QF Lovers, Bring It.

[Sellular1]

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

 

 

Just look at the last TWO seasons.

We sure have piled up the wins the last 2 seasons under his safeguarding.

[Bull-Hornz]

 

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

 

 

Just look at the last TWO seasons.

We sure have piled up the wins the last 2 seasons under his safeguarding.

 

LOL.

[CousinRicky]

 

 

 

 

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. 

 

 

The first comment was about you saying no QB wins by running unless through improvisation.  The Navy QB runs the ball well on designed plays, albeit the option.  I take improvisation to mean that you run around after a play breaks down and create something.  

 

As to why the coaching staff would start a QB that they didn't think could throw - you really need to ask the coach.  You do notice the difference in plays called, don't you?  

[Bullshiznitz]

 

 

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.

 

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!   

 

Those numbers statistically speaking are basically identical.  So if the backup during his opportunities proves he is no better than the starter you're committed to, it makes no sense to swap them out.  If MW "failed" with those numbers than couldn't we say Bench "failed" too?  I don't see how thats not true by your own words. 

 

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.

 

I've given you the more equitable comparison, you just choose to continually ignore it.  Again, Bench played basically the entire game twice last year (and twice the season before that).  He got the majority of first team snaps prior to one of those games (Houston).  How a QB leads the offense for an entire game is a much more equitable comparison as it takes small sample size issues out (like leading the team for only 1-2 drives vs 13-14) when using appearances (which is what you are using) vs actual games.  What you have is the equivalent of trying to compare relief pitcher stats with starter stats.  It doesn't work.  We have whole games to compare, you just don't want to because they completely destroy your argument.  That's why you've failed to address them in any of your responses.  

 

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.

 

Again, you somehow in the same argument say that after 2 complete games and 59 PA in his sophomore season, that QF is what he is and its more than enough to evaluate him, then on the other side say 4 complete games and 177 career PA at USF is not nearly enough to know what we have in Bench, a senior.  Read that again.  Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? 

 

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,

 

Again, he's been given more opportunity than QF's has.  This isn't my opinion.  Its verifiable fact.  He's had more PA, more game appearances and more full games than QF.  This isn't even arguable.  

 

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?

 

And more Bench is somehow going to give you a different outcome?   Again, we have a far greater sample size with Bench.  We know what he is, and its not good.  

 

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.

 

And there is no way of knowing if QF would help us win without giving him a fair shot.  See how that can be played.  

 

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?

 

We have 2-3 games to lose as well as further development of a QB who is very likely to be at least your backup QB next year.  If we're going to lose, I'd rather us lose with a purpose (developing a needed QB) than play merry-go-round-the QB for 2 straight seasons for no discernible purpose.  

 

Your statement of relative comparable data  where QF ends up on top is just false.

 

Its not one bit.  If you compare starts to starts, complete games to complete games (however you want to dice it), then QF's passing numbers, his running numbers and the overall offensive numbers for the whole team are all better.  Again, ALL better. 

 

I'll leave it at that.  I'm sorry, my analytical engineer side hates emotion based arguments, but even more, emotion based arguments with incorrectly used data (memo to bullpen trolls, make a wild claim with erroneously used data and you'll have me hook line and sinker).  And the call to start Bench is nothing more than an emotion based argument.  Its wanting to throw **** against the wall strictly to see what sticks, with no care for short term or long term consequences.  

[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. 

 

 

The first comment was about you saying no QB wins by running unless through improvisation.  The Navy QB runs the ball well on designed plays, albeit the option.  I take improvisation to mean that you run around after a play breaks down and create something.  

 

As to why the coaching staff would start a QB that they didn't think could throw - you really need to ask the coach.  You do notice the difference in plays called, don't you?  

 

Ok yeah I understand now and agree. Navy QB is excellent in the full on option run game. As for QF improvising after the play breaks down, sometimes I question if he even see's some of his receivers open downfield. It can't be possible that as good and speedy as WR's are, they're never open. This is where I think QF lacks and where SB is better. The busted play usually should lead to someone being open. I think QF might have hesitance to throw because he's being overly cautious. Good and bad I guess. 

 

Yes I agree, the plays were very different just on SB's one drive alone. I want to see QF in a spread type drive to see how he operates in a pass attack that's all. 

[bullsfan97]

He's actually improving.    His ESPN QBR ranked #94 out of all 121 QB's.   Last week he ranked #112.   So, now we have a Top 100 QB.

Edited September 21, 2015 by bullsfan97

[Sellular1]

He's actually improving.    His ESPN QBR ranked #94 out of all 121 QB's.   Last week he ranked #112.   So, now we have a Top 100 QB.

Not if you average it out.

[WWMJD]

Guys, if you count only the quarters of football played on a Saturday morning away game where Flowers played and we didn't score a touchdown, Flowers' passing numbers are downright awful! And if you look at Bench's statistics in games played on Thursdays where we scored at least 21 points, his numbers are great!

QE-f'ing-D

[ArmyBull]

Guys, if you count only the quarters of football played on a Saturday morning away game where Flowers played and we didn't score a touchdown, Flowers' passing numbers are downright awful! And if you look at Bench's statistics in games played on Thursdays where we scored at least 21 points, his numbers are great!

QE-f'ing-D

 

Don't you dare use science.  

