crazy number on connor shaw

[trapper82]

Originally Posted by Cocky2001

Connor chose to play against UAB...That was mentioned numerous times in the pc's related to that game and in the broadcast...so that point is moot.

It would have been in our team's best interest for him, since he was injured going into the game and injured even more during the game, to have sat out (since this was a non-conference, should be a gimme game) and heal for another week while letting his backup(s) gain valuable real game experience.

Not his job to decide the starting qb.

But the point is using that game as any sort of comparison has a lot of problems.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by Cocky2001

This was to all of the 'discussers' of this topic...I didn't single any one out and that was not my intent. Just something to look at that I had yet to see addressed (and there aren't many aspects of this topic that haven't been addressed ad nauseum since the clemson game.) so I thought I would throw this out there as long as this discussion was continuing.



I know...and I am...and these two stats are part of the reasoning behind that.



I don't want to take anything away from Connor. Whether you consider him the greatest QB to ever walk the planet or the worst to ever play the game, the one thing that you cannot do is argue the fact that he has led us very successfully through what could have been some pretty rough times. 17-3 is nothing to laugh at, esp here. FTR...like with baseball, the starting pitcher/QB gets the credit for the win...unless, there is a save op.

Concerning the rest of the post...some posters that favor Thompson (and I am one as you know...the two stats mentioned by me are the primary reasons...were kinda backed into a corner of having to defend their thoughts on this matter by some overly zealous CS supporters and said some things that they wouldn't normally have said (out of politeness and appreciation for what he has done) to support their thoughts. I fell into this. Looking at the positives of each QB I think Dylan is the better of the two...but to support this, I posted some of the negatives of CS's play that I normally wouldn't have mentioned.

Anyway...several threads ago I posted that I was leaving this topic...but these two stats stood out to me and I didn't see anyone mentioning them. If Connor Shaw never plays another down for us at QB (and I don't foresee this being the case) he will forever have my appreciation not only for playing for us, but for saving our butts in 2011 when we could have collapsed...and for this (and he doesn't get enough credit here) for changing the mentality of our QB's from Garcia's 'goof off 'til gameday and wingit' approach to one or working your butt of in the training rooms and fields and in the film room.

I have absolutely no problems with anything you said in this post (not saying you would care). I have no issues with someone thinking Dylan should be the starter for the exact reasons you mention. I have no issues with someone think Connor should be the starter. Me? I have no idea who should be the starter.

But I simply have not seen these "Dylan detractors". Where are these posts? I asked me4usc just a minute ago since she is the one that used the term and she hasn't responded. It is easy to see that you are objective enough to know that you can't classify someone being positive about Connor as being a "detractor" against Dylan. They are mutually exclusive. Me saying something positive or negative about Connor no more has to do with my thoughts on Dylan than me saying something negative or positive about Ace Sanders would have to do with my feeling on Shaq Roland.

But I absolutely see people bringing down Connor's accomplishments and that is what I end up defending. me4usc saying that we would have lost against UAB if Thompson had not have come in was not even close to being a reality and we both know that. SC was up 21-6 and UAB didn't score in the second half. We both know ANYONE could have played QB and we would have won. That takes NOTHING away from what Dylan did because he played excellent. I didn't say that anyone could have come in and played as well as Dylan. I said that anyone could have come in and we would have won the game, which in turn, would have give Connor the W. Just as you said about starting pitchers, that is how winning QBs are determined. But yet, she wants to say that SC would have actually lost if Dylan had not come in? That is exactly what she said by the way. That idea is ludicrous and anyone with objectivity knows there is no way SC was going to lose that game.

Then she says things like that she "laughs" when she hears people say Connor's record as a starter is 17-3. Why? Why can't Connor have a record of 17-3 and you be proud of that accomplishment and AT THE SAME TIME still think Dylan is the better QB? Why would you make sure you let everyone know that you laugh when you hear Connor's record is 17-3?

