Bullshiznitz

 

You could tell he was the better QB against FAMU.

Also seems to have done better against MD even though he did not get any full first team reps last year for that game or prior too...

 

On what earth and what game were you watching to come to that conclusion?  

 

 

 

I dont if this comparison is apples to apples. BJ had a cannon with no touch on the ball. QF looks like he is throwing ducks.  The whole motion is just ugly.  I dont know if you can fix ugly.

 

You are right, and you touched on mechanics.  Bull is going to yell at you now.  It is best to ignore the obvious and ride the hope/hype train.  

 

 

Please, so what is your solution then?   If you want to argue about ignoring the obvious, then how is putting a QB with a 47% completion rate with over 150+ pass attempts a better option.  I'd love to hear your expert opinion on this.  

 

 

I am not sure there is a solution, again, for some Bench may seem like the answer, but I don't know that.  The only reason I think Bench may start this year is because CWT will be searching for answers.  Our QB situation is bad, the only solution is for them to play better.  Is it the best we have, maybe, but it is still bad and QF is not the answer in my opinion.  I fail to see why I need to also have a solution to validate that opinion.  

 

Thats fine to have that opinion (I'm pretty sure 99% of people will agree our QB situation isn't great), but to constantly make straw-man arguments (that anyone is saying that Flowers is a great QB right now), to make definitive statements on his ability based on essentially one game and then to whine and complain about it (in almost every thread) with no solution seems futile (if not idiotic). Until AW is eligible or Kean gets more seasoning under him, QF is our best option.  

 

I dont if this comparison is apples to apples. BJ had a cannon with no touch on the ball. QF looks like he is throwing ducks.  The whole motion is just ugly.  I dont know if you can fix ugly.

 

You are right, and you touched on mechanics.  Bull is going to yell at you now.  It is best to ignore the obvious and ride the hope/hype train.  

 

Please, so what is your solution then?   If you want to argue about ignoring the obvious, then how is putting a QB with a 47% completion rate with over 150+ pass attempts a better option.  I'd love to hear your expert opinion on this.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

BJ Daniels was a much better passer than QF will ever be.

and once again you talk about the future in certain terms.

 

 

ok Is this better BJ was never as bad of a passer at USF than QF is now. It's not even close.

perhaps we should wait to see how Quinton does to determine that?

 

BJ had a 53% completion percentage his first year. Flowers is at 60% now. BJ had 14 TDs and 9 picks (1.5 TD:int ratio) Flowers is at 4 TDs and 2 picks (2:1)

 

 

Wonder what the percentages would be at if we only included pass completions that went more than five yards in the air?

 

 

Is that relevant? If the kid takes care of the ball and completes the passes he's capable of completing, that's a win. Some guys will get wide open if MD stacks the box every play and we've sen he can hit those plays. The kid is playing within his ability and that's all you can really ask for.

 

Yes, we will eventually be in positions that he will have to throw down field (behind in the 4th by more than a touchdown), and he has little experience doing such.  This was also the case with FSU, his downfield throwing ability had nothing to do with the FSU secondary.   

 

And how else is he suppose to get that experience unless you let him?    Again, I'll continue to beat the dead horse, but Bench has lead USF to ZERO comebacks in his time here.  He's had 4 opportunities and USF was cumulatively outscored during those.  His attempts at starting have been absolute train wrecks.  If we had Woulard eligible and just needing to get caught up on the playbook, I could see the calls for the back up, but he's not.  Our options are bad with a chance to improve (Flowers), or just plain bad (Bench).  I'll take option 1 all day long. 

Looking at both of their schedules, they're likely both to start off atleast 6-0 to start the season.  Temple has a good chance of being 7-0 I believe before rolling into Notre Dame.  

 

 

 

A 47% career completion percentage would disagree with this assessment.  

 

Again all I am concerned with at this point is what his recent history says and who is the right QB for the situation. Its clear that both players have some skills the other doesn't. If we need to pass the ball to win the game, and you truly think QF is better than SB, then all we can do is disagree.

 

 

You keep waving the "just the facts" flag, but you've ignored the fact that they are fairly close in passing stats over the window you selected, with Flowers having a huge edge running the ball. I don't think either of these guys are very good (as they stand now), but your own numbers don't bear out your position.

 

It's fine to hold an opinion but it just looks foolish to pretend like it's based on hard evidence.

 

 

Facts are facts. The fact is that was my response to criticism of SB being a turnover machine that cant cut it at QB. I will continue to wave the "flag of facts"  proudly. Apparently you do not like that and have resorted to calling someone else foolish...so be it. I will continue refuting factually incorrect assessments with facts.

