forums

Tears Gator Tears

flagator86 said:
And you know me well enough to know i’m not going to say anything reckless about my squad, but my Gator fans who are still holding on to the “Mertz has experience”….**** we coming off a 5 win season (granted HE wasn’t the reason for that) and got molly whoped with him at QB two weeks ago. This a talent acquisition business and you play the better player.

This “experience” talks frustrates me from that part of the fan base:

Kelly Bryant had more experience than Trevor Lawrence

Cole Stoudt had more experience than DeShaun Watson

Treon Harris had more experience than Will Grier

Hurts was more experienced than Tua

The list goes on and on. This isn’t 1994 anymore, true freshmen QB’s play early a lot more than ever. Lagway is a 3 year QB no matter where he ends his college career at, you better get the most outta him while you can
Click to expand...

Not to take anything away from Lagway, who I think will end up a good quarterback somewhere, but be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking the one player who is the entire difference between success and failure is sitting on the bench.
 
Advertisement
I think if Billy starts and plays Lagway this week he can beat A&M. The Aggie offense is terrible but their defense is good. Lagways ability to threaten deep and on the ground to extend drives could get them a W. Then again … Billy is HC lol
 
RVACane said:
They need to be careful but he should start imo.

Did you see the gif montage I made for you and gator Mike on this page.
Click to expand...


GIF montage? I saw the video of Murda Mertz getting murdered, and it was beautiful. :LOL:

Look, if Lagway puts up superior numbers against even ONE Division I-A team, I could see moving him to starter. But until that time, he shouldn't be starting just because he had one great scrimmage against a terrible SAMFORD.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
GIF montage? I saw the video of Murda Mertz getting murdered.

Look, if Lagway puts up superior numbers against even ONE Division I-A team, I could see moving him to starter. But until that time, he shouldn't be starting just because he had one great scrimmage against a terrible SAMFORD.
Click to expand...
That didn’t come that way. I had to take the video from the game, pullout 3 parts in gif form and then combine them, you heathen.

IMG_8891.gif
IMG_8894.gif
IMG_8895.gif
 
I would start Mertz for a few reasons.

One, integrity. Especially if he knows, or thinks, he's getting fired. Mertz isn't the problem and won the job.. it used to be common that an injury wouldn't lose a job. If Lagway had won that job in camp straight away then this is a different conversation, IMO.

Two, the locker room. I'm sure it's already in shambles, but there is just no way those upper classmen on that roster would keep fighting if he benches the guy who had a nice year and won the starter job because napiers seat is on fire.

Napier is in a very tough spot, which I am thankful for, but there is a right way to handle this transfer of powers and it isn't just handing the keys to the True Freshman in the 11th hour, even if the fans are screaming for it.
 
816Cane said:
I would start Mertz for a few reasons.

One, integrity. Especially if he knows, or thinks, he's getting fired. Mertz isn't the problem and won the job.. it used to be common that an injury wouldn't lose a job. If Lagway had won that job in camp straight away then this is a different conversation, IMO.

Two, the locker room. I'm sure it's already in shambles, but there is just no way those upper classmen on that roster would keep fighting if he benches the guy who had a nice year and won the starter job because napiers seat is on fire.

Napier is in a very tough spot, which I am thankful for, but there is a right way to handle this transfer of powers and it isn't just handing the keys to the True Freshman in the 11th hour, even if the fans are screaming for it.
Click to expand...
What if those seniors thought Lagway should have been the starter to begin with and that Billy went with mertz for the wrong reasons?
 
816Cane said:
I would start Mertz for a few reasons.

One, integrity. Especially if he knows, or thinks, he's getting fired. Mertz isn't the problem and won the job.. it used to be common that an injury wouldn't lose a job. If Lagway had won that job in camp straight away then this is a different conversation, IMO.

Two, the locker room. I'm sure it's already in shambles, but there is just no way those upper classmen on that roster would keep fighting if he benches the guy who had a nice year and won the starter job because napiers seat is on fire.

Napier is in a very tough spot, which I am thankful for, but there is a right way to handle this transfer of powers and it isn't just handing the keys to the True Freshman in the 11th hour, even if the fans are screaming for it.
Click to expand...


Solid points.

