Dylan Thompson To Play

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

Do you understand what I was saying??? Just making sure.

EVERY TIME that Connor drops back to pass, he picks up almost a yard more on average than Dylan. So taking into account all of the "Shaw will not throw to anyone unless they are wide open,""Shaw will not get rid of it,""Shaw can't throw the deep ball"........ TAKING ALL OF THAT INTO ACCOUNT...... Connor somehow still MIRACULOUSLY IT SEEMS finds a way to pick up almost a yard more per passing play than Dylan..

This has nothing to do at all with rushing plays. So him "taking off running" as you state has absolutely nothing to do with what I am stating.

When they ATTEMPT TO PASS, Connor picks up more yardage than Dylan.

Could Connor pass the ball more and not hold onto it???? Sure. But lets be VERY CLEAR and please read this carefully. We are NOT COMPARING Connor 1 to hypothetical Connor. We are comparing Connor Shaw to Dylan Thompson.

And Connor Shaw that holds on to the ball too long and will not throw it unless the receiver is open, etc. STILL averages almost a yard more per play when he drops back to pass than Dylan.

Hmm, you think that might by why Spurrier continues to start Connor?? Just maybe?

oh man!!! you beat me to it. i was just about to write almost the exact same thing, when i read yours. some of these guys are unbelievable. it's like talking to a box of rocks. you make an incontrovertible point, and they come back with the same comment as if you never made the point, or they aren't bright enough to understand a simple point of fact. damn!

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by Cocky2001

Hello Kettle, this is Snoop...You're black!

it's the kettle calling the pot black, not the other way around. man, you just can't get anything right. just like your arguments, once again you fall short of an accurate account.

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by pantera17

Haha was talking to a coworker about Connor yesterday. And he was like I like Connor but he gets hurt a lot. From his shoulder, to his foot, to his pussy.

Made me laugh.

yeah, i guess that's funny if you're maybe an eight year old...

try to focus.

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

Overall, Connor has played less talented teams.

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

Because they are both good QB's and obviously Connor won the job in the off season. Sorry, but the answer is that simple. Sometimes it's difficult to know exactly what would happen in a game. Go coach a game of anything and you will know exactly what I'm talking about.

sorry, but these are two of the dumbest posts i have ever read anywhere in any time of my entire life.
the man asked you a simple question, and you can't answer it, because you know if you do, it's checkmate!

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

As it stands RIGHT NOW half the teams Dylan has started against have been 10 win BCS teams, on the road.

You want to use stats without enough data, here you go.

BOOM!

are you suffering from some sort of brain ailment or what? clemson is NOT A TEN WIN BCS TEAM!!!!! they are playing in the chicken bowl in atl. last time i looked that is not a bcs bowl.
how can you guys give clempscum fans so much shit for playing in a joke of a conference, where anyone with a decent team could win, but then when it is convenient, you pull up that they are a ten win team to make it seem like your boy did something against someone? they have one of the worst defenses in the entire nation. can you understand that? seriously man, get a brain scan.

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by sc455

Why do you feel the need to let us know you arent homosexual? did you really think we thought you were gay? why the insecurity?

maybe it's because of all the "blam" statements?

sorry for all of these posts in a row, but i was replying each time i read a post from earlier in the thread. so they've all collect here at the end. i am half a day in front of you guys, so most of you are asleep by the time i get home from work.

and one final point that seems to be lost in this thread most of the time. some of you keep saying that dylan is a gunslinger and connor is a grind it out guy. NO! connor has been playing all season long with a fracture in his scapula, and over the last third of the season with a fractured foot and high ankle sprain. so he isn't throwing it around as much as he did last year. but go back and look at his games last year. he throws the ball plenty. but with a very porous ol, and his injuries, i'd be a little hesitant to throw the ball as well. dylan hasn't faced the stellar defenses connor has, and he isn't playing with fractured bones on his throwing side. try to consider this before you label connor unfairly.

[Cocky2001]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

it's the kettle calling the pot black, not the other way around. man, you just can't get anything right. just like your arguments, once again you fall short of an accurate account.

Reverse all that you said and you'll be correct...for the first time in a long time.

