re: Eason already looks like the starter IMO

quote:

---

National Championship or fire the motherfricker...

---

quote:

---

If I were Channy, I'd put all 5 of these guys out there on 5-receiver sets

---

bold move cotton

Why wouldn't ya? If that fat Fuk can utilize all these big ball catching fricks with a tall arse cannon armed bastard and Chubb puttin the wood to um. We might see a few teams quit.

quote:

---

We also have an OC who has proven before that he likes to use the TEs.

---

this is what I heard about shittenheimer..which is why I will wait and see...

solid post though...lots of effort went into that I'm sure...

quote:

---

this is what I heard about shittenheimer..which is why I will wait and see...

---

yes that is true, I know going into the season and ESPECIALLY after SC we were all on cloud 9 until reality set in.

Still though, CBS hadn't been in the college game in 15 years (TE coach at SC) prior to us, whereas CJC has been an OC in college the last 7 seasons. Obviously we hoped schott could adjust, and he did not. Also didn't help he hitched his wagon to a dud.

I'd be ok with taking some shots to the chin with Eason as a true FROSH starter. I believe it would pay big dividends come year 2 of the CKS regime.

quote:

---

While there is a good amount of talent on this team, a lot of it is young and unproven, and we do have some key spots that arent as talented or as deep as they need to be. Combine that with a tough start to the season, and it could lead to some irrational fans saying stupid things.

---

Definitely this.

Interesting quote from Smart related this following the G-day game actually:

quote:

---

"A lot of the guys with the ones, I think, get out in the game and get comfortable, and we've got a theme around here, there will be no comfortable," Smart said. "I think that's a disappointment. We've got to show improvement. We've got good enough players on defense to be successful, but we've got to have total buy-in to do exactly what they've got to do and execute, and we didn't get that (Saturday). Not in my opinion."

LINK

---

My personal thoughts are this. This year is less important than the long term. If everything else is equal in the QB competition, start Eason. That's a big if though... you don't want to put a freshman QB out there to be a human target if he struggles at picking up blitzes and recognizing defenses. That's a quick way to ruin his confidence and/or his career. With the offensive line being a bit of a work in progress, I'd also say that plays in to how soon Eason can/should start. If he's not in "danger", I feel like this season is a perfect setup to letting him start.

The UNC game in Atlanta, is a "neutral" field that will be overrun with Dawgs. So a friendly environment to say the least (followed up with a cupcake where internally Smart could place really high bar on Eason for performance against substandard competition). Even if we were to lose that game, it doesn't really do much to our season in the grand scheme of things. I don't think many Dawg fans are proclaiming Natty for 16/17 season, so losing an out of conference game to a team that went to their conference championship last year doesn't really hinder the program in their goals, for this year or for going forward, and that's assuming that we lose the game solely due to starting a freshman which is unlikely. I'm starting to think that I'd rather see him start and a more conservative gameplan used than seeing more of Lambert. Ramsey actually looked pretty good at G-day but I just don't think he's winning the spot.

This is not to say that we can't contend for the east this year, but simply that it isn't the be-all/end-all. I see us right at about 9 wins regular season +/- 1 game. It's not impossible to do better than that, but any *worse* than 8 wins would be an unmitigated disaster of a season. 8 Wins would still be disappointing IMO, though not all 8 win seasons are created equal. If we lose 4 games to the best 4 teams we play and they're all hotly contested matchups where we appear prepared but get outplayed, fine. I'm not happy, but I can live with that. You give me 4 losses where we look sluggish, competition plays poorly and we play down to that level, I'll be pissed, and everyone else should be as well.

I mean the dangerous games on the schedule are:
UNC, Ole Miss, UT, and UF

Followed by probably Auburn (this seems like a year where they surprise on top of zero expectations) and Tech (1st time facing that shitshow offense is almost never pretty)

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect wins out of the latter 2 there, and then win at a minimum 1 of the other 4. If you win UT and UF, you would have to royally eff up to lose the East, so just don't see how anything other than getting Eason max playing time is "helping us to win games". Win the *right* games and you end up in Atlanta. To me, that means starting Eason early. First road test at a pretty pitiful looking Mizzou team. You build up your defense with the idea that they've got to *protect* the team in an early road start for the freshman QB. Follow that up with Ole Miss which most would predict as a loss, and it's a west opponent, so it's a chance to go in with low pressure IMO and try to steal a win. Once you've done that, the schedule hits the meat, but he has 4 starts, 2 on the road and he's probably playing a little less like a freshman. Stafford was playing pretty well by about 5-6 games in and that was with a lot of flip-flopping mid season.

I think ultimately, there is a distinct difference between being "ok" with an 8 win season, and "expecting" an 8 win season. My expectations based on the schedule we play and the talent we have is that we shouldn't be worse than last year. We just didn't lose that much in the way of production. OLB is really the only position I feel like you can point to and say you lost elite talent, and even that might be stretching their actual impact on the field. Floyd was inconsistent and JJ was dependable but I feel like his performance could be replaced or approximated with who we have on the roster. The real loss there is the 30% of plays where Floyd is an absolute monster. But 70% of the time, he was failing to set the edge on rushing plays and/or playing largely undisciplined football. I loved the kid's potential, but it never felt like he lived up to it following a strong first season. Hope he has a hell of a career in the pros (somewhere other than Atlanta).

quote:

---

If we get into August and the 5th year SR still hasn't separated himself from the TFr, there's really no reason not to start eason.

---

Exactly. If they're essentially equal, you go with the future. If he has indeed separated himself, then fine, but if we're splitting hairs, give Eason the reins and let him run with it. You've got at least 1, 2 if Chubb is healthy, elite backs to run a conservative offense around early, and still take advantage of his ridiculous talents when the windows present themselves. I had the exact same mindset, and I think we've come to the same conclusion. If he's not starting early, we're making a mistake.

quote:

---

he will almost surely make more mistakes and turnovers than GL/BR

---

Maybe, maybe not. BR has more practice time for sure, but not more under this regime and the same goes for GL. GL has a lot more college game time, BR not so much.

I saw GL for a year, I don't want to relive that. BR has been asked and answered. I don't think GL/BR wins us one more game this year than Eason would.

At the first glance at Eason in red and black, and it is a first glance, he seems to be the choice to me.

quote:

---

I believe Eason will be the least turnover prone of the three. Lambert can't see the field and he tends to throw ducks

---

Really? How many INTs did Lambert throw last year? Dude only lost 2 games all year last year (One to the eventual NCs and the other to a Game Chubb was hurt and had a lead). I still say start Eason, but some of you all need to check stats before you ramble off stupid shite.