Sims=Bilbo

LibertyTurns

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,994
Agreed. Let's go back to talking about what a stupid idea for a thread this is
You’re a 3rd year Freshman in GT Fan Years if you think Bilbo = Sims.

Here’s a calculator. Select Lab, type in GT fan years & it calculates equivalent human to see where you fit. It’s pretty accurate, 3 years give you 29 year’s old. You’d be 10 when Bilbo started, about the time when you can figure out whether a football player on your favorite team is good or not.

 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,313
I think the game changes when Yates is in. Teams won't defend him the same way because he is a different kind of QB in general. Against Sims everyone is going to stack the box, spy the QB and force him to beat them with his arm on 3rd down. That's why we are 25% on third down conversions in the last three games, against three teams that aren't all that great defensively. Well, that and obvious issues with play calling. Before the final drive, which was a great showing by Sims and Sanders, im not trying to take that away from them, Sims was 8-20, and we had gone 3 and out 3 straight times with the game on the line against a pretty bad team. Without a holding penalty on Duke, that would have been what decided the game in the other direction. Do I think possibly Yates may have gotten a first down and more in one or all of those drives? Yes. Is it possible that Yates could have hit the wide open tight end over the middle and put the game away? Yes. Sims simply wasn't playing well yesterday.

You think teams respect Yate's arm more than Sims?

BTW we were 3-14 against Clemson on third down. Against UNC we were 0-4 on third down with Yates. There is little to no reason to believe Yates is better at sustaining drives against P5 teams than Sims.

Do I think possibly Yates may have gotten a first down and more in one or all of those drives? Yes. Is it possible that Yates could have hit the wide open tight end over the middle and put the game away? Yes. Sims simply wasn't playing well yesterday.

Anything is possible when you don't actually have to do it. Kind a like I could say "is it possible Sims would have thrown for 300 and 3TDs against Clemson? Yes." It's a vacuous statement. There is no reason to believe that Yates would have lead us to more than 31 against Duke based on the way he has played this year especially with an OL that is as banged up as our has been.
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,225
I would love for someone to show us what Yates has done against power 5 competition that they are so convinced that he will run the offense better than Sims. Yates may not turn the ball over as much but he has not shown that he can move the offense either. The Duke game was never going to be a 10-3 type game. We were going to have to score points to win. With our oline woes I think you need a player like Sims back there that can make things happen. With that being said he has things he needs to improve. However he is still a very young player and definitely not a finished product. I think he will continue to improve.

Yates vs P5 has a 57 percent completion percentage, 0 TD, 1 INT. A little more than 1 ypc as a runner, surely skewed by some big sack losses.
 

Squints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,080
You're math is wrong. Sims had two TDs after we went up by 14 early and led another drive to a FG. Did you think 14+7= 31?
My math wasn't wrong I just wasn't particularly clear in what I meant which is my bad. What I meant to say is after we went up 14 and before that final drive where we took the lead. So no I didn't think 14+7 = 31. Appreciate the snark though. It's very cute.

Except Yates is not more consistent or at least not in the way you think. There is more to consistency than simply not turning the ball over.

Against NIU Yates got 7 drives - 3 TDs, 3 punts, and downs. And one of those drives was one that started at the NIU 25.
Against Clemson - 10 drives, 2 field goals. The start to that game was 4 and out, 3 and out, 3 and out. People had such low expectations going into that game that any kind of ball movement was seen as wonderful but there wasn't much consistency to our offense. We'd have a good play and do little else on the drive.
Against UNC - 5 drives, 2 FGS, 1 starting on the UNC 10. 4 failed to produce a 1st down.

People have a warped view on what Yates did because of the game against an FCS team and a game with such low expectations that anything would be seen as a success.

What is ridiculous is the claim the insinuation that Yates probably wins that game easily. Other than the first TD to Gibbs I don't see Yates making the plays it took for us to score the other TDs. I don't see him moving the pocket and hitting Carter like Sims did on the second drive, I don't see him hitting McGowan in the endzone the way Sims did for the third TD, and the last drive wasn't happening. Maybe he wins by virtue of the extra possessions if he never turns it over but he certainly doesn't win easy and I doubt we win at all with him if we can't establish a running game to lean on.
If I were you I would save my time and energy on someone who actually thinks these things about Yates and not someone who in all likelihood agrees with me on this subject. I've never said or intimated any of this. Most I've said is that if Yates tears it up while Sims is out he should keep the job. He didn't so he didn't. Doesn't mean Sims doesn't need to improve his consistency of play going forward.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,879
You think teams respect Yate's arm more than Sims?

BTW we were 3-14 against Clemson on third down. Against UNC we were 0-4 on third down with Yates. There is little to no reason to believe Yates is better at sustaining drives against P5 teams than Sims.



Anything is possible when you don't actually have to do it. Kind a like I could say "is it possible Sims would have thrown for 300 and 3TDs against Clemson? Yes." It's a vacuous statement. There is no reason to believe that Yates would have lead us to more than 31 against Duke based on the way he has played this year especially with an OL that is as banged up as our has been.
Honest question. Since you are criticizing Yates for his performance against Clemson, do you think Sims would have done better and would we have had a reasonable chance to win at the end had he started and played the whole game?
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,313
Honest question. Since you are criticizing Yates for his performance against Clemson, do you think Sims would have done better and would we have had a reasonable chance to win at the end had he started and played the whole game?

