Jordan Yates

[GT_05]

A graduate who is a redshirt sophomore. Amazing.

Jordan Yates, PhD student and starting QB? Has that ever….

 

[LibertyTurns]

Jordan Yates, PhD student and starting QB? Has that ever….

PhD student where? I can see him getting a 740 on the GMAT, no weak areas, but GT fails to select him for admission because he only carried a 3.7 GPA and has no work experience.

 

[GT_05]

PhD student where? I can see him getting a 740 on the GMAT, no weak areas, but GT fails to select him for admission because he only carried a 3.7 GPA and has no work experience.

Let CGC deal with admissions. I’d love to have a starting QB that is pursuing a PhD. I really wonder if that has ever happened though.

 

[bobongo]

Let CGC deal with admissions. I’d love to have a starting QB that is pursuing a PhD. I really wonder if that has ever happened though.

He has three more years of eligibility after this one. Imagine, if he takes a medical redshirt he could theoretically still be playing here four years from now, in 2025. He could already have his PhD. Can you play if you're a professor?

 

[LibertyTurns]

Let CGC deal with admissions. I’d love to have a starting QB that is pursuing a PhD. I really wonder if that has ever happened though.

I’d think not, but then again it’s not unusual to have a true freshman with 2-3 yrs worth of credit hours at your average factory school. You could theoretically be thru your Masters by the time you were a Junior & if you redshirted you could have 2 yrs towards you doctorate. If you took something like EdD which is education’s joke of a doctoral degree, you could be damn near done by the time you’re 23. There’s probably a lot of PhD’s on here, but I’d think 6 years is a pretty good timeframe for something more hefty.

 

[Jerry the Jacket]

I think the coaches have to take the position that Sims did not lose his starting position due to injury, therefore, when he is healed, they have to bring him back as the starter (assuming he does not suck at practice). Hopefully, he comes back and plays well and takes the reigns of the team, and leads us to several wins. If he does not play well, you bring in Yates and see if he can get things going. From then you play the guy with the hot hand. I think that approach minimizes any chance for either guy getting mad and transferring or damaging the team chemistry with some sort of team split over who should be playing.

I think you will see it play out that way.

Go Jackets!

 

[Lawyer mark]

can he change majors and that way he is still making progress towards graduation, but buys more time? Maybe he can get a double major.

 

[slugboy]

can he change majors and that way he is still making progress towards graduation, but buys more time? Maybe he can get a double major.

You can get a second degree—and then you don’t even have to worry about academic progress

 

[bke1984]

This doesn’t make any sense. There was a mesh fumble. Mesh fumbles are not just on the QB. The fumble did not result I. Anything but a lost possession. Turnovers were not the issue with Sims against NIU, inaccurate passes and bad decisions were. We’re you watching the same game?

The lost possession was a big deal in that game. If you’ll remember we needed more points to win. And yeah - it’s at least 50% on the QB, so he doesn’t get a free pass.

 

[bke1984]

can he change majors and that way he is still making progress towards graduation, but buys more time? Maybe he can get a double major.

If he wants to stay he can just pursue grad school or another undergrad degree. Non issue.

 

[danny daniel]

The real head scratcher with me is our OC in the "Red Zone". There seems to be a real pattern here, I know Clemson is tough in the RZ, but I'm not just speaking about the Clemson game, I'm looking back since CDP has arrived, there seems to be a pattern here of real head scratchers of what the hell are you doing fella?? Also what are you doing trying to run Mason wide against a team like Clemson, listen I love JM but lets face it he ain't the swiftest in the room. CDP seems to do really well outside the RZ, but we go in the tank with our play calling and execution in the RZ. Again I understand nobody does well against Clemson in RZ.

I am disappointed that we are yet to have a "heavy" package of players for a power run to score in the red zone or even a commitment to run. We also still seem to not plan ahead for our plays or our subs as evidenced by another wasted timeout inside the 5 yard line when we could not get our players in/out or our play called just after the lightning delay. Put the heavy package in, run Mason three times, and then if you must, call a time out and run a coach P play or kick a field goal. That is not rocket science or cute, but it is the best chance to score with a first down inside the 10. Bobby Dodd and Paul Johnson certainly knew that.

I would further recommend the "heavies" to be something like a two tight end set using Kirby and Pendley if available or someones comparable. Man up.

 

[slugboy]

I am disappointed that we are yet to have a "heavy" package of players for a power run to score in the red zone or even a commitment to run. We also still seem to not plan ahead for our plays or our subs as evidenced by another wasted timeout inside the 5 yard line when we could not get our players in/out or our play called just after the lightning delay. Put the heavy package in, run Mason three times, and then if you must, call a time out and run a coach P play or kick a field goal. That is not rocket science or cute, but it is the best chance to score with a first down inside the 10. Bobby Dodd and Paul Johnson certainly knew that.

I would further recommend the "heavies" to be something like a two tight end set using Kirby and Pendley if available or someones comparable. Man up.

In Collins’ press conference, he mentioned we weren’t as deep on the offensive line this week. No details beyond that, but I get the impression our jumbo set would have to have been TEs

 

[danny daniel]

You talk about folks hidden on the OL. I saw Lay in the game a few times. I know he filled in admirably last year during some injuries/COVID but you have to wonder why we are still playing walkons with a full compliment of scholarship OL available.

