Starting QB speculation

[1BearJACKET]

Back to GT quarterbacks. This staff has hitched its wagon to Sims for now so I don't expect to see a different starter for now. At some point if the same mistakes continue over several games then I will have to say I will lose confidence in the coaching staff's ability to prepare an offensive game plan and make adjustments. So far I am not impressed this season. We actually did show some improvement last year in the later part of the season but still not great. Maybe same this year but only a couple of wins this season is not going to give me much confidence in this staff. We cannot get in a perpetual wait til next year cycle.

Bad idea to "hitch their wagon" to one person. They could take a ride over a cliff. If they are sacrificing wins to develop one player then they could lose the team if not the fans. They better have someone and more than one someone ready to play should the Sims experiment goes sideways. A team is always one play away from losing a player to injury, so not having a backup ready to go is whistling past the graveyard. Not to mention academics. No guarantee that the starter will be available next season. I hope neither of those scenarios play out, but the coaches need to have a contingency plan in place.

 

[JacketOff]

Bad idea to "hitch their wagon" to one person. They could take a ride over a cliff. If they are sacrificing wins to develop one player then they could lose the team if not the fans. They better have someone and more than one someone ready to play should the Sims experiment goes sideways. A team is always one play away from losing a player to injury, so not having a backup ready to go is whistling past the graveyard. Not to mention academics. No guarantee that the starter will be available next season. I hope neither of those scenarios play out, but the coaches need to have a contingency plan in place.

1) Suggesting the coaching staff would sacrifice potential wins by benching the better player at a position, for the sake of developing another player is ridiculous

2) Suggesting Sims or any other QB might not be academically eligible next year?!?!? Come on dude. WTF is wrong with this fan base sometimes

 

[1BearJACKET]

1) Suggesting the coaching staff would sacrifice potential wins by benching the better player at a position, for the sake of developing another player is ridiculous

2) Suggesting Sims or any other QB might not be academically eligible next year?!?!? Come on dude. WTF is wrong with this fan base sometimes

1) Playing a starter exclusively despite multiple turnovers should be expected. It should not be viewed as killing the starter's confidence. I think should be an opportunity for that player to learn and improve. If the players behind the starter that are ATL cannot produce because they are so much worse than the starter, then I have no confidence in the QB coach's ability to evaluate or develop QBs. And keeping a struggling starter in until there is no reasonable way that a comeback could be made with another man under center is sacrificing a W.

2) I in no way suggested that Sims would become ineligible due to academics. And while I doubt that it is probable, it most definitely is possible. It is Georgia Tech after all, not UGA or some other factory.

 

[smokey_wasp]

Our fan base: Pick a QB and stick with him. No, wait, not that one!

 

[Deleted member 2897]

1) Playing a starter exclusively despite multiple turnovers should be expected. It should not be viewed as killing the starter's confidence. I think should be an opportunity for that player to learn and improve. If the players behind the starter that are ATL cannot produce because they are so much worse than the starter, then I have no confidence in the QB coach's ability to evaluate or develop QBs. And keeping a struggling starter in until there is no reasonable way that a comeback could be made with another man under center is sacrificing a W.

2) I in no way suggested that Sims would become ineligible due to academics. And while I doubt that it is probable, it most definitely is possible. It is Georgia Tech after all, not UGA or some other factory.

 

[1BearJACKET]

Good job. You just added the perfect illustration of keeping a struggling QB on the field. For clarification, who is that down in the hole? Collins or Patenaude?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Good job. You just added the perfect illustration of keeping a struggling QB on the field. For clarification, who is that down in the hole? Collins or Patenaude?

To clarify, that’s me yelling at you, and you’re down there digging, digging, digging your hole even deeper.

Feel free to extricate yourself though - what have you seen in practice, and by which quarterbacks, that leads you to believe someone else should be playing right QB right now?

 

[smokey_wasp]

Good job. You just added the perfect illustration of keeping a struggling QB on the field. For clarification, who is that down in the hole? Collins or Patenaude?

Why make a change just to make a change? What are you basing your assessment on that someone else would come in and provide a spark? A guess? A hunch? Wishful thinking?
Gleason is a true freshman who didn't have spring practice either. Graham was a three and out machine the last time anyone saw. Yates, I dunno. You are making assumptions without evidence. Last year, everyone seemed to think giving multiple QB's a chance was the worst idea ever and Patenaude was an idiot for doing it. Now, we need to see all the QB's play?

If you have a QB1, you pretty much let them play.

If you think otherwise, provide a suggestion for who we should bring in and why. "Change the QB" is the easiest and laziest of football fan takes.

 

[stech81]

Can we all at least agree on a punter

 

[1BearJACKET]

To clarify, that’s me yelling at you, and you’re down there digging, digging, digging your hole even deeper.

Feel free to extricate yourself though - what have you seen in practice, and by which quarterbacks, that leads you to believe someone else should be playing right QB right now?

Feel free to share your obvious insider information- what have you seen in practice, and by which quarterbacks, that leads you to believe someone else should not be playing QB right now? The coaches have listed 3 QBs as being above the line. What I have seen is one player responsible for 75% of Tech's turnovers to date.

