crazy number on connor shaw

[STEPHONGILMOREFAN!]

Connor has been the most consistent qb we've had. Thats why I did the math to find out what his stats would have been. Sure dylan plays just as well I didn't say he didn't. But connor wins. Dylan wins. I was just bringing up how solid connors number was

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by STEPHONGILMOREFAN!

Connor has been the most consistent qb we've had. Thats why I did the math to find out what his stats would have been. Sure dylan plays just as well I didn't say he didn't. But connor wins. Dylan wins. I was just bringing up how solid connors number was

That's fine, and I believe you. I think you can do that without mentioning Thompson at all.

As there is currently a quarterback controversy (regardless of how many people say there isn't), putting the two of them in the same sentence will inevitably lead to comparisons.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by me4USC

That's fine, and I believe you. I think you can do that without mentioning Thompson at all.

As there is currently a quarterback controversy (regardless of how many people say there isn't), putting the two of them in the same sentence will inevitably lead to comparisons.

The reason that you keep getting slammed is because you talk out of both sides of your mouth. First, you make the comment about about a QB controversy (regardless of how many people say there isn't.) Where? Where are these post that are saying that Dylan and Connor are not both going to get a legitimate shot next year and that there isn't a controversy? You keep wanting this chip on your shoulder regarding Dylan, but you are making up a lot of the info for that chip.

And then you say "putting the two of them in the same sentence will inevitably lead to comparisons." And you tell the one guy that if he is going to mention Connor he shouldn't mention Dylan. But you do the EXACT same thing throughout every thread. Every time someone brings up something positive about Connor, you go right to the stats posting and COMPARING THE TWO! So it is ok when you do it, but not ok when someone else does it?

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by me4USC

That's fine, and I believe you. I think you can do that without mentioning Thompson at all.

So let me ask you a question. In your opinion are both of these statements wrong to say on the message board since you don't think both QB should be mentioned at the same time?

"I think Connor is a great QB and is one of the best in the country. However, I just like what Dylan does for us a little better and, therefore, I would start him if it was up to me."

"I think Dylan is a great QB and is one of the best in the country. However, I just like what Connor does us for a little better and, therefore, I would start him if it was up to me?"

Are both of these statements wrong to say and do you believe that both of these statements are "negative" or "derogatory" towards the first QB mentioned even though it states that that QB is a great QB and one of the best in the country?

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by me4USC;3646043|

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.

1. You keep referring back to Michigan and trying to go away from UAB, but the FACT is that you have said that Connor didn't deserve the win for that game. You have said on a few occasions dating back to before the bowl game (when Michigan hadn't even happened). You specifically used the UAB game and said that you "laugh" every time someone mentions Connor's 16-3 record as a starter. I can find it if you need me to.
2. Who has said that Connor deserves to be the starter simply because he is 17-3 as a starter? Where has that been stated? It is one of MANY factors that people use to form their opinion. Are you saying that isn't right. It is just like someone looking at Dylan's TD/possession ration to form their opinions on Dylan. So you are saying that it is "disingenuous" for someone to look at how successful a guy has been as a starting QB to HELP them form an opinion on how they feel about someone?
3. Your EXACT wording was that SC "would not have beaten UAB if Thompson had come in." Sorry, but no matter how you slice that is taking credit away from Shaw for the UAB win and absolutely everyone on this message board knows it. There is no way that SC loses that game in the second half and we ALL KNOW IT. Yet, you DIRECTLY said that "SC would have lost to UAB if Thompson had not come in." Again, you will have to explain this one to me considering SC had 21 points at halftime and UAB only scored 6 the entire game. So help us understand how "SC loses if Thompson doesn't come in."

[me4USC]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

So let me ask you a question. In your opinion are both of these statements wrong to say on the message board since you don't think both QB should be mentioned at the same time?

"I think Connor is a great QB and is one of the best in the country. However, I just like what Dylan does for us a little better and, therefore, I would start him if it was up to me."

"I think Dylan is a great QB and is one of the best in the country. However, I just like what Connor does us for a little better and, therefore, I would start him if it was up to me?"

Are both of these statements wrong to say and do you believe that both of these statements are "negative" or "derogatory" towards the first QB mentioned even though it states that that QB is a great QB and one of the best in the country?

This is the only one of your posts to which I will respond, because I have answered the others more than once. I don't think any of those statements are wrong. My point was that using both names in the same post will lead to comparisons of the two, and it will. I didn't say that stephengilmore was "wrong" for posting what he did. I said that using Thompson's name in the opening post invited comparisons. If you want a thread that is completely about Shaw's accomplishments and achievements, don't mention Thompson in the opening post. When you do that, you can expect responses about Thompson.

Until a starter is declared, and one will have to be eventually (and unfortunately), there will be a controversy. If a depth chart could be designed that shows no starter at qb, there would be no controversy. If the names could be listed side-by-side, there would be no controversy. Since that cannot happen, one of them will have to be named the starter, and one will be the backup. Spurrier may choose to alternate them as starters in games; he may choose to name one as the starter and keep him all season; he may choose to play them together with one of them in a different position; he may also choose to do something that none of us has thought of. He is the coach. That's his job. He will do whatever he thinks will give us the best chance of winning, and I'm good with that.

[highpockets12]

The only stat that intrest me is the win lost column.these stats are like the curls in a pigs tail. When you stretch it out it doesnt make the pig any bigger. Conner is imo a real gamer. he played most of the year in pain, but put the team above his pain.Whatta guy. Cant we all agree how blessed we are to have Mr.Shaw and Mr. Thompson. These guys support each other and share the same goals. Making USC the best they can.