I absolutely think we would have had a better chance to beat Clemson with Sims. We got about as good a game as we could have expected from the defense and special teams, and Yates played about as well as could be reasonably expected from him. But he can't make the plays we need him to. Not this year Sims can make those plays even if he doesn't always. Yates gives us a lower chance to lose by 14+ but Sims gives us a better chance to win.

I'm not criticizing Yates. I'm criticizing people who have attributed to him things he hasn't proven yet.
 

jojatk

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
810
I can't tell you how awesome it is to watch GT fans battling each other to belittle one GT QB or the other so much that they can right about which one they like. Yes, it's great to be a fuzzy bee.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,926
Location
North Shore, Chicago
If you are not going to accept the reality that Jeff Sims has been in the program and played for two seasons now, there is no point trying to discuss anything with you. Yell "He's just a freshmen" as much as you want. Everyone knows you are delusional.

Sophmores make mistakes too, aka sophmore slump. You don't have to keep putting on that clown makeup and act like he just showed up, we all know how long he's been here.

No one said he just showed up. No one said this was his first year. You taking umbrage with him being a freshman sounds like a personal problem. He is a freshman. NCAA says he's a freshman. Georgia Tech says he's a freshman. He hasn't played for 2 seasons; he played for most of 1 and a half of another. He played last year and probably shouldn't have. He's young and making young mistakes like young people do. If he were a sophomore, that would mean he'd only have his junior and senior years after this one. Guess what...he still has a sophomore, junior, and senior year of eligibility.

Oh, and if I were you, I wouldn't be making any clown references. That mud you're trying to sling is pretty sticky. You might have a little on your cheek.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,926
Location
North Shore, Chicago
You’re using his eligibility as a replacement for experience. He is a sophomore by experience. Heck even Yates is a Freshman with a RS and a COVID year. But you can’t call him a freshman forever. He has a year+ of experience and was a starter in over 10 games. Call him what you want, but you can’t say he hasn’t touched the ball at all.
No one said he didn't have experience. No one said he hadn't touched the ball. What was said was that he's a freakin' freshman (which he is) and [to paraphrase] to expect inconsistency from a young QB. Hell, even the old QB's we've played were inconsistent as hell.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,926
Location
North Shore, Chicago
What was he last year when he started all 10 games for us? You pick the dumbest hills to die on.
He was a freshman then, he's a freshman now. To argue differently is stupid.

If someone wants to talk about years of experience, that's fine, but that wasn't the comment. The point that was made still stands. He's 1 year removed from HS football; who in their right mind would not expect inconsistencies? There's a reason most of the teams that do well in college football have experienced QB's. Rarely do young QB's play, even rarer are they consistent. That's the point. You guys just decided to get hung up on him being called a freshman, which, by the way, he is.

It's easy to pick the hill when you're right.
 

FlatsLander

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
435
He was a freshman then, he's a freshman now. To argue differently is stupid.

If someone wants to talk about years of experience, that's fine, but that wasn't the comment. The point that was made still stands. He's 1 year removed from HS football; who in their right mind would not expect inconsistencies? There's a reason most of the teams that do well in college football have experienced QB's. Rarely do young QB's play, even rarer are they consistent. That's the point. You guys just decided to get hung up on him being called a freshman, which, by the way, he is.

It's easy to pick the hill when you're right.
Okay, I solved it, he's a RS freshman that got to play 10 games instead of the currently allowed 4 games. The RS next to freshman is invisible on the ramblin wreck website.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,879
I absolutely think we would have had a better chance to beat Clemson with Sims. We got about as good a game as we could have expected from the defense and special teams, and Yates played about as well as could be reasonably expected from him. But he can't make the plays we need him to. Not this year Sims can make those plays even if he doesn't always. Yates gives us a lower chance to lose by 14+ but Sims gives us a better chance to win.

I'm not criticizing Yates. I'm criticizing people who have attributed to him things he hasn't proven yet.
We are going to go round and round about potential vs decision making. Clemson had more QB hurries and as many sacks as UNC, Pitt, and Duke combined. Sims statically does poorly under pressure right now and is turnover prone. I don't think that would have gone well. Maybe he figures that out though and we see a monster game from him against UGA. Well see.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,926
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Okay, I solved it, he's a RS freshman that got to play 10 games instead of the currently allowed 4 games. The RS next to freshman is invisible on the ramblin wreck website.
I'm okay with just calling him a young, inexperienced player who's going to force the ball at times, make mistakes, throw off his back foot, think he's superman, try to do too much, make bad reads, and generally be inconsistent. I'm not sure why others are not expecting some inconsistency. He's been consistently inconsistent. Most young players are.
 

yeti92

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
888
I'm okay with just calling him a young, inexperienced player who's going to force the ball at times, make mistakes, throw off his back foot, think he's superman, try to do too much, make bad reads, and generally be inconsistent. I'm not sure why others are not expecting some inconsistency. He's been consistently inconsistent. Most young players are.
I think that's an accurate description we can all agree on.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
5,982
If you want a player with a lot of upside who sidearms occasionally and throws too many interceptions but also has big throws, why not throw in the Brett Favre comparison?

I’m not saying we should say he’s going pro and winning a Super Bowl, but it’s not like the Bilbo comparison is accurate
 
Top