Playing time is won on the practice field with competition with no distinguishing between walk-ons and scholship players, according to the coach pressers. I do not believe a lot of the coach talk but in this case I agree with them.

 

[Dress2Jacket]

I am disappointed that we are yet to have a "heavy" package of players for a power run to score in the red zone or even a commitment to run.

I am not a fan of lining everyone up tight to score in the red zone. I'm a fan of spreading people out and running it between the tackles. If you bunch everyone up, you're depending on your front 7/8/9 to be stronger than theirs. Ours aren't stronger than Clemson's. If you spread things out there are gaps to run through.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I think the coaches have to take the position that Sims did not lose his starting position due to injury, therefore, when he is healed, they have to bring him back as the starter (assuming he does not suck at practice). Hopefully, he comes back and plays well and takes the reigns of the team, and leads us to several wins. If he does not play well, you bring in Yates and see if he can get things going. From then you play the guy with the hot hand. I think that approach minimizes any chance for either guy getting mad and transferring or damaging the team chemistry with some sort of team split over who should be playing.

I think you will see it play out that way.

Go Jackets!

Wally Pip agrees with you. Lou Gehrig and the rest of sports history disagrees.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I am not a fan of lining everyone up tight to score in the red zone. I'm a fan of spreading people out and running it between the tackles. If you bunch everyone up, you're depending on your front 7/8/9 to be stronger than theirs. Ours aren't stronger than Clemson's. If you spread things out there are gaps to run through.

Ours are not stronger than most ACC teams.

 

[danny daniel]

So far our three games this year are.

A game against a bad UNI team where Yates played clearly better than Sims but still came up short in terms of a win. Not entirely his fault, but a lack of playmaking puts pressure on everyone else to not make mistakes as well.

A game against an FCS team where Yates played well. Hard to put much importance on this game due to the level of competition and Sims never playing against an FCS team.

A game against Clemson where Yates played pretty well but failed to find the endzone and resulted in a loss despite the defense and special teams playing as well as could be hoped for, imo.

I think it's fair to say at the moment that Yates is more consistent, but we've yet to see that consistency translate to wins (unless you actually think we lose to KSU with Sims). I also think there is a real concern about whether we just need a game manager who is consistent or if we need someone who can go out and make big plays to take the pressure off the rest of the team to have to execute every play for 10 plus plays. I'm sure Yates will still get his chances, but I really wonder if Yates actually gives us a better chance to win or just a better chance to not lose by as much. If our defense/Special teams really are what they looked like against Clemson that would favor Yates.

I am not a fan of lining everyone up tight to score in the red zone. I'm a fan of spreading people out and running it between the tackles. If you bunch everyone up, you're depending on your front 7/8/9 to be stronger than theirs. Ours aren't stronger than Clemson's. If you spread things out there are gaps to run through.

I do not disagree with you as a theory or if the team has a better OL, but we have over two years of dismal performance of spreading it out and some kind of change seems in order. You can bunch up and still run outside. CPJ was way more successful in the red zone bunched up with a relatively weak OL and running the ball inside and outside. I think a run first priority is better inside the 10 and we do not do that and our red zone performance has been really bad..

 

[GT_05]

I think the coaches have to take the position that Sims did not lose his starting position due to injury, therefore, when he is healed, they have to bring him back as the starter (assuming he does not suck at practice). Hopefully, he comes back and plays well and takes the reigns of the team, and leads us to several wins. If he does not play well, you bring in Yates and see if he can get things going. From then you play the guy with the hot hand. I think that approach minimizes any chance for either guy getting mad and transferring or damaging the team chemistry with some sort of team split over who should be playing.

I think you will see it play out that way.

Go Jackets!

I see your point but I hope you’re wrong. To your point about maintaining team chemistry, maybe run two QBs for a game or two. I’ve never been a fan of two QBs but the mutts had some success doing it. This would have the advantage of making life harder on the opposing DC because I don’t think you call the same game for Yates and Sims.

FWIW, my untrained eyes tell me the whole offense functions better when Yates is calling the plays.

 

[VRTechFan]

Part of my thought process is how our coaches talk about him. Either way, I think we can both agree that had Sims stayed healthy and played at an above-average level, Yates might’ve not gotten a legitimate snap this year.

Also it’s really hard to come in at QB and play well in the limited snaps he had last year on a horrible team.

I’m sure the coaches thought Sims beat Yates out. But was it Sims’ potential that beat him out? Sims already has significantly more college game experience than Yates, and Yates looks like he’s on a completely different level out there. And I’m not sure we would’ve ever known that if Sims didn’t get hurt this year.

Or is it that the coaches don't know how to evaluate players maybe?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I see your point but I hope you’re wrong. To your point about maintaining team chemistry, maybe run two QBs for a game or two. I’ve never been a fan of two QBs but the mutts had some success doing it. This would have the advantage of making life harder on the opposing DC because I don’t think you call the same game for Yates and Sims.

FWIW, my untrained eyes tell me the whole offense functions better when Yates is calling the plays.

So much of playing quarterback is getting into a rhythm. I just don’t see how you do that going in and out. You also lose chemistry with the center and backs and then you have dissimilar cadences.