Yet, me4usc is the one that keeps talking about the "Dylan Detractors." So honestly, since you make no bones that you are a Dylan supporter, where are these posts in this thread where someone has said something negative about Dylan? Where are the posts where someone says that we wouldn't have won a game if Dylan had been in? Because that is what I am struggling with. You seem very objective, so help me understand where these posts are where people are bashing Dylan.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by trapper82

So even though Shaw was injured when playing against UAB, you want to use that one. And even though Thompson was the backup for Vandy, and was subsequently demoted by Spurrier after that game in the post game press conference, you don't want to include that. His doing that blows two of Me4USC's main arguments out of the water: 1) Spurrier continued starting Shaw because he was named the starter in preseason (Dylan was named backup in preseason, lost it temporarily after Vandy) and 2) Spurrier obviously felt it was fair to judge Thompson's performance after Vanderbilt. You may not believe Thompson was prepared enough, or that he didn't practice with the first team enough, etc. but Spurrier apparently disagreed.

http://sportstalkgolive.com/index.ph...-opener-audio/

I don't see why this discussion keeps going, Spurrier will start whoever he thinks has the best chance of winning. If that is Thompson, great. If its Shaw, great. If its the equipment manager or the jock strap sniffer or the towel dryer, great. I don't care, I really don't. As long as you believe Spurrier will start who HE believes is the best guy, you won't find a single person here that will disagree. Where people disagree is when someone else makes excuses as to why their choice of the best guy isn't playing.

Was Thompson demoted from backup for about 10 minutes after Vandy according to Spurrier's postgame remarks? Since Thompson started the next game - ECU - he must have regained his spot fairly quickly. According to any depth charts I can find, he never actually lost the backup position. I also remember Spurrier's interview after LSU. He kept asking if Connor had hit his head. It sounds to me as if he was unhappy with both of them at times. Does that mean that Shaw lost his starter position after LSU but regained it before Florida? I don't think so.

Supposedly, Shaw was healthy for UAB. At least that's what everyone said going into the game. He was reinjured at the end of the second quarter, and Thompson went in.

They are both good quarterbacks. They both deserve playing time.

[trapper82]

Originally Posted by me4USC

Was Thompson demoted from backup for about 10 minutes after Vandy according to Spurrier's postgame remarks? Since Thompson started the next game - ECU - he must have regained his spot fairly quickly. According to any depth charts I can find, he never actually lost the backup position. I also remember Spurrier's interview after LSU. He kept asking if Connor had hit his head. It sounds to me as if he was unhappy with both of them at times. Does that mean that Shaw lost his starter position after LSU but regained it before Florida? I don't think so.

Supposedly, Shaw was healthy for UAB. At least that's what everyone said going into the game. He was reinjured at the end of the second quarter, and Thompson went in.

They are both good quarterbacks. They both deserve playing time.

Click the link, you'll see where he was demoted. Near the bottom, in other notes.

And yes, you bring up a great point, players have bad games. Aaron Murray vs. us and Aaron Murray vs. Alabama was two very different performances. No player should be scrutinized like this, a 61 yard td pass and all some people can say is "well it was underthrown." What do we expect from players exactly? Both played well, both deserve a shot, and Spurrier will play the one that gives us the best chance to win.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by trapper82

Click the link, you'll see where he was demoted. Near the bottom, in other notes.

And yes, you bring up a great point, players have bad games. Aaron Murray vs. us and Aaron Murray vs. Alabama was two very different performances. No player should be scrutinized like this, a 61 yard td pass and all some people can say is "well it was underthrown." What do we expect from players exactly? Both played well, both deserve a shot, and Spurrier will play the one that gives us the best chance to win.

Ah, yes. Here it is: "Dylan Thompson struggled when he came in for Shaw and Spurrier said Seth Strickland is now the number two quarterback. Strickland took a few snaps in the second half to spell Shaw but didn’t throw a pass."

However, in reality, Strickland didn't take the spot. Thompson started the next game. Spurrier got over his pique and reinstated Thompson fairly soon, because Dylan was announced as the starter during the following week.

[trapper82]

Originally Posted by me4USC

Ah, yes. Here it is: "Dylan Thompson struggled when he came in for Shaw and Spurrier said Seth Strickland is now the number two quarterback. Strickland took a few snaps in the second half to spell Shaw but didn’t throw a pass."