 

Last three games for both players

 

QF

OPP RESULT CMP ATT YDS CMP% LNG TD INT RAT

@SMU W 14-13 6 15 105 40.0 34 0 0 98.8

FAMU W 51-3 12 16 141 75.0 45 2 1 177.8

FSU L 34-14 12 24 125 50.0 71 2 1 112.9

 

SB

Mem L 31-20 6 11 57 54.5 17 1 0 128.1

UCF L 16-0 7 13 88 53.8 27 0 0 110.7

FAMU W 51-3 8 10 140 80.0 62 1 0 230.6

 

QF

Avg CMP%: 55%

TD Ratio: 2/1

Avg RAT:  129.83

 

SB

Avg CMP%: 62.7% 

TD Ratio: 2/0

Avg RAT:  156.67 

 

You're continued cherry picking is amusing.  Taking a look at your original cherry pick, since the middle of last year (using the stats correctly, which is as a whole and not averages): 

Bench 42/73  57.5%  4TD 1 INT 15RA  -4yds

Flowers 31/56  55.3%  4TD 2 INT 28RA  131yds

And thats cherry picking to make Bench look as good as possible, and theres still basically no difference between them as a passer (all this while ignoring that most of Bench stats were accumulated during garbage time, and that Bench accumulated those stats during junior/senior years compared to freshman/sophomore years).  

You want some other fun cherry picked but factual stats: 

FACT#1   Bench has been given 4 chances at USF to show his stuff (QB'ing most/all of the game with 20+ pass attempts).  In those 4 games (FAU, Miami, Maryland, Houston): 

47/111  42% completion percentage  2TD  4 INT         RA 30 RYDS -30         Avg Offensive Pts/Game:  9.3    QB Rating: 88.5

FACT#2    # of comeback wins by Bench = 0

                 This is where I really am baffled at the argument that if we need to comeback, Bench is the guy to do it.   Bench has had 4 opportunities here to lead a comeback:

                 2013  Louisville, came in late 2Q down 17-3, left late 4Q with USF down 34-3   =  difference  -17 pts

                 2014  Cincy, came in whole 2nd half with USF down 20-3, finished game with USF down 34-17   =  difference 0 pts

                 2014  Memphis, came in with 5 min left in game with USF down 31-13, finished game down 31-20 = difference +7pts

                 2014  UCF, came in with 9 min left in game with USF down 16-0, finished game down 16-0 = difference 0pts

So in 4 opportunities, the only time USF even reduced the deficit was in the Memphis game in which he took 4 min with a little over 5 min left in the game to score against a prevent defense.  So where is the rational coming from Bench being some comeback king? 

FACT#3    Career stats:  

                 Bench 83/174  47.7% comp perc  6TD 5INT  Career QB Rating: 108.5  44RA  -25RYDS    1 sack/10.2 PA

                 Flowers   32/60  53.3% comp perc   4TD  4INT   Career QB Rating:  114.8    34RA   174RYDS    1 sack/20 PA

I realize that Flowers isn't a great QB.  But he's a sophomore learning in a system almost designed exactly for him.   He's shown improvement from last year, and will no doubt continue to improve as the season goes on.   His passing skills are already basically on par with Bench, and his ability to avoid the sack while also giving you a running threat in my mind makes this a no brainer. There is absolutely nothing in Bench's career as a starter or reliever that point to him being better suited than Flowers for either scenario.   Unless Flowers somehow regresses, or gets injured, there's no reason for Bench to be put in there. 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately I can't say the same...at least in this thread I have mostly seen people asking to see Bench making mostly logical arguements while the QF as starter supporters have been making excuses...

Again I am not against QF playing or even starting next game, I am just not being dogmatic about it. It's not one or the other, one has skill set the other doesn't. Just play the QB that is best suited for us to win. If MD has a poor secondary, then we should be all calling for SB so we can take advantage of that matchup.

QF has started 3 games. we have won 2 of them. the one loss was to a top ten team on the road. no one is arguing he is a heisman contender.

 

no one is dogmatic. Bench has appeared in 14 games for us. He is 3-11. The wins were FAMU, Western Carolina (1-1 for 10 yards) and Cincy (1-1 for 7 yards). last year he would have ranked #106 in the country for passer ranking.

 

you guys act like we have joe montana on the bench.

 

I have said that Bench should be put into the game if we are down by more than 2 TDs in the 4th quarter otherwise i believe flowers gives us a better chance. he doesn't get sacked as much , he takes care of the ball better, and is a better runner.

