Should we go after a grad transfer QB to backup Tua?

No. You expect someone to learn the playbook in 3 months?

quote:

---

Don't see how any good grad transfer is going to come here to sit. Mac Jones probably is a better option than anyone that would be willing to do that.

---

So is Taulia.

No. I'd like to see coach play Mac or Taulia as much as possible. Actually give them the whole playbook and let them roll full throttle. If I have any criticisms of coach, it's this. The backups get to play, but it's a 3 play playbook.

Edit: And one of the 3 plays is a punt.

quote:

---

Behind Tua is a lot of inexperience.

---

I'm not picking on you, Stomp - many or maybe even most here share your viewpoint, i.e. that the only possible way to get "experience" is in games.

Well, this is ridiculous and patently false. Sure, it's very necessary for these kids to get some real game experience, in order to be prepared for the pressure of playing in front of a huge crowd, to be used to the game day prep schedule, and to get acclimated to generally how things work in the game regarding coaches in the booth and their headset communication as well as how a gameplan evolves during the game. And all of this can be accomplished in a couple games of garbage time. That's literally the point of playing these kids in garbage time.

Outside of those few things, Alabama's practices include literal game simulation nearly every single practice, and that's just as good of experience as doing it against Miss St. It's literally exactly as good. As so, regarding a player like Mac Jones, saying that he's "inexperienced" is just plain wrong. The dude, by many accounts, knows the playbook like the back of his hand. He started his career as a solid 4-star prospect, has a nice arm, is a tall kid with a good frame, and has shown the ability and willingness to run our playbook and read defenses in the passing game - and he has hundreds if not thousands of reps in practice (a lot of it with the 1s) that are exactly as good as reps in the game (outside of the aforementioned necessity of getting actual game reps a few times). Mac Jones is a better 2nd option at QB that most teams in CFB have. It's just a fact.

Anyone who thinks that game experience is the only kind of experience that develops a player is showing that he/she never played the sport (or any sport) and even a medium level, like HS football for example. Much more than 50% of a player's development will happen at practice and in the film room, and I'd estimate it to be probably 90% or more.

Mac Jones is not inexperienced. He just doesn't have that many game reps with the game in doubt. And those things are very, very different.

Seriously, what do some of you think practice is for?

quote:

---

You essentially wrote a dissertation attempting to disagree with me...only to agree with me in the end.

Good God, dude.

---

You and I have a VASTLY different definition of "experience". And no, I didn't agree with you at all. I think your OP was laughable, and if this thread is indicative of your level of football understanding, I don't think you know piss about the game.

Are we clear about where we stand on this issue?

EDIT: I'm sorry a bit for going a bit harsh, but I get frustrated by folks who can't read and understand basic logic. How can you possibly read what I wrote and think I agreed with you at all?

I wrote:

quote:

---

Mac Jones is not inexperienced. He just doesn't have that many game reps with the game in doubt. And those things are very, very different.

---

Did you see the bolded portion? I completely disagreed with your basic definition of experienced.

quote:

---

He just doesn't have that many game reps with the game in doubt

---

And if you think this equals inexperienced, my question is, "Why?" Do you think the game of football changes when the score is close? Do you think the players are completely shocked by what transpires? Do you think the rules are different, or that the dimensions of the field change? What could possibly be so different about playing when the score is relatively close that can't possible be prepared for?

It's the exact same game, dude. And I think practicing/scrimmaging with the 1s at an Alabama practice can be orders of magnitude more pressure than starting and playing the first half against half the teams on our schedule.

Prevatt,

What makes Mac Jones experienced from a game standpoint? In what game(s) did Jones have to play 4 quarters with more than 5 plays of the playbook?

Yes, Alabama practice is hell and simulates real games. But its still not a real game.

He is wholly inexperienced in relation to Hurts' game day experience level. There is a SIGNIFICANT drop off in game experience between Hurts and Jones, and is there a need for a contingency plan. Thats all Im getting at.

However, for all we know, Jones could step in and win games if needed. That's not my argument.

What kind of fanbase are we when we start scoffing at the idea of a contingency plan?

quote:

---

And that is a much more logical reasoning for disagreeing than Prevatt's super homer "they're all 5 stars" bullshite.

---

Where did Prevatt say anything of this nature? I believe you are misrepresenting his position. His position is that any game experience is good experience, and that experience in a "close game" is not qualitatively superior to garbage time. His position, if I am reading it correctly, is that logistical things get worked out, e.g. getting plays in, communicating with coaches, in garbage time and as for quality competition, one can compete against our first team defense and get a better challenge than against the vast majority of our competition.