‘Memory Lane’ can become a slippery slope once you begin walking down it. The power of hindsight can infest a notion you hold in such a way that it becomes dangerous. Almost detrimental to the future. This is something those of a Longhorns persuasion and the wider football sphere are experiencing right now. Texas’ old guard, a la Quinn Ewers, is out and in steps Arch Manning. But as people look forward to this new era in Austin, there’s some looking back going on as well. Ewers’ astonishing NFL Draft slide has fanned the flames of this retrospection. Which has spawned a very intriguing question: Should Arch Manning have been QB1 earlier? In particular, during the CFP last season when the offense lacked vim. EssentiallySports did an exclusive interview with college football savant Adam Breneman to dissect this premise and see whether it’s fair or revisionist.
This premise stems from a couple of things. For one, Arch Manning’s potency and positive impact in the limited playing time he did get. After Quinn Ewers went down with an oblique injury, Manning started 2 games in his absence. Texas won both, giving people enough ammo to want him to be installed full-time. Additionally, Steve Sarkisian also used Manning’s athleticism to move the sticks in certain schemes and in-game situations. Which also netted positively for Texas. However, there’s one key piece to the proverbial puzzle missing here: Quinn Ewers’ own performances. Which, quite frankly, aren’t represented well in his position within the NFL Draft hierarchy. Ewers’ solid performances are at the crux of former All-American tight end turned CFB analyst Adam Breneman’s reply to the question we asked him during his exclusive EssentiallySports interview.
“Do you feel Arch Manning was held back for Quinn Ewers last year and could’ve made more of a difference for Sark and Texas in hindsight?” is what we presented to Breneman. He answered in disagreement. “I don’t think Arch was held back — Quinn was playing high-level football. You don’t make a change when your QB is leading you to a Big 12 title and a playoff spot,” said Adam Breneman. On the surface level, the argument is airtight. In the two years Ewers was starting ahead of Manning, Texas made the CFP both times. There was no real reason to cause disruption and risk a lower floor to chase a higher ceiling. A ceiling that isn’t even guaranteed to be higher with Arch. Texas was largely successful with him, but that said, was Ewers the primary catalyst behind this success?
There are two kinds of quarterbacks. Not in terms of archetype, but in a more abstract, intangible sense. To borrow a Charles Barkley analogy, there are bus drivers and bus riders. Trucks and trailers, if you will. Those who are force multipliers and accentuate everybody around them vs. those who are a mere cog in the machine. There’s a prevalent belief that Quinn Ewers, in burnt orange, fell in the latter category. That he was good enough to quarterback a playoff team, but maybe not to will them over the line when push came to shove. Well, that 4th and long play he made in the Peach Bowl at the end of regulation time to keep Texas’ season alive says otherwise. Texas may not even have been in the semifinals if not for Ewers.
During his exclusive interview with EssentiallySports, Adam Breneman also proceeded to add, “That said, Arch is the future, and the experience he got last year behind the scenes will only help him. Sark handled it the right way — now Arch gets his shot to shine.” Touche, Adam. Pondering over what could’ve been is a futile exercise. Ewers’ time as a Longhorn was good, and rewriting history just to have Manning’s flame burn brighter isn’t necessary. Meanwhile, Arch Manning’s promotion to QB1 actually gives birth to a paradoxical problem. Zoom out, and you’ll realize that no matter what happens in 2025, Steve Sarkisian comes out on the other side in a pickle.
Whichever way Arch Manning pans out, Steve Sarkisian will face criticism
The Arch Manning debate really is a paradoxical, self-fulfilling prophecy. Here’s how. Suspend disbelief and assume he lives up to the hype and fanfare. Plays up to his 5-star rating coming out of high school and leads Texas to the Natty. Maybe even helps them get the monkey off their backs and win it. It means Steve Sarkisian wasted him last year as he had Arch sitting behind a 7th-round draft pick. Even wasted a year where Texas could’ve won hardware. That’s scenario #1.
Scenario #2 plays out in the inverse. A reality where Sark was correct and Ewers was the right choice last year. Say none of the aforementioned success transpires next season, and we realize there were genuine footballing reasons why Manning was sat behind Ewers, other than experience and seniority. That means, in theory, Arch Manning isn’t as good as the 7th-round pick. So Sark put the program’s hopes on a fallible pair of shoulders. There are negatives in both scenarios, making it a bit of a paradox.
Either scenario shows Sark in a bad light for mismanaging the quarterback situation. Alas, he’d take the pelters for ‘wasting’ Arch and his roster last season if it means they win the national championship. The way the program is headed, they’re going to be in the championship conversation perpetually anyway. No matter who’s lined up under center. Unrelated, EssentiallySports also got an exclusive scoop from Penn State alum Breneman about the state of their program heading into 2025.
The post (EXCLUSIVE) Steve Sarkisian’s Arch Manning Snub for Quinn Ewers Was ‘the Right’ Call, Says Adam Breneman appeared first on EssentiallySports.