|
Replies: 31
| visibility 2600
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
I say it once more...Cole Stoudt is NOT our problem.
Sep 16, 2014, 11:43 AM
|
|
I have no idea why so many are jumping on the DW bandwagon as to him being the solution to our problem. Cole is not the problem. I'd point at our OLine, our play-calling (or lack thereof), our weakness at RB, or even the poor play on Special Teams as being our problems. If we don't even realize what the real problems are - then how are we ever going to actually fix them?
Once more for the slow learners: COLE IS NOT THE PROBLEM!
|
|
|
|
 |
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
Re: I say it once more...Cole Stoudt is NOT our problem.
Sep 16, 2014, 11:44 AM
|
|
He doesn't have to be a problem for there to be this debate. As long as DW continues to outperform him on the field (AND I ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF A SMALL SAMPLE SIZE AND HAVE FACTORED THAT INTO THAT ASSESSMENT)...there will be this debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16629]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
|
Yeah but
Sep 16, 2014, 11:45 AM
|
|
are you even considering the small sample size in your assessment?
tia
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
Re: Yeah but
Sep 16, 2014, 11:47 AM
|
|
IT'S LIKE, BRO, DESHAUN WATSON'S PERFORMANCE IS FROM A SMALL SAMPLE SIZE....A SMALL SAMPLE SIZE THAT'S ONLY SMALL BECAUSE HE'S NOT STARTING. MIND = BLOWN
A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY THAT CAN'T BE REFUTED UNTIL THE DEBATE IS ACTUALLY OVER. GENIUS!
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [529]
TigerPulse: 100%
19
|
If that's the case
Sep 16, 2014, 12:00 PM
|
|
Then why did we not let Cole start after SC State last year? His small sample size blew Watson's away. By the way, nice contradictory premise. He does not need the starting job to build a larger sample size. It can be built gradually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22940]
TigerPulse: 87%
53
Posts: 18886
Joined: 2007
|
Re: If that's the case
Sep 16, 2014, 12:01 PM
|
|
Not hardly. Stoudt's throws were all less than 20 yards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [529]
TigerPulse: 100%
19
|
Re: If that's the case
Sep 16, 2014, 12:11 PM
|
|
I can't figure out why we don't just send 5 guys deep every time. I mean it works on Madden...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6776]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
Posts: 11287
Joined: 2007
|
Because Tajh was the starter?
Sep 16, 2014, 12:05 PM
[ in reply to If that's the case ] |
|
hth
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [529]
TigerPulse: 100%
19
|
Re: Because Tajh was the starter?
Sep 16, 2014, 12:09 PM
|
|
You mean the coaches decided he had proven in practice that he deserved to play? INCONCEIVABLE!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
Re: Because Tajh was the starter?
Sep 16, 2014, 12:23 PM
|
|
Let me help you out here. Tajh had proven himself as the starter the 2 years before that.
You're comparing apples to oranges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [529]
TigerPulse: 100%
19
|
Re: Because Tajh was the starter?
Sep 16, 2014, 12:46 PM
|
|
Nope. I am comparing apples to apples and so are you. You are just choosing to call some of your apples oranges. Tajh had proven to the coaches (let me help you out here by telling you this is the important part) by his body of work that he was the starter. You know, the same thing the coaches are saying about Cole. Now the body of work may be different, so maybe we are talking Red Delicious apples to Gala apples, but they are apples none the less.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6776]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
Posts: 11287
Joined: 2007
|
Re: Because Tajh was the starter?
Sep 16, 2014, 12:51 PM
|
|
That makes no sense at all. Literally none. I feel dumber than before I read that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
Re: so what are you saying IBWG?***
Sep 16, 2014, 11:50 AM
|
|
Basically that you don't have to hate Cole or think he's the worst QB ever or the weakness of the team to think DW should get more looks.
I guess we'll see Saturday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
yes... but what are you saying?***
Sep 16, 2014, 11:50 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
Re: yes... but what are you saying?***
Sep 16, 2014, 11:53 AM
|
|
I'm team DW 100% based on the small sample size where he played with the same unit against the same competition as the other guy. It's the safe bet for my T-Net future. In 2 months, I don't want to be one of those guys who wasn't seeing the obvious. I will not be the guy who defends Kevin Steele or defends giving Jamie Harper 50% of AE's snaps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
I understand that... but what are you saying?***
Sep 16, 2014, 11:54 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [110]
TigerPulse: 92%
11
|
Re: I understand that... but what are you saying?***
Sep 16, 2014, 1:23 PM
|
|
I think I missed this joke. Or there is a Tmale thread encourage you bois to screw with me.