[Bull-Hornz]

 

 

 

 

 

 

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!   

 

Those numbers statistically speaking are basically identical.  So if the backup during his opportunities proves he is no better than the starter you're committed to, it makes no sense to swap them out.  If MW "failed" with those numbers than couldn't we say Bench "failed" too?  I don't see how thats not true by your own words. 

 

I was communicating in SB haters language. I guess you all don't like it when its applied to others lol. Indeed they are basically the same numbers, which are statisically speaking below average and one got all the chances in the world and the other didn't. So you agree with me then, in-spite of not being setup to do well SB basically did as well as the starter. What would happen if he got an equal opportunity then? We don't really know

 

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.

 

I've given you the more equitable comparison, you just choose to continually ignore it.  Again, Bench played basically the entire game twice last year (and twice the season before that).  He got the majority of first team snaps prior to one of those games (Houston).  How a QB leads the offense for an entire game is a much more equitable comparison as it takes small sample size issues out (like leading the team for only 1-2 drives vs 13-14) when using appearances (which is what you are using) vs actual games.  What you have is the equivalent of trying to compare relief pitcher stats with starter stats.  It doesn't work.  We have whole games to compare, you just don't want to because they completely destroy your argument.  That's why you've failed to address them in any of your responses.  

I am glad you stopped with the cherry picking nonsense, thats progress. Bench was thrust in against MD where he did not practice as the number one. Against Houston he split reps with an injured MW and the decision was not made until gameday. So even using your own logic we can't compare start to start b/c both MW and QF have been given full first team reps for mulitple weeks and they both still have worse numbers than SB.

 

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.

 

Again, you somehow in the same argument say that after 2 complete games and 59 PA in his sophomore season, that QF is what he is and its more than enough to evaluate him, then on the other side say 4 complete games and 177 career PA at USF is not nearly enough to know what we have in Bench, a senior.  Read that again.  Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? 

Maybe you misunderstood the argument...I am saying that even with SB not getting the same shot as MW or QF, his numbers show he is better at WB than QF (or MW) who has had 3 full weeks as the starter. I am saying at this moment we know what QF brings to the table and its not enough to win us games. Looking at SB last five games it looks like he has a skill set that MIGHT be better if he is given a chance. 

 

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,

 

Again, he's been given more opportunity than QF's has.  This isn't my opinion.  Its verifiable fact.  He's had more PA, more game appearances and more full games than QF.  This isn't even arguable.  

The opportunity that QF and MW have been given has not been given to SB and that is another fact. Even if we were to say that they were equal the numbers still say SB is better.

 

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?

 

And more Bench is somehow going to give you a different outcome?   Again, we have a far greater sample size with Bench.  We know what he is, and its not good.  

Yep they haven't been given equal opportunities. If you can't understand that, I dont know what to tell ya.

 

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.

 

And there is no way of knowing if QF would help us win without giving him a fair shot.  See how that can be played.  

Three games of full first team reps and ranked 114 QBR tells us plenty. Look at SB last three games and tell me where he falls in that?

 

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?

 

We have 2-3 games to lose as well as further development of a QB who is very likely to be at least your backup QB next year.  If we're going to lose, I'd rather us lose with a purpose (developing a needed QB) than play merry-go-round-the QB for 2 straight seasons for no discernible purpose.  

 All SB recent numbers tell us that he will do better than QF at QB, pls tell me how that translates into us playing worse than we are?

 

Your statement of relative comparable data  where QF ends up on top is just false.

 

Its not one bit.  If you compare starts to starts, complete games to complete games (however you want to dice it), then QF's passing numbers, his running numbers and the overall offensive numbers for the whole team are all better.  Again, ALL better. 

 

Listen the best comparison we can make is them playing against the same team. You can ignore it all you want, try to compare apples to oranges til your blue in the face but fact is your wrong 

 

SB

Raw: 93.4 Adj: 81.6

QF

Raw: 82.6 Adj: 59.8 

 

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

 

I'll leave it at that.  I'm sorry, my analytical engineer side hates emotion based arguments, but even more, emotion based arguments with incorrectly used data (memo to bullpen trolls, make a wild claim with erroneously used data and you'll have me hook line and sinker).  And the call to start Bench is nothing more than an emotion based argument.  Its wanting to throw **** against the wall strictly to see what sticks, with no care for short term or long term consequences.  

There is nothing emotional about my response, in fact you are pulling a lot harder than I am to make your argument fit b/c your position is weak. I am an engineer and a scientist so I look at numbers all day as well. So no winning there either my friend. I would argue that winning now is more important than next year for the greater good of the programs long term stability. If we go bowling this year that is the best possible outcome. Neither you nor I can know what will happen if SB gets the same shot QF just got as the starter. My position is backed by facts and numbers you are trying to wiggle some weak arguments with nothing but what you think. 

 

Again I am not saying that SB will in fact save us, just that numbers make it a logical reason to give him a shot. Your argument is you have seen enough of him thrown into situations where he was prepped to fail, to make the conclusion he is no good but are not looking at QF in the same critical light under the guise that he might be a back up QB next yr. I for one think we need to try everything to win the next game and the rest of our games and putting in the best QB NOW to do so.

Edited September 22, 2015 by Bull-Hornz