While I understand I don't have to click on these posts, men who react emotionally, sometimes through a series of posts, are littering this board with fragile takes. Their premises lack context, nuance, and objectivity. And, yes, some are trolls who only show up when Texas loses or wins “too close.”
Others are fans who purport to know a thing or two about football but never fail to prove otherwise. It’s like last year’s season, and the 4-5 one-score games never happened.
Yesterday's game was a redux of the Mississippi St game. Texas’ penalties (and turnovers) prevented an easy victory. Some will claim penalties are coaching, but Texas has fewer penalties per game than Georgia, Alabama, and A&M. This is an inconvenient truth.
Just win, baby. This is all that matters in the SEC, especially on the road. Road victories are why Georgia’s 13-12 victory at Kentucky is all but forgotten (as well as their loss at Alabama). Yes, the same Kentucky that almost beat Georgia at home but lost at home to Vanderbilt by a larger margin.
Recency bias to form narratives is predictable from this kind. They ask readers to project future outcomes from the day’s result and ignore the seven other games worth of evidence. It’s how a post stating “1-3 the rest of the season” can be reasoned. Can it happen? Sure. But based on today’s odds and objective analytical data, 3-1 is MUCH more probable.
It’s also how someone can unironically claim that Elko “inspired the defense” by making the difficult decision to bench his struggling quarterback. This is not simply a poor opinion; it's an embarrassing attempt to conflate Ewers's 80% completion percentage with Weigman's embarrassing play and the strange insistence on missing the more obvious issue entirely.
Sark has always enjoyed a 1000-yard rusher, but he will not have one this season. The tried and tested idiom of football- that the team with the better rushing attack is more likely to win- and the challenge facing Sark today - a lack of a different maker in the running game. Sark has attempted to mitigate this with the short passing game to mixed success. However, his dilemma is that he knows he needs a running game, so when and how to employ it, especially when the short passing game is clicking, can affect the offense. This was evident during the second half of the Michigan and Vanderbilt games when Texas enjoyed great success employing quick passes against an aggressive defense but introduced more rushing balance to poorer results.
I’m unsure what the answer is because there may not be a good answer. What can a team do when they lack above-average running backs, which Sark hasn’t had to worry about during his first three seasons at Texas? They must collectively play better. Ewers played well yesterday but needs to play better. The OL has looked poor for the last three games and must correct their gaffes. And, yes, because Texas can’t run the ball with any predictability, Sark needs to forge more of a reliable identity and take advantage of the team's strengths.
Others are fans who purport to know a thing or two about football but never fail to prove otherwise. It’s like last year’s season, and the 4-5 one-score games never happened.
Yesterday's game was a redux of the Mississippi St game. Texas’ penalties (and turnovers) prevented an easy victory. Some will claim penalties are coaching, but Texas has fewer penalties per game than Georgia, Alabama, and A&M. This is an inconvenient truth.
Just win, baby. This is all that matters in the SEC, especially on the road. Road victories are why Georgia’s 13-12 victory at Kentucky is all but forgotten (as well as their loss at Alabama). Yes, the same Kentucky that almost beat Georgia at home but lost at home to Vanderbilt by a larger margin.
Recency bias to form narratives is predictable from this kind. They ask readers to project future outcomes from the day’s result and ignore the seven other games worth of evidence. It’s how a post stating “1-3 the rest of the season” can be reasoned. Can it happen? Sure. But based on today’s odds and objective analytical data, 3-1 is MUCH more probable.
It’s also how someone can unironically claim that Elko “inspired the defense” by making the difficult decision to bench his struggling quarterback. This is not simply a poor opinion; it's an embarrassing attempt to conflate Ewers's 80% completion percentage with Weigman's embarrassing play and the strange insistence on missing the more obvious issue entirely.
Sark has always enjoyed a 1000-yard rusher, but he will not have one this season. The tried and tested idiom of football- that the team with the better rushing attack is more likely to win- and the challenge facing Sark today - a lack of a different maker in the running game. Sark has attempted to mitigate this with the short passing game to mixed success. However, his dilemma is that he knows he needs a running game, so when and how to employ it, especially when the short passing game is clicking, can affect the offense. This was evident during the second half of the Michigan and Vanderbilt games when Texas enjoyed great success employing quick passes against an aggressive defense but introduced more rushing balance to poorer results.
I’m unsure what the answer is because there may not be a good answer. What can a team do when they lack above-average running backs, which Sark hasn’t had to worry about during his first three seasons at Texas? They must collectively play better. Ewers played well yesterday but needs to play better. The OL has looked poor for the last three games and must correct their gaffes. And, yes, because Texas can’t run the ball with any predictability, Sark needs to forge more of a reliable identity and take advantage of the team's strengths.
