If Arch Manning had been present, would Texas have defeated Ohio State? Opinions among fans are split.
The world of college football is one defined by passionate fanbases, intense rivalries, and debates that can last for years. The Texas Longhorns have long been a prestigious program, but their recent struggles to maintain national championship contention have left fans longing for the return to dominance. The 2024 season was a pivotal one for Texas, with many eyes on the team as they took on one of their most challenging matchups: a non-conference showdown against Ohio State, one of the most historically successful programs in college football. The game was high stakes — a chance for Texas to make a statement to the rest of the country.
But as fate would have it, Arch Manning, the most hyped recruit to come to Texas in decades, was not the starting quarterback at the time. That role was filled by Quinn Ewers, who had earned the trust of head coach Steve Sarkisian and was tasked with leading the team. Despite a solid effort from Ewers, Texas came up short, falling to Ohio State in a closely contested game. It raised the question that continues to linger in the minds of many fans: What if Arch Manning had been the starting quarterback instead of Ewers? Could Texas have defeated Ohio State?
This debate has become a topic of intense discussion among Longhorns fans. There are supporters of both quarterbacks, with some arguing that Manning’s talent and pedigree could have been the difference-maker, while others believe that the result would have been the same regardless of who was under center. As the offseason progresses and speculation about Manning’s future continues, it’s an interesting time to reflect on how the presence of the future superstar might have changed the course of that game and whether Texas could have secured a statement win over a national powerhouse like Ohio State.
The Case for Arch Manning: A Generational Talent
Arch Manning entered the college football scene with a tremendous amount of hype. The nephew of Peyton and Eli Manning, both Super Bowl champions, Manning’s arrival at Texas was the culmination of years of anticipation. His high school career at Isidore Newman School in New Orleans was nothing short of stellar. Manning’s skill set was admired by scouts and analysts alike, with his poise, arm strength, and football IQ being frequently cited as traits that set him apart. He was heralded as a once-in-a-generation quarterback, and his pedigree seemed to make him the perfect fit for a Texas program that had long sought to reclaim its former glory.
Fans who advocate for Manning’s potential to have changed the outcome of the Ohio State game point to several key factors that make him an intriguing alternative to Ewers. First and foremost is Manning’s composure under pressure. Having grown up in a football family and playing in high-pressure situations throughout his career, Manning had an innate ability to perform in big moments. His calm demeanor on the field, combined with his quick decision-making, could have helped Texas in critical moments during the Ohio State game, especially when the stakes were high.
Additionally, Manning’s football IQ and his ability to read defenses at a high level were frequently cited as strengths during his high school days. While Ewers was no slouch in this regard, Manning’s experience at a higher level of competition during his time at Isidore Newman may have allowed him to adjust to Ohio State’s defense more effectively than Ewers, especially if Texas faced complex defensive schemes.
Talent-wise, Manning is often viewed as a more dynamic quarterback than Ewers, especially in the long run. He possesses an impressive arm, an ability to throw on the run, and an accuracy that rivals some of the best quarterbacks in recent memory. His ability to make every throw on the field — from deep balls to short, quick hitters — would have been a key asset against a talented Ohio State defense.
Fans who argue that Manning could have been the difference in the Ohio State game believe that he would have given Texas an edge in all of the key areas: leadership, experience, and raw talent. They believe that Manning’s skill set would have unlocked additional potential in the Texas offense, leading to better execution, particularly in high-pressure situations. Had Manning been under center, Texas could have potentially executed more explosive plays or better taken advantage of Ohio State’s defensive weaknesses.
The Case for Quinn Ewers: Development, Experience, and Trust
On the other side of the debate, many fans believe that Quinn Ewers, despite his inconsistency, was the right choice for Texas against Ohio State — and that even with Manning in the game, the outcome would have likely been the same. This camp of fans points to Ewers’ experience and his growth throughout the season as key factors that made him the better option.
Ewers’ first season at Texas after transferring from Ohio State was one filled with ups and downs. He showed flashes of brilliance, such as his strong arm and ability to make difficult throws, but also struggled with inconsistency, which led to some frustrating moments for Texas fans. However, by the time Texas faced Ohio State, Ewers had grown considerably as a player. His command of the offense had improved, and he showed a better ability to manage the game. Many of those who back Ewers argue that, despite his occasional mistakes, he was capable of leading Texas on a deep run and was the best option for that moment.
One of the main arguments for Ewers is his experience with Sarkisian’s system. By the time Texas played Ohio State, Ewers had been in the program long enough to develop a strong understanding of Sarkisian’s offensive philosophy. He was able to orchestrate drives, read defenses, and get the ball into the hands of his playmakers — such as Xavier Worthy and Jordan Whittington — more effectively than many fans may realize. Sarkisian’s offense requires a quarterback to be in sync with the system, and Ewers, even though he made mistakes, was better integrated into that system than Manning could have been at the time.
While Manning undoubtedly had the physical talent to succeed, Ewers’ ability to manage the game and handle high-pressure situations — which were crucial in the matchup against Ohio State — were areas where fans argue that Ewers still had an edge. As a more experienced player, Ewers was trusted to lead the team through difficult moments in the season, and the game against Ohio State was a testament to that trust.
Furthermore, team chemistry played a significant role in this debate. Ewers had built a rapport with his offensive line, running backs, and wide receivers. This connection, while it might have taken Manning time to develop, was an essential element of the offensive success in big games like the one against Ohio State. There’s a belief among some fans that throwing Manning into such a high-stakes game, even with his obvious talent, could have disrupted that chemistry and hurt Texas’ chances.
The Influence of the Ohio State Defense
Another crucial element in this debate is the performance of the Ohio State defense. Ohio State has long been known for its defensive prowess, and the Longhorns faced one of their toughest defenses of the season in this game. The Buckeyes’ defensive line, secondary, and linebackers presented unique challenges that both Ewers and Manning would have had to navigate.
Ewers, despite his inconsistencies, had the benefit of facing and adapting to elite defenses throughout the season. His ability to adjust to difficult situations — particularly when facing a defense like Ohio State’s — may have played a significant role in keeping Texas competitive in that matchup. He had been tested by elite defenses in the Big 12, and that experience could have helped him manage Ohio State’s defensive pressure better than Manning would have in his first high-pressure start.
That said, Manning’s raw ability to escape pressure and make plays with his legs could have been a game-changer. His mobility and creativity when the pocket broke down might have given Texas a better chance to move the ball, particularly when facing elite pass rushers from Ohio State. Had Manning been able to keep plays alive and stretch the field with his legs, it could have opened up more opportunities for big plays, especially when traditional passing lanes were closed off by the defense.
The Ultimate Question: Could Texas Have Defeated Ohio State?
Ultimately, the question remains: Would Texas have defeated Ohio State if Arch Manning had been the starting quarterback? The answer is far from simple, and opinions among fans will remain divided.
On one hand, Manning’s talent and potential might have been the difference in the game. His ability to elevate the Texas offense and add another dimension to the team could have turned the tide in a tightly contested matchup. If Manning had been able to execute at a high level and use his football IQ, he could have been the spark Texas needed to defeat Ohio State.
On the other hand, Ewers’ experience and the cohesion built over the season should not be underestimated. Even though the Longhorns didn’t win, Ewers demonstrated the ability to manage the offense and perform under pressure — traits that would have helped keep Texas competitive in such a high-profile game.
Ultimately, fans may never know for sure. What is certain, however, is that both quarterbacks offer unique strengths and that Texas is in good hands moving forward, with the ability to compete at the highest level regardless of who is under center. Whether it was Ewers or Manning on that day against Ohio State, the future of Texas football looks bright.
