The Skinny:

Developing passer with flashy arm talent. Little wasted motion and passes arrive quickly. Effortless vertical drive that doesn’t require a sound base. Strong anticipation skills but not always on the same page as his receivers. Presently struggling with down-to-down consistency

The Fat: 

Ewers is moderately-sized, but his potential is colossal. He has a naturally strong arm and likes pushing the ball vertically.  With more focus past the sticks, he delivered desirable returns capturing conversions and explosive completions. Though he didn’t have any attempts top 45 yards downfield against his hardest foes, the Longhorn has palpable pop. But, doesn’t rush to show off his fast ball. Despite his youth, he has displayed advanced craftsmanship on throws with various speeds and touch points. So, he can play both fiery and full of finesse. Ewers' strength allows him to maintain zip even when he sets a poor base. Plus, his refined upper body mechanics shine against closing pressures. That said, his inconsistent balance overly undercuts his operation at large. Even when clean, there were numerous sails out of bounds and a hefty amount of uncatchables. 

Some of his downfield misfires were more judgment mistakes from misreading routes or not always being in sync with his target. He tended to release attempts at appropriate times when his receivers made their breaks but had difficulty gauging their trajectories and avenues. This made his performance look worse than it actually was. Because, some of these throws are downright atrocious on their face. Still, Ewers was solid at releasing in rhythm and seeing a potential downfield opening. That trait can sometimes take years to develop. So despite the errancy, that helps prop up his ceiling. 

Another aspect that definitely brightens his outlook is his stellar environment. Even without getting into his talented teammates, Ewers’ head coach and play caller is one of the best around at orchestrating offenses. Blessed with razzmatazz and a slew of scheme elements, let’s just say his guys came open a little easier than some of his peers. All in all, 56% of his attempts against his hardest opponents came off a screen, RPO, or dropback play action. However, despite his lowered bar, his aforementioned inaccuracy and a double-digit Drop Rate produced a middling ANY/A and Success Rate. And while he moves well with smooth fluidity, the Longhorn is not a standout designed rusher or sack eraser. The spice is right. But Ewers just needs a smidge more time to marinate, grow his confidence, and polish his precision. 

Largest Strength: Arm Strength and Anticipation 

Largest Area of Opportunity: Downfield Accuracy 

The Stats: color-coded to reflect percentile standing within impact class (green = great, white = mid, red = bad)

Spray:

Overall:

Ewers played aggressively against his hardest opponents. He logged the 3rd-highest ADOT, hammering home he looked for downfield completion. But while about an eighth of his attempts went for at least 20 yards, no other Impact QB had a worse Adjusted Completion% and his 7.9% Interceptable% was well in the dangerzone. Sure, most vertical QBs have worse placement metrics than Checkdown Charlies. But Ewers deep and midrange miscues damaged his profile and stained his perception as a passer. Already with a poor overall raw Accuracy%, both his 27.1% Uncatchable% and 40.5% Depth Adjusted Accuracy% were right at the Impact group’s floor. Acknowledging that nearly a quarter of his attempts targeted behind the line of scrimmage, his stinky placement stats present a clear red flag.

His twitchy release helped negate rushes and limit takedowns. But since pressure was seen on over 31% of his tries, adversity overly edged out his schematic advantage to where Ewers’ down-to-down efficiencies didn’t excite. His mid 7.4 YA in our study finished well outside the group’s top10. Now, Ewers has the tools to rectify his performance moving forward. And again, thanks to his supporting cast, he is a popular candidate to breakout this year and burst into first round discussion for next April. However, there’s a lot to fix before he can be considered a dependable overall passer. 

Downfield:

Ewers was not a good passer targeting beyond ten yards downfield against his hardest opponents. Bluntly, if he replicates these returns, 1) Texas will not be back 2) His case for a first round pick implodes. WR errors, misjudged breaks, and drops did hurt his offerings on occasion; especially his deep ball. Over half of his dingers in his sample were duds. Still, his biggest hangup remains to be an inconsistent lower body. While a potentially nice off-balance thrower, his down-to-down base must be more sound to improve his accuracy when the slightest tick can be the difference between a crazy completion and a ball sailing out of bounds. 

