QF Lovers, Bring It.

[Bear]

QF > Bench

 

 

They are both not good options.

[bullzfanatic]

 

 

 

One of many of your posts through the 17 pages of the "Start Bench!" thread:

Finally, look at [bench's numbers over the past 5 games]. If we can get this kind of production from the QB we will go bowling for sure! The TD to INT ratio should end any notion that he is a turn over machine. Further that avg passer rating for the last 5 games would put SB currently in the top 40 QBs of 2015. Those of us asking to "SEE" SB I believe are fully justified.

Yeah that is a great post isn't it Thanks for reposting...

Still not sure how that supports your straw man argument that QF is losing us games. That is just supporting my argument that I think SB is good enough to get a shot at QB and might win us games. See the differences? If we get a good lead QF has the type of game where we would might be able to grind out a win if our D is good enough.

 

As stated previously, our offense is too one dimensional. With the USF version of the read option, the only option is to run, unless someone is fully wide open down field. Taggart wants QF to win the game with his feet but as we've all seen, that is not going to happen when the defense always knows your running. 

 

Every defense we have played outside of FAMU just spy's the qb since they know we're not athletic enough at WR to beat them downfield. If we were we'd be playing 4 and 5 sets all day.The only way any qb beats a team with their feet is through improvisation. Daniels and Grothe went through their progressions and then made defenses pay with their athleticism if nothing was there. 

 

When QF is in, we don't throw enough and that pisses people off. Say what you want, but QF hasn't thrown even remotely enough for anyone to have an opinion on how good of a passer he is. However, QF has done a good job overall of protecting the ball while he's in. With SB in, we throw much more, but the kid has a gunslinger mentality which at times has lead to stupid stupid picks. He is a toss up, because when he plays his best, he can make some really nice throws. 

 

I'm in 100% agreement that SB and QF are not big threats at the position and it is hard to say one is the "better" option for this team. I just don't think it will matter who is in with the current play calling via Taggart. With that said, change the game plan by Memphis to feature some easy throws for SB and I'd be completely fine with him playing. I think he is plenty mobile enough for this system. However, I'd really like to see QF have the chance to throw the ball more. 

 

 

 

First one, have you watched Navy?

 

Second one, do you think that is possibly because of the confidence in the QB throwing the ball?  The plays called when Bench is in there seem to be different.  There do appear to be passing plays in the play book. 

 

What about Navy? What does a 100% run heavy team have to do with a conversation on whether QF is an effective passer? Yes, they're the best option team in football. But they don't pass the ball. As shown below from last game. Sure they're great at running the ball and will win games, but their defense loses them games. Running the same offense for like 50 years is bound to be pretty good. Not many teams can be as one dimensional as them and see success. 

 

Keenan Reynolds 4/7 41 YDS 5.9 AVG  0 TD 0 INT 86.9

 

I just don't see why the coaching staff would start a QB that they didn't think could throw the ball. WT has been cited numerous times about QF's ability to throw the football. We need to throw the football, end of story. Of course there are passing plays in the playbook but I don't think we're seeing enough of them. If we don't trust QF to throw the ball in addition to running, then he needs to be BENCHED. We need a balanced attack and I'm happy with anyone that can execute a balanced game plan. 

Edited September 21, 2015 by bullzfanatic

[KevinUSF00]

Let's face it. Our only real chance this year is for Taggart to figure out how to use QF, Mack, Johnson, and Tice to run for 3-5 yards every play. We almost can't afford to waste a play down the field since that means we only have 2 downs to pick up those 10 years on the ground. He should be running an option with this talent. i would only consider throwing the ball once we are down 17 or more in the 4th. 

[Bull-Hornz]

 

 

One of many of your posts through the 17 pages of the "Start Bench!" thread:

Finally, look at [bench's numbers over the past 5 games]. If we can get this kind of production from the QB we will go bowling for sure! The TD to INT ratio should end any notion that he is a turn over machine. Further that avg passer rating for the last 5 games would put SB currently in the top 40 QBs of 2015. Those of us asking to "SEE" SB I believe are fully justified.

Yeah that is a great post isn't it Thanks for reposting...

Still not sure how that supports your straw man argument that QF is losing us games. That is just supporting my argument that I think SB is good enough to get a shot at QB and might win us games. See the differences? If we get a good lead QF has the type of game where we would might be able to grind out a win if our D is good enough.