[Cocky2001]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

clemson is NOT A TEN WIN BCS TEAM!!!!! they are playing in the chicken bowl in atl. last time i looked that is not a bcs bowl.
how can you guys give clempscum fans so much shit for playing in a joke of a conference, where anyone with a decent team could win, but then when it is convenient, you pull up that they are a ten win team to make it seem like your boy did something against someone? they have one of the worst defenses in the entire nation. can you understand that?

I actually agree with the parts of your post that I quote (perhaps the mayans were only off by a few days...you are getting smarter...no, wait, you think pot calls kettle black...nevermind) clemson has a ton of talent but between their inability to coach and their pansy schedule, their finished product does basically suck. They are over-rated year in and year out. But, up until 4 years ago, that had been a pretty tough place for us to play since the mid 70's and they actually had fielded some pretty good teams (as much as it hurts to say that). The fact is, while clemson isn't all that, they were the foe that Dylan was called upon to beat b/c Connor couldn't go. (not slamming him, just pointing out) Just like ECU and the bulk of UAB, Dylan delivered. So, you have to give him a few props there.

Would Connor have won the game? I would say yes, but it would have been a different game based on their playing styles...but they were prepared for Connor (as much as their coaches could get them), they were surprised by Dylan. When we could complete passes beyond their linebackers they were caught off guard. Connor had beaten them before and if healthy would have again...but that is the key this season...Connor's health.

[trapper82]

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

It makes for fun discussion? How boring would it be if we all just talked about well nothing...

Hi, coach is doing well. We won/lost today. I'm sure there is nothing to talk about because, well, coach is probably doing everything right. Good day.

We must have different definitions of fun. I like the discussion aspect as much as anyone and have had this conversation with numerous Gamecock fans in person, but none of them have gone as far as some on this thread to mock Connor and/or say Dylan should be the starter, should have been all year and is undeniably the better qb for Spurrier's system.

If you really think that, you have to explain Spurriers insistence that a healthy Connor Shaw continues to start. It crosses the line of discussion to criticism, which isn't always bad, but is pretty sad when it devolves into saying Connor has lady parts as a "joke."

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by Cocky2001

I actually agree with the parts of your post that I quote (perhaps the mayans were only off by a few days...you are getting smarter...no, wait, you think pot calls kettle black...nevermind) clemson has a ton of talent but between their inability to coach and their pansy schedule, their finished product does basically suck. They are over-rated year in and year out. But, up until 4 years ago, that had been a pretty tough place for us to play since the mid 70's and they actually had fielded some pretty good teams (as much as it hurts to say that). The fact is, while clemson isn't all that, they were the foe that Dylan was called upon to beat b/c Connor couldn't go. (not slamming him, just pointing out) Just like ECU and the bulk of UAB, Dylan delivered. So, you have to give him a few props there.

Would Connor have won the game? I would say yes, but it would have been a different game based on their playing styles...but they were prepared for Connor (as much as their coaches could get them), they were surprised by Dylan. When we could complete passes beyond their linebackers they were caught off guard. Connor had beaten them before and if healthy would have again...but that is the key this season...Connor's health.

ok, so i got the kettle and pot thing wrong. i have to admit it.
and, i agree with this post!!! un-b-f*$@-n-leav-able!!!!
listen i have said it several times, but i don't dislike dylan or have any qualms about him playing. i like that we have a capable backup. but i have been flabbergasted by so many posters acting like the clempscum game was some great game he played, that says he is better than connor. that is the only reason i have argued so hard against him.
i feel that our offense would have score a lot more points against clempstank if connor was able to play. i don't get why people think us putting 27 on cu was some great thing? they had given up many more points to a lot worse teams. and of course, connor's numbers against them last season were a ton better. so i have totally whiffed on why some posters think dylan is a better qb?

Originally Posted by trapper82

We must have different definitions of fun. I like the discussion aspect as much as anyone and have had this conversation with numerous Gamecock fans in person, but none of them have gone as far as some on this thread to mock Connor and/or say Dylan should be the starter, should have been all year and is undeniably the better qb for Spurrier's system.