 

LOL...I am not sure you watched last season at all but if it were up to QF, the only win QF would have would be against FAMU. Now that IS what I call using number to support a foregone conclusion.

 

Also I believe most of us are not advocating QF not play just be used in the right situations. Conversely the other side is advocating SB not play at all...which seems more reasonable? I wonder....

 

Who has said that Bench shouldn't play? He should if we are forced into a passing situation dictated by game flow. otherwise it should be Flowers.

 

Those stats you want to look at for Bench were in garbage time. His only 2 good games were Cincy and maybe memphis. They came in the 4th quarter when we were down 27-3 against Cincy and 31-13 against memphis. 2 of those 3 TDs were the last drive of the game and were meaningless.

 

 

Garbage Time:

Listen...I am not arguing whether or not those came against good teams, bad teams, "non-garbage" or garbage time etc etc...I am saying he has tools that QF does not, which is being able to execute most throws we need from a QB which is an argument to use SB and are not meaningless. 

 

Using the right QB at the right time:

Welcome to the fray 

 

A 47% career completion percentage would disagree with this assessment.  

 

LOL... everyone griped and moaned that Taggart needed to settle on a QB.  In year three he did... now everyone wants him to change because it's not the guy they like.  Like they know more than the coaching staff.  I find that hilarious. 

 

     

 

LIKE has nothing to do with it, only winning.  If your starting QB can't win winnable games, he should be replaced.  Anyone who says FSU wasn't winnable is giving them far too much credit.

 

Yes, how dare they give credit to a team who's 29-1 over their last 30 games, currently ranked 9th in the nation, with arguably the best RB in the nation, in a game they were favored by 28.5 pts in their own house.  I mean if our sophomore starting QB in his 3rd start ever is incapable of leading this team to the 35+ points that would have been needed to beat the 9th ranked team in the nation on the road, then how can anyone rationally not reach the conclusion that we absolutely need to put in our senior career backup QB, with an impressive 47% completion percentage in his career who has heroically lead his team to a 1-9 record in games he had more than 10 pass attempts in.

I mean how can anyone logically and objectively not reach that conclusion...

Some of you guys are funny, you'll find something to moan and whine about no matter what.  When we had BJ, you complained about him not having any touch on passes and gunning it when it wasn't needed.  Now we have a QB who "floats" it too much and needs to gun it to wide open receivers.  

I was on the RJS if perfectly fine bandwagon for a long time.  However, with the trend across the nation of attendance being down, and it likely only to continue to move in that direction as TV tech improves, I'm finally jumping ship to the OCS bandwagon.  After watching more carefully at other games at mid-majors, I really do think an intimate, nice 40K-45K seat stadium would be perfect to start building a better atmosphere and tradition.  

I do agree up top with MOSI location not being ideal, but its better than the current, and more ideal than the often brought up mall location.  

 

First thing to fix is the center snap issues.

Also, taggart said post game they stayed in one set all game. It was utterly vanilla. That means we either limited the playback heavily to give fsu less film or we don't have a lot of plays. I got the impression taggart left some stuff in his back pocket though. Didn't run any triple option but we saw some in camp.

It's clear we ran a very limited play book and it's not bc we don't have the plays...it's great that we can do that again.

 

Thats what I thought.  I find it funny our brethren to the east are trying to make themselves feel better (on their forum) by saying we threw the whole playbook and the kitchen sink at FAMU.  No clue where they got that other than hoping we aren't that good looking. 

USF

41-13

Mack

Adams

511

 

 

Why does everyone think Taggart dislikes Bench?

It's not everyone, just some of the ones who don't think Taggart is the one to take us to the next level ... something else for them to whine about.

I don't consider myself a tin foil hat guy, heck I am a scientist by trade and its my job to think critically. As I have stated before, in the past CWT has kept SB off the field when it was clear he was the better option and he has never answered questions as to why. This is why many of us believe something doesnt add up...no conspiracies just taking the facts into account. I want CWT to work out bc I believe what he had done recruiting wise is nothing short of amazing. It needs to show on the field though otherwise he is no head coach.

 

Being a scientist, I'm sure you can articulate exactly what "facts" you are taking into account to determine that SB was the "clear better option".  

Ive seen updates on SB and QF in practice, haven't see anything recent on Woulard.  Still looking like the better QB than either?  Shouldn't his decision be coming soon.  

Here's a question, if SB is declared the starter will QF backers be upset or support the decision?

