Laviano currently rated #4 qb in Big Ten
- Thread starter Kbee3
- Start date
"Ups and downs" for a quarterback can include an average interception a game if combined with a few touchdowns, and a rare (maybe 2-3 times a season) fumble.
The following does not qualify as an acceptable "learning curve" for a D1/P5 quarterback:
-Multiple games without a passing touchdown
-31 yards passing in 3 whole quarters of a game
-An average of nearly one fumble per game, for the SNAP
Also, you stating that Rettig is not the answer is useless, considering that he hasn't had an adequate chance to prove his worth one way or the other this season.
I think it is overplayed as well.
However the intangible guy should not be putting the ball on the ground as much as Laviano does, nor should he be displaying the poor mechanics that Laviano does.
And Rettig pretty clearly has a big arm, so even if we agree Laviano has average arm strength(as opposed to noodle arm) the Rettig still has a clear advantage.
As per what looks like a complete lack of faith in Laviano in terms of play calling vs's the insistence on rolling him out there? I got no answer for that.
Well it's certainly not how you develop Rettig.
And I'm not for QB musical chairs, but there does come a point. IMO we passed that point. I'd be surprised if we don't pass that point yet again this weekend.
Developing is one thing, but there comes a time during a game where you need to pull that quarterback, or any player, out to let the coaches talk to him. He might just need a reminder about issues with mechanics, or even just a word from the coach "hey kid, calm down you can do this."
It makes NO sense to let an ineffective QB stay in the game and risk damage to his self-confidence. It is also deluded to think that your backup can ever be ready if he's only given mop up in a blow out loss. Rettig should see the field BEFORE the 4th quarter if the offense is not moving. You can't overlook 31 passing yards; and that doesn't mean (necessarily) that Laviano loses his starting gig, but he needs to know that improvement is the goal. Annointing starters spells disaster. I'm much more familiar with hockey, and I'll tell you this, about half the time a goalie gets pulled, it's not the goalie, it's the team in front of him playing like crap. Wake up calls tend to alert everyone to the problem.
This is why I feel Laviano starting vs Michigan is actually unfair to Laviano. The chances of him having a bad game and RU getting blown out are pretty good. Why give Laviano a 3rd straight week of that? If Rettig is in there, and we get mopped up Laviano can say "OK it wasn't just me". But instead he gets the start and if the predicted happens the call's for Rettig grow even stronger.
Seriously another blowout vs Michigan, and Laviano starts vs Nebraska? Home crowd will not take well to that.
I think you guys make some fair points. Suppose you pull Laviano at the end of the first half, but Rettig gets the entire second half and is just as ineffective, who do you start the following game? What would be your rationale?
I'd go Rettig. Coming in at the start of the 2nd half in a blowout is not a legit chance. While Laviano would be on a 3 game streak of terrible.
So I'd then go Rettig for at least Nebraska, and outside of a horrendous effort there Army as well.
Last time i checked a top four qb in any conference throws for more than 25 yards in the first half and more than 40 through three quarters. Numbers can be very misleading at times and this is a prime example.
Or suppose instead you pull Laviano after the third quarter and put in Rettig and he is also completely ineffective against the starting defense. Who do you start the next game?
But wait... that above scenario is exactly what happened against Wisconsin. What did Rettig show Flood against the starting Wisconsin D that would warrant him starting against Wisconsin? Two three and outs? And then against the scrub D he kills a potential TD drive by stumbling over his own feet and sacking himself? Oh yeah... but tell me all about the long pass he completed against the third string. And that he fell because he twisted his ankle.
And like I said... go look how effective the Iowa QB played against the Wisconsin Defense. His stats were not much better than Laviano against Wisconsin, and the Iowa QB played a whole game... with a much better offensive line and running game to support the passing game. Even the number 10 ranked team was only able to muster 10 points against that Wisconsin D and a QB who thre for 3.6 yds per attempt vs 2.2 for Laviano. Not much different. And people are blaming Laviano?
Name another team that Laviano would be starting for in the B1G... you cant because he is not a major D1 qb! Now all the so called Rettig supporters aren't saying he is a lock first round pick by no means. We are saying with how awful this offense has looked 3 out of the 5 B1G games we've played so far rettig deserves a shot to show what he can do. Yeah sure he may be just as bad as laviano, hell he might even be worse. But Flood is doing the team a disservice by not giving him a chance at a time where the offense is literally dead. I'm not talking about giving him 2 drives against the starting d of Wisconsin when were already down by 30+ points. Give the kid a start and see what he does. Were not going bowling so we should see what this kid can do. Look around college football coaches make qb changes all the time! Hell Meyer changed qb's when they were undefeated and jones hasn't lost a game as starter in his career and lead them to a national title. It wasn't based on performance it was because JT brings a different dimension to there team. Now as far as Rutgers the qb play merits a change based on performance alone.
So Iowa enters their game with Wisconsin averaging 38 points per game... and score 10 points and their QB throws for 77 total yards (in a full game) against Wisconsin. Do you think Iowa fans were calling for their coaches head because he would not put in the backup ?? No because they won the game because they have a strong Defense. If RU's D had held Wisconsin to 6 points, and CL was able to scratch out another FG in the 4th quarter would the narrative have changed? Maybe not that much. But Look at #10 Iowa. After their game with Wisconsin they went back out and continued to score a lot more points. But look again at their schedule. Did they play any other defense anywhere near as good as the defenses we have played? Ohio State, Michigan State or Penn State ? No... So perhaps their Offensive struggles had to do with the quality of the Wisconsin defense.
