OTF Premium Thoughts on Arch Manning

[AusMOJO]

On 8/31/2025 at 7:55 AM, Quinncent McManning, Jr. said:

As i said in the game thread… too many poor side arm flicks without feet set. Look at this throw (ignore the fact that endries would have walked in for a td)

 

 

If he looks to his left, he had Endries wide open, I believe. 

[AusMOJO]

5 minutes ago, AusMOJO said:

If he looks to his left, he had Endries wide open, I believe. 

Actually looking at it closer, that looks like Spencer Shannon, #83. I think Endries is #88. But still, he was wide open on that drag route, the S or CB was being blocked in the end zone. All he had do was turn and plow into the end zone. 

That felt like an all game thing for him. He was barely under any pressure, even in this one, perfect OL block, has plenty of time, still makes the wrong read. 

[AusMOJO]

On 8/31/2025 at 8:05 AM, awashbump said:

I don’t think the run game was as good at the box score suggests. Patricia was fine with letting Texas get good runs when the field was big, but Texas simply didn’t run the ball when it counted. (3 & 4th and short, goal line)

I disagree, if you hand it off to Baxter on the goal line, instead of having Arch run it, those are TD's. There was push there. Because they converted several 3rd downs via running the ball, which were 3&2, etc. 

[harveycmd]

8 minutes ago, AusMOJO said:

I disagree, if you hand it off to Baxter on the goal line, instead of having Arch run it, those are TD's. There was push there. Because they converted several 3rd downs via running the ball, which were 3&2, etc. 

Before the game everyone was saying just let Arch run it on the goal line. Sark let him run it, but it didn't work. In Sark's defense, Arch had been successful running throughout the game, including a previous fourth down.

 

[DanielOnorato]

On 8/30/2025 at 4:16 PM, Gerry Hamilton said:

Rod and I said the least pre-snap motion of any game we could remember in real time 

Was there less motion in practice? Its confusing because the Publics leading heisman candidate was Texas weak link on the field. You could argue arch was their worst starter. I get it, its a tough road game, we flush it. I always felt Quinn was underrated because like Tom Brady he was unselfish and money on short and intermediate. Take what's there and let the other teams dumb dumbs make the mistakes. Arch was lucky not to throw a second pick. I chalk it up to inexperience and think his ceiling hasn't changed from prior thoughts. However, I have to ask has short and intermediate passing been a struggle for arch throughout his practice time at Texas, its clear he has Michael Vick downfield passing.

[DanielOnorato]

56 minutes ago, AusMOJO said:

If he looks to his left, he had Endries wide open, I believe. 

endries is 88, Spencer shannon is 83

[AusMOJO]

6 hours ago, DanielOnorato said:

endries is 88, Spencer shannon is 83

Yeah I corrected myself in another comment, couldn't edit that one for some reason. 

[Aspann85]

23 hours ago, Assistant Regional Manager said:

You have shown zero offensive pulse all game. You are going to need to score a TD at some point. You are at the one foot line. All a FG does is require you drive down again and score a TD, which looked like a daunting task up to that point.

You do not kick a FG from the 1 foot line in that situation. Ever. It is just flat wrong to adjust otherwise. It lowers your win probability in every way, making a one possession game, a one possession game.

And not to pile onto you specifically, but it’s the skee-ball analogy. You have the guy that goes for the “100” the whole time and unless he is lucky he may hit it 2-3x, but me, I go for the 50 every time and never lose. I can hit the 50 with my eyes closed bc it is taking the easier points when they are given. Those 50s add up to 500 from 10 balls when the guy going for the 100 only hits that hole 1-3x per game. It’s an all or none philosophy that can win you games but more consistently leads to losses. This game didn’t warrant the all or none mentality at all. We were moving the ball and they weren’t, plain and simple.

[Assistant Regional Manager]

4 minutes ago, Aspann85 said:

And not to pile onto you specifically, but it’s the skee-ball analogy. You have the guy that goes for the “100” the whole time and unless he is lucky he may hit it 2-3x, but me, I go for the 50 every time and never lose. I can hit the 50 with my eyes closed bc it is taking the easier points when they are given. Those 50s add up to 500 from 10 balls when the guy going for the 100 only hits that hole 1-3x per game. It’s an all or none philosophy that can win you games but more consistently leads to losses. This game didn’t warrant the all or none mentality at all. We were moving the ball and they weren’t, plain and simple.

We obviously disagree about this.

Kicking a FG from the 1 foot line to make a one possession game, a one possession game, has nothing to do with going for 50s every time vs 100s. It's called simple game theory. If the score of the game is 7-0, you need a touchdown. Kicking a FG from the 1 foot line makes the score 7-3. You know what is required when a score is 7-3? A touchdown. So you just bypassed an opportunity from the 1 foot line for a TD in hopes of a later possession ending in a TD when you have shown very little offensive pulse all game. It isn't smart. It lowers win probability. You just had as good of a scoring chance as you ever get in the game of football and chose to bypass it in hopes of scoring on a different possession later on.