Ridiculous question.  Why would anyone be upset?  I think all anyone here is for is for whats best for the team.  The arguments I've seen simply are saying that anyone on here saying that someone is incapable of playing QB based off of one half last year and 1-2 practices witnessed this year are making opinions based on nothing.  If CWT thinks that QF is the best QB to start based on this new offense, then he will.  If he believes SB has shown more in running this offense, then he will.  Anyone thinking he has some set in bias (I think the fact of how he rotated QBs last year, has shown that he's not married to anyone) is simply spouting rumors based on their own bias. 

 

 

So if the team is now jelling like it should, why were the major coaching positions replaced and offensive and defensive schemes changed? If this was a player attitude issue, why wouldn't he still be using his system? Wouldn't the majority of the team better know his system from his first year vs totally changing it year 3? I don't hate CWT, but I think he's in over his head and a better coach would have had USF bowling last year.

And yeah, I think CWT could admit that he's floundered to find an effective scheme on both sides of the ball. He doesn't have to use those terms, but looking back his tenure at USF to me seems less like coaching and more like on the job training.

 

You're making up an argument he's never made.  No where, let me repeat that slowly...NO WHERE in that article did he state that the past 2 years were disasters because of a team chemistry issues.  

 

I know this may be hard for some of you to grasp, but in a team sport, its an accumulation of issues that typically lead to a loss or a bad season overall.  Team chemistry (for anyone who watches and follows this team knows) played a part (again, a part, not the whole reason, not the only reason, but a part) in our struggles.  A lack of DI QB played a part (player and coaching issue).  Some poor play calling on offense and defense played a part (coaching issue).  Poor execution played a part (player issue).  Lack of talent played a part (previous coach issue).  Its not a black and white scenario, and Taggart at no time has made a black and white argument like this.  

 

 

Nowhere?

 

"I see a team that's starting to care about each other like the way that team at Western does. That's a big part of it."

 

Hmmm...

 

And statement right before that.....".......and I'm really excited about the season. I think we're going to have one heck of a season."   

So he's stating that seeing his team jell and come together is a part of the reason why he's excited for this year.  Where in that does he place sole blame on his first two seasons on a lack of team chemistry.  Again, you guys are so desperate to hate on anything Taggart related that you are making up arguments.  

So if the team is now jelling like it should, why were the major coaching positions replaced and offensive and defensive schemes changed? If this was a player attitude issue, why wouldn't he still be using his system? Wouldn't the majority of the team better know his system from his first year vs totally changing it year 3? I don't hate CWT, but I think he's in over his head and a better coach would have had USF bowling last year.

And yeah, I think CWT could admit that he's floundered to find an effective scheme on both sides of the ball. He doesn't have to use those terms, but looking back his tenure at USF to me seems less like coaching and more like on the job training.

You're making up an argument he's never made.  No where, let me repeat that slowly...NO WHERE in that article did he state that the past 2 years were disasters because of a team chemistry issues.  

I know this may be hard for some of you to grasp, but in a team sport, its an accumulation of issues that typically lead to a loss or a bad season overall.  Team chemistry (for anyone who watches and follows this team knows) played a part (again, a part, not the whole reason, not the only reason, but a part) in our struggles.  A lack of DI QB played a part (player and coaching issue).  Some poor play calling on offense and defense played a part (coaching issue).  Poor execution played a part (player issue).  Lack of talent played a part (previous coach issue).  Its not a black and white scenario, and Taggart at no time has made a black and white argument like this.  

Whaaaat? It sounds like Taggart is putting the team's lack of success on player attitude toward each other, at least some of it. I think his trying to fit square pegs into round holes has a lot to do with it. His abandoning his offense being a sign that he finally figured it out.

http://www.bgdailynews.com/sports/wku/taggart-continues-to-track-doughty-wku-s-success/article_1c046a9a-962f-5bb5-9c15-ae42e1b88c9e.html

It doesn't sound like that at all.  But I guess when you hate the coach, you see what ever it is you want to see in order to validate your standpoint.  

Its either that, or you're attempting to argue that team chemistry doesn't exist nor does it have any effect on how a team performs.  If that's the case, I'd love to hear more on this argument. 

 

 

smh .... Another one of those "making a mountain out of a molehill" moments on the TBP.

Blaming the team's lack of success on player's feelings toward one another is lame and insulting. Saying WKU players care more about each other than Bull's players is insulting too. Does he really believe that or was blowing smoke, I don't know. But if he's going to talk about it going slower than he thought it would he needs to man up and shoulder that responsibility like he did after that first loss year one.

