense. If as a QB or a coach, you don’t trust a guy, you don’t continually go to him. So why do we continue to do so? I think Sark is loyal and stubborn. That’s why QE didn’t get pulled a couple of games. That’s why we continue to throw deep with Worthy. Both guys have very high upsides. Both are Sark guys.

    I don’t think Worthy’s hands are great so he tries to basket catch too much. Certainly he does the further downfield he goes. But the dude gets open like nobody else I’ve seen around here.

    Now Ewers I’d say he played pretty well. Probably his best game at navigating the pocket. But he needs to exhibit more patience at times. With 3 minutes left, Cain runs a double move. Similar to the first drive to Worthy. He throws both too quick. In that case, it looks like Worthy could find the ball, but he’s still working his route so it’s harder to locate. To Cain, he threw the damn thing at the start of the second move.

    Other missed opportunities were the 4th and 1 throw to Worthy, the 3rd and 3 throw to Whittington (was really a poor throw and not easily catchable), and with 2:25 left throwing into double coverage while Worthy’s roasting his man.

    As I watch more, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s easy to be critical. I do try to remind myself to be reasonable and consider how most would either succeed or fail in similar circumstances of a given play.

    In looking back at the season, I think Thompson and Barron were under rated and under appreciated. Maybe the best two players on the defense. The Dline was vastly improved but showed a little reversion to last year in the game. At least part of that was the opponent.

    The game didn’t necessarily give me the warm and fuzzies for next year. I do think UW was a very good team so playing with them is a positive given all the circumstances.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. BornOrange0855

    BornOrange0855 250+ Posts

    Only occasionally do I blame a coach for losing a game. Coaches coach and players play, and its the players who either make the play or they don't. It's not a coaches' fault Worthy dropped a couple of balls, or Ewers threw behind Worthy on a 4th down play.
    As for Sark, I ask myself are we better off than we were under Herman. The answer is a resounding "Yes"! I think it's unreasonable to expect a coach to turn a loser into a winner in his first two seasons, even though some have done it. It's year 3 where the rubber meets the road, IMO. Next year is it. Show me. I don't want to hear about it next August, how the culture is good, everyone has bought in, blah, blah, blah.

    Show me.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  9. Run Pincher

    Run Pincher 2,500+ Posts

    I don't like it either because of the blown games. I actually predicted 8-5 in the pre-game prediction thread, but I didn't expect the B12 to suck so bad. Especially okie lite. Otherwise I would have predicted 10-3. And there simply is no excuse for 5 losses with the schedule Texas had.

    You can beat gooner 49-0 but lose to a s^%$# okie lite team? Texas lost 3 games simply due to Sark's stubbornness and stupidity. And it could have very well been 4 games had it not been for a flat out lucky fumble.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. Texadelphia

    Texadelphia 1,000+ Posts

    We are there now. Not quite as bad, but we are there. Ego needs to be checked by allowing an OC to call the game the HC manages the overall game. See Saban’s model….it’s done OK over the past decade or two.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Texadelphia

    Texadelphia 1,000+ Posts

    Perhaps a better OC than HC? I get the want to be “the guy” as HC, but some people just don’t have what it take to do it well and are much more productive as an OC or DC.

    You are what your record says you are….and that’s a .500-.600 coach. Here. USC. UW. As Jesse would say, “it’s science, b*tch!”
     
  12. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada 10,000+ Posts

    Bitter much, Texadelphia?
     
  13. Texadelphia

    Texadelphia 1,000+ Posts

    Nah - not really. Love my Horns, but no longer let the outcome of games affect me like it used to. Just call it like I see it, but try to do it without venom or bitterness. Life’s too short and too many other important things to get worked up about over a goofy game played by 18-22 year olds.
     
  14. Chinstrap

    Chinstrap 1,000+ Posts

    I totally agree. As much as I disliked Jackie Sherrill I had to agree with a statement he made on his way out of a&m. The reason teams usually win is because they have the best players. Before one spews their win/ loss records about the first 2-3 years on the job they need to consider the talent level the coaches have, at each position. And this is impacted significantly by the administration’s handling of the change, how long it takes and how messy. For Texas it has been too many bad years of change.

    If Sark had walked into the job at Bama with all of those previous years of glorious recruiting, I wonder??? Sark has the backing of a lot of people who know a lot more football than anyone on this board. Do you think he gets Manning if he is as bad as some Hornsfans say he is? Do some on this board know more than Archie, Peyton or Eli? Armchair quarterbacking is part of being a fan and critiquing a decision is easy, in hind-site. Fans can and should do that. But dooming a coach to failure after two years is wrong.

    Go aead. The target is on my back.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
  15. Your Wrong

    Your Wrong 500+ Posts

    If it wasn’t coaching, shouldn’t the team with the best players win 100% of the time?

    I am more of a deployment of resources guy than a development of resources guy. Coaches borrow lots from each other including developmental methods and schemes so how much variation is there when it comes to development.

