Texas' future offensive identity

[diegozanna20]

It seems clear to me what the plan on defense is:
- Aggression, energy, effort;
- Man Coverage that ties well with the aggresive fronts.

But what is the plan going to be on offense?
Does Sark want to go back to the original plan at the start of the season (a lot of 12 personell, heavy run game up the middle tied up with play action, lot of 7 step drop PA concepts with Arch snapping the ball under center) or stick with the thing that seemingly worked really well for Arch (spread offense, get it out quick most of the time, lot of straight dropbacks with bunch formations, etc...)?
I think it's very doable to tie in a more heavy downhill running game with what arch does best without having to resort to 12 personell sets (Do we have the guys for 12P?)...

I guess it all comes down to what Sark thinks was the reason for the struggles early on... Was it Arch having the yips? Was it just because of the lackluster running game? Was it the OL? Were the passing concepts (Having an ADOT of 20 against Florida) too "bold" and unsustainable?

We're probably going to get a better picture about what the plan is after the portal but for the most important thing is just having a clear cut idenity... doesn't matter what that identity is.

Edited 4 hours ago by diegozanna20

[hookem1014]

I think that answer will come after the bowl game. Let’s see if Sark makes more staff changes on offense and what kind of personnel we bring in from the portal. 

[whereiend]

Good question.

IMO Arch is a football player and we should let him make plays. No need for the slow developing play action schemed deep shots.

Just give him some receiving options and let him keep his eyes down field.

[diegozanna20]

20 minutes ago, whereiend said:

Good question.

IMO Arch is a football player and we should let him make plays. No need for the slow developing play action schemed deep shots.

Just give him some receiving options and let him keep his eyes down field.

I see Arch thriving more in the kind of offense that Burrow ran in 2019 rather than Mac Jones at Bama(with Sark as the OC), for example...
I feel like he needs to get in a rhythm and throw all over the field... Arch chuking it deep off of PA all day wouldn't work IMO

[Here for the Wins]

2 hours ago, diegozanna20 said:

I guess it all comes down to what Sark thinks was the reason for the struggles early on... Was it Arch having the yips? 

This yips discussion is ridiculous.

Arch versus A&M had as many poor throws as any game.  The rollout right that was nowhere near the WR.  The ball well short of Endries in the left flat.  The early second half ball in the dirt after leaving the pocket to a wide open WR in the end zone.  Even the TD to Wingo was a little off.  That’s 3 balls in one game that were as bad as any in any game.  Yet not a single, solitary yips discussion.

Sometimes a QB just throws a crappy ball.  Sometimes the QBs rhythm is off because of pressure.  Sometimes a QBs timing is off for a myriad of reasons - maybe it’s inconsistent route running, maybe the play calling hasn’t gotten him into the flow of the game or maybe that’s not the QBs strength.
 

It is merely speculation but yeah I’m sure he was nervous at OSU, but Sark and the run game fell short of making a difference.  I’d wager OSU gave him some looks that were not anticipated then they made some good plays.  The pressure was pretty constant too.  Nevermind it was game 1 and as Bobby told us the QB and WRs really had limited work together thru the spring and into summer.

Arch was pretty solid versus SJSU yet I’ve read numerous times on boards that was not the case.  Or maybe just think real hard at the ball at Wingo’s feet and think “that’s the yips”  as if that’s indicative of how the game played out.  Nevermind if you watch closely the route is questionable but the effort is poor on attempting to catch the ball.  Ignore those plays he evades the rush and hits the receiver in stride because of a penalty or a drop.

UTEP.  Sark screwed this one up.  I don’t remember how I calculated it, but it was 70/30 run pass ratio.  For the previous 16-ish games that I reviewed only 3 were greater than 50/50 with only 1 at 60/40 in favor of run.  Given the run game struggles to that point, it was clear the preparation for the week and the gameplan was work the run game.  Nevermind that Wisner was out.  Baxter got 1 play.  Moore didn’t play.  Moseley still was out.  And on drive 1, on 4th and 4, Arch “yips” it into the ground.  Or the truth is that when your QB is moving left you as a WR do not keep moving to his extreme right.  Arch anticipated reasonably well.  Wingo did not.  As a result the pass looked terrible.  Watch it again.  If Wingo sits, it is right there.  Then against OU we saw a great example of how Wingo should have responded in such a situation.  First down.  Then we had a sequence of poor Arch plays, but there are only 3 of real significance.  Two were overthrows and one non-throw.  The ultimate failing was on Sark here with the gameplan.  It’s quite possible that if we get a normal plan with respect to run/pass, that we score more, the QB gains confidence and the arm chair QBing wanes sooner.   Yeah the QB needs to hit the throws but I’ve watched two-three games of football and those misses happen.  

Just yesterday I saw Beck completely miss a wide open deep throw and on his first 3rd down throw it was well behind the receiver.  Even the throw that Toney fumbled was on his back shoulder.  Let’s get some Film Guy review of this game. How about it Benkert.