If you really think that, you have to explain Spurriers insistence that a healthy Connor Shaw continues to start. It crosses the line of discussion to criticism, which isn't always bad, but is pretty sad when it devolves into saying Connor has lady parts as a "joke."

good post, and good point. it says a lot about their mentality.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by Cocky2001

You boys (and girls...sorry me4) have been busy today...

It really doesn't bother me at all not to be recognized as a female on here. Actually I prefer it. What bothers me is to be ridiculed or ignored because I am one.

I count it a compliment when you treat me like everyone else.

[COCKYTALKIN]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

sorry, but these are two of the dumbest posts i have ever read anywhere in any time of my entire life.
the man asked you a simple question, and you can't answer it, because you know if you do, it's checkmate!

Then you obviously don't read your own posts... BOOM!

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

are you suffering from some sort of brain ailment or what? clemson is NOT A TEN WIN BCS TEAM!!!!! they are playing in the chicken bowl in atl. last time i looked that is not a bcs bowl.
how can you guys give clempscum fans so much shit for playing in a joke of a conference, where anyone with a decent team could win, but then when it is convenient, you pull up that they are a ten win team to make it seem like your boy did something against someone? they have one of the worst defenses in the entire nation. can you understand that? seriously man, get a brain scan.

Clemson didn't win 10 games? They aren't in a BCS Conference? Let me check my facts....

... seems as though they are. Perhaps this is the dumbest post I have ever read.

The point is that picking one stat to hang your hat on is ignorant.

[COCKYTALKIN]

Originally Posted by trapper82

We must have different definitions of fun. I like the discussion aspect as much as anyone and have had this conversation with numerous Gamecock fans in person, but none of them have gone as far as some on this thread to mock Connor and/or say Dylan should be the starter, should have been all year and is undeniably the better qb for Spurrier's system.

If you really think that, you have to explain Spurriers insistence that a healthy Connor Shaw continues to start. It crosses the line of discussion to criticism, which isn't always bad, but is pretty sad when it devolves into saying Connor has lady parts as a "joke."

It's also sad that posters tend to lump all of one side together. I certainly haven't said anything derogatory about either one.

I have explained Spurrier's stance as best I can tell. When you spend an entire offseason planning for a completely different offense then that ship has sailed. But given the fact I am not psychic I couldn't tell you the exact reason and wouldn't waste my time trying to. In the end it's irrelevant.

This isn't a "read Spurrier's mind" board. It's a Gamecock discussion board.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

ok, so i got the kettle and pot thing
i feel that our offense would have score a lot more points against clempstank if connor was able to play. i don't get why people think us putting 27 on cu was some great thing? they had given up many more points to a lot worse teams. and of course, connor's numbers against them last season were a ton better. so i have totally whiffed on why some posters think dylan is a better qb?

Connor played them at home. That's quite different from playing them at Clemson. He has illustrated that he plays much better at home than on the road.

Neither young man should be denigrated by any Gamecock. They are both solid leaders, capable, and of high character. They are both starting caliber quarterbacks.

[snoopcockycock]

Originally Posted by COCKYTALKIN

It's also sad that posters tend to lump all of one side together. I certainly haven't said anything derogatory about either one.

I have explained Spurrier's stance as best I can tell. When you spend an entire offseason planning for a completely different offense then that ship has sailed. But given the fact I am not psychic I couldn't tell you the exact reason and wouldn't waste my time trying to. In the end it's irrelevant.

This isn't a "read Spurrier's mind" board. It's a Gamecock discussion board.

posters tend to "lump all of one side together" because they believe in a common point, that other posters do not. and no, you haven't explained anything, let alone spurrier's stance. he didn't spend all off-season planning for one offense, and then had to run another one. this has been his offense for years now.
you don't have to be a psychic to know and understand why sos starts and plays connor over dylan. he does this because connor is the better qb, and thus the better option. period!
here is a stint from his latest press conference:
"Steve Spurrier and Brady Hoke held a joint press conference on Saturday. The highlights:

* Connor Shaw is 100 percent. He will start. Dylan Thompson will play, but Spurrier doesn't know how much. The preference is for one guy to play most of the game, and to avoid replacing a QB if he makes one mistake."

doesn't sound like you need to call upon your psychic abilities to understand that.

btw, you said in one of your other posts that clempscum WAS a bcs team, not that they played in a bcs conference. if you didn't know, there is a big difference between the two.

