Where Quinn Ewers ranked among Big 12 quarterbacks in play-action passing

In Texas head coach Steve Sarkisian‘s offense, the preferred method for big plays is through converted deep shots on play-action. Sarkisian often states his offense is “run first,” so play-action attempts punish defensive backs and other back seven defenders for making assumptions about a play based on a playfake.

[Get SIX MONTHS of Inside Texas Plus for only $29.99!]

“The quarterback’s best friend is a really good running game, and when you can run the ball well and you have people deploying to try to stop the run, now you should find some advantageous throws down the field where you can do that,” Sarkisian said Tuesday.

Sarkisian mentioned that with Quinn Ewers, his starting quarterback for the upcoming 2023 campaign, he’s seen an increased level of comfort for Ewers within the Longhorn offense. He’s observed him cycle through progressions better, including in those play-action opportunities.

If Ewers can improve in play-action to support whatever the run game led by Jonathon Brooks, Keilan Robinson, Jaydon Blue, or CJ Baxter can offer the Longhorn offense, the entire operation could see drastic improvement.

Pro Football Focus tracks quarterback statistics for play-action and non-play-action passes. From last year’s mark, Ewers definitely has room for improvement.

Inside Texas offers a look at how Ewers performed in play-action and other passing opportunities, plus how his numbers compare to other quarterbacks in the 2022 Big 12.

All stats are via Pro Football Focus

Quinn Ewers

Total passing stats: 171-of-296, 57.8%, 2174 yards, 14 TD 6 INT
Play-action passing: 73-of-121, 60.3%, 913 yards, 6 TD 1 INT
Non-play-action passing: 98-of-175, 56.0%, 1261 yards, 8 TD 5 INT

Consider what happens on play action, especially in Sarkisian’s offense. The quarterback typically takes the snap in the pistol and fakes a handoff. That’s meant to fool defensive backs, making them potentially a half-step late on their read and possibly setting up one-on-one opportunities downfield. The quarterback’s progression is usually far-to-close, so the quarterback looks deep, then looks at the medium read, then for the checkdown.

If that deep read looks even or open, the ball is thrown. A look at Ewers yards per attempt on play-action reveals how much room he had to grow in that area in the offseason. He averaged 7.5 ypa on play-action. That’s a fine number for overall passing, but when the attempts in these situations are often 25-30 yards downfield? It indicates the level of struggles Ewers had at times.

So why are his statistics arguably worse for non-play-action passing? There’s no attempt to fool the defense with a play fake in those situations. The defensive backs see pass and are reading that all the way, putting themselves in position to break up the pass or pick off the ball. These plays are also typically run when the offense is behind the sticks. They could also be screens, plays that don’t typically go for big yardage.

Of note, the PFF stats are unable to filter RPOs, which sometimes feature brief play fakes.

Ewers’ ability to convert more downfield opportunities and avoid Oklahoma State-style performances will help his stat line and the Longhorns as a result.

Hudson Card

Total passing stats: 75-of-109, 68.8%, 928 yards, 6 TD, 1 INT
Play-action passing: 32-of-45, 71.1%, 484 yards, 5 TD 0 INT
Non-play-action passing: 43-of-64, 67.2%, 444 yards, 1 TD 1 INT

Despite his departure for Purdue, looking at Card’s stats in his opportunities against Alabama, UTSA, Texas Tech, and West Virginia offers additional data about the Longhorn offense. Card was efficient when asked to make plays with his arm versus those teams, and even led a game-tying drive versus the Red Raiders.

Card heads to an Air Raid system in West Lafayette, Ind. and will hope to continue to excel in an offense with a solid number of non-play-action pass attempts, as the next QB will show.

Max Duggan, TCU

Total passing stats: 267-of-420, 63.6%, 3697 yards, 32 TD 8 INT
Play-action passing: 77-of-119, 64.7%, 1360 yards, 13 TD 1 INT
Non-play-action passing: 190-of-301, 63.1%, 2337 yards, 19 TD 7 INT

The Heisman finalist and the Big 12 offensive player of the year was a force all of last season, even though he began the year as Chandler Morris‘ backup. Duggan effectively distributed the ball to weapons like Quentin Johnston and Jordan Hudson, and took the game into his own hands from time to time.

Will Howard, Kansas State

Total passing stats: 119-of-199, 59.8%, 1633 yards, 15 TD 4 INT
Play-action passing: 28-of-58, 48.3%, 434 yards, 2 TD 1 INT
Non-play-action passing: 91-of-141, 64.5%, 1199 yards, 13 TD 3 INT

Howard bounced back and forth with Adrian Martinez for opportunities, but was poor on play-action. Deuce Vaughn and Malik Knowles heading for the NFL could put a bit more into Howard’s hands this year.