You have one game where Mertz played most of the game. You have one game where Lagway played most of the game.

Let them both play against the same competition, and then the better results win the starting role. Upperclassmen and underclassmen both are able to respect the outcome.
 
RVACane said:
What if those seniors thought Lagway should have been the starter to begin with and that Billy went with mertz for the wrong reasons?
Click to expand...


Do they?

I don't believe that they feel that way. What would it be based on, a few months of practice?

I get the feeling that Lagway's physical tools can accomplish a couple of things Murda Mertz can't (better running, bigger arm). But I have not seen any evidence, from fans or writers or players, that would indicate Lagway was clearly superior to Murda in August.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Do they?

I don't believe that they feel that way. What would it be based on, a few months of practice?

I get the feeling that Lagway's physical tools can accomplish a couple of things Murda Mertz can't (better running, bigger arm). But I have not seen any evidence, from fans or writers or players, that would indicate Lagway was clearly superior to Murda in August.
Click to expand...
Practices are closed mostly. @flagator86 do the players want mertz or Lagway?
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Yeah it will.
Click to expand...
I just don’t see multiple 3 loss teams making the playoff. I think it’ll be 7 teams from those two conferences but I don’t believe there will be 9 teams that go 2 losses or less without having a bad loss. If you drop three and one is a clunker I don’t think you can get in also how can you make an argument for a 3 loss team with losses to 3 top 25 teams to get in over an 11 win team with a singular bad loss or close loss to a top 25 squad.

In years past finding excuses to include these teams were valid because of the exclusivity of the playoff. In this new more inclusive model I think SEC and B1G teams with more than 2 losses have a slim shot and only teams with 2 “good” losses will be locks to be included. Unlike years previous the committee will be looking for reasons to exclude these fringe power 5 teams that have already had a crack at the top tier of their conferences and give that shot to some teams that haven’t gotten a chance to match up with the perceived elite teams.

It’ll be really hard to project until the season plays out but looking at the different schedules I just don’t see a path to exclude a 1 loss CG loser from the big 12 or ACC. I also feel a 1 loss team from either conference who loses a tie break to play in their CG game would be taken over a 3 loss P2 team.

The scenarios are endless and most unlikely but I just don’t think you are going to see many 3 loss teams rewarded with a shot at the title. Last season only 2 B1G teams made it through the season with 2 losses or less, while 4 SEC teams made it. The additions to each conference definitely give them more quality teams but I think they will cannibalize themselves leaving the door open for those aforementioned teams with one loss to sneak past them into a playoff.

I can see 6 to 7 being the norm with 8 not out of the question but 9 just seems too high.
 
Tamu may not be any good but their defense is good and Elko will have their defense ready. They also have a good pass rush
 
JD08 said:
Not to take anything away from Lagway, who I think will end up a good quarterback somewhere, but be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking the one player who is the entire difference between success and failure is sitting on the bench.
Click to expand...
What?! If Jake Garcia had played we would’ve been in the final four!!!
 
TheOriginalCane said:
GIF montage? I saw the video of Murda Mertz getting murdered, and it was beautiful. :LOL:

Look, if Lagway puts up superior numbers against even ONE Division I-A team, I could see moving him to starter. But until that time, he shouldn't be starting just because he had one great scrimmage against a terrible SAMFORD.
Click to expand...
All the Gator fans I know are already apoplectic at just the idea of Lagway going back to the bench.
 
Advertisement
Kn[]_[]ckles3o5 said:
I just don’t see multiple 3 loss teams making the playoff. I think it’ll be 7 teams from those two conferences but I don’t believe there will be 9 teams that go 2 losses or less without having a bad loss. If you drop three and one is a clunker I don’t think you can get in also how can you make an argument for a 3 loss team with losses to 3 top 25 teams to get in over an 11 win team with a singular bad loss or close loss to a top 25 squad.

In years past finding excuses to include these teams were valid because of the exclusivity of the playoff. In this new more inclusive model I think SEC and B1G teams with more than 2 losses have a slim shot and only teams with 2 “good” losses will be locks to be included. Unlike years previous the committee will be looking for reasons to exclude these fringe power 5 teams that have already had a crack at the top tier of their conferences and give that shot to some teams that haven’t gotten a chance to match up with the perceived elite teams.

