Have you flip-flopped on Laviano/Rettig?

[DJ Spanky]

Flood's prior handling of QBs is a big reason why I'm not sold that he knows what he is doing. And yes, I've always been a a Flood hater so that he chose Laviano doesn't surprise me at all.

So that just gives you another reason to hate him. If he had chosen Rettig that would have given you a reason to hate him. If he ties his shoes, that's a reason to hate him. Kisses his wife goodbye in the morning: hate him! Gives a walk-on a scholarship: hate him. Breathes: hate him!!!

 

[wisr01]

If Rettig was as good as some people seem to think he is, he would have beaten Laviano. The coaches want to win more than any fan. Even if you don't trust Flood, Friedgen and McDaniels certainly were a big part of the decision. So if you are inclined to think Rettig was better, the most you can reasonably take away from this is that they were nearly even and the coaches chose the other guy.

I can't see how any fan can second guess the staff in that circumstance, or how anyone would have a basis to claim the other guy should have been chosen. If they are so close it is a coin-flip, why not just support the decision made by the professional coaches?

For me, if it is true that they can run more plays with Laviano then Rettig, I would think that is a huge factor. The decision also fits the standard way of handling these things across college football, which is that in a toss up situation, whoever was with the program longer gets the nod.

My only question to this is: I heard all summer that Laviano was given more snaps with 1st team (about 2 to 1 in practice). That would explain a lesser comfort with the entire playbook. If true that what is holding HR back is playbook knowledge and team chemistry, I would have done everything humanly possible to help him overcome those things because I would choose long term potential over immediate success. Was that done? I hope so.

For example, Palko knew the offense much better, was very talented and in the end had a good career at Pitt. But how does Palko's NFL career stack up to Joe Flacco? I am sure the Pitt coaches thought 100% that they made the right choice. In hindsight, it was not the ideal choice because DW did not see what could be with Flacco at the helm. Frankly, I think DW was way too conservative for his own good. He recruited a lot of talent at Pitt but did not have the vision or personality to develop them into their full potential. Was he a good coach? Sure he won a lot of games. Was he popular with his player? I hear they loved him. But in my opinion they underachieved and did not fulfill their potential as a program. I believe the same could be said for GS but I will save that discussion for another day. The great ones have the vision and make choices to achieve it.

Does HCKF have the vision for our program and the ability to get us there? I sure hope so because he seems like a good man. How this season plays out will answer some of those questions. I hope CL is getting Heisman votes at the end of the season and was the right choice for the long term success this year and beyond. If so, I will be donating to help HCKF get another raise.

But I also hear voices saying that we could have something special long term in HR and I hope we didn't just pull a Dave Wannstedt. Only time will tell.

One more thing, let's rally around CL and beat WSU!

 

[PaKnight]

You earn your reps in practice and it did seem that Rettig was getting more reps later in the summer.

 

[Ole Cabbagehead]

You have no idea how Friedgen and McDaniels advised Flood. For all we know one of them or both may have preferred Rettig or considered it a toss-up. Flood is the head coach. He made the call.

You are correct, that I don't know how Flood was advised by McDaniels. Based on what I nkow of Flood and how he runs the team, I assume the staff makes a decision together. But let's take your assumption, that Flood was advised by the OC to pick Rettig, and he chose to go with Laviano against McDaniels' wishes. How does that change anything else I said?

If you think Rettig should be starting, you have to conclude that:

1. Flood is incompetent, and went against the recommendations from other staffers, because he thinks Laviano is better even though he isn't .

2. Flood chose Laviano knowing he is not as good as Rettig, even though his job depends on the football team winning games.

So which one is it? Or do you have another point of view? My whole point is that no fan has enough information to question the decision. If you think Rettig should be starting, you can really only base it on the fact that you believe Flood is incompetent, and therefore assume he made the wrong decision, and that in making the wrong decision he must have disregarded his advisors.

So basically, it sums up to: Haters gonna hate.

 

[stuw6]

There is simply not enough data to go on at this point. Trying to say one is better than the other after a body of work that contains a Spring game and a half each against a MEAC team is simply ludicrous. Can't we all just be happy that it appears Rutgers has the best backup option that it's had in a long, long, time. Remember, we are not that far away from Jabu.

 

[Caliknight]

There isn't enough data based on field results. That is why it would have been prudent to play both against WSU, including giving Rettig the opportunity to play with the best player on the Rutgers roster.

 

[stuw6]

"That is why it would have been prudent to play both against WSU"

This may still be the case. If history is not a precedent.

