re: Did Trevor Lawrence progress faster than Justin Fields?

quote:

---

Most QB rankings have Bryant ranked in the ACC about where Fromm is ranked in the SEC. Doubt Fromm is leaving after next year.

---

Are you under the impression the ACC is as tough to play in as the SEC?

quote:

---

you really think I am going to go back 10 years and watch those games so I can make a list of mistakes they made

---

Point is they didn’t make many. They were amongst the most efficient qbs in the nation as freshmen. Deshaun Watson and Trevor Lawrence for Clemson have looked fine as freshmen. Hurts and tua looked fine as freshmen. So did Bentley.

quote:

---

You don't yank your starter for a mostly untested freshman if you aren't desperate. Alabama made the switch against us because they were desperate. We haven't gotten there yet.

Fields may be the greatest QB ever but there's no reason to take that gamble in the heart of SEC play with our season and goals on the line just to prove a point when our starting QB is one of the most efficient passers in the nation. Fields will be given playing time but Fromm is our go-to QB until he starts losing us games and that's how it should be.

---

No one is talking about yanking Fromm. We only think fields needs more PT. You can both win and develop players at the same time when you are much better than your competiton like we are. It’s not such a gamble. It’s maximizing your talent if anything.

quote:

---

Everybody wants Fields to get more time. He is our 2nd teamer and needs it to be ready at a moments notice.

---

The only reason anyone is complaining is because fields hasn’t gotten legit PT in sec games so far. Games we had 20 point leads in. Since we have people supposedly supporting that choice by defending it, you can’t say everyone wants him to play more.

I think the main reason Fields didn't play more against Missouri is that our defense played a lot of snaps and was getting tired. The coaches wanted to avoid offensive mistakes at all cost because Locke can get a hot hand and put up points in a hurry, so they stayed with Fromm as the safer option. A freshman qb on the road is always high risk because of communication issues.

I believe/hope that Fields gets more action this weekend and going forward. He still looks a little slow with his decisions in the pocket, but that will improve. As for Lawrence, he's a talented freshman playing for a good team against cupcakes. If Clemson faced some half decent defenses going forward he'd probably cost them games.

quote:

---

Well, no one other than HTDawg

---

Your reading comprehension is as bad as your arguments on this subject. We can come back to this subject after Fields transfers at the end of the year.

You said Fromm hasn't been consistent in the 2nd halves of games this year.

He's 13/15 for 300+, 4 TDs, 0 INTs. You're spinning that somehow, and it's honestly amazing to watch.

quote:

---

No one is talking about yanking Fromm.

---

My response was to Whiznot who said:

"Why is Fromm allowed to make his mistakes but Fields isn't allowed to make any mistake?

Both QBs deserve meaningful playing time. Fields' meaningful time should be in the first three quarters. Fromm deserves to start and to play the 4th quarter if the win is in doubt."

Within that context, I would consider it "yanking Fromm" to pull him out of the game for a significant period of time against a conference opponent when the game is still in question simply to give the backup some experience. It'd be one thing if there were designed packages and situations for Fields to be utilized, but letting Fields run the offense with the game still in the balance just to let him have some snaps? I don't think so. We did that for our cupcake games because those were cupcakes.

quote:

---

We only think fields needs more PT. You can both win and develop players at the same time when you are much better than your competiton like we are.

---

I think that would be based on score, not necessarily talent. It's often said that it's not always true that the best team wins the game. We were playing sloppy and got pushed around in the trenches against Mizzou, which I would agree with you in that we have superior talent and depth as a whole compared to them. Therefore the game should dictate who leads the offense. Even with Fromm's three quick TDs in the 3rd quarter, we were still one turnover a way from a very close game and we didn't have a lot of room for error.

quote:

---

It’s not such a gamble. It’s maximizing your talent if anything.

---

Again, when the outcome of the game is still in question, it's always a gamble to play someone untested simply to give them reps.

As I said previously, the #1 goal for each game is to win it. You play your best players in any given scenario to win you the game and then you worry about getting other players experience as you can so long as you aren't risking a loss. That is a philosophy that most coaches hold to because it is logical and reasonable.

There's no reason why the 3rd string safeties, for instance, should be brought in to the game in the 1st quarter just to give them experience. They should only be in if the 1st and 2nd stringers can't play. Same with the QB position with the exception of specific formations, packages, or scenarios where the backup may have a different skill set better suited to those unique conditions.

Considering Fields is being treated as a pocket passer and is running the same playbook as Fromm, it's foolish for CKS and CJC to put in Fields during a close conference game just to give Fields some experience.

quote:

---

I would consider it "yanking Fromm" to pull him out of the game for a significant period of time against a conference opponent when the game is still in question simply to give the backup some experience.

---

Don't be obtuse. Fields wouldn't be put in just to get experience--he would be put in to score.

quote:

---

The coaches wanted to avoid offensive mistakes at all cost because Locke can get a hot hand and put up points in a hurry,

---

This is the line of thinking.

We weren't going to lose the game unless we lost the game (i.e. offensive mistakes). We were up 3 scores in the 4th as Missouri took a 14 play drive to bring it to a 2 score lead.

We weren't even throwing the football (all fields would be doing is handing the ball off). We finished the game with 14 runs to 2 passes (both in 3rd down I think).

We all want fields to play more. It is just a matter of "when" that is subjective.