Started By
Message
1
Posted on 9/27/17 at 2:40 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I certainly don't count where the ball was released to where it landed or was caught when talking about yards gained/lost, but when talking about arm strength and how far and fast a QB can chuck it, I thought it was an appropriate way to measure it.
And that's fair as long as we account for that for everybody in the conversation.
quote:
I thik "woeful" is a subjective descriptor but if it was woeful to you, I can't argue that. It just didn't seem that bad to me given the context.
Woeful sounds worse than I meant, no doubt. To me a badly thrown ball is one that makes a receiver slow down and in this case, woeful was used since Hardman not only slowed way down, but had to come back for the ball when he had everybody beat. Still, he should have caught the ball.....and woeful was a poor choice of words on my part. I am probably tougher on QB's than many because I played receiver.
quote:
The Mecole drop? I watched it a few more times and it definitely looks like he's throwing it from the 38 or 39 yard line on UGA's side of the field.
Another poor choice in phrasing on my part. I should have said the LOS is from the 47 1/2.
quote:
Maybe he catches, it, maybe not. The ball hit him right the hands about a foot in front of his body (facing down the field where the ball came). IMO, there's no excuse for the drop
I agree/ Any time a receiver gets his hands on the ball he should catch it ....well.....most times, at least.
quote:
I've been impressed with how quickly Fromm has improved over the first four games and I'm excited to see him keep it up.
He seems to have made great strides quickly. He learns fast.
The fact people are starting a thread like this is good. It's nice to have a QB controversy....instead of being worried about the position. A position of weakness has turned into a position of strength.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 2:42 pm to djsdawg
quote:
I was just proving a couple examples of fromm deep passes that were not underthrown because you said you had not seen any.
His arm does seem to be stronger than I remember. But I am an older guy, so my memory isn't always the best!
I appreciate everybody's patience with me when I am disagreeing with them. I can be frustrating sometimes....I realize that. If I ever forget it, my wife is willing to remind me.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 2:43 pm to DawgsLife
If you're comparing arm strength why would you not count how far the ball actually traveled in the air? Like, from the QB's hand to the receiver's hand? That would be the only sensible way to do it. You're not comparing passing stats, you're comparing yards the ball actually traveled.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:22 pm to DawgsLife
quote:I agree. I am of the mind that until proven otherwise, Fromm should continue to start because I believe his strengths are a better fit for our offense than Eason's.
That's the only point I have been making. (or trying to make.) Bot guys have particular strengths and weaknesses.
quote:Exactly. Fromm has been the one benefiting from playing with our other offensive starters and has the most recent experience playing. I said it earlier but Eason (not counting the 2+ series he got in game 1) hasn't really had the benefit of real game time in like 10 months. Fromm has been able to play every weekend for the last month.
I think we all have that concern. The only thing we have to go on is what we hear from the coaches. they said he has improved, but what you see in a practice and what happens in a game can be completely different things, sometimes.
From the comments that the coaches and players have made regarding Fromm, he's been playing well since he stepped on to campus. He's also been able to back that up in real games. If Eason has improved, then great, I just don't think he should get the chance to prove it except in mop-up duty at this point unless Fromm suffers a setback.
quote:True. If Eason has improved in those other areas to where he's at least equal to Fromm, then that makes the decision that much harder. There's also the chemistry that has developed with the #1s to worry about. Does Eason still have it? If not, can he get it back in time to not suffer against our conference opponents? One thing I doubt has improved is his leadership skills. Fromm oozes confidence and seems to have a natural ability to lead. That's important for that position.
Unless eason has improved in those particular areas. if he has, and he is equal to Fromm in those areas now, we would have a kid with a great arm that is equal to Fromm in the other areas. That is for the coaches to decide.
quote:4 games = 1/3 of the season. Assuming Fromm starts against TN, he'll have led the team for nearly half of this season. That's not inconsequential. In the four games he's played (as a TrFr), he's got one of the best QB ratings in this country. He's over 60% in completion percentage and has thrown 7 TDs to 1 INT. Aside from the one fumble and not jumping on the bad hand off, he's done exceptionally well protecting the ball and getting our offense in position to move the ball and score (we're 100% in the red zone this year).
