Are we better off?

SGA_Jacket said:
I said he could have. Did I say he was a shoe in to start?

Duke had a pretty good QB at the time. Thad Lewis put up good numbers for Duke. Their QB position was much better than ours in 2007 and 2008 if Chan was our coach.
Click to expand...

Is it so hard for you to believe that Thad Lewis started ahead of Renfree because Cutcliffe believed Thad had more experience and that he thought Thad gave the team the best chance to win? I realize you'd like to believe otherwise because it will support your side of the argument better.

As much as I like discussing what *should* or *could* have been, I like to look at what actually happened.

I remember watching Thad's games. I also saw the UNC Duke game last week. Their offensive line is night and day between when Thad was the QB and when Renfree is the QB. It also helps the QB that you actually have a running game that you can depend on.

It's too easy to just look at the QB and say the team sucks with this QB so we should've played this other QB. But take look at what everyone else is doing.
 
andrew said:
Better off this particular season? Probably. Better off long-term or the past several seasons? I don't think so.

However, I do have to say that I've come around to Dave Braine's view of the program. When he made his comment originally it made my blood boil, but now I'm a few years older and a few months wiser and I kind of see his point.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's a lot harder nowadays to be "MIT during the week, Notre Dame on Saturdays".
 
alpha said:
Is it so hard for you to believe that Thad Lewis started ahead of Renfree because Cutcliffe believed Thad had more experience and that he thought Thad gave the team the best chance to win? I realize you'd like to believe otherwise because it will support your side of the argument better.

As much as I like discussing what *should* or *could* have been, I like to look at what actually happened.
Click to expand...

What? I was saying Renfree could have started for us as a frosh, not for Duke. My comment was stating Renfree didn't start for Duke because their QB was better than Renfree and better than anyone we had at the time. Renfree would have had a chance to start for us. Did I explain that better for you this time?
 
SGA_Jacket said:
What? I was saying Renfree could have started for us as a frosh, not for Duke. My comment was stating Renfree didn't start for Duke because their QB was better than Renfree and better than anyone we had at the time. Renfree would have had a chance to start for us. Did I explain that better for you this time?
Click to expand...

What exactly makes you believe that Renfree could have started as a true freshman for us? You realize you're making wild guesses right now right?

I'll wait for this one...
 
alpha said:
What exactly makes you believe that Renfree could have started as a true freshman for us?

I'll wait for this one...
Click to expand...

Jesus man, I'm saying the kid had a chance. What makes you think he didn't? He's obviously talented.

We were coming off the Taylor Bennett season and Nesbitt and Booker were his back-ups. He would have been given a shot. Chan showed us early on that he would roll with a true frosh if it gave us a chance to win.
 
You dont make a good argument. Outside of Renfree the entire 2008 class which Chan mostly recruited, sucked ass.
 
SGA_Jacket said:
Jesus man, I'm saying the kid had a chance. What makes you think he didn't? He's obviously talented.

We were coming off the Taylor Bennett season and Nesbitt and Booker were his back-ups. He would have been given a shot. Chan showed us early on that he would roll with a true frosh if it gave us a chance to win.
Click to expand...

Because it takes an unusual amount of talent for a kid who just came out of high school to beat out experienced players.

And Thad was a decent QB at Duke. He wasn't as talented as you are trying to make him out to be.

Cutcliffe is known for his ability to develop his QBs. Renfree didn't get to his current level of play by himself.
 
alpha said:
Because it takes an unusual amount of talent for a kid who just came out of high school to beat out experienced players.

And Thad was a decent QB at Duke. He wasn't as talented as you are trying to make him out to be.

Cutcliffe is known for his ability to develop his QBs. Renfree didn't get to his current level of play by himself.
Click to expand...

Because Reggie was such an unusual talent that only people with talents such as his could start as a true frosh for a D-1 football team.

Thad put up really good numbers at Duke. He had nothing around him. He had a good 2007 season so he was the unquestioned starter. This argument isn't even about Thad.

Cutcliffe has done a good job with him but it's not like he turned this kid from a scrub into a stud. Renfree was the 10th ranked QB in the country.
 