Tyler Shough, Texas Tech

Total passing stats: 107-of-179, 59.8%, 1290 yards, 7 TD 4 INT
Play-action passing: 34-of-50, 68.0%, 434 yards, 3 TD 1 INT
Non-play-action passing: 73-of-129, 56.6%, 856 yards, 4 TD 3 INT

Shough is the likely starter for the Red Raiders this year after Joey McGuire rotated three quarterbacks throughout his first season in Lubbock. Another Air Raid offense, Shough looks to improve in non-play-action passing this year to make Zach Kittley’s offense hum.

Spencer Sanders, Oklahoma State

Total passing stats: 212-of-368, 57.6%, 2641 yards, 17 TD 9 INT
Play-action passing: 48-of-88, 54.5%, 663 yards, 4 TD 3 INT
Non-play-action passing: 164-of-280, 58.6%, 1978 yards, 13 TD 6 INT

It was a tough year for Sanders and Oklahoma State. Often dinged up, Sanders was charged with being the Cowboy offense for much of last year and his body had a hard time answering the bell. He transferred to Ole Miss, where he could reap the benefits of wide splits and run lanes in Lane Kiffin’s offense depending on how the competition with Walker Howard and Jaxson Dart goes.

Blake Shapen, Baylor

Total passing stats: 231-of-366, 63.1%, 2781 yards, 18 TD 10 INT
Play-action passing: 79-of-123, 64.2%, 1165 yards, 12 TD 2 INT
Non-play-action passing: 152-of-243, 62.6%, 1616 yards, 6 TD 8 INT

Shapen is the trigger-man for Jeff Grimes’ “Reliably Violent Offense.” It’s a decent analog for what Sarkisian runs in that it utilizes play-action passing, the Bears just major in a different run scheme.

Jalon Daniels, Kansas

Total passing stats: 152-of-231, 65.8%, 2014 yards, 18 TD 4 INT
Play-action passing: 56-of-87, 64.4%, 913 yards, 9 TD 1 INT
Non-play-action passing: 96-of-144, 66.7%, 1101 yards, 9 TD 3 INT

Kansas runs the most unique offense in the Big 12, with Lance Leipold utilizing plenty of option principles in his system. Daniels missed much of last season due to a shoulder injury and saw his dynamism reduced following his return.

Dillon Gabriel, Oklahoma

Total passing stats: 234-of-373, 62.7%, 3184 yards, 25 TD 6 INT
Play-action passing: 104-of-172, 60.5%, 1652 yards, 16 TD 2 INT
Non-play-action passing: 130-of-201, 64.7%, 1532 yards, 9 TD 4 INT

When healthy, Gabriel turned in a solid effort during his first year in the Power 5 ranks. The non-play-action passing numbers may be indicative of the quick throws Jeff Lebby’s system produces. It is worth following what freshman five-star Jackson Arnold accomplishes in his opportunities in 2023.

JT Daniels, West Virginia

Total passing stats: 200-of-327, 61.2%, 2107 yards, 13 TD 9 INT
Play-action passing: 53-of-82, 64.6%, 679 yards, 4 TD 1 INT
Non-play-action passing: 147-of-245, 60.0%, 1428 yards, 9 TD 8 INT

Daniels is looking to start over with Rice after a year on a woeful WVU roster.

[Subscribe to the ON TEXAS FOOTBALL YouTube channel for daily videos from Inside Texas!]

Hunter Dekkers, Iowa State

Total passing stats: 302-of-458, 65.9%, 3044 yards, 19 TD 14 INT
Play-action passing: 94-of-154, 61.0%, 1189 yards, 6 TD 3 INT
Non-play-action passing: 208-of-304, 68.4%, 1855 yards, 13 TD 11 INT

Dekkers and Iowa State serve as another decent analog for what Sarkisian runs. ISU struggled to score in the red zone last year, and the interception numbers indicate Dekkers was asked to compensate for a lackluster Cyclone run game. Texas fans know there is one significant incompletion in those stats.

Drew Pyne, Notre Dame

Total passing stats: 164-of-254, 64.6%, 2021 yards, 22 TD 6 INT
Play-action passing: 52-of-71, 73.2%, 796 yards, 11 TD 1 INT
Non-play-action passing: 112-of-183, 61.2%, 1225 yards, 11 TD 5 INT

Why include Pyne in this list? He was the starting quarterback under Tommy Rees for the Fighting Irish last year. Rees is now at Alabama, who the Longhorns will face in Week 2. While Pyne won’t be playing for the Crimson Tide — that’ll be Tyler Buchner — a view of those stats indicates what Rees and company might try to do versus the Longhorns in Tuscaloosa this season.