 

[smokey_wasp]

Feel free to share your obvious insider information- what have you seen in practice, and by which quarterbacks, that leads you to believe someone else should not be playing QB right now? The coaches have listed 3 QBs as being above the line. What I have seen is one player responsible for 75% of Tech's turnovers to date.

One player is responsible for the turnovers? Really, really giving the O-line quite a pass there.

 

[lv20gt]

Which begs the question...why wait until the game is lost before making a change and tutoring your starter on the sidelines for a series or 2?

People really overplay this idea of removing a starter for a drive or two. A QB can already get coaching during the game when the defense is on the field, and usually does. When the offense is on the field the person who would be most logical to talk to him is too busy calling plays. Other than him, the next likely choice to talk to Sims would be a veteran QB who can give advice based on experience. Not only do we not have that, usually if you're going to go that route, that is the player you're going to put in. If the issues were something like remaining calm or keeping composure then it might make some sense to sit him and have Collins talk to him, but that's not been Sims' issues.

You pull a QB if you think the other guy gives you a better chance to win. So why didn't we do so earlier? Because the staff didn't think the back ups gave us a better chance to win. It's not like the offense is completely ineffective and unable to generate anything and there is no real option we have to turn to that it makes sense to believe will give us better results.

 

[ramblinwreckguru]

People really overplay this idea of removing a starter for a drive or two. A QB can already get coaching during the game when the defense is on the field, and usually does. When the offense is on the field the person who would be most logical to talk to him is too busy calling plays. Other than him, the next likely choice to talk to Sims would be a veteran QB who can give advice based on experience. Not only do we not have that, usually if you're going to go that route, that is the player you're going to put in. If the issues were something like remaining calm or keeping composure then it might make some sense to sit him and have Collins talk to him, but that's not been Sims' issues.

You pull a QB if you think the other guy gives you a better chance to win. So why didn't we do so earlier? Because the staff didn't think the back ups gave us a better chance to win. It's not like the offense is completely ineffective and unable to generate anything and there is no real option we have to turn to that it makes sense to believe will give us better results.

Many coaches will pull a qb just to let him settle down and get a different perspective of what the defense is doing from the sideline.

 

[1BearJACKET]

One player is responsible for the turnovers? Really, really giving the O-line quite a pass there.

I will go back and rewatch the games already played to see which OL was lined up in shotgun, the pistol, or Wildcat and see which one threw a pass. Or fumbled, or made a poor handoff.

 

[g0lftime]

Why make a change just to make a change? What are you basing your assessment on that someone else would come in and provide a spark? A guess? A hunch? Wishful thinking?
Gleason is a true freshman who didn't have spring practice either. Graham was a three and out machine the last time anyone saw. Yates, I dunno. You are making assumptions without evidence. Last year, everyone seemed to think giving multiple QB's a chance was the worst idea ever and Patenaude was an idiot for doing it. Now, we need to see all the QB's play?

If you have a QB1, you pretty much let them play.

If you think otherwise, provide a suggestion for who we should bring in and why. "Change the QB" is the easiest and laziest of football fan takes.

You don't want to get your starter hurt when the game is over for all practical purposes and might as well get your backups a little game time. Those guys go to practice everyday too.

 

[lv20gt]

Many coaches will pull a qb just to let him settle down and get a different perspective of what the defense is doing from the sideline.

I don't think that happens nearly as often as you believe it does.

 

[g0lftime]

I don't think that happens nearly as often as you believe it does.

That is exactly why I was totally dumbfounded when Saban pulled his starter against UGA to put in Tua and he threw the winning TD. It was either SEC championship or for national championship play-off. Not many coaches would do that in such a big game. Usually it's when the game is a blowout or for a special set of plays.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Feel free to share your obvious insider information- what have you seen in practice, and by which quarterbacks, that leads you to believe someone else should not be playing QB right now? The coaches have listed 3 QBs as being above the line. What I have seen is one player responsible for 75% of Tech's turnovers to date.

That’s the point - the only thing we have is that compared to last year, Sims is 25% higher completion rate, double the offensive yards, 25% higher yards per play, 50% more points, 1/5th the number of sacs, and 2 more turnovers per game. All of that leads me to believe that the coaches know what they’re doing. So until we know any reason to believe differently, it’s pure speculation in contradiction of the numbers.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I will go back and rewatch the games already played to see which OL was lined up in shotgun, the pistol, or Wildcat and see which one threw a pass. Or fumbled, or made a poor handoff.

I mean, he was hit in the arm on at least one and I am not putting tipped balls completely on a 6'3" QB. Again, "change the QB" is a lazy take and you still haven't provided any additional rationale for the who and why, so I don't think I am going to take you seriously here.

 

[smokey_wasp]

You don't want to get your starter hurt when the game is over for all practical purposes and might as well get your backups a little game time. Those guys go to practice everyday too.

And we did that in the last game. The guy I was responding to suggested we pull him sooner.