Arch Not Seeing Field in Picture Format

[rgvhorn80]

Sometimes people can’t accept the truth on here. The whole team didn’t play well Saturday. Arch included. I’d bet he’d tell you that too.

[FootLaw]

11 minutes ago, harveycmd said:

I don't get this. Arch is much better at avoiding sacks than most. He misses throws. He makes throws. Defense screwed us against Florida. What do you want?

In complete fairness, he's not completely wrong or right. Arch is definitely not progressing fast enough through check downs and releasing the ball earlier. I'm sure he understands this and doesn't love the struggles. That said, Arch is also not solely to blame for the fiasco we are witnessing. Our line play on both sides of the ball is very underwhelming thus far. Hard to work your reads when you're running for your life.

Sark needs to adjust the offense and make it similar to early QE. QE did some damage through the air and Arch has a better scrambling ability to capitalize on space given. My hope is we'll see more short-intermediate shots on Saturday.

[Here for the Wins]

27 minutes ago, rgvhorn80 said:

He’s not seeing the field well. He is missing wide open WRs in addition to not having time to throw at times. 

Did Quinn see the field well when we scored 17 against the Aggies, 20 against the Pigs, 14 against the Buckeyes?  It’s been referenced or implicated that 3rd year guys are better.  In those games we ran incredibly well versus the Aggies, decent against the Pigs, not so good against OSU.  And surprisingly the worst run game of those 3 resulted in the fewest points.  Probably had the most pressure too.

People are stumbling over themselves to be seen and to profit.  Hot and over the top takes is the theme of the day.

Can you explain to me what seeing the field looks like because ultimately it has to result in points as that is your objective?  And even as many passes as he’s thrown Murray needs to know what coverages we prepared for and what coverages did we actually get.

There is absolutely a lack of honesty or understanding.  And that screen play to Endries is a perfect example.  Arch evaluated the risk and adjusted his actions based on that.  It’s not even worth critique much less the criticism that some put upon it.  He actually gave his team a chance.  It just didn’t work out.

 

 

[Oldest Horn]

Imagine using still photos to critique field of vision. It’s almost like someone is desperate to drive home their narrative. 

[DanielOnorato]

11 minutes ago, Here for the Wins said:

Did Quinn see the field well when we scored 17 against the Aggies, 20 against the Pigs, 14 against the Buckeyes?  It’s been referenced or implicated that 3rd year guys are better.  In those games we ran incredibly well versus the Aggies, decent against the Pigs, not so good against OSU.  And surprisingly the worst run game of those 3 resulted in the fewest points.  Probably had the most pressure too.

People are stumbling over themselves to be seen and to profit.  Hot and over the top takes is the theme of the day.

Can you explain to me what seeing the field looks like because ultimately it has to result in points as that is your objective?  And even as many passes as he’s thrown Murray needs to know what coverages we prepared for and what coverages did we actually get.

There is absolutely a lack of honesty or understanding.  And that screen play to Endries is a perfect example.  Arch evaluated the risk and adjusted his actions based on that.  It’s not even worth critique much less the criticism that some put upon it.  He actually gave his team a chance.  It just didn’t work out.

 

 

For me it's less about Quinn, this is about Arch and more or less seeing the same struggles and troubles that weren't just against Florida but showed up for an 11-25 passing performance vs UTEP. I've voiced my concerns and what I think is necessary to improve moving forward which is mistaken for QB bashing. I'll keep my mouth shut moving forward for the echo chamber but all criticisms I've pointed to can be fixed and will be but they aren't hateful, trolling or in bad faith. 

Arch will get it and the upside is tremendous as I love the kid but he has missed gimme throws and has struggled to read the field undoubtedly. 

Edited 1 hour ago by DanielOnorato

[Neil Leininger]

54 minutes ago, Here for the Wins said:

Did Quinn see the field well when we scored 17 against the Aggies, 20 against the Pigs, 14 against the Buckeyes?  It’s been referenced or implicated that 3rd year guys are better.  In those games we ran incredibly well versus the Aggies, decent against the Pigs, not so good against OSU.  And surprisingly the worst run game of those 3 resulted in the fewest points.  Probably had the most pressure too.

People are stumbling over themselves to be seen and to profit.  Hot and over the top takes is the theme of the day.

Can you explain to me what seeing the field looks like because ultimately it has to result in points as that is your objective?  And even as many passes as he’s thrown Murray needs to know what coverages we prepared for and what coverages did we actually get.

There is absolutely a lack of honesty or understanding.  And that screen play to Endries is a perfect example.  Arch evaluated the risk and adjusted his actions based on that.  It’s not even worth critique much less the criticism that some put upon it.  He actually gave his team a chance.  It just didn’t work out.

Nope. which is why there were plenty talking about Ewers holding the team back last year. I expect QBs that want to have legitimate NFL careers to be able to figure things out in year three of the same system. There is a reason why this team struggles to score points in the SEC and a lot of those struggles is due to our mid QB play the past 2 seasons. Don't give the game reps excuse either. Mac Jones had this offense humming in his first year as QB1. There is no reason Manning shouldn't be picking up the coverages post snap and throwing to wide open guys.