    So many games come down to a handful of plays, which ultimately means execution. Some guys are better with their play calls to make executing those crucial plays easier. It’s also the application of scheme/deployment on those crucial plays that makes execution easier. This is the maddening thing with Sark. He has many plays that make execution easy. But then he has many beat your head against the wall lower chance of execution calls.

    Now you’ve got Bama, Georgia and Ohio State who simply out talent you. Then you’ve got so many teams that could beat you on a given day. So it’s back to execution.

    At this point I lean towards Sarks best chance of big success is to achieve the Bama/Georgia/Ohio State level of talent acquisition. He may be able to do it. I’m hopeful of more consistent execution however. I do think that improves with more time in the system.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Chinstrap

    Chinstrap 1,000+ Posts

    As I said. They usually win with better talent. There will always be some upsets or near equal talent level. But as much as I admire Nick I wonder how he does without his annual loading up of 5 stars. How would he do with that “O” line Sark inherited. Sarks only ace in the hole was at running back and he lost that on Thursday to the money game. Brown had incredible talent in his two NC games and then it dropped off and he went from the penthouse to the sh- -t-house. And while he was building and reaching the top there was tremendous dislike for his OC, Davis. Royal was out-recruited by Switzer and fans called for his head. Good talent, just like a growing top line in business, can solve a lot.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. Your Wrong

    Your Wrong 500+ Posts

    I’d say Saban won initially with better coaching and then talent acquisition took over. Smart, kinda like Mack, I’d say was more talent acquisition. But each have some level of coaching competency.

    We didn’t lose to Tech or OSU because they’re more talented. They certainly aren’t without talent either. Tech beat us because their decision to go on 4th followed with execution. There are tons of teams in this grouping. There’s enough talent and skill to win any Saturday. So thats where coaching matters over the long term. We know undefeated seasons are few so it’s not about being perfect but rather consistency week to week.

    Sark hasn’t shown that he can overcome the lack of dominant talent. He is showing great signs of talent acquisition. He’s shown enough competency that if he does compile the talent then he can be in that position you’re talking about.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. old65horn

    old65horn 1,000+ Posts

    Wow, that is a real reach looking for something about Sark to criticize.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. Horn2RunAgain

    Horn2RunAgain 2,500+ Posts

    That usually means you're behind on the scoreboard for most, if not the entire game
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. Horn2RunAgain

    Horn2RunAgain 2,500+ Posts

    Sam and Vince were more effective because they weren't one dimensional like ewers. Those 2 could, and often did beat teams with their legs . And leadership

    Two things that bug me the most about ewers are
    His footwork. His fundamentals are awful, which affect his accuracy downfield. He reminds me of a lot of swc QBs from the early 80s and prior. Decent arm, poor footwork that lead to poor accuracy.
    Xfer from Ohio state. So he's not good enough to start, yet he was tagged as a generational talent. Red flag #1. Red flag #2 is he doesn't fight for the starting job. Picks up his toys and goes to Austin where he leads an 8-5 squad.

    He just doesn't look like a better than avg qb to me. My .02 worth
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2022
  21. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    So a guy who played a total of 18 games in high school while skipping his senior season was going to beat out Stroud at Ohio State?

    Mechanics are a problem but it did look better last night. Next year he will clean it up even more. He will be a good QB.
     
  22. Horn2RunAgain

    Horn2RunAgain 2,500+ Posts

    I hope you're right. I can only go by what I see and his record.

    We're TEXAS. Let's get a qb with top shelf talent, and who isn't afraid to compete. :hookem:
     
  23. Pomspoms

    Pomspoms 5,000+ Posts

    I would love a top-notch dual QB. Ewers has shown he can run for those first downs. He just doesn't do it very often. I am presuming that Sark doesn't like his QBS to be running backs which is understandable but I love it when a QB is chewing up yards in a mostly open area.
    I also love QB that can throw on the run; that puts a whole lot of stress on a defense.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  24. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    He scrambled from the pocket a lot better too.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    Yep. People have to realize that Ewers doesn't have much college or high school experience. He's about as raw as you can get.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  26. Horn2RunAgain

    Horn2RunAgain 2,500+ Posts

    One good thing, maybe 2 I like about ewers. Pocket presence. Also climbs the ladder very well giving his linemen a chance to protect.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  27. Pomspoms

    Pomspoms 5,000+ Posts

    yep, I don't have a problem with that.
    I have a problem with the head coach letting him play when he is stinking up the joint with terrible play, not giving us the best chance to win the game.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  28. Phil Elliott

    Phil Elliott 2,500+ Posts

    Jonathan Brooks got only 8 touches and still scored 2 touchdowns. Ill just leave it at that.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  29. old65horn

    old65horn 1,000+ Posts

    So is your point QE is not that QB?

    QE was the best QB in the Alamo Bowl period.
    Give him credit.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • poop poop x 1
  30. Texadelphia

    Texadelphia 1,000+ Posts

    Agreed. Hard to be a top D1 program without a significant dual threat QB running the O. Doesn’t typically translate to great NFL talent, but fun to watch QBs line Vince tear apart defenses running and passing.
     

Share This Page