I guess I am just concerned because everybody is ready to crown Fromm the man after 4 games
From the first snap he took in the first game, there was an added swagger we've seen in this offense that was missing last season and during the first few possessions Eason had this season. I said a few weeks ago he reminded me of Tim Tebow with his energy, leadership, and drive to win. He's an exciting player and he has improved from game to game. It's still early, yes, but he's already impressed me more than Eason did last year, save for a few throws here and there.
quote:I'm fine with an equal standard for both QBs but no one is disputing the arm strength of Eason. I just think that if we're going to talk about Fromm's ability to sling the ball downfield, we should be measuring distance of his throws. LOS can be misleading in this regard, too. If a QB throws the ball 20 yards beyond the LOS and the receiver catches it 30 yards past the LOS, that's a 50 yard throw. If the QB throws it at the LOS and the receiver catches it 30 yards past the LOS, that's a 30 yard throw. Basic math, yes, but when talking about how strong a QB is and his ability to throw the ball, we should be measuring how far the ball travels. I wouldn't count yards gained after the catch as part of arm strength, either.
Again you are counting from the thrown ball and not the LOS. From the LOS it is a 32 yard pass. and the last one was 37 yards. (Again I count from the LOS) If you want to count from in the air, that's ok, but you would have to do the same with Eason.
quote:I'm in agreement with you that Eason has the stronger arm. I'm contending that an advantage in arm strength is not a compelling reason to start Eason over Fromm given what we've seen last year from Eason and this year from Fromm.
I am not saying that Fromm cannot throw. I am saying his arm is not as strong....and you have already said as much yourself. And I have no problem counting overthrown balls....I mean the distance is what we are discussing, not accuracy or completions.
Really, I'm not sure where we are disagreeing, actually. We are both saying that Eason has the stronger arm, and we both think Fromm has the advantage in the intangibles.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:29 pm to DawgsLife
quote:Like I just said, I'm fine with that, I just don't think it's necessary given the discussion. If Fromm can throw the ball 40+ yards with pretty good accuracy and "zip", that should be enough for him to be serviceable in terms of arm strength. I don't think we gain that much from Eason except for a few rare plays that most players in college football wouldn't be able to make.
And that's fair as long as we account for that for everybody in the conversation.
quote:Understandable. When evaluating QBs like this, there is objective evidence we can point to, but there's a lot of subjectivity, as well. What's "good" for you may not be "good" for me and vice versa based on context, experience, and expectations.
Woeful sounds worse than I meant, no doubt. To me a badly thrown ball is one that makes a receiver slow down and in this case, woeful was used since Hardman not only slowed way down, but had to come back for the ball when he had everybody beat. Still, he should have caught the ball.....and woeful was a poor choice of words on my part. I am probably tougher on QB's than many because I played receiver.
quote:No big deal. I just don't think LOS is a great way to measure arm strength.
Another poor choice in phrasing on my part. I should have said the LOS is from the 47 1/2.
quote:I think one thing we all can agree on is that this is a good controversy to have. At least we're not talking about why our starter sucks and which backup should we gamble with to replace him, like when Bauta started against UF
The fact people are starting a thread like this is good. It's nice to have a QB controversy....instead of being worried about the position. A position of weakness has turned into a position of strength.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:45 pm to FooManChoo
Daaang... and I get a bad wrap for making long posts around here.
Just came to see if anyone had mentioned Kirby's most recent comments. It seems the narrative has shifted from "what is healthy? ..." conversation to the newly created:
This gives Kirby the ability to ease Eason back in mid-game at some point and see if it's better, same, or worse... which is likely the appropriate move. No "starter" controversy but still get to see whether he has indeed improved or not live.
Just came to see if anyone had mentioned Kirby's most recent comments. It seems the narrative has shifted from "what is healthy? ..." conversation to the newly created:
quote:
“So he’s improving day to day and mentally catching up to the speed of the game. It’s different when you go three, four weeks without taking a snap. So he’s started catching up on that.”
This gives Kirby the ability to ease Eason back in mid-game at some point and see if it's better, same, or worse... which is likely the appropriate move. No "starter" controversy but still get to see whether he has indeed improved or not live.
This post was edited on 9/27/17 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:45 pm to GeorgiaBoy
quote:
If you're comparing arm strength why would you not count how far the ball actually traveled in the air?
Because it is basically going to be the same from QB to QB. It's just easier to count from the LOS. It's ok to count from where the QB throws it....if that is what you are going to do, just make sure you do the same for the one you are comparing them to.
quote:
Like, from the QB's hand to the receiver's hand? That would be the only sensible way to do it. You're not comparing passing stats, you're comparing yards the ball actually traveled.
Again, you can, but it is easier to count from the LOS, and it all comes out the same as the QB you are comparing them to dropped back, too.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:51 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I agree. I am of the mind that until proven otherwise, Fromm should continue to start because I believe his strengths are a better fit for our offense than Eason's.