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

If it is a blow out in Rutgers favor then both might play.

No one should flip flop until after the game.

 

[AreYouNUTS]

If it is a blow out in Rutgers favor then both might play.

No one should flip flop until after the game.

Unfortunately Wazzou's D really might not be a fair assessor of anyone's talent.

 

[bitnez]

i still believe Rettig should be the starter. i can't deny that my preference is based, in part, on his pedigree and ranking coming out. i also love that we run a pro style and he has a big arm. in addition, i wasn't impressed in what i saw from Laviano last year. based on saturday, i thought laviano looked better than lat year. but, i liked what o saw (a lot) from Rettig. so, i guess sometimes i figure it is better to go with the guy i haven't seen so much than go with a guy who i think has the lower ceiling.

i just want to win though. so, i hope that Laviano plays well

 

[Extra Point]

Laviano and Rettig

 

[NickKnight 1]

Of course Laviano has a head start on the play book on the 1st day of spring,
how could he not be? So how does Rettig catch up, I say by getting playing
time. It would not be a problem if Rettig is a sophmore and Laviano is a Junior
or Senior but they are both in their 2nd years. So Rettig can't wait on the bench
for Laviano to graduate. This is tough on Rettig he has to get playing time some
how. How, besides Laviano getting hurt or completely blows it does Rettig get
to prove himself or improve his play.
Oh, getting back to the topic. I believe it should be Rettig.
I think he has a bigger upside, and I have not been impressed with Laviano yet.

 

[RutgHoops]

I know I am in the minority, but I thought Laviano was the better QB Saturday. I thought Rettig showed talent for certain. BUT, the burning of the two timeouts is something that needs to be cleaned up and is certainly something that has the potential to burn you in a closer game. In my opinion one of the major reasons we couldn't "push it" at the end of the first half was because we had burned those two timeouts. HR's "almost pick" was also much more dangerous than Laviano's under throw. I know CL had Carroo and that matters, but still.

I thought Rettig certainly showed an ability to win a CFB game. And our depth at the QB spot certainly looks better than it has in the recent past. To this untrained observer Chris looked like the guy I would want starting Saturday.

 

[wisr01]

I know I am in the minority, but I thought Laviano was the better QB Saturday. I thought Rettig showed talent for certain. BUT, the burning of the two timeouts is something that needs to be cleaned up and is certainly something that has the potential to burn you in a closer game. In my opinion one of the major reasons we couldn't "push it" at the end of the first half was because we had burned those two timeouts. HR's "almost pick" was also much more dangerous than Laviano's under throw. I know CL had Carroo and that matters, but still.

I thought Rettig certainly showed an ability to win a CFB game. And our depth at the QB spot certainly looks better than it has in the recent past. To this untrained observer Chris looked like the guy I would want starting Saturday.

To me, it looked like one of the burned TOs was on the staff. But even if not, to make the decision based upon factors such as that plays right into my earlier post. A short-sighted person would look at today and say we would burn a few extra TOs and maybe get into the wrong play a few times a game. If, and note I say if, Rettig has the potential to be special you live with those things. If those issues are fixed in a few games and the higher upside gives us a better chance against MSU, Nebraska, etc, then you have to go with upside.

 

[PaKnight]

Unfortunately Wazzou's D really might not be a fair assessor of anyone's talent.

This. At some point the coaches have to step up and make a decision.

 

[Caliknight]

To me, it lokked like one of the burned TOs was on the staff.

At least one. At the 10 second mark on the clock they were still trying to get it in.

 

[wisr01]

At least one. At the 10 second mark on the clock they were still trying to get it in.

I was at the game and that is how I saw it too.

 

[mildone]

So that just gives you another reason to hate him. If he had chosen Rettig that would have given you a reason to hate him. If he ties his shoes, that's a reason to hate him. Kisses his wife goodbye in the morning: hate him! Gives a walk-on a scholarship: hate him. Breathes: hate him!!!

Or, to put it more succinctly, haters gonna hate.

 

[Ole Cabbagehead]

My only question to this is: I heard all summer that Laviano was given more snaps with 1st team (about 2 to 1 in practice). That would explain a lesser comfort with the entire playbook. If true that what is holding HR back is playbook knowledge and team chemistry, I would have done everything humanly possible to help him overcome those things because I would choose long term potential over immediate success. Was that done? I hope so.