 

As stated previously, our offense is too one dimensional. With the USF version of the read option, the only option is to run, unless someone is fully wide open down field. Taggart wants QF to win the game with his feet but as we've all seen, that is not going to happen when the defense always knows your running. 

 

Every defense we have played outside of FAMU just spy's the qb since they know we're not athletic enough at WR to beat them downfield. If we were we'd be playing 4 and 5 sets all day.The only way any qb beats a team with their feet is through improvisation. Daniels and Grothe went through their progressions and then made defenses pay with their athleticism if nothing was there. 

 

When QF is in, we don't throw enough and that pisses people off. Say what you want, but QF hasn't thrown even remotely enough for anyone to have an opinion on how good of a passer he is. However, QF has done a good job overall of protecting the ball while he's in. With SB in, we throw much more, but the kid has a gunslinger mentality which at times has lead to stupid stupid picks. He is a toss up, because when he plays his best, he can make some really nice throws. 

 

I'm in 100% agreement that SB and QF are not big threats at the position and it is hard to say one is the "better" option for this team. I just don't think it will matter who is in with the current play calling via Taggart. With that said, change the game plan by Memphis to feature some easy throws for SB and I'd be completely fine with him playing. I think he is plenty mobile enough for this system. However, I'd really like to see QF have the chance to throw the ball more. 

 

Thank you bullzfanatic lol. You have given me hope that I am not beating my head against the wall. 

 

I agree with just about everything you have said. The only point of contention that I would make is that I think QF doesn't make those throws but b/c he can't run them but that is speculation on my part. Only the coaches know what's really going. What I do know is CWT has in the past put QF in there with a limited playbook in the past (SMU) and that against FAMU SB made throws that made our offense look much more balanced and QF did not. I also know that CWT's seat is on fire and he has clearly shown his desire to give QF an opportunity to succeed by leaving him in the entire games against FSU and MD. If he could make those intermediate throws he would have made them by now IMO. I did see hope in QF and he actually made 2 throws that were more intermediate against MD. To me that means he is learning which is a good thing. In fact I wouldn't be mad if QF started again against Memphis but I would have a really short chain on him and make the decision to give SB 2-3 games after that. One conference loss against what seems to be a good team is not the end of our season. Any more than that might very well be though.

 

I am not 100% sure that IF we start SB he would be MUCH better than QF though his numbers do seem to suggest he could. All I am saying is at this point lets give him a shot and put him in a position where he is setup to succeed. That means getting all the first team reps for 2-3 games and not throwing him in off the bench cold without practicing which is fielded on game day. If he fails then the season is done and the experiment is over and let QF develop.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Bull-Hornz

[bullzfanatic]

 

 

 

One of many of your posts through the 17 pages of the "Start Bench!" thread:

Finally, look at [bench's numbers over the past 5 games]. If we can get this kind of production from the QB we will go bowling for sure! The TD to INT ratio should end any notion that he is a turn over machine. Further that avg passer rating for the last 5 games would put SB currently in the top 40 QBs of 2015. Those of us asking to "SEE" SB I believe are fully justified.

Yeah that is a great post isn't it Thanks for reposting...

Still not sure how that supports your straw man argument that QF is losing us games. That is just supporting my argument that I think SB is good enough to get a shot at QB and might win us games. See the differences? If we get a good lead QF has the type of game where we would might be able to grind out a win if our D is good enough.

 

As stated previously, our offense is too one dimensional. With the USF version of the read option, the only option is to run, unless someone is fully wide open down field. Taggart wants QF to win the game with his feet but as we've all seen, that is not going to happen when the defense always knows your running. 

 

Every defense we have played outside of FAMU just spy's the qb since they know we're not athletic enough at WR to beat them downfield. If we were we'd be playing 4 and 5 sets all day.The only way any qb beats a team with their feet is through improvisation. Daniels and Grothe went through their progressions and then made defenses pay with their athleticism if nothing was there. 

 

When QF is in, we don't throw enough and that pisses people off. Say what you want, but QF hasn't thrown even remotely enough for anyone to have an opinion on how good of a passer he is. However, QF has done a good job overall of protecting the ball while he's in. With SB in, we throw much more, but the kid has a gunslinger mentality which at times has lead to stupid stupid picks. He is a toss up, because when he plays his best, he can make some really nice throws. 

 

I'm in 100% agreement that SB and QF are not big threats at the position and it is hard to say one is the "better" option for this team. I just don't think it will matter who is in with the current play calling via Taggart. With that said, change the game plan by Memphis to feature some easy throws for SB and I'd be completely fine with him playing. I think he is plenty mobile enough for this system. However, I'd really like to see QF have the chance to throw the ball more. 