It's really kind fo hard to say for me. The teams seems to respond better to Fromm....but the only thing we can make a comparison with is last years tem to this years team. And that isn't fair to Eason.
As someone who has played at a similar level, all I can say is players do not like to think they will be replaced because of an unavoidable injury. by the same token, they also like to believe if they perform well, they will be given a starting job. It's a double edged sword.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:55 pm to DawgsLife
If he practices well, he should play well.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:55 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Daaang... and I get a bad wrap for making long posts around here.
I am terrible about it. I am very long winded.....and I try not to be.
quote:
This gives Kirby the ability to ease Eason back in mid-game at some point and see if it's better, same, or worse... which is likely the appropriate move. No "starter" controversy but still get to see whether he has indeed improved or not live.
Doesn't surprise me. I think we see Eason again against Vandy or Missouri. We will get a healthy dose of him, though, to see what is what. It needs to be settled before we roll into Florida. Kirby is in a tough situation. Glad I am not him!
Posted on 9/27/17 at 3:59 pm to grey
quote:
If he practices well, he should play well.
Not that simple. I have seen players that practiced like All-Americans and played like crap. I've seen the opposite, too. And it is not from a lack of effort or anything. It's just the way it is.
I knew a guy that needed confidence shown in him by the coaches. if he thought they didn't have confidence in him it steamrolled into a bad stretch or at least a bad game. If they showed confidence in him he played lights out. Nothing that could be helped...it's just that people need different things to be at their best.
Some need encouragement, some need to be kicked, some need to be ignored, some need to be petted. It's a different approach for every player....and that is one aspect that makes a coaches job harder.
ETA
The above is said in a vacuum and may not relate your post.
This post was edited on 9/27/17 at 4:02 pm
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:14 pm to DawgsLife
It is that simple & Kirby has said so, time and time again.
Why are you guys doing this to yourselves. If any of you knew half a crap what you were talking about in breaking down a college QB you'd probably be coaching in one of the 500 college FB coaching positions.
When Eason is healthy. He will practice. IF he practices better than Fromm, he will play or start.
Kirby system demands that the better practicer plays...that is what the program is built on. It isn't built on determining player by player who needs what "confidence" from the coaches....
Kirby has said at least 500 times in the last 20 months or so...whoever practices best plays.
End of discussion.
You guys are really wearing yourselves out on this.
Why are you guys doing this to yourselves. If any of you knew half a crap what you were talking about in breaking down a college QB you'd probably be coaching in one of the 500 college FB coaching positions.
When Eason is healthy. He will practice. IF he practices better than Fromm, he will play or start.
Kirby system demands that the better practicer plays...that is what the program is built on. It isn't built on determining player by player who needs what "confidence" from the coaches....
Kirby has said at least 500 times in the last 20 months or so...whoever practices best plays.
End of discussion.
You guys are really wearing yourselves out on this.
This post was edited on 9/27/17 at 4:17 pm
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:19 pm to texasdawginGA
Fromm will start until Kirby and the coaches feel Eason is a BETTER option that Fromm. I don't care who it is, our how they throw it, or what the yardage is, or the catchability, or the timing...the coaches will put the best guy out there.
They called me for my opinion yesterday, but I told them "Yo, Kirbs, you got this!"
They called me for my opinion yesterday, but I told them "Yo, Kirbs, you got this!"
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:23 pm to texasdawginGA
quote:
It is that simple & Kirby has said so, time and time again.
No. Kirby said the guy that practices well will play. That should not be thought of as if you practice well you will play well. I can assure you there have been kids that had had great weeks of practice that have had bad games.
quote:
Why are you guys doing this to yourselves. If any of you knew half a crap what you were talking about in breaking down a college QB you'd probably be coaching in one of the 500 college programs.
So....you are saying that people who know a lot about football always coach? I wonder why Terry Bradshaw, Tony Romo, and the countless other people that know a ton about football are not coaching? Seems odd. You can know a lot about football and not be a coach.
quote:
When Eason is healthy. He will practice. IF he practices better than Fromm, he will play or start.
Maybe.
quote:
Kirby system demands that the better practicer plays...that is what the program is built on. It isn't built on determining player by player who needs what "confidence" from the coaches....
Mind showing me where i said Kirby's "system' demanded that? I don't recall ever saying that. I merely pointed out that it is true for many people. If you don't believe that, I guess I now understand why you are not a coach.
quote:
Kirby has said at least 500 times in the last 20 months or so...whoever practices best plays.
Nobody has said any different. Why are you so worked up about our conversation?
quote:
You guys are really wearing yourselves out on this.