CU2012 did the "are you slow? you sound slow" yesterday and I'm so confused. Please send help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16629]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
|
This is very reasonable.
Sep 16, 2014, 11:53 AM
[ in reply to Re: so what are you saying IBWG?*** ] |
|
I'm more surprised with the folks claiming that based on their extensive knowledge of football and the fact that they know more than our coaches that Watson is without question better than Cole in every aspect of the position. I have no issue with Watson getting more looks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
me either***
Sep 16, 2014, 11:54 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3885]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
I'm just hearing about this Munson dude....he may be the
Sep 16, 2014, 11:47 AM
|
|
problem
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11161]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
Posts: 10900
Joined: 2007
|
And all along I thought it was Perry Noble. Oh well.***
Sep 16, 2014, 11:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
48
Posts: 25447
Joined: 2005
|
We have had all those issues over the past 3 seasons...
Sep 16, 2014, 11:49 AM
|
|
Yet that hasn't affected our play. By the way we have a ton of talented young running backs which Dabo refused to play against UGA. Poor oline play the previous 3 seasons didn't prevent us from being one of the best offenses in the nation. And play calling ain't the problem, Chad Morris is responsible for creating one of the most high powered offenses in Clemson history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6776]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
Posts: 11287
Joined: 2007
|
Hell Rod McDowell ran for 1,000+ yards last year behind the
Sep 16, 2014, 12:35 PM
|
|
o-line.
That doesn't normally happen with a below average o-line as much as some people hate to think that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [453]
TigerPulse: 95%
18
|
While that may be true
Sep 16, 2014, 11:56 AM
|
|
The fact is, we likely don't have better linemen sitting on the bench. We have yet to find a running back that is substantially better than average. What we do have it a QB that offsets some of those deficiencies by keeping safeties deeper with a strong arm and slowing down a pass rush by being a running threat.
In addition Cole does not draw any respect running the read option.
If we had a very good oline and ground game, Cole wouldn't be the problem. But we don't and I don't see that changing.
Watson covers some of those blemishes. Granted were he the starter, he would have some of his own issues such as making reads and limiting the playbook, but with the state of our offense I feel his skillset is a better fit than Cole's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [978]
TigerPulse: 96%
24
|
Re: I say it once more...Cole Stoudt is NOT our problem.
Sep 16, 2014, 12:10 PM
|
|
I was unaware we had a problem. This is only game 3 and you folks are freaking out. Settle down it will all work itself out starting this week with Fsu.
Go tigers I'm all in !
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7309]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 10322
Joined: 1998
|
Agree........
Sep 16, 2014, 12:19 PM
|
|
The offensive line is going to be the difference in this game. If we can't run the ball....if Cole doesn't have time to throw, everything else will be rather irrelevant. Why? Because no matter how well the D plays, they are not going to shut down FSU. They will get theirs. We have to keep up the pace and move the chains. Keep our D on the sidelines. If our Oline does not play well, a 20 point differential will be a piece of cake for them. And, this has to be a full 4 quarters effort because there will be no lead big enough against FSU in Doak. We've seen it before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2749]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
But, is he the solution? That is the question.***
Sep 16, 2014, 12:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3633]
TigerPulse: 89%
35
|
You are correct. Our weakness is not our skilled players.***
Sep 16, 2014, 12:33 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solid Orange [1320]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
Re: I say it once more...Cole Stoudt is NOT our problem.
Sep 16, 2014, 1:20 PM
|
|
PASSING STATISTICS
NAME CMP ATT YDS CMP% YDS/A TD INT RAT
Stoudt 38 60 446 63.3 7.43 1 1 127.9
Watson 10 13 213 76.9 16.39 4 0 316.1
Schuessler 2 2 11 100.0 5.50 0 0 146.2
Watson should start because your know who is better when you watch them. Also, see stats above particularly yards per attempt. Stoudt's going to throw it to Humphries or Howard within 5 to 10 yards of the LOS. Watson's going to throw it to Mike Williams down the field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solid Orange [1320]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
sorry about the formatting
Sep 16, 2014, 1:22 PM
|
|
YDS/Attempt is 7.43 to 16.39 for Stoudt and Watson respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [122]
TigerPulse: 74%
11
|
Re: I say it once more...Cole Stoudt is NOT our problem.
Sep 16, 2014, 1:26 PM
|
|
Obviously DW has the better numbers but what stands out to me are the actual throws. I don't know if you realized it or not but several passes that Cole threw against SC State, especially deep balls, could have and should've been picked off. SC State batted them down or tipped them away but good teams WILL intercept those kind of throws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 31
| visibility 2600
|
|
|
50