Chan could get athletes to tech no doubt about that and for first year or so PJ did wonderful job of using them but Chan equated college players with Pros and this was his downfall.Reggie never should have been a four yr starter but he was.We played good defense under JT and folks forget we should have beat Ga twice .YeaH HE NEEDED TO GO and PJ was the choice but I think for getting high school players the pro style offense Chan used was best for us.Who in hell wants to get hit every play he takes the snap from center ,who wants to run the dive hole all day long and get clobbered and who wants to block all day long and maybe catch a pass.We need to ask ourselfs would Murray or the kid form Fla come to tech to run a option.........dont think so but who knows.............we just need to get better and quick.
 
SGA_Jacket said:
Cutcliffe has done a good job with him but it's not like he turned this kid from a scrub into a stud. Renfree was the 10th ranked QB in the country.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll make this brief because I haven't done a good job of explaining my position.

Talking about Renfree now and trying to discuss what he could/would have done here now based on his performance now at Duke, is completely illogical unless the point you're trying to make is that we should've hired Cutcliffe.
 
alpha said:
Okay, I'll make this brief because I haven't done a good job of explaining my position.

Talking about Renfree now and trying to discuss what he could/would have done here now based on his performance now at Duke, is completely illogical unless the point you're trying to make is that we should've hired Cutcliffe.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that it is stupid to look at all angles of the situation? It's stupid to talk about what might have happened if Gailey would have stuck around and Renfree or someone else ended up being our QB and if our recruiting continued to get better? Then let's just shut down the message board during the off-season since it's illogical to even talk about what might happen in the upcoming season. I thought this was a message board?
 
SGA_Jacket said:
So what you're saying is that it is stupid to look at all angles of the situation? It's stupid to talk about what might have happened if Gailey would have stuck around and Renfree or someone else ended up being our QB and if our recruiting continued to get better? Then let's just shut down the message board during the off-season since it's illogical to even talk about what might happen in the upcoming season. I thought this was a message board?
Click to expand...

No what he's saying is people take one thing and spin in so many different ways that things get taking out of context
 
SGA_Jacket said:
So what you're saying is that it is stupid to look at all angles of the situation? It's stupid to talk about what might have happened if Gailey would have stuck around and Renfree or someone else ended up being our QB and if our recruiting continued to get better? Then let's just shut down the message board during the off-season since it's illogical to even talk about what might happen in the upcoming season. I thought this was a message board?
Click to expand...

Hey, maybe you're onto something. It does get pretty boring in the football forum during the off-season until spring practice starts.
 
Cutcliffe is a beast at coaching QBs. Let's not forget that.

However, I do believe Chan's 08 class was destined to be along the lines of his 2007 class. In hindsight he may have had things going in the right direction recruiting-wise at that point, but he took too ---- long to get there. Dave Wilson cost Chan his job.

Johnson just wasn't the right hire. It happens. We can recruit NFL players and we can run an offense that NFL players want to play for. Just need to find the right man for the job.
 
SGA_Jacket said:
So what you're saying is that it is stupid to look at all angles of the situation? It's stupid to talk about what might have happened if Gailey would have stuck around and Renfree or someone else ended up being our QB and if our recruiting continued to get better?
Click to expand...

No dumb ----. It's stupid to live in the past. Pretty simple concept jackass. If you're gonna play "what if", at least make a better argument than you did. Your entire point is stupid.

I'll say it again, I don't know what is worse. Losing or having to read dumb as ---- posts on the message boards after we lose.
 
GT90 said:
Chan's next QB was Nesbitt. I love the guy, but can you imagine him in a drop back and pass offense?
Click to expand...
No problem. We could have gotten Patrick Nix back to coach him once he was finished at Miami.
 
knoxjacket said:
Johnson just wasn't the right hire. It happens. We can recruit NFL players and we can run an offense that NFL players want to play for. Just need to find the right man for the job.
Click to expand...

+ 1

We used to recruit NFL talent under Gailey despite all the issues that we have to deal with at GT. Do you see anyone on our team that is good enough for the next level? PJ's offense has essentially shut down our ability to get any of these kids that we used to land. Im sick of the academic arguments...you guys watched ND this year?
 
BarrelORum said:
No dumb ----. It's stupid to live in the past. Pretty simple concept jackass. If you're gonna play "what if", at least make a better argument than you did. Your entire point is stupid.

I'll say it again, I don't know what is worse. Losing or having to read dumb as ---- posts on the message boards after we lose.
Click to expand...

Losing is worse. I can choose not to read what dumbasses write. I have no control over a loss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top