And does that mean that the QB's who had low completion %'s vs crummy teams are even more worrisome? I'd think so. I much rather see a QB have some trouble against a very good defense instead of vs a crummy D. And don't forget that Cox, Leak, Croyle, etc. had some very crappy games vs good competition as well as against crappy teams. Your post was too incoherent to debate as well as made up. You try to compare Russell with Booty and then make the mistake of going one step further by comparing JR to Randall in your next post. All you wish to do is point out JR's flaws over and over again, completely overlooking all of the good and great things he did last year. Flynn had a very good game vs Miami and I hope like heck that he does compete with JR for the starting QB spot this season, with both of them elevating their games to heights the coaches have not seen before. I really do not care which one wins the job, only that one of them wins it not by default but because he was tremendous in fall practice.
Obviously, I don't have the energy to do all the work to answer your expansive question. My guess is many of them improved their numbers as the season went along. That's why I only looked at a few other SEC qb's to draw a comparison and what I noticed is what is posted above. My point was that JR had a completion rate of 52% in your seven biggest games and only one big game over 60%. The result was six games decided by 4 points or less and the loss to Georgia. Although you were able to win 5 of the six close games, I doubt seriously that 45% (ARK), 48% (AU), 50% (TN), or 53% (Bama) were part of the game plan. If you're LSU and you know your QB isn't a running threat (negative yardage each of the past two seasons), shouldn't you be able to count on him to have a completion average of 58-62% in most any big game? Hopefully, JR will step it up this year, but I do see why there's a controversy of sorts. :yelwink2:
Give me a break. Russell is what? 14-2 as a starter and Flynn is 1-0. You are making erroneous conclusions based on a sample size of one! You really think Flynn is going to bat .1000 forever? Recognizing that Russell HAS FAR MORE VIRTUES THAN FAULTS takes nothing away from Flynn. A time will come when Flynn will lose a game, too. He hasn't even played an SEC game and you want him to start ahead of a guy that won us 10 games. This offense won 11 games last year ya' crybaby. I hate it when you make me sound like SabanFan.
I went back to see how incoherent my post was... all I can say is, what? Damn we are frothing at the mouth for football. Geaux tigers and whichever qb can lead us best. I called for Russell when a Randall lead offense was looking lackluster. I got Russell and saw that he wasn't much of a better option than Randall at the time. I posted earlier that I'd probably start Russell because of his insane physical attributes despite the doubting I've been doing. I'm all for giving the guy a chance - if he can put it all together we'd have a hell of a team. I have to say that Flynn looked too good to let a Russell led offense to continue where it left off last season. I'd find it difficult to not see what Flynn could do. But I'd love for Russell to take the job and run with it.
I actually said I'd probably start Russell ahead of Flynn based on Russell's potential, I'd just have a quick hook. Russell has been at the helm from start to finish of some gutsy wins, but can you name me one opponent he has looked good against from start to finish? I know you don't care how good it looks - a win is a win, etc etc. Some of these close wins are a bad break away from being losses. That has to come into your thinking. The more times the offense converts possessions into points, the better off your team is. When your offense is doing just enough to capitilize on the stoutness of your defense, something is wrong when your defense is as stout as the one LSU fields. Russell is young and gifted, and the old, experienced Flynn has only one start under his belt. Flynn's one start happens to be one of LSU's most impressive wins ever, but it is only one start. But when a Russell lead offense struggles against the likes of Vandy and Appalachian St, yeah I begin to wonder. Sure, the whole offense struggled, but the qb is a key cog of the offense - and if you're giving Russell credit for the Ws and the entire offense blame for struggling, you also have to give the entire offense credit for gutting out x number of wins and Russell blame for leading an offense that was just good enough to capitalize on the play of the defense. And you really have to give alot of credit to the defense for the wins. I don't feel certain Flynn would have done worse last season. But maybe the coaches do... Of course the coaches could have been afraid to tinker too much with qbs. That does seem a common phobia among many coaches, especially conservative coaches in their first season. Hell, I could criticize the offense more, but I should give the defense credit and move on. Liberal quoting on my part. I have no idea what Flynn will bat. .1000 wouldn't be so hot. :yelwink2: I'm not sure why you think Russell is the reason we lost only 2 games last season and the offense is the reason we only won 11 games last season, but I have to admit Russell is a stud and looks good back there as qb. Maybe SabanFan is more right than you like to acknowledge, or maybe you are more blowhard than you like to acknowledge. Whatever the case, cheers from a fellow tiger fan.
