All Activity

I'm not worried about Arch.

Didn't some laugh at the thought of getting 200k subscribers this year? OOps

I'm sure some are thinking red zone calls weren't "creative" enough. First red zone opportunity was fine. Arch actually made a good throw to Livingstone. It was good coverage and you can't really blame Livingstone for not making the catch. Don't like the way the goal line QB sneak unfolded. Not necessarily a bad call, but when they got to line of scrimmage and saw how OSU was stacked for the sneak. I would say there should have been a timeout or audible option. These were both individual plays that aren't indicative of systemic problems. If it keeps happening this season, then you can get worried.

From an ESPN article - https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/46154733/more-8300-nil-deals-worth-80m-approved-new-commission For me the key takeaway is that > 8,300 deals, worth $80 million, have been approved. None have been rejected totally - "332 deals had not been cleared to date and 75 had been resubmitted, while none had entered arbitration, which is available for parties who feel their deals have been wrongly rejected." This is good news for the student athletes, great news for the rich schools (like Texas) equipped to play the new NIL game, bad news for the bagmen of old. Quotes, in case you have problems accessing the link "The new College Sports Commission has cleared more than 8,300 name, image and likeness deals worth nearly $80 million, it said Thursday in its first full update on how the new system is working. The commission, which is in charge of approving contracts worth $600 or more between college athletes and third-party companies, said 28,342 students signed up on its NIL Go platform between June 11, when it launched, and Aug. 31. Nearly 3,200 "representatives" or agents had also signed up. ... The commission said the most common clearance issues were delays in attesting to or providing required information; contradictory deal terms; misreporting of deal terms or mistakes in entering deal terms; and deals that don't satisfy the "valid business purpose" requirement that caused confusion when the platform first rolled out. [ this valid business purpose clause was what most NIL co-ops were most worried about ] The CSC said values of the deals ranged as high as $1.8 million [ so probably they are just going on an annual basis instead of multi-year deals? Assuming the reported numbers for say Felix Ojo and Mark Bowman etc were accurate ]

After listening to Coffee and Football this morning, Will Matthews confirmed my fears about Arch Manning last Saturday against Ohio State. According to Will Matthews, Arch looked fine pre-game and looked to be his normal self. However, when Arch turfed his first throw that was wide open, it looked all the life drained from Arch and everyone on the sidelines were somewhat shocked he missed that throw. From that moment on up until the 4th quarter, it looked like Arch had the yips. People can complain all day about Sark's play calling, but there's nothing you can do if you're a head case and can't make the simple throws. I'm confident that Arch will find his game this season, but I'm worried that Arch is going to make the same mistakes against San Jose State. He needs to find success early, and I hope that Sark can give him confidence and early wins because that's what he needs the most right now.

I think he did fine in this game at making adjustments. In the 2nd half Sark figured out that Ohio St was almost always ending up in cover 3, so he started attacking the seams and flats. There were guys open. unfortunately our qb had the worst game of his life

Must admit I don't understand the criticism. Given that the offense (primarily Arch) had trouble executing basic pass plays that were clearly schemed well enough to work, what exactly should Sark have done to "adjust"? Sark adjusted by running more, which was successful, and eventually working Arch into connecting on some shots. It's not the end of the world. Arch will play much better.

This is the concern for me, as great as Sark is as scripting plays, it seems he has trouble making adjustments during the game. This was something Saban was a master at. If I recall correctly, Saban explained coverage vs. ATM in a game, and he pulled the same play that ATM ran up twice and the first time it was successful and then Saban talked about the adjustments they made and the second time it was ran the Bama defense handled it because of the adjustments.

Crisp routes....indeed, after watching again it was obvious just how poor Wingo performed. The WR group as a whole under performed. But I like Parker ALOT.

Hey Longhorns family, I have a couple spots that may be coming open in our longhorns dynasty league as we have some managers that are not responding. If you are interested in taking over a team please DM me.

Dedman right by the Thompson Center which is below LBJ Library.

Yes!

Now you’re just burying your head in the sand if you think LSU’s performance against Clemson amounted to the same level of domination as our game vs TAMU. If we had just over 100 yds rushing vs Clemson and a quick 3 and out on our final drive to give them an opportunity to tie, there would be PLENTY said about Sark’s imperfections. We had over 150 rushing yds vs Ohio State, yet the common talking point is not that that was a really good showing, but that RBs left yds on the field. True double standard at play

This is exactly what I’m talking about, the fact that you think the two games were similar enough to compare. Our game vs TAMU was a 2 score game from midway through the 2nd quarter to the end of the game. They NEVER had even a chance to tie the game from there. We had ~250 yds running down their throats. TAMU forced one three and out the whole game (first series). Our last series, we did not go quick 3 and out and give them hope. We gained a first down, bled clock and made them burn their TOs. You have to put blinders on to say the games were similar. We truly dominated that game. LSU did not.

See you at the coop

I don't know about a stronger arm than Burrow but comparable i'd say yes. As far as arm talent, Arch has a long way to go from Burrow and i'm just comparing them in college. Arch does not posses the same accuracy Burrow had nor does he throw with the same anticipation and have the ability to layer the football that Burrow had. But Arch is still young and we will need to see how he progresses.

If enough people get upset, the pocketbooks will open up. It's Alabama. They have motivated donors who care. A lot.

I wasn't.

Texas scored 7 points. Whether they were high or not, they were higher than one single touchdown last Saturday. It was a failure of a game plan and it was a failure of execution.

This is it right here 👏🏿

The issue is not much the buyout, but giving a max contract to a new coach plus nil, and buyout of the current coaching staff. Bama doesn't have the money for all of that.

It was a conservative game plan but despite this his offense poorly executed it, which argues that they would have done worse had it not been a conservative approach. His QB1 will progress these next few weeks and we should now have a chip on our shoulder to provide that extra motivation.

I agree with this sentiment. Yes, I think fan expectations were too high. The Arch Manning hype also played a part(Arch will be just fine BTW).

Weren't we expecting too much from the Texas offense vs OSU? Only one returning starter on Oline. Only 3 of top recievers from last year. New TE to replace Helm. A RB returning from triple knee ligament damage. A QB with the weight of the world (so to speak) with Only two starts (against far inferior teams) to his name. And a playcaller who is inept inside the opponents 20 yard line. We expected too much vs a traditional supreme program with consistent higher regarded D. And led by a brand new DC with deep NFL experience. We'll improve a lot before Florida. 🤘

This feels like one of those games that looks good in week one - road win vs a top 5 team. Then it turns out the loser just isn't very good. Both teams looked bad the first half. LSU's first half went: punt, fumble, punt, field goal, fumble. To their credit, they played much better the second half while Clemson continued to suck. Still, LSU was primed and ready to give the game away. My takeaway wasn't that LSU dominated, it's that they are capable of playing well for stretches while Clemson was significantly over-rated. Again.