Started By
Message
re: Eason will start vs Vandy?
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:02 pm to fibonaccisquared
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:02 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
intentionally obtus
Well, you could explain how it's so obvious we went off script, but you haven't, and you proved my point when responded to the part about Nauta falling down.
1
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:18 pm to Jay Gatsby
quote:He has certainly gone through progressions. He did so on his first TD run against UTk where his first and second targets were covered and he took off running. Granted, at that point pressure was coming down on him, but he still looked that way before running.
I enjoy that you at least think about your point but...
this can highlight something else just as much. Fromm locks onto his primary receiver pre-snap and throws it to them no matter what, neglecting to ever go through his progressions which takes time.
Also, it's strange how most of his pre-snap reads are good. He just happens to lock on to a target that is open or has a great matchup. He's got to be super lucky, our receivers have made drastic improvements over last year, or he's making good pre-snap reads so that he doesn't have to go through his progression as much. I don't know which one it is but he's been very successful so far with only a couple glaringly bad misreads.
quote:As has been discussed, the running game helping the passing game is a chcken and egg scenario. Running helps our passing and passing helps our running. That's why having a balanced offense is so important.
Lucky for us that our running game rocks or this would actually be a very bad thing. it certainly sucks for our Tight Ends who have all but disappeared because they are rarely the primary receivers. Nauta was our second leading receiver last year. Think about that. Jake is throwing to wide open guys a fair portion of the time. A luxury Eason almost never had last year.
We've got receivers open because we are focusing on short-to-medium passes; slants, crossing patterns, out routes, etc., and we are having success with those passes against the overages we've seen. Several of the passes Fromm has thrown the receivers weren't necessarily wide open but he's hit them where the ball needed to go to give our receivers the highest chance of success and defenders the lowest chance of a breakup.
Last year was a combination of problems. Eason didn't have a lot of support in the pocket but he also took too long to go through his progressions and deliver the ball so he was always under pressure. He threw a lot of balls downfield for lower percentage plays. He also threw the ball too hard on the short passes that made it difficult for our receivers to react and catch them in time.
Nauta is averaging 1 reception per game. Last year he averaged 2.2 receptions per game. Considering we're throwing the ball significantly less than we did last year, that makes sense.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:32 pm to djsdawg
quote:
so obvious we went off script
A) You apparently think the script either included or at a minimum accounted for Eason going down with an injury...
B) You think the script involved using more traditional sets on offense while we had Eason in the game and switching mid drive to more shotgun/spread sets immediately upon inserting Fromm into the line up.
Or... is it more plausible, that Chaney adjusted based on both the fact that he had to insert a freshman who'd never played a collegiate game into the lineup *and* the fact that our run game was getting stifled prior to that...
I dunno... one of those things seems more realistic to me. Tough to say though...
quote:
proved my point when responded to the part about Nauta falling down.
What was your point? That Fromm made an incorrect read and the ball was high (ie. off the mark)? It's a bad throw and a worse decision... even if Nauta doesn't fall down... But he doesn't have his balance when the ball is even released, didn't matter Fromm had already made up his mind. It doesn't make him a bad quarterback, or even worse than Eason... simply another example of how people in this thread are being hypocritical. Eason makes a bad read and sails one in the endzone and it's proof that he hasn't improved. Fromm makes a bad read and sails one into the numbers of a defender instead of a wide open touchdown and he gets a pass... but please continue.
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 2:36 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:40 pm to fibonaccisquared
Interchanging from one style of offense to another is far from abnormal. I would imagine both qbs rehearsed the same script in practice. If the script did change due to who was our qb, then that makes it obvious Fromm should be our qb.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:41 pm to djsdawg
quote:
There is a more fair way of doing a stupid thing.
I'll spell it out for you... I was demonstrating visually how the point was over your head... Apparently, it continues to be so.
In no way are any of the comparisons "fair" or "telling"... so your approach isn't any more balanced or fair than my hypothetical (which was intentionally inane). That you continue to fail to understand that only belabors an unnecessary argument.
So let's try this.
True or False - There is sufficient evidence - based solely on the information gleaned during the 2017 season - that Jake Fromm is the best quarterback on our roster and there is no reason to provide Eason anything other than snaps as a backup quarterback, given that his passing problems from 2016 are identical and there has been no progress.
If you state the answer is true, that's all we need to know. If you answer false, then you're agreeing with me and in which case wtf is this discussion about?
You don't have to think Eason *is* better than Fromm, simply that you can't prove that he isn't based on the on field product demonstrated thus far.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:44 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Interchanging from one style of offense to another is far from abnormal
As part of scripted play, yeah it generally is a bit abnormal. Particularly to make such a specific change.
quote:
If the script did change due to who was our qb, then that makes it obvious Fromm should be our qb.
Why? Because Chaney used a more straightforward approach and it worked? This is a classic correlation =/= causation argument.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 2:55 pm to fibonaccisquared
My point was you said that ball should have been picked and that is quite the reach. I haven't seen anyone make such a comment about that play besides you. In response to point about the target falling, You seemed to back off that idea.
Ftr, I haven't said anything about Eason's pass vs Ut, and I haven't given Fromm a pass for his first pass.