It’ll be really hard to project until the season plays out but looking at the different schedules I just don’t see a path to exclude a 1 loss CG loser from the big 12 or ACC. I also feel a 1 loss team from either conference who loses a tie break to play in their CG game would be taken over a 3 loss P2 team.

The scenarios are endless and most unlikely but I just don’t think you are going to see many 3 loss teams rewarded with a shot at the title. Last season only 2 B1G teams made it through the season with 2 losses or less, while 4 SEC teams made it. The additions to each conference definitely give them more quality teams but I think they will cannibalize themselves leaving the door open for those aforementioned teams with one loss to sneak past them into a playoff.

I can see 6 to 7 being the norm with 8 not out of the question but 9 just seems too high.
Click to expand...


All of that sounds good in theory.

But what actually happens is as follows.

The SEC (and Big 10) start with a dominant number of Top 25 teams. And then when one of their Top 25 teams loses to another Top 25 team, it is a "quality loss", so they don't drop down very far. Even when Pedo State and Oregon struggle early against TERRIBLE non-Big-10 teams, they are STILL hanging around the Top 25.

So if a core of 15 teams just keep sucking each other's *****...the next thing you know, you'll have a BUNCH of 3-loss SEC and Big 10 teams that populate the Final 12. Sure, you'll have an ACC team and a Big 12 team and a non-P4 team...

And then the rest will come from the SEC and Big 10. Remember, they don't all play each other anymore. And only the top 2 teams in each conference have to play in a championship game.

In other words, the rankings become a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you start high, you stay high, even after a couple of losses.

Which is why the complacent "if we keep winning, everything will work itself out, man" crowd is wrong. ACC teams have to lobby to be ranked as high as possible every week, because even one loss will validate the "ACC competition sucks" crowd.
 
RVACane said:
What if those seniors thought Lagway should have been the starter to begin with and that Billy went with mertz for the wrong reasons?
Click to expand...
It's a fair point, but we do not know the answer to that question. Locker room culture would typically suggest that a guy who's been there and grinding alongside you and is not a cancer to the team would carry more favor internally.

But my second point is also subject to interpretation. Just seems like an impossible place to be in as a coach. Happy it's not us.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
All of that sounds good in theory.

But what actually happens is as follows.

The SEC (and Big 10) start with a dominant number of Top 25 teams. And then when one of their Top 25 teams loses to another Top 25 team, it is a "quality loss", so they don't drop down very far. Even when Pedo State and Oregon struggle early against TERRIBLE non-Big-10 teams, they are STILL hanging around the Top 25.

So if a core of 15 teams just keep sucking each other's *****...the next thing you know, you'll have a BUNCH of 3-loss SEC and Big 10 teams that populate the Final 12. Sure, you'll have an ACC team and a Big 12 team and a non-P4 team...

And then the rest will come from the SEC and Big 10. Remember, they don't all play each other anymore. And only the top 2 teams in each conference have to play in a championship game.

In other words, the rankings become a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you start high, you stay high, even after a couple of losses.

Which is why the complacent "if we keep winning, everything will work itself out, man" crowd is wrong. ACC teams have to lobby to be ranked as high as possible every week, because even one loss will validate the "ACC competition sucks" crowd.
Click to expand...
I dont want to hijack gators tears for this discussion much further. I appreciate your point of view and this being the first year of the expanded playoff it very well may play out exactly as you describe.

If you look at the final CFP ranking last season only 1 team in the top 12 was slotted behind a team with more losses than them (FSU behind Bama.) The first 3 loss team was at 13 (LSU.) Oregon and Oklahoma would have made it in as 2 loss teams from non P2 conferences, aware they are now P2 teams. The CG losers from the ACC and the B1G had 3 and 4 losses respectively which kept them out of the top 12.

I stand by the notion that the number of 1 and 2 loss teams from the P2 will be reduced by the added strength of their new programs. How the committee chooses to view a 3 loss P2 team to a 1 loss team with a major conf loss is the real question. Who gets the nod in that scenario likely will be based on the eye test. I believe any 3 loss team who caught a fat L to one of the title contenders will get passed up by a team that has not been blown out and has less losses.
 
Back
Top