However, in reality, Strickland didn't take the spot. Thompson started the next game. Spurrier got over his pique and reinstated Thompson fairly soon, because Dylan was announced as the starter during the following week.

Good for him for beating out Strickland that week of practice. Guess Spurrier really does play who he thinks is best for us to win the game.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by trapper82

Good for him for beating out Strickland that week of practice. Guess Spurrier really does play who he thinks is best for us to win the game.

Touche.

[Cocky2001]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

I have absolutely no problems with anything you said in this post (not saying you would care).

You and I have been on opposite sides of discussions before, but we have been able to do it in a friendly manner, so your posts do carry a little more weight with me than the posts of someone that is in 'attack' mode instead of 'discuss' mode.

Regarding the 'Dylan detractors'...This topic has been an ongoing discussion for 2 months now in about 12 different threads...It is tough having been a part of this not to let the other threads infiltrate this one. I don't know that I have read all of this one (just being honest with you), but, even if Dylan hasn't been 'put down' or whatever in this one, he has been in other threads on this topic. I don't recall you being one that did this, but I could name some who have. This is really me4's topic to defend, but I can see, from the other threads...and a lot of the same people have posted in all of them...where she is coming from.

Like we both have said...trying to defend our thoughts has caused us (and I would suspect many others) to say things about the other that we would never have said outside of this context.

I think a lot of this goes back to format. If we were all in a room together where inflection, body language and etc could be seen, I think this would have gone much smoother because the communications would have been more complete.

[me4USC]

I actually don't usually look at a poster's name. I have no idea who spoke negatively about Thompson, and I am not accusing any particular poster of doing so. If I make one comment, it is repeated five or six times until it seems that I screamed the same thing over and over. Because of that, I choose not to respond to posters who do that. The only reason I ever quote another poster is to reply directly to that post, that one time. I do not endlessly quote the phrase or poster.

I also NEVER said that Shaw did not deserve credit for the UAB win. I do understand how stats work. I DID say that it was disingenuous to keep saying he deserves to be the starter based on his 17-3 record when Shaw was losing when he was taken out of the Outback Bowl with 26 seconds on the clock. Yes, he gets the win in his column because he started the game, but I doubt even he would say he did it by himself. That is his record, of course, but it doesn't make a stronger case for him when it is used. Anyone who thinks Thompson deserves a shot remembers how that game ended. I would say that anyone who watches college football remembers how it ended. That was the #2 play on ESPN.

This discussion is pointless. No one here has anything to do with the decision unless one of us is Spurrier. I can tell you for certain that I'm not. I'm younger, prettier, and my voice is lower. HA!

[Cocky2001]

Originally Posted by me4USC

I DID say that it was disingenuous to keep saying he deserves to be the starter based on his 17-3 record when Shaw was losing when he was taken out of the Outback Bowl with 26 seconds on the clock. Yes, he gets the win in his column because he started the game, but I doubt even he would say he did it by himself.

IN baseball, Dylan would have gotten the win.

Originally Posted by me4USC

This discussion is pointless. No one here has anything to do with the decision unless one of us is Spurrier. I can tell you for certain that I'm not. I'm younger, prettier, and my voice is lower. HA!

(Where is that Bates kid when you need him?)

[trapper82]

Originally Posted by Cocky2001

In baseball, Dylan would have gotten the win.

In baseball you can't rotate pitchers like they did here unless they remain on the field, like going into the outfield or something like that. In other words, Connor or Dylan would not be able to re-enter the game after being taken out for a replacement at their position while they went to the sideline. But that is baseball, and football treats it differently. There seems to be a little underlying current here of changing the entire way stats are considered for people to prove their opinion of who should be the starting quarterback correct. Its an opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

I haven't seen the first negative thing said about Dylan Thompson, and if someone can show me something I'll definitely recant. What I have seen is people pointing out that Dylan Thompson's sample is obviously smaller and against fewer teams, so it is hard to compare his accomplishments with Connor Shaw's on a 1 to 1 basis. That is not being negative, at least not in my book.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by trapper82

In baseball you can't rotate pitchers like they did here unless they remain on the field, like going into the outfield or something like that. In other words, Connor or Dylan would not be able to re-enter the game after being taken out for a replacement at their position while they went to the sideline. But that is baseball, and football treats it differently. There seems to be a little underlying current here of changing the entire way stats are considered for people to prove their opinion of who should be the starting quarterback correct. Its an opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

I haven't seen the first negative thing said about Dylan Thompson, and if someone can show me something I'll definitely recant. What I have seen is people pointing out that Dylan Thompson's sample is obviously smaller and against fewer teams, so it is hard to compare his accomplishments with Connor Shaw's on a 1 to 1 basis. That is not being negative, at least not in my book.