Ftr, I haven't said anything about Eason's pass vs Ut, and I haven't given Fromm a pass for his first pass.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:08 pm to djsdawg
quote:
that ball should have been picked
If Nauta had not fallen down, probably less likely, but Nauta is off balance at the time the ball is thrown... again it comes down to a missed read and a poor decision... you either agree with that or you're giving him a pass.
quote:
back off that idea
back off of what idea? The ball, as it was thrown should have been picked off. He hit a defender in the hands/chest. Does that mean the throw itself was always destined to be an INT? Not necessarily, but on the replay, it does appear to be high, so either it would have sailed right to where it *did* go - the defender - or it likely gets tipped into the air off of Nauta's hands, *also* potential for an INT. In either scenario, missing the open read to Michel is the bigger crime as it was the difference in 4 points (potentially 7 at the time were we to have missed the FG).
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:16 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
He has certainly gone through progressions. He did so on his first TD run against UTk where his first and second targets were covered and he took off running. Granted, at that point pressure was coming down on him, but he still looked that way before running. Also, it's strange how most of his pre-snap reads are good. He just happens to lock on to a target that is open or has a great matchup. He's got to be super lucky, our receivers have made drastic improvements over last year, or he's making good pre-snap reads so that he doesn't have to go through his progression as much. I don't know which one it is but he's been very successful so far with only a couple glaringly bad misreads
Sorry man, I cant agree. I think you are just spinning things at this point because you just love the guy and thats okay. The presnap reads are a joke.. he is throwing to his primary and reading absolutely nothing. The article where Hardeman quoted him saying in the huddle he was throwing to him was a clear indication of this. His throw to Nauta in the Tenn game is another. Nauta fell out early in the route. If the play goes to X he's throwing it there. If it goes to Y, he's throwing it there. Your timing numbers support this beyond all. He cant drop back in the pocket and make 2 or 3 reads in an avererage of 1.5 seconds on the regular dude. I'm sorry, he isn't reading a got-dam thing bro. His primary targets have just been super wide open a lot because we run the ball 70% of the time.
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 3:19 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:24 pm to DawgHolliday
quote:
No...it’s with very good reason. primary target was not there from the snap..
Who said it was the correct read? No one, so repeating that it wasn't the correct read is rather pointless.
As for Nauta, I Disagree. He wasn't as open as Sony was, but he wasn't covered up either. Despite being tripped, it appears that Nauta would have been open and right where the ball was placed.
1. It wasn't low enough to be picked by the LB underneath.
2. The LB who tripped Nauta was running towards Sony.
3. The DB closest to Nauta was behind Nauta and looking at Sony.
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:27 pm to gamatt53
quote:
There was a wide open WR on the play
It was a RB, gaymattfor#10
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:27 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
n no way are any of the comparisons "fair"
Disagree. Similar situations like lower level opponent at home would be more fair.
Doesnt make it anymore telling though, which is your whole point, right? If not, then it went over my head. If yes, then it went over your head.
quote:
in which case wtf is this discussion about?
Good fricking question.
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:31 pm to DawgHolliday
quote:
The Fromm fanboys are going to want Fromm despite there being no tangible evidence that he is better than Eason.
The Eason fanboys are going to want Eason because arm strength.
I want Fromm because defenses play us honest with him in there. They rape our run game with Easy E in there.
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:41 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
back off of what idea? The ball, as it was thrown should have been picked off. He hit a defender in the hands/chest. Does that mean the throw itself was always destined to be an INT? Not necessarily, but on the replay, it does appear to be high, so either it would have sailed right to where it *did* go - the defender - or it likely gets tipped into the air off of Nauta's hands, *also* potential for an INT. In either scenario, missing the open read to Michel is the bigger crime as it was the difference in 4 points (potentially 7 at the time were we to have missed the FG).
The DB in the back could have picked it off but only because Nauta fell down. If the throw was high as you claim, the DB wouldnt have had to dive forward to try to grab it like he did. It would have traveled a few more yards before hitting the ground.
The maddening part of the play is that Sony going out for the wheel is what led to Nauta getting tripped up and Sony being so open. Really makes ME wonder about the whole play.
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:48 pm to djsdawg
quote:
n no way are any of the comparisons "fair"
quote:
Disagree. Similar situations like lower level opponent at home would be more fair.
An unfair comparison doesn't innately become good because it's relatively more fair than another unfair comparison. It's still a bad argument... one of us made it intentionally. One of us thought they were improving it. *That* is the point. The *underlying cause* of all of that is that neither are good because you're attempting to extrapolate conclusions from inconclusive data.
quote:
Good fricking question
To be clear, that's a "false" then, yes?
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:49 pm to Croot
People forget that Matt Stafford was god awful in year one, improved some in year two and was damn good in year three. What Fromm is doing is awesome but I have doubt Eason would be just fine manning the show. Hell, we are 5-0 easing a true freshman into a starting role. I don't believe in losing your job to injury but in losing it on the field. If he comes in and struggles you play the better player. Why not have 2 QBs you can trust instead of 1. I say give him some chances and see how he looks.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:53 pm to Croot
quote:
I want Fromm because defenses play us honest with him in there. They rape our run game with Easy E in there.
You are an idiot if you are trying to compare our run game with Eason last year to our run game with Fromm this year.
You are also in idiot if you are trying to say that teams stop our run with Eason in this year. Look no further than the two series with Eason last week for evidence.
In general you are just an idiot
This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 3:54 pm
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:55 pm to Prettyboy Floyd
quote:
I have doubt Eason would be just fine manning the show.
Same here
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:57 pm to gamatt53
quote:
You are also in idiot if you are trying to say that teams stop our run with Eason in this year. Look no further than the two series with Eason last week for evidence.
You want to look at two trash time series to determine anything and I'm the idiot?
How'd the run game look the first 2 series against app state? Pretty bad, idiot,
Posted on 10/4/17 at 3:58 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Same here
I was wondering who would point it out.
Page 7 of 14
Latest Georgia News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News