 

Thank you bullzfanatic lol. You have given me hope that I am not beating my head against the wall. 

 

I agree with just about everything you have said. The only point of contention that I would make is that I think QF doesn't make those throws but b/c he can't run them but that is speculation on my part. Only the coaches know what's really going. What I do know is CWT has in the past put QF in there with a limited playbook in the past (SMU) and that against FAMU SB made throws that made our offense look much more balanced and QF did not. I also know that CWT's seat is on fire and he has clearly shown his desire to give QF an opportunity to succeed by leaving him in the entire games against FSU and MD. If he could make those intermediate throws he would have made them by now IMO. I did see hope in QF and he actually made 2 throws that were more intermediate against MD. To me that means he is learning which is a good thing. In fact I wouldn't be mad if QF started again against Memphis but I would have a really short chain on him and make the decision to give SB 2-3 games after that. One conference loss against what seems to be a good team is not the end of our season. Any more than that might very well be though.

 

I am not 100% sure that IF we start SB he would be MUCH better than QF though his numbers do seem to suggest he could. All I am saying is at this point lets give him a shot and put him in a position where he is setup to succeed. That means getting all the first team reps for 2-3 games and not throwing him in off the bench cold without practicing which is fielded on game day. If he fails then the season is done and the experiment is over and let QF develop.

 

We're on the same page. I think its a pure toss up. Just looking forward to Oladokun and Woulard for the next 5 years after we win the Bourbon Bowl this year!

Edited September 21, 2015 by bullzfanatic

[Bullshiznitz]

 

 

 

One of many of your posts through the 17 pages of the "Start Bench!" thread:

Finally, look at [bench's numbers over the past 5 games]. If we can get this kind of production from the QB we will go bowling for sure! The TD to INT ratio should end any notion that he is a turn over machine. Further that avg passer rating for the last 5 games would put SB currently in the top 40 QBs of 2015. Those of us asking to "SEE" SB I believe are fully justified.

Yeah that is a great post isn't it Thanks for reposting...

Still not sure how that supports your straw man argument that QF is losing us games. That is just supporting my argument that I think SB is good enough to get a shot at QB and might win us games. See the differences? If we get a good lead QF has the type of game where we would might be able to grind out a win if our D is good enough.

 

As stated previously, our offense is too one dimensional. With the USF version of the read option, the only option is to run, unless someone is fully wide open down field. Taggart wants QF to win the game with his feet but as we've all seen, that is not going to happen when the defense always knows your running. 

 

Every defense we have played outside of FAMU just spy's the qb since they know we're not athletic enough at WR to beat them downfield. If we were we'd be playing 4 and 5 sets all day.The only way any qb beats a team with their feet is through improvisation. Daniels and Grothe went through their progressions and then made defenses pay with their athleticism if nothing was there. 

 

When QF is in, we don't throw enough and that pisses people off. Say what you want, but QF hasn't thrown even remotely enough for anyone to have an opinion on how good of a passer he is. However, QF has done a good job overall of protecting the ball while he's in. With SB in, we throw much more, but the kid has a gunslinger mentality which at times has lead to stupid stupid picks. He is a toss up, because when he plays his best, he can make some really nice throws. 

 

I'm in 100% agreement that SB and QF are not big threats at the position and it is hard to say one is the "better" option for this team. I just don't think it will matter who is in with the current play calling via Taggart. With that said, change the game plan by Memphis to feature some easy throws for SB and I'd be completely fine with him playing. I think he is plenty mobile enough for this system. However, I'd really like to see QF have the chance to throw the ball more. 

 

Thank you bullzfanatic lol. You have given me hope that I am not beating my head against the wall. 

 

I agree with just about everything you have said. The only point of contention that I would make is that I think QF doesn't make those throws but b/c he can't run them but that is speculation on my part. Only the coaches know what's really going. What I do know is CWT has in the past put QF in there with a limited playbook in the past (SMU) and that against FAMU SB made throws that made our offense look much more balanced and QF did not. I also know that CWT's seat is on fire and he has clearly shown his desire to give QF an opportunity to succeed by leaving him in the entire games against FSU and MD. If he could make those intermediate throws he would have made them by now IMO. I did see hope in QF and he actually made 2 throws that were more intermediate against MD. To me that means he is learning which is a good thing. In fact I wouldn't be mad if QF started again against Memphis but I would have a really short chain on him and make the decision to give SB 2-3 games after that. One conference loss against what seems to be a good team is not the end of our season. Any more than that might very well be though.

