Polish Leppy 22
Well-known member
- Messages
- 5,530
- Reaction score
- 710
Will be very intriguing to watch him and Texas his first two years in parallel with his third year when they go to the SEC, especially if Saban is still there.
It makes sense. UT jumped from 42nd to 12th in Adjusted Line Yardage between 2020 and 2021, and their 2022 OL haul was elite.
Sark obviously cares about whether he'll be fielding a competent defense, but that's probably of secondary concern to the Mannings. An underperforming blue-blood program with a huge fanbase, a good OL, and plenty of elite offensive skill talent is all he needs to win a Heisman and leave after three years as the first pick in the draft.
random video I thought of today
Arch's last name is going to guarantee him serious Heisman consideration as long as he's putting up numbers. Sark needs an elite defense to win a title. Arch doesn't need one to accomplish his own goals.If he wins a Heisman, he's going to have to be on a team that wins games. Lamar Jackson won a Heisman on a 9-4 team. He's the exception.
The QB position gets judged by wins and losses, fair or not. If they're going to win games, they need a defense that's better than 99th in the country to get their program where they want to go and to get where the Mannings want Arch to go.
Peyton might subscribe to having a bad defense. Poor guy had great offenses and put up greats stats but always had a bad defense.I do believe you're correct that real life could be different than fantasy football, and in this particular case there is zero doubt. This is a Power Five college football program with a dumpster fire issue on the defensive side of the ball.
Last year they scored 35 per game and allowed 31 per game (99th in 'Merica out of 130). They went 5-7 and didn't get a 5-7 "there are two many games so we need teams" invite to a bowl.
They've been hot garbage defensively now for some time.
We'll see. I don't see the pundits and scouts giving Arch a pass just because of who he is. Maybe to some degree. Winning games is everything for Quarterbacks in the eyes of the people who matter when it comes to the Draft and awards.Arch's last name is going to guarantee him serious Heisman consideration as long as he's putting up numbers. Sark needs an elite defense to win a title. Arch doesn't need one to accomplish his own goals.
He had two losing seasons with the Colts. His first and his fourth. Won 10-14 games in the rest.Peyton might subscribe to having a bad defense. Poor guy had great offenses and put up greats stats but always had a bad defense.
He'll be playing in a Big-12 with Oklahoma in major rebuilding mode post-Riley. He's not trying to win games in the SEC-W.We'll see. I don't see the pundits and scouts giving Arch a pass just because of who he is. Maybe to some degree. Winning games is everything for Quarterbacks in the eyes of the people who matter when it comes to the Draft and awards.
Welcome to the Big-12.Last name or not, he's going to have to be putting up whack ass video game stats if he's losing 4-5 games a year for the train of thought to suddenly change that he's a winner even though his team isn't winning.
Sark is a proven commodity when it comes to producing elite offenses. He did it as an assistant to Carroll at USC, as HC at USC, as an assistant to Saban at 'Bama, and had Texas looking very dangerous at times last year despite losing Ehlinger and all the cultural rot at UT.I get he's a Manning, but the people who vote for these awards have their own set of standards and ego, too. This would be one hell of an exception for them to break protocol. None of this is to say that Sark can't right the ship and get the defense turned around in time for Arch to arrive on campus, but that remains to be seen. Alabama and Georgia already have the proven infrastructure, and the Mannings know this, so to your point I think they see what Sark is offering as it relates to them specifically on offense for Arch.
Absolutely. 5-7 isn't gonna cut it. But the Mannings are betting on Sark to make UT's offense elite within the next couple years, and to at least have the defense stop underperforming it's talent level. I'd say that's a pretty good bet. A top-5 attack and a top-20ish defense is all Arch needs to do reach his ceiling (whatever that is).That being said, even with the defense having the ability to not get much worse than it is, if they're losing games the questions are going to be asked no matter how many yards and TD he throws for.
I'm with LAX. Arch is overrated.
Then a second round pick, a brief NFL career, cup of broadcast coffee and whatever Jimmy's doing with his life now.Think he'll turn out like Jimmy Clausen where the hype is so outrageous that he can never possibly live up to it, even if he's a very good QB.
Lotta similarities there. Sark also brings Weis' "decided schematic advantage". But Ol' Charlie didn't get to play in the defense-optional Big-12 with his biggest rival recently brought low by a coaching change. Point being, I wouldn't bet against Arch putting up big numbers in Sark's offense during his time at UT. Whether Sark can fix the defense, clear out the cultural rot, and got a hold on the Longhorn's meddling boosters is another question.Think he'll turn out like Jimmy Clausen where the hype is so outrageous that he can never possibly live up to it, even if he's a very good QB.
He's playing in the Big 12 for one year. Texas goes to the SEC in 2024 do they not?He'll be playing in a Big-12 with Oklahoma in major rebuilding mode post-Riley. He's not trying to win games in the SEC-W.
Welcome to the Big-12.
Sark is a proven commodity when it comes to producing elite offenses. He did it as an assistant to Carroll at USC, as HC at USC, as an assistant to Saban at 'Bama, and had Texas looking very dangerous at times last year despite losing Ehlinger and all the cultural rot at UT.
Absolutely. 5-7 isn't gonna cut it. But the Mannings are betting on Sark to make UT's offense elite within the next couple years, and to at least have the defense stop underperforming it's talent level. I'd say that's a pretty good bet. A top-5 attack and a top-20ish defense is all Arch needs to do reach his ceiling (whatever that is).
It's looking like 2025 for Texas and OU to join.He's playing in the Big 12 for one year. Texas goes to the SEC in 2024 do they not?
Feel for the kid in a way. He's got his family to fall back on, but there is a ton of weight on the shoulders of an 18 year old who has probably never experience real adversity.
Didn't have it rough growing up like his old man and his uncles.
And, both Sark and Weis liked to overindulge. One on the booze and one on the Little Debbies.Lotta similarities there. Sark also brings Weis' "decided schematic advantage". But Ol' Charlie didn't get to play in the defense-optional Big-12 with his biggest rival recently brought low by a coaching change. Point being, I wouldn't bet against Arch putting up big numbers in Sark's offense during his time at UT. Whether Sark can fix the defense, clear out the cultural rot, and got a hold on the Longhorn's meddling boosters is another question.
So two years in the Big 12. Assuming he starts in 2023.It's looking like 2025 for Texas and OU to join.
Archie had it rough. I think his three sons were quite comfortable, but only because Archie went out of his way to be a good father and was being paid as a professional football player.Didn't have it rough growing up like his old man and his uncles.
He had two losing seasons with the Colts. His first and his fourth. Won 10-14 games in the rest.
In college, they went 8-4 his freshman year. 11-1, 10-2, 11-2 the rest of the way.
If Peyton had played on crap teams, he'd have just been his dad in the end.
Eh,… his side chicks will make even the most stunning IE wags look like beef jerky,… kid will be fineFeel for the kid in a way. He's got his family to fall back on, but there is a ton of weight on the shoulders of an 18 year old who has probably never experience real adversity.
Arch rollin' up to Austin.Eh,… his side chicks will make even the most stunning IE wags look like beef jerky,… kid will be fine