You seem more worked up about this than any of us.
You do realize this is a discussion board, right? Now you are telling us we can't discuss a subject that is on a lot of people's minds? Would you please tell us what we are allowed to discuss so we don't get you upset?
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:24 pm to DawgsLife
Hey DawgsLife
Not attacking your post, you got some great comments based on experience!
I just don't understand the scrutiny at this point or why anyone really cares who is QB as long as he is kicking @ss!
Carry on with the unending and unwinnable debate.
Oh yeah, I beleive Eason is hurt (day to day), so he isn't starting at TN....just in case anyone was unclear.
Not attacking your post, you got some great comments based on experience!
I just don't understand the scrutiny at this point or why anyone really cares who is QB as long as he is kicking @ss!
Carry on with the unending and unwinnable debate.
Oh yeah, I beleive Eason is hurt (day to day), so he isn't starting at TN....just in case anyone was unclear.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:30 pm to DawgsLife
I hear ya.
I was a gamer in HS BB. I was a horrible practicer and always was. The JV guys made me look foolish in practice. But I always performed in the games....not as a starter of course, because starters generally have to do BOTH, unless you just got no talent on the roster.
I guess I just don't see the point in the debate, until there is a scenario where there is a potential change.
1) Both healthy, both practicing....and there is an imbalqnce (Fromm with experience and Eason practicing better)
2) Fromm struggling on the field, with Eason healthy and practicing well.
3) Eason returns to start, and struggles with a healthy, experienced Fromm on the bench.
I am all in on those debates....I just try to channel my limited mental capacity very efficiently. But the debate is entertaining for sure, just as a chat board is intended!
I'll hang up and read...
I was a gamer in HS BB. I was a horrible practicer and always was. The JV guys made me look foolish in practice. But I always performed in the games....not as a starter of course, because starters generally have to do BOTH, unless you just got no talent on the roster.
I guess I just don't see the point in the debate, until there is a scenario where there is a potential change.
1) Both healthy, both practicing....and there is an imbalqnce (Fromm with experience and Eason practicing better)
2) Fromm struggling on the field, with Eason healthy and practicing well.
3) Eason returns to start, and struggles with a healthy, experienced Fromm on the bench.
I am all in on those debates....I just try to channel my limited mental capacity very efficiently. But the debate is entertaining for sure, just as a chat board is intended!
I'll hang up and read...
This post was edited on 9/27/17 at 4:32 pm
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:31 pm to texasdawginGA
quote:
Hey DawgsLife
Not attacking your post, you got some great comments based on experience!
My apologies, then. I thought you were attacking. Some times it is hard to tell on a message board.
quote:
I just don't understand the scrutiny at this point or why anyone really cares who is QB as long as he is kicking @ss!
Carry on with the unending and unwinnable debate.
You are right, though, actually. It is unwinnable. But all the discussions and differences of opinion are unwinnable. Nobody ever changes their minds on here, but we argue and drone on.
quote:
Oh yeah, I beleive Eason is hurt (day to day), so he isn't starting at TN....just in case anyone was unclear.
You are right again. I doubt we see him this week. MAYBE next week for a bit and some more against Missouri. Then an off week and we need to know who gets the nod going into Florida.
I said the same thing you did in one of my earlier posts....it's pointless because the coaches will make the decision, and we have to live with it. If we don't trust the coaches, then we don't need them at UGA.
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:34 pm to texasdawginGA
quote:
I guess I just don't see the point in the debate, until there is a scenario where there is a potential change.
No point, really. Just passing time.
ETA
Just noticed....16 pages!
This post was edited on 9/27/17 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 9/27/17 at 4:36 pm to DawgsLife
I personally LOVED the 2 QB when it was Greene and Shock.
I know it is freakin taboo to be knowledgable and like having 2 QBs. (You have 2 = you have none)
Shock didn't run much, and neither did Greeney...and that worked out well!
Someone remind me, Did Richt ever have any DESIGNED runs for Shockley? I don't remember the offense working that way.
Though, he did have some nice long runs...
Just win, baby! Play 5 QBs - lets get this perennial playoff train rolling!
I know it is freakin taboo to be knowledgable and like having 2 QBs. (You have 2 = you have none)
Shock didn't run much, and neither did Greeney...and that worked out well!
Someone remind me, Did Richt ever have any DESIGNED runs for Shockley? I don't remember the offense working that way.
Though, he did have some nice long runs...
Just win, baby! Play 5 QBs - lets get this perennial playoff train rolling!
Page 15 of 16
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News