 

I am not 100% sure that IF we start SB he would be MUCH better than QF though his numbers do seem to suggest he could. All I am saying is at this point lets give him a shot and put him in a position where he is setup to succeed. That means getting all the first team reps for 2-3 games and not throwing him in off the bench cold without practicing which is fielded on game day. If he fails then the season is done and the experiment is over and let QF develop.

 

 

They don't one bit, but if continuing to ignore that makes you feel better, go for it.  I guess better to be delusion-ally happy than realistically sad.  

[Sellular1]

All I know is IF we get behind against Memphis, CWT better have some mid range pass plays for QF to throw. I'm not sure if SB is a better passer than QF (actually they both are pretty bad) but if coach keeps running the ball hoping for 8 minute TD drives then we are dead

[Bull-Hornz]

 

 

 

If you are going to hold that drive against SB then you are just showing your colors IMO..

I think your use of numbers is selective and shows nothing of any real substance, so I provided comparable numbers to demonstrate that even under your metrics SB measures miserably. FWIW I don't think either of them are any good as it stands now, but I also don't think either is the sole cause of our problems.

Can you sincerely not understand how what you did is not equivalent? It seems to me that I put numbers up that those who disapprove of SB and every excuse under the sun is used including illogical statements like the one above.

We want to know who can win now let'slook at the last 5 most recent games...o your cherry picking

Ok let's look at a direct comparison when both played against FAMU...o that team sucks

Let's remove FAMU from the equation and see how QF has done the last two full games...your numbers have no substance...

It doesn't matter how you slice it QF right now is not better than SB.

 

 

Actually quit the opposite.  You talk about not being equivalent, yet you continue to try to use comparisons that are by no means equivalent.   

 

First you tried to go with the 5 most recent games.  For one, there was no reason to choose that many as QF hadn't played that many games at that point, and it was obvious you choose that as to not include Bench's miserable Maryland game from last year.  Even with that cherry picking, the was barely any difference in passing numbers.  

 

When this was pointed out, you moved the goalposts to 3 games.  But for one, appearance does not equal game.  You were comparing from Bench (5 min in the 4th quarter against Memphis, 9 min in the 4th quarter against UCF, and a little less than the whole second half of FAMU) vs Flowers (1st half against SMU, 1st half against FAMU, and whole game against FSU).  Even if we take FAMU as equivalent (which is a stretch), you were comparing a total of 14 min playing time (less than 1 quarter) for Bench against worn down prevent defenses to 1.5 games of Flowers verse starting defenses of SMU and top 10 FSU.  How is that remotely an equivalent comparison?  And even with this extreme cherry picking, the difference in numbers was marginal at best.  So in Bench's absolute best case scenario racking up stats against worn down prevent defenses, he still could barely could outperform QF in passing data (again while ignoring the huge disparity in running ability).  

 

Why is it that you don't want to compare their last few whole games for each?   The last few starts of each?   Their career numbers?   I know why, as does any body else.  

 

And please stop with the charade of Bench not getting a fair shake.  He's had 10+ pass attempts in 9 games here.  4 games of 20+.   He's had more than enough opportunities to prove himself. He's a good kid, a fighter and good team mate by all accounts.  But he's not remotely a good Div-1 QB.  To start him over QF at this point, is not only giving up on the season, but making the exact same mistake CWT made last year (and that a vast majority on here complained about) in not giving your starter a chance to grow.  

 

QF is not a good QB either, but taking any relative comparable data, the offense as a whole performs better under him than it did under Bench.  The absolute best argument you can make for Bench is he's "about the same".  But you don't drop a true sophomore likely to grow and improve "about the same" for a senior, is what he is, and gone after this year "about the same".  It makes virtually no sense in the short term, and is borderline moronic long term.   

 

We are wasting lots of time and probably have better things to do with our energy w/ a discussion that will have very little relevance in the end. I will spend a little more to show that I am not intentionally doing anything biased just trying to inform.  

 

First you tried to go with the 5 most recent games.  For one, there was no reason to choose that many as QF hadn't played that many games at that point, and it was obvious you choose that as to not include Bench's miserable Maryland game from last year.  Even with that cherry picking, the was barely any difference in passing numbers.