There was some statistical solace from Ewers’ midrange production. Yes, he was relatively average compared to our Impact QBs. Like a lot of young right-handers, he favored targeting the right side. About 57% of his downfield targets went outside the right hash. But thanks to his savvy working fastballs, off-speeds, and touch passes, his traits tease great things are right around the corner.  

Pressured: 

Ewers is a volatile passer under duress. He was just as likely to log an explosive completion as an interceptable, nearly half of his throws were uncatchable despite a relatively low number of throwaways, and barely a fifth of his attempts beat situational goals. Yet, his accuracy scores performed fairly well. 

He overly preferred to hang in the pocket rather than extending. Plus when he broke rank, he often hunted for a checkdown or quick outlet; playing hot potato. In structure, he posted a 6.1 ANY/A, which would have been a top7 figure in our study. His quick release enabled him to sackblock pass rushers and generally provided juice to keep his offense ahead of the chains. His 15.0% Pressure:Sack Ratio cracked the group’s top10. 

Outside the Pocket:

Again, Ewers preferred to dish it downfield within structure. Outside the pocket, he aimed to play it safe. Not even 21% of these throws traveled over ten yards downfield. The conservative approach did begat good returns. But for a player known for fun deliveries, one would think he would’ve played with a little more flair. Only two other Impact QBs had a lower ADOT in these spots than his 6.7 clip. In turn, he posted good placement stats for a change. And with more on-target connections, he experienced moderate boosts in his consistency metrics. Though his bottomline outside the pocket isn’t exemplary, it illustrates how his toolsy arm can find unconventional avenues to find situational victories. 

Contested/Tight Windows:

Ewers didn’t test tight windows too often as only about a fifth of his sample’s targets were contested. However, His arm talent shined thru with a top5 such Accuracy% amongst the group. And along with an above average 1D+TD Rate and Depth Adjusted Accuracy%, no Impact QB posted a preferable Breakup% than his 16.2% clip. But his profile wasn’t all sunny. Nearly a quarter of these throws were uncatchable, and his Adjusted Completion% finished under 40%. Worst off, he threw three picks against only one score. Granted, it’s nice his arm hubris hasn’t produced too many backbreakers on a per throw basis. But his juicy arm also didn’t produce a remarkable amount of big gainers. His 3.2 ANY/A was decidedly forgettable in this context.  

Dropback:

Without RPOs and screens, Ewers' aggressiveness and verticality cranked up. No Impact QB topped his such 15.8 ADOT as both his Explosive Pass% and Interceptable% grew versus his overall returns. But due to bountiful boo boos, his dropback resume stinks. Every placement metric placed under the group standard, accentuated by the worst Adjusted Completion% and Uncatchable%. Even without taking sacks, Ewers stood little chance to sport anything besides a subpar ANY/A in this context. Even though the next level is evolving to help spoonfeed completions to passers more, Austin’s Golden Arm cannot get by if his down-to-down accuracy stays this poor. Sarkisian will set him up for success, but it won’t matter much with that many blunders. Improving his precision is critical. If not, he might be a dealbreaker for many folks. 

Dropback Play Action:

Sark loves motion and deception tactics. So naturally, Ewers had one of the highest True Play Action% in our study. But while this helped create openings and manipulate backends, the Longhorns failed to maximize on this tactic against their hardest defensive foes. Ewers did see gains on his bottomline in terms of potency and his Success and 1D+TD Rates stayed flat. Plus his such Explosive Pass% tripled his Interceptable. But while his accuracy stats were relatively average in these spots, they clearly soured compared to attempts without play fakes. This further implies rockiness within Ewers' resume and another hole to patch despite his clear capabilities to punish over-eager opponents. 

“Floor” Passing:

Ewers has an okay passing floor. He generally made nice decisions and captured at least moderate efficiency while still providing some splash plays. And, that’s taking into account about an eighth of these throws were dropped. With another year of progression and instruction under Sark, Ewers should be able to find better consistency and results within structure. But his substandard accuracy remains to be a major drag on his profile. All of his placement stats failed to beat the group average and 11% of his throws had turnover-potential. This operation oozes risk and screams stagnation could be around the corner if this doesn’t improve as soon as possible. Though Sark, his teammates, and his own physical tools puff up his ceiling to create one of the highest upside in the game, Ewers’ errancy refuses to elevate his floor beyond mediocrity.