For example, Palko knew the offense much better, was very talented and in the end had a good career at Pitt. But how does Palko's NFL career stack up to Joe Flacco? I am sure the Pitt coaches thought 100% that they made the right choice. In hindsight, it was not the ideal choice because DW did not see what could be with Flacco at the helm. Frankly, I think DW was way too conservative for his own good. He recruited a lot of talent at Pitt but did not have the vision or personality to develop them into their full potential. Was he a good coach? Sure he won a lot of games. Was he popular with his player? I hear they loved him. But in my opinion they underachieved and did not fulfill their potential as a program. I believe the same could be said for GS but I will save that discussion for another day. The great ones have the vision and make choices to achieve it.

Does HCKF have the vision for our program and the ability to get us there? I sure hope so because he seems like a good man. How this season plays out will answer some of those questions. I hope CL is getting Heisman votes at the end of the season and was the right choice for the long term success this year and beyond. If so, I will be donating to help HCKF get another raise.

But I also hear voices saying that we could have something special long term in HR and I hope we didn't just pull a Dave Wannstedt. Only time will tell.

One more thing, let's rally around CL and beat WSU!

I think coaches certainly have to make a decision, and if they are leaning one way, they have to get reps there in practice. I don't doubt that Flood was leaning towards Laviano, and that as a result Laviano got the majority of reps with the 1s. Coaches are also certainly no infallible -- his inclination could be wrong, and he could be seeing what he wants to see in Laviano, while ignoring what Rettig has to offer.

That said, you always have to beat the starter by a decent margin to get the nod, and no one is suggesting Rettig has done that, nor are they really saying anything other than that the 2 are really close, and each have their positives. Knowing that, I don't see how any fan is in a position to question the decision. Its the same at all levels. If you want to unseat the guy, you have to make it plain. The coaches will always see what they see. I'm sure a lot of us thought we should have been playing over somebody at some point in our scholastic athlete days, and for whatever reason the coach just wasn't having it. That's kind of the way it goes.

I also don't love the Flacco example, because it assumes Flacco was capable of playing better than Palko at Pitt, and it is possible he was just a late developer. But I certainly see your point. Wannstedt could have been too invested in Palko and not seen the upside in Flacco.

 

[SanFranRutgers]

You have no idea how Friedgen and McDaniels advised Flood. For all we know one of them or both may have preferred Rettig or considered it a toss-up. Flood is the head coach. He made the call.

For that matter, you have no idea how Friedgen or McDaniels advised Flood, yet you put forth the idea that they went the other direction and Flood contravened them.

I can never understand why some people's first instinct is to gin up a set of circumstances that defend their previously held prejudices: "I have no idea how the reps were split in practice, I have no idea how the support staff advised the head coach, I have no idea who contributed to the final decision, so let's assume -- in each case -- it was done to Rutgers's detriment."

 

[mildone]

I'm curious. A lot of people have posted that they think that Rettig has more upside than Laviano. On what is that based? I'm not trying to make a point - just asking. Because I haven't seen enough to judge that. I'm wondering what others are seeing in the QB play that I'm missing.

Based on the Spring game and the first game of the season (which I watched live and then rewatched later), I couldn't possibly say how good either QB is or is going to be. They both did a good job, with some minor mistakes, and one near-major mistake (by Rettig). But that was against a team that really didn't come close to generating the kind of intense pressure that will be felt at the PSU game (or OSU or others). I need to see them under a lot more pressure, playing a team with a strong secondary and athletic linebackers.

And I'd need to see them play more than a game or two in those conditions. Then maybe I could maybe start to form an opinion as to how good they really are now. As for how good they could be, that's not necessarily something I could ever evaluate. I don't think I'm qualified and I don't think I'd have enough data from just watching games.

One thing is for certain. Neither QB is going to play mistake-free games. There will be bad passes, bad decisions, some interceptions, etc. Doesn't matter who plays - those things will happen. And regardless of who plays, I think we've seen enough to realize that there will likely be some good plays by either QB.

As to Flood's handling of QBs, sure, I would be quicker to sit a QB having a really bad game than Flood has demonstrated. Against PSU last year, for example, I would've pulled Nova (although at least three of the INTs in that game were not his fault). But then, Nova had pretty good games most of the rest of the season. Even in the blow-outs he played at a high level and it would be hard to pin those losses on Nova or QB play.

So who is to say that sitting Nova against PSU, for example, would not have shaken his confidence enough that he doesn't ever play at the high level he played in subsequent games? I can't state that with certainty. And it was pretty clear we didn't have anybody sitting on the bench that had demonstrated they were better.

