|
Replies: 17
| visibility 1
|
110%er [6153]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4043
Joined: 2/15/11
|
Questions re: Replacing a multi--year starter at QB ...
Aug 17, 2014, 9:32 PM
|
|
When in the history of Clemson football, has the team lost a multi-year starter at QB and actually been *better* at the position the following year? Not almost as good, not just as good, but "better" ...
and ... IF by some magical means, you could arrange for Tajh Boyd to come back this year and be our starting QB, would you do it?
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [5737]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5984
Joined: 2/3/10
|
Re: Questions re: Replacing a multi--year starter at QB ...
Aug 17, 2014, 9:43 PM
|
|
As long as were being magic, let's bring back Whitehurst so we can beat the coots!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [842]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 748
Joined: 10/26/02
|
I think Tajh replaced a multi year starter.***
Aug 17, 2014, 10:18 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [32]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 126
Joined: 7/30/11
|
Re: Questions re: Replacing a multi--year starter at QB ...
Aug 17, 2014, 10:21 PM
|
|
Chris Morroco was a much much better passer than Rodney Williams and a comparable runner (at least statistically).
Rodney Williams
Passing
Year G Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate
*1985 12 56 122 45.9 772 6.3 4.6 1 5 93.6
*1986 12 98 200 49.0 1245 6.2 4.8 4 8 99.9
*1987 12 101 209 48.3 1486 7.1 5.5 6 10 108.0
*1988 12 78 186 41.9 1144 6.2 5.7 5 4 98.2
Chris Morroco
*1989 12 79 134 59.0 1131 8.4 8.7 6 2 141.6
Rushing
Rodney Williams
Year G Att Yds Avg TD
*1985 12 56 127 2.3 0
*1986 12 97 352 3.6 5
*1987 12 75 85 1.1 1
*1988 12 79 299 3.8 6
Chris Morroco
*1989 12 81 295 3.6 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
That's a reasonable example ...
Aug 18, 2014, 10:32 AM
|
|
I'd have to agree that Morroco was probably "just as good" as Rodney for that one season. I do not think he was necessarily a "better" QB though.
Rodney had so many intangibles other than great overall skill contributing to his value to the team. As a leader and a winner, he was without peer as a Clemson QB IMHO.
Just his toughness and durability alone make him unique.
Though he took tremendous punishment on every single play for almost 4 years, he never missed a start and rarely (if ever) came out of the game because of injury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [623]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 1500
Joined: 12/17/12
|
Re: Questions re: Replacing a multi--year starter at QB ...
Aug 17, 2014, 10:21 PM
|
|
I would take Woody or Charlie first, with Hamilton, Ford, D Allen, Spiller, Aaron Kelly, Watkins and Hopkins. Since we're talking magical
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [32]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 126
Joined: 7/30/11
|
Re: Questions re: Replacing a multi--year starter at QB ...
Aug 17, 2014, 10:26 PM
|
|
Also, I think Parkers first year was better than Harpers last and Boyds first year was better than Parkers last.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Very good examples ...
Aug 18, 2014, 10:35 AM
|
|
nm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2457]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 4246
Joined: 3/12/08
|
Re: Questions re: Replacing a multi--year starter at QB ...
Aug 17, 2014, 10:26 PM
|
|
I would say 2009 KP was better than 2008 with Cullen.
2011 Tajh was also better than 2010 KP (though throwing to Sammy and Nuk is easier than Xavier and Terrence).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23418
Joined: 8/16/03
|
"Better" opens up a semantics issue. "Better" depends on
Aug 17, 2014, 10:27 PM
|
|
context. Better statistically? Better, as in capable of extremely athletic plays? Better, as in makes less mistakes? "Better" as in their particular attributes fit a particular system? "Better" as in team final record?
People are injecting a lot of BS into the so-called "Tajh debate."
Nobody on here has been a "Tajh-hater." Everyone on here recognizes him as one of the best Clemson QB's of all time. Everyone on here absolutely loves the guy and wishes him the best.
There are a couple of blowhards on here who are making a straw man argument that is getting attention from others. The only debate I have seen is that Cole Stoudt, while obviously not more athletic, stands a good chance to lead the team to more overall success because Tajh's particular weaknesses (which everyone says are vastly outnumbered by his awesomeness) were particularly damaging to consistent success against elite competition.
That is a pretty reasonable premise... though not as easy to argue as "people hate Tajh because he had a couple of bad throws." Or..."people have decided that Cole is better than Tajh even though Cole hasn't ever started a game."