No, that's not being negative, trapper. I actually said that myself. I do object when it is said that Thompson won only against weak defenses. He beat Clemson, and Clemson beat LSU. Also, Shaw won against weak defenses as well, but no one takes those games out of his win column. To me, saying that about Thompson is negative. I also object when it is said that he has no running game. He proved himself in that category against Clemson when he ran 20 yards on a 3rd and 19. Those are the two remarks which I consider to be negative, and they have been said over and over.

I know how baseball stats are kept, because I have done that myself. There is, in fact, a limit to how many innings a pitcher can pitch in a certain amount of time. There are no limits in football. However, had Thompson not been in the game earlier, and had he been substituted in while Shaw was pitching and we were losing, he would have been given the win. Maybe basketball is a better system. No one player is given credit for the win in his individual stats, though stats can point to the most important player. Volleyball is the same way. If football stats were like basketball or volleyball, Ace would be getting the credit. He was named MVP of the Outback bowl. Obviously, Spurrier didn't think Shaw was the MVP, and it would have been ridiculous to give MVP to Thompson considering he played only 10% of the time the offense had the ball. Since Spurrier gave both Shaw and Thompson game balls, he recognized the contributions of each equally. While the stats list that as a Shaw win, it doesn't seem that Spurrier sees it that way. Can you understand my reasoning? I am not yelling, calling names, or accusing anyone of anything. I'm also not manipulating stats.

I don't know who said the negative things, but I did read them. I'm not going to waste time going back through the threads.

[Dizzy01]

The problem isn't that anyone is a "Thompson Detractor" but that anything remotely positive about Shaw gets twisted by some to be a slight against Thompson and a reason to trash Shaw. It started early in this thread when the OPs statement was completely misrepresented to give fuel to attack the "Thompson Detractor" who didn't say anything negative about Thompson until new words were mythically added to the statement.

Another name got brought up in this thread which I still believe is Shaw's primary problem with some. Some people were so caught up in defending and obsessing over his predecessor that they are conditioned to have a dislike of his replacement.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by Dizzy01

The problem isn't that anyone is a "Thompson Detractor" but that anything remotely positive about Shaw gets twisted by some to be a slight against Thompson and a reason to trash Shaw. It started early in this thread when the OPs statement was completely misrepresented to give fuel to attack the "Thompson Detractor" who didn't say anything negative about Thompson until new words were mythically added to the statement.

Another name got brought up in this thread which I still believe is Shaw's primary problem with some. Some people were so caught up in defending and obsessing over his predecessor that they are conditioned to have a dislike of his replacement.

If I started a thread called, "Thompson's Incredible Breakout Season" or anything else with Thompson in the title in a positive light, I can promise you that Shaw fans would show up in droves. The OP used Thompson's name in his opening post.

his quarterback rating is 158.1 which finished 9th!!! in the nation. wow... ive been a huge dylan suuporter... but wow.. i did not know how good connors numbers really were. virtually 2000 yards (while being hurt a few games) 17 tds, and only 7 ints... wow.. hes our QB in my opinion

HE brought Thompson up. If you want to have a love fest for Shaw, do so, but don't mention Thompson in it. I promise that I won't post in that thread at all. You can all gather round and chat up Shaw with no opposing opinions at all. It sounds like a great discussion. Go for it.

Shoot, I'll even start one and then stay off of it. Would that make you happy?