[pantera17]

Here are the definitions of game manager and gunslinger.

Game manager: a game manager is a quarterback who makes a minimum number of mistakes for a team that relies on its defense and rushing offense to win games. The player is expected to not lose games with interceptions, fumbles, or poor decisions. It is commonly used to describe a quarterback on a winning team who does not accumulate large individual statistics such as passing yards and touchdowns

Gunslinger: Term for a quarterback who plays with an aggressive and decisive manner by throwing deep, risky passes. These quarterbacks usually possess the strong arm needed to throw deep effectively

I think that fits them pretty well.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

"Steve Spurrier and Brady Hoke held a joint press conference on Saturday. The highlights:

* Connor Shaw is 100 percent. He will start. Dylan Thompson will play, but Spurrier doesn't know how much.

Do you really think Spurrier is going to announce his entire game plan at a press conference several days before the game? He waited until about two hours before the Clemson game to say that Dylan was the starter. According to Thompson's postgame interview, Spurrier told him Thanksgiving morning that he was going to start.

Spurrier doesn't want them to be fully prepared for Thompson, but he wants them to have to prepare for both.

[pantera17]

Originally Posted by pantera17

Here are the definitions of game manager and gunslinger.

a game manager is a quarterback who makes a minimum number of mistakes for a team that relies on its defense and rushing offense to win games. The player is expected to not lose games with interceptions, fumbles, or poor decisions. It is commonly used to describe a quarterback on a winning team who does not accumulate large individual statistics such as passing yards and touchdowns

Term for a quarterback who plays with an aggressive and decisive manner by throwing deep, risky passes. These quarterbacks usually possess the strong arm needed to throw deep effectively

I think that fits them pretty well.

Let me add, it's all about what you prefer.

I think there are a lot of people that love Connor for taking care of the ball and winning. So many people were tired of watching past QBs struggle. Annd have dumb turnovers that they really love what Connor does. And that's fine.

[COCKYTALKIN]

Originally Posted by snoopcockycock

btw, you said in one of your other posts that clempscum WAS a bcs team, not that they played in a bcs conference. if you didn't know, there is a big difference between the two.

Never said anything about them being in a BCS Bowl Game, I said they were a BCS team. Are you seriously unable to answer the following question?

Clemson is in a BCS _______.

A. Bowl Game
B. Conference
C. Pasture
D. None of the Above

If you are to ignorant to answer that question you need to sit down.

[klempsux]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

Do you understand what I was saying??? Just making sure.

EVERY TIME that Connor drops back to pass, he picks up almost a yard more on average than Dylan. So taking into account all of the "Shaw will not throw to anyone unless they are wide open,""Shaw will not get rid of it,""Shaw can't throw the deep ball"........ TAKING ALL OF THAT INTO ACCOUNT...... Connor somehow still MIRACULOUSLY IT SEEMS finds a way to pick up almost a yard more per passing play than Dylan..

This has nothing to do at all with rushing plays. So him "taking off running" as you state has absolutely nothing to do with what I am stating.

When they ATTEMPT TO PASS, Connor picks up more yardage than Dylan.

Could Connor pass the ball more and not hold onto it???? Sure. But lets be VERY CLEAR and please read this carefully. We are NOT COMPARING Connor 1 to hypothetical Connor. We are comparing Connor Shaw to Dylan Thompson.

And Connor Shaw that holds on to the ball too long and will not throw it unless the receiver is open, etc. STILL averages almost a yard more per play when he drops back to pass than Dylan.

Hmm, you think that might by why Spurrier continues to start Connor?? Just maybe?

That stat in no way accounts for the times that Connor is supposed to attempt a pass and takes off for a one yard gain. It is impossible to figure out the stats accurately because the main complaint about Connor is when he takes off and doesn't make yards. Those are not going to be considered incomplete passes, which they essentially are.