 

 

You must be mistaken.  I've been assured that Taggart never blames anyone but himself.

 

Its a sad indictment when you have to resort to such ridiculous hyperbole in an argument.  

My take is that for the first time in a while I'm really excited for a season.  Not necessarily because I think we'll do great this year, but more because there's indications that we are returning to what I would consider "Bulls" football.  Meaning a return to a spread offense matched with an aggressive defense.  What truly made these past few 4-5 years bad, wasn't just the losses, but it was the losses coupled with a frustrating to watch wait-and-see defense along with a depressingly boring offense.  There were times the past few years where I think I dreaded watching our game more than I felt "excited" about it.  I'm hoping that even if we don't necessarily see drastic improvement in regards to record, the games themselves should be much more entertaining to watch. Having said that, my take on a few of the positions: 

QB:  While you may argue that White was a better QB (and that is highly debatable), his actual production was nothing to write home about.  If we go with a duplicate year from Bench (assuming he fills in during injuries/slumps/change of pace), then Flowers/Kean need only exceed 1750yds passing on the year (and 8TD's) to help show an improvement in that area.  I would hope with a switch to a spread offense that this should be easily achievable.  Production wise, I just have a real hard time believing that we could be worse in this area.  

RBs:  In my opinion, I dont think we really even need to see improvement here, as that group did more than fine last year, thats even with the opposing defenses gearing up to stop them pretty much all season.  A move to the spread, a better OL should at least help this group remain just as good.  I could see a scenario though where yards wise this group doesn't necessarily improve (especially with Flowers stealing some yards from the QB spot), but an improvement in yds/carry happens almost across the board (especially for Johnson and Tice).  

WRs/TEs:  As a group, I expect them to be much improved.  The switch in offenses make the loss of Davis much easier to replace.  For example, in 2008 we passed for 750 more yards on the season, yet not a single WR had more receiving yards or TD's than Dre had last year.  Why?  Because you don't have to rely on that go-to-receiver near as much as we did in Taggarts power 2 WR sets.  Having a deep talented group is much more important, and I think we have that with Bronson, Adams,  Price, and company.  We'll be able to run out 3 and 4 WR sets with some very good talent. 

Defense: Just going to do this as a group.  Talent wise I think there's an improvement, and I'm excited to see a switch back to hopefully a much more aggressive defense.  I could see us get burned more this year, especially with some of that talent being so young still, but as long as we can offset that with more turnovers and getting off the field more often than this group should be atleast as good as years past if not start to make us do comparisons to some of the late 00s teams.  

Not real indepth analysis I know, just throwing out my thoughts.  I'm just hoping to get back to being really excited about Saturdays again.  

Never thought the mall was the right place for a stadium, but am surprised they found investors and anchor stores.  I am confused by what they mean on destruction of the common area and creating a new "lifestyle" area.  If they move towards a more outdoor mall situation, it might stand a chance.  Keeping it an indoor mall just seems like you'll still have the same problems that currently plague it.  

I'll never get why some think we are above accepting transfers from players that spurned us initially.  It happens all the time all over college football.  If AW is willing to swallow his pride and come back here and put in the work and know that he's just competing for a starting job and not having one handed to him, then why not.  I'd much rather have more quality depth at a position that has been an absolute albatross around the programs neck for the past 2 years.  

I couldn't find if this was addressed in here, but is Publix moving away from the griddles?  Just recently moved from the epicenter of Publix land (mid St Pete where you not only have 1, but 2 Publixes to choose from across the street from each other) to Carillon in north St Pete.  Ordered a Philly Cheese sub and they used the bogus Subway type micro-oven to cook the meat/veggies and melt the cheese.  Just wasn't the same as having it done on the griddle.  I know the Carillon Publix is like a mini-Publix up here, so hoping this is isolated.  

Don't know if they'll give up what they knew, but would be interesting to hear what made several of the local bloggers think USF suddenly had a chance in the last day or two.  Rumors seemed to come out of nowhere.  

 

This board is becoming tiring. The same 5 people feel the need to trash CWT on EVERY ******* THREAD ON THIS FORUM.

 

WE GET IT, YOU DONT LIKE HIM. NOW SHUT THE **** UP

 

Same can be said of the Holtz haters. 

 

The only time any "hate" on Holtz is brought up is only after someone inexplicably states that they somehow miss the coach who submarined this program and drove it into the ground.  

I personally would have renamed the "hater" thread the "Grown men acting like 12 year old girls thread".  Apis apparently has more patience and couth than me though.