Started By
Message
re: Texas vs Oklahoma
Posted on 10/1/24 at 10:56 am to BigBro
Posted on 10/1/24 at 10:56 am to BigBro
quote:against other teams, I’d agree. But we need QE to knock the rust off and be fully in the flow of the game. I wouldn’t want to disrupt that by subbing. Do hope Arch comes in to hand the ball off in the 4th because we’re blowing them out so bad!
If I am Sark, I create a set of scripted plays for both. It's the same offense, but both quarterbacks have very different skillsets. Quinn is great in the short and intermediate routes, and Arch is great with the deep ball and he is also a threat to run.
1
Posted on 10/1/24 at 11:17 am to BevoBucks
If Sark announced that Quinn is QB1 and he will get the majority of the snaps, but the plan if for Arch to play 1-2 series each half, I think it creates an advantage for Texas.
1) The other team has to prepare for both Quarterbacks, and they are different, despite the same offensive scheme.
2) Sark has the option to sit Quinn for a series each half (if needed) to change up the momentum of the game and/or allow Quinn to see the field from the sidelines as opposed to behind the OL. If Quinn is locked in and on fire, you obviously don't make a change.
3) It avoids QB controversy. It gives Sark options to use Arch without the backlash that will happen if Arch does enter the game without a huge lead.
It's just an idea. I understand the opposition to the idea, and I even agree that it could be tricky, especially if Arch is successful and Quinn is not.. It's also possible that it could negatively impact Quinn, but if handled right, it could be a nice weapon.
I trust Sark to figure it out either way. Just thinking out loud..
1) The other team has to prepare for both Quarterbacks, and they are different, despite the same offensive scheme.
2) Sark has the option to sit Quinn for a series each half (if needed) to change up the momentum of the game and/or allow Quinn to see the field from the sidelines as opposed to behind the OL. If Quinn is locked in and on fire, you obviously don't make a change.
3) It avoids QB controversy. It gives Sark options to use Arch without the backlash that will happen if Arch does enter the game without a huge lead.
It's just an idea. I understand the opposition to the idea, and I even agree that it could be tricky, especially if Arch is successful and Quinn is not.. It's also possible that it could negatively impact Quinn, but if handled right, it could be a nice weapon.
I trust Sark to figure it out either way. Just thinking out loud..
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News