For this season, I would've been equally happy with either QB choice. And I'm prepared to be pretty patient with Laviano, like I would've been w/Rettig.

 

[mildone]

For that matter, you have no idea how Friedgen or McDaniels advised Flood, yet you put forth the idea that they went the other direction and Flood contravened them.

I can never understand why some people's first instinct is to gin up a set of circumstances that defend their previously held prejudices: "I have no idea how the reps were split in practice, I have no idea how the support staff advised the head coach, I have no idea who contributed to the final decision, so let's assume -- in each case -- it was done to Rutgers's detriment."

Good, rational post. I wonder how many here will read it and try to view themselves objectively to consider if they're guilty of what you described in the second paragraph. There does seem to be more than the typical degree of persecution-complex or conspiracy-complex thinking here.

 

[scarletrat]

Why I think Rettig has more upside is 2 reasons: the gap he closed between Spring and now leads me to believe he can continue to improve as he gets more reps and becomes more familiar with the offense (he didn't play a lick in 2 years), and his arm strength. We need better QB play to close the gap with other teams in our division if we have a chance to compete.

In terms of being a hater, if Flood had picked Rettig I would have given him credit and guts. But that would have been the first time with Flood, so I knew that wouldn't happen. I believe he made up his mind before camp started in August, and then couldn't pull the trigger given how Rettig played. We'll see what happens on Saturday--will be rooting obviously for Laviano and team do well, but no, I'm not a Flood supporter. I thought he was very underwhelming in his interview broadcast yesterday on BTN--his "1-0 on Wednesday" crap was nauseating. Does he have an original thought--I suppose emailing profs maybe.

 

[JQRU91]

Just checking in on this thead. Got to say, kudos to everyone for a good and civil conversation.

 

[mildone]

Why I think Rettig has more upside is 2 reasons: the gap he closed between Spring and now leads me to believe he can continue to improve as he gets more reps and becomes more familiar with the offense (he didn't play a lick in 2 years), and his arm strength. We need better QB play to close the gap with other teams in our division if we have a chance to compete.
.

Let me play devil's advocate about those points. Which I think are good points, BTW.

I agree that Rettig improved a lot from the Spring. However his performance improvement during that time period is not exactly a deterministic indicator of future improvement. It depends on where he is on his developmental curve. While all good athletes continue to get better, the improvements tend to grow more subtle over time - the developmental curve flattens out. Perhaps Laviano started out farther ahead on that curve. Which might have been due to Laviano's relatively greater number of reps.

Yes, Rettig has better arm strength or so I read. But I would think that, beyond a certain level of required arm strength, there are other differentiators that come into play that might be more important than any differences in relative arm strength.

Logically, it seems to me that, if Laviano didn't have the requisite arm strength to outweigh any arm-strength differences, we'd have seen Retting named as the starting QB long before the first game.

 

[PaKnight]

Why I think Rettig has more upside is 2 reasons: the gap he closed between Spring and now leads me to believe he can continue to improve as he gets more reps and becomes more familiar with the offense (he didn't play a lick in 2 years), and his arm strength. We need better QB play to close the gap with other teams in our division if we have a chance to compete.

In terms of being a hater, if Flood had picked Rettig I would have given him credit and guts. But that would have been the first time with Flood, so I knew that wouldn't happen. I believe he made up his mind before camp started in August, and then couldn't pull the trigger given how Rettig played. We'll see what happens on Saturday--will be rooting obviously for Laviano and team do well, but no, I'm not a Flood supporter. I thought he was very underwhelming in his interview broadcast yesterday on BTN--his "1-0 on Wednesday" crap was nauseating. Does he have an original thought--I suppose emailing profs maybe.

Then why didn't he just name Laviano 7 - 10 days into camp? Which was the original plan. He could have given Chris the bulk of the reps in the second scrimmage, so there would be less room for second guessing.

 

[scarletrat]

mildone, what I also should have added is that our pro-style offense, going back to Teel, throws the ball downfield to stretch the D. we don't necessarily dink and dunk. I still think scheme wise Rettig is better suited--but of course, I hope to be proven wrong. Laviano to me feels more like Natale, which we quickly realized in '09 home opener that it wasn't going to work.

 

[mildone]

mildone, what I also should have added is that our pro-style offense, going back to Teel, throws the ball downfield to stretch the D. we don't necessarily dink and dunk. I still think scheme wise Rettig is better suited--but of course, I hope to be proven wrong. Laviano to me feels more like Natale, which we quickly realized in '09 home opener that it wasn't going to work.