[trapper82]

Whether you like how the OP phrased it or not, the thing I believe he was trying to get across is that Shaw has a reputation around SOME Carolina fans as being a good game manager and dual-threat QB, but possessing serious flaws in the area of arm strength, reading through progressions and decision making especially, yet when you actually look at his statistics and where he ranks nationally, he is one of the best Quarterbacks in the country. I think the OP was genuinely surprised of the reality of those stats based on the perception one would have if the only source of information he/she had was what you can read on Cockytalk.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by trapper82

Whether you like how the OP phrased it or not, the thing I believe he was trying to get across is that Shaw has a reputation around SOME Carolina fans as being a good game manager and dual-threat QB, but possessing serious flaws in the area of arm strength, reading through progressions and decision making especially, yet when you actually look at his statistics and where he ranks nationally, he is one of the best Quarterbacks in the country. I think the OP was genuinely surprised of the reality of those stats based on the perception one would have if the only source of information he/she had was what you can read on Cockytalk.

You think one thing; I think another. Neither of us knows the intent of the OP unless you know the OP personally.

Again, had the OP not referenced Thompson in his original post, I would never have entered this discussion. That is a certainty.

Shaw is one of the best college quarterbacks in the country. Spurrier said that we have the TWO best quarterbacks on the same team in the country. He treated them equally Saturday. He made no distinction at all between them. Spurrier is a smart man. It was not accidental that he did that.

[Dizzy01]

Originally Posted by me4USC

If I started a thread called, "Thompson's Incredible Breakout Season" or anything else with Thompson in the title in a positive light, I can promise you that Shaw fans would show up in droves. The OP used Thompson's name in his opening post.



HE brought Thompson up. If you want to have a love fest for Shaw, do so, but don't mention Thompson in it. I promise that I won't post in that thread at all. You can all gather round and chat up Shaw with no opposing opinions at all. It sounds like a great discussion. Go for it.

Shoot, I'll even start one and then stay off of it. Would that make you happy?

There are two problems with this:

1) Just because the OP mentioned Thompson's name doesn't make anything a slight on Thompson or make them a "Thompson Detractor".

2) It still doesn't explain why the comment was followed by multiple posts to explain why that stat is meaningless and discredit Shaw's accomplishments. Oddly enough though while the slights started with Shaw it soon turned into complaints about the "Thompson Detractors"

[trapper82]

Originally Posted by me4USC

You think one thing; I think another. Neither of us knows the intent of the OP unless you know the OP personally.

Again, had the OP not referenced Thompson in his original post, I would never have entered this discussion. That is a certainty.

Shaw is one of the best college quarterbacks in the country. Spurrier said that we have the TWO best quarterbacks on the same team in the country. He treated them equally Saturday. He made no distinction at all between them. Spurrier is a smart man. It was not accidental that he did that.

I believe if Thompson played more often he'd be up there too. That's why this is so amazing...we have a top 10 QB nationally for QB Rating and we have at least one guy pushing him seriously for playing time. Next year it will probably be 2 with Nosovitch in the mix. That is an AMAZING problem to have.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by Dizzy01

There are two problems with this:

1) Just because the OP mentioned Thompson's name doesn't make anything a slight on Thompson or make them a "Thompson Detractor".

2) It still doesn't explain why the comment was followed by multiple posts to explain why that stat is meaningless and discredit Shaw's accomplishments. Oddly enough though while the slights started with Shaw it soon turned into complaints about the "Thompson Detractors"

Okay, Dizzy, here it is. I said "Dylan Detractors" ONE time. Exactly ONE time. I was quoted over and over and over. I never referred to anyone by name.

That post was a recent one, and it was not followed by multiple posts by me slighting Shaw. I was quoted by another poster multiple times. Those are not multiple posts by me.

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by trapper82

I believe if Thompson played more often he'd be up there too. That's why this is so amazing...we have a top 10 QB nationally for QB Rating and we have at least one guy pushing him seriously for playing time. Next year it will probably be 2 with Nosovitch in the mix. That is an AMAZING problem to have.

Thank you. That is exactly my point. I never wished to discredit Shaw in any way. It's getting to the place that I no longer want to post here because what I say is picked apart and quoted over and over. Yet when I quote a post, I am told that I misunderstood it.

I taught English for twenty-five years, and my comprehension of the language is fairly good, I think.