I choose the last 5 games b/c those are the most relevant to our situation now, nothing more. In fact his performance against Houston was worse than MD and was included in those numbers of his last 5 games, so there is no cherry picking involved, its chronological order. If you can't understand how relevant time is in this argument so be it. Furthermore I also have included SB overall QBR of 43.9 for the entire last season which was better than MW's of 43.4 who was given a much better opportunity to be the starter and failed. SB was NOT given a single entire week of practice as the starter last year and that's a fact jack!   

 

You were comparing from Bench (5 min in the 4th quarter against Memphis, 9 min in the 4th quarter against UCF, and a little less than the whole second half of FAMU) vs Flowers (1st half against SMU, 1st half against FAMU, and whole game against FSU).  Even if we take FAMU as equivalent (which is a stretch), you were comparing a total of 14 min playing time (less than 1 quarter) for Bench against worn down prevent defenses to 1.5 games of Flowers verse starting defenses of SMU and top 10 FSU.  How is that remotely an equivalent comparison?  And even with this extreme cherry picking, the difference in numbers was marginal at best.  So in Bench's absolute best case scenario racking up stats against worn down prevent defenses, he still could barely could outperform QF in passing data (again while ignoring the huge disparity in running ability).

If you don't like how the numbers play out with the data we have available to us that is a fair point. I don't either. Unfortunately that is what we have. If you can find a more equitable comparison then I would love to hear it. But to suggest I am cherry picking data is a weak argument. You could say that there is not enough data to make a one-to-one comparison and I would agree. All I am saying is that QF has shown his ability and we should know what we have in the other QB who was supposedly only edged out and has numbers to suggest that he might be what we need now. That means giving him the same opportunity you have given MW and now QF.

 

And please stop with the charade of Bench not getting a fair shake.  He's had 10+ pass attempts in 9 games here.  4 games of 20+.   He's had more than enough opportunities to prove himself. He's a good kid, a fighter and good team mate by all accounts.  But he's not remotely a good Div-1 QB.  To start him over QF at this point, is not only giving up on the season, but making the exact same mistake CWT made last year (and that a vast majority on here complained about) in not giving your starter a chance to grow.  

So wait first you say that you don't like the comparison b/c its not one to one...I say lets try to make it a more equitable comparison by giving SB the same opportunity that QF has been given, then you say that would be giving up on our season. Why b/c more of the same with QF would result in a different outcome? I would concur that giving QF more playing time would undoubtedly help him improve, but I would argue it would be at the cost of a losing season. There is no way to know if SB would not help us unless we give him a fair shot. What does that mean, let him get 2-3 games where he is number one. Just like he did with MW and just like he has with QF. The worse that happens is he stinks it up and QF becomes our starter again. At this point what do we have to lose?

 

QF is not a good QB either, but taking any relative comparable data, the offense as a whole performs better under him than it did under Bench.  The absolute best argument you can make for Bench is he's "about the same".  But you don't drop a true sophomore likely to grow and improve "about the same" for a senior, is what he is, and gone after this year "about the same".  It makes virtually no sense in the short term, and is borderline moronic long term.   

Your statement of relative comparable data  where QF ends up on top is just false. The only fair comparsion we have on both QBs is the FAMU game. The Adjusted QBR below takes into account downs, quarters, every down, QB involvement, extending plays with legs, sacks, ints etc, as well as the poor defense:

 

SB

Raw: 93.4 Adj: 81.6

QF

Raw: 82.6 Adj: 59.8 

 

That is a 36.45% difference in SB's favor.

 

Listen I am not trying to imply that I KNOW SB is going to be the solution, I am not sure. All I am saying is that there is an argument to be made that he could give us an opportunity to win.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Bull-Hornz

[Bullshiznitz]

All I know is IF we get behind against Memphis, CWT better have some mid range pass plays for QF to throw. I'm not sure if SB is a better passer than QF (actually they both are pretty bad) but if coach keeps running the ball hoping for 8 minute TD drives then we are dead

 

While I may defend the use of QF over Bench, I won't defend some of the playcalling.  Things need to drastically improve there.  I'm still baffled that in year 3, with 3 great RB's that we have virtually never used a RB screen pass.  I honestly can't even remember one during the CWT era.  Maybe we have and they failed miserably so they just blend in with all the other crap plays, but I cant recall them. 

[Bear]

We know that QF makes fewer mistakes than Bench...

 

 

Just look at the last TWO seasons.