I remember that game w/Natale. But I think Laviano has already shown that he's better than Natale was, no?

 

[mikefla]

Coming into last game I was a Rettig based on what i heard, his resume and pedigree.

But it seemed to me the team responded better to Laviano.....blocking seemed better and of course Caroo stepped up. Its just a gut feeling but I thunk Laviano is "the guy"

 

[Veiox]

Laviano is Natale? LOL

Laviano is going to be just fine out there. I was hoping for Rettig, but that was not for any knock on Laviano. I just believe Rettig could have been the QB to take us to another level.

That said, I think we need to stop the madness about Laviano. He is very talented too. I am going to support him fully and cheer my ass off on Saturday.

 

[SanFranRutgers]

Laviano is Natale? LOL

Laviano is going to be just fine out there. I was hoping for Rettig, but that was not for any knock on Laviano. I just believe Rettig could have been the QB to take us to another level.

That said, I think we need to stop the madness about Laviano. He is very talented too. I am going to support him fully and cheer my ass off on Saturday.

To be fair to both quarterbacks, I don't think that anyone is taking Rutgers to another level in 2015. This is not our year. The schedule and the depth chart are not working in our favor.

 

[mildone]

Laviano is Natale? LOL

Laviano is going to be just fine out there. I was hoping for Rettig, but that was not for any knock on Laviano. I just believe Rettig could have been the QB to take us to another level.

That said, I think we need to stop the madness about Laviano. He is very talented too. I am going to support him fully and cheer my ass off on Saturday.

I wish I could cheer my ass off. Instead, I may need to consider altering my diet a little bit. Perhaps it wasn't the best idea to have just sent my kid off to fetch me 3 five-guys bacon cheeseburgers for dinner.

 

[ruready07]

Then why didn't he just name Laviano 7 - 10 days into camp? Which was the original plan. He could have given Chris the bulk of the reps in the second scrimmage, so there would be less room for second guessing.

Not sure if this is what Flood did for certain, but when you have two guys close enough in a position battle, you try to let it carry on a bit and let the competition/pressure make both guys better. I have to say, I think this QB battle did exactly that. Both guys had to make every rep count because they knew each play was being watched closer than ever.

Its been a great battle so far.. can't wait for Dare vs Russo in 2018.

 

[RP78]

What impresses me about Laviano is he looks cool and collected in the pocket (especially coming in when Nova got hurt last season and in the spring game). I think he is seeing the field really well. Also, the offense responded in the 2nd half of the Norfolk State game. Was it because of Laviano or because of a chewing out the team got in the locker room?

Rettig has definitely improved since the spring game and his statistical accuracy showed it. But, I think on the one touchdown pass where he threw to the short guy he actually did not see the WIDE OPEN receiver in the end zone behind him. Yeah, it's a quibble but it looked to me he either didn't see him or took too much time to make the decision. You can get away with that against Norfolk but you won't have the time in most of our B1G games.

I've always been dubious of the "better gun" upside. With most QBs it gets them into the "I can force it in a crack" mentality. Show me you can play QB first. It took Mike Teel almost three seasons to get it. And when he did, he was unstoppable.

Anyway, it's been a long time coming to have such a nice dilemma. I say let both QBs play until the better one is obvious.

 

[Plum Street]

If one quarterback stinks it up I hope that flood has a fairly quick hook.

 

[IL Lusciato]

I think it just boils down to people still dreaming about Rettig being some steal of a future all pro QB and the best QB to ever don a scarlet jersey.

If he does not start, that dream is over, so they need to come up w all kinds of conspiracies, reasons, excuses etc for why Rettig can still be that guy and the dream lives on. It is not rational, but they will continue to try and rationalize it.

Truth is Laviano and Rettig have similar talent. Rettig was 3rd string at LSU and maybe wasn't going to live up to the hype. Still going to be a very good QB, but maybe not of the stature some here wish for.

I watched both Rettig and Lavianos high school tape, and honestly thought Laviano was more impressive. It looked like the Cali ball was a bunch of kids playing in shorts. Kind of not wanting to get hit, and just standing around chucking the ball every play.

Right now we have 10 SEC teams in the top 25. Of course it's bc they are all so great right? Right?!?!

Maybe Rettig was a bit over and Chris a bit underrated , and just maybe Chris Laviano won the QB competition and is gonna be a pretty darn good quarterback. Just maybe.