Just like in politics, the whole debate is framed in a farcical manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [623]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 1500
Joined: 12/17/12
|
Re: "Better" opens up a semantics issue. "Better" depends on
Aug 17, 2014, 10:30 PM
|
|
But if he is "better" and can do all of those things better, take care of the ball, control the game, hit check downs, etc., why has he held a clipboard for so long? My thing is, why talk ab it so much when he's never played against a 1st string defense?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23418
Joined: 8/16/03
|
The logic of that argument is flawed.
Aug 17, 2014, 10:33 PM
|
|
The current version of Cole Stoudt could be better than Tajh was last year, regardless of last year's Cole Stoudt being better than last year's Tajh.
Let me say clearly that I do not think that is the case (I don't believe Cole is "better" than Tajh".... I think the "better" debate is a worhtless oversimplification) but it's a logical fallacy to rest an argument on a person from last year representing a person from a year later in an argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [623]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 1500
Joined: 12/17/12
|
Re: The logic of that argument is flawed.
Aug 17, 2014, 10:42 PM
|
|
I agree, things change alot from year to year. I want Cole to do it all and lead this team to perfection, some things bother me though. Honestly, if Chad Kelley were still at Clemson and being interviewed the way Stoudt is and saying the things he is saying, how do you think that would be perceived? I say as cocky, and ppl saying that he has no ground to stand on saying that until he proves it. Lots of hypocrisy in my opinion. I liked the way Chad carried himself bc no matter if he was a true freshmen or whatever, it was the same thing. But Cole has just now developed the somewhat cocky attitude now that he is off the bench. Maybe that doesn't make sense, and maybe it's a good thing that he's being this way now, but I just have a problem with it being cocky when one said it but awesome when another does.
Jumping around from point to point I know, I just want him to prove it
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23418
Joined: 8/16/03
|
Everyone who says Cole hasnt really proved anything is right
Aug 17, 2014, 10:53 PM
|
|
He hasn't.
The whole underlying basis for all the optimistic posts I make about improvement in our offense because of a new QB are because of 3 main reasons.
1. Though Tajh was awesome, and did a LOT more good than bad, he had more outrageously bad plays, that were absolutely devastating to the rest of the team than any Clemson QB I have ever seen. This does not mean he was worse... because he was usually better. But I would trade many of Tajh's elite capabilities for just eliminating his worst lows. Though the loss wasn't all his fault, he single-handed made it impossible to come back in the 4th quarter against the coots. At that point, he gave us no chance. He did NOT single-handedly lose us the game, as some turnovers and playcalls were nowhere close to his fault... but at a certain point he destroyed our chances.
2. Because of what we have seen from Cole thus far (which is very limited) and what we know about his background and his particular attributes, it is reasonable to compare what we experienced with Tajh (which was anomalous)and what we have a better than 50% chance to expecrience with Cole (which is less talent, but more consistency) and expect less game destroying blunders.
3. The only reason the first two matter is because of our particular system. Our system is particularly effective when accurate mid-level and short passes are made. Tajh was amazing, but he struggled with those particular type of passes more often than your average QB. He had to play amazing sometimes just to make us for something amazingly bad. Our offense relies on progression checking as well. Everyone who isn't blind knows that Tajh had a weakness for getting locked on, especially after facing adversity. Did he always do that? NO. But he did it at the wrong time against good defenses relatively often. Analysts noticed it, coaches said it, NFL scouts documented it. It's just reality. Cole Stoudt appears to be better at the one crucial aspect, which is especially important in our particular offense. I'm not saying I'm sure we will be better on offense with Cole behind center, but I am saying I believe it to be most likely based on the available evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Why do you think Cole is cocky? Just because he goes from
Aug 17, 2014, 10:55 PM
[ in reply to Re: The logic of that argument is flawed. ] |
|
a relative unknown who isn't frequently interviewed to a player that no HAS to occupy the spotlight doesn't make him cocky. Just curious what you're seeing that makes him this way to you...
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [623]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 1500
Joined: 12/17/12
|
Re: Why do you think Cole is cocky? Just because he goes from
Aug 17, 2014, 11:20 PM
|
|
Saying the offense will be better than ever, I just feel that coming from someone like Chad Kelley or a player that ppl already see as cocky it would me highly criticized. Just bc ppl already thought he was cocky, but that's how he was from day 1. Never a word of anything like this from Cole, until now. Play a couple games, then say we're better than ever if he's doing it better than anyone ever
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [623]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 1500
Joined: 12/17/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6468]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/2/03
|
Re: Questions re: Replacing a multi--year starter at QB ...
Aug 17, 2014, 11:46 PM
|
|
We never know what will happen. Usually your super star college Quarter backs have the starting job by Sophomore year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 17
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