I would think most people on this board would give their left arm to have a guy like Kirk Ferentz as the RU head coach. I wonder why Kirk Ferentz and his coaching staff could not come up with a scheme to move the ball better against the Wisconsin D. I guess they suck and should be fired as well for not giving the backup a chance. Sometimes no matter what scheming you do, the defensive matchup isn't going to work out for you. So why would coach Ferentz think the player he feels is inferior to his starter with much less experience would make a difference against the tougher defense and give hime a better chance to move the ball.
I wonder if any team in the country so far had to play a string of defenses as good as Laviano and Rutgers staff have had to face in the last month or so.
But just keep dreaming that changing the QB or the play calling is going to make that much of a difference. I know, you are typical fans... and anything less than a "W" is justification for complaining , whining and telling the world that you know better what should be done to fix the problems
Most on this board are hoping that the offense comes to life. You are hoping that Laviano never be challenged for playing time; ever. Our starting QB threw for a whopping 31 yards in 3 and a half quarters. To me, that warrants the other guy getting a shot. There is no certainty that Rettig would have played better, but at that point what difference would it make.
In the games that Laviano has been less effective, the teams filled the box and the challenge was to beat them by throwing; essentially they had stopped the run. We could not do it. Maybe it was play calling, or maybe execution, but regardless we couldn't move the ball. A QB with a better arm MIGHT be able to connect enough to keep the D honest; its just we're not allowed to find out, Flood has made his decision.
You've stated that Laviano was "far and away" the better QB coming out of camp; no one else had ever said that. I think Flood even described the competition as pretty much neck and neck, but hey, don't let that get in the way of your pontificating. And your assertion that Rettig took over after the 3rd quarter was a bit of hyperbole, I think there was less than ten minutes on the clock, so it was a real shot.
End of the day, the Coach will replace the punter to allow the backup valuable experience, but he won't afford the same to a back up QB (we can agree that QB is a more valuable position?), until there is all but ZERO chance to change the outcome.
Don't care if he starts, but I'd have #5 on a VERY short leash, like the first fumbled snap.
If we beat Nebraska and Maryland like many say we could/should, then we'd most likely finish 7th of 14 in the Big Ten overall standings, which is right where we finished last year (and in the top half of the conference). But, we are the worst program in college football according to some fans.
You are lacking any shred of objectivity. But, hey, if you're happy with 31 yards of offense, good for you, you are a true optimist.
Laviano doesn't deserve the blame for the loss, that's not my point. His line was not partcularly good, but Wisconsin schemed to expose his weakness. They took away the run and said, go up top if you're going to move the ball.
"You've stated that Laviano was "far andaway" the better QB coming out of camp;"
Please don't misquote me. I never said that. I have spoken hypothetically to make a point and have stated IF the coaches felt that Laviano was "far andaway" the better QB coming out of camp; I know it was never stated. Just the typical coach speak that the two qbs were neck and neck. Which I am sure was not really true to keep both working hard. And I made that point as well in the same post
"Andyour assertion that Rettig took over after the 3rd quarter was a bit of hyperbole, I think there was less than ten minutes on the clock, so it was a real shot."
WRONG AGAIN
The last time Laviano was on the field was the last play of the 3rd quarter. RU punted on the first snap of the 4Q. The only QB that took snaps for RU in the 4Q was Rettig
I would think you would agree that means he played the whole quarter.
I could see you missing some of his time on the field since he engineered those two quick three and out drives against the starters
you obviously weren't an athlete growing up were you because that is a terrible way to make laviano's horrible play this season acceptable. I honestly don't care who we are playing or who Wisconsin shut down in previous games because that had no impact on the game that we played against them. So what do you suggest we do then??? sit back and watch the debacles such as wash st, Penn state, Kansas, Ohio state, and the one this past week and be happy about it?? You have a victim mentality and are probably happy with just being 6-6 every year. When all the fans who are calling for rettig to get a shot want to see what he has. We want to see a change to an offense that i one of the worst in all of college football at this time. We have talent on this team we are not as out manned against these B1G teams as the scores say. But the place that counts the most at qb we are at a disadvantage every game we play. Not giving the kid a shot who was supposedly just as good as laviano all through training camp is a slap in the face to the kid, the team, and the athletic department as a whole. You may have a point that Rutgers is going through a stretch with the toughest line up of defenses in all of college football but that doesn't mean the coaching staff cant make an adjustment to help the team have a better chance to win the game. We've seen what laviano can do and its really not that inspiring to be honest. Yeah he played well against Indiana who is probably the worst team in the B1G, he managed the game well against Mich st. but besides that he has been terrible. Yes its his first year starting and i get he needs time to prove that he can play, but he has had enough time and has shown 0 progress he hit his ceiling.
Just to let you know there were a lot of pieces missing from that Wisconsin d that shut down Iowa. They are suffering from injuries so enough with the "oh well Wisconsin shut down Iowa so who cares if they totally bend us over that what we expected, or oh well we are playing tough teams so who cares if we get treated like a cheap prostitute its okay because laviano is the fourth rated qb based on stats that don't mean shit!! I honestly don't know how some of you can sit back and just shrug this off while flood and his little boy toy laviano totally destroy everything that Greg built here its sickening.
Now you're implying that the quarterback competition coming out of spring camp wasn't close, and that the coaches were bullshitting to keep the players completing.
So by your logic, "we are focused on going 1-0" is coach speak for "we suck and I can't do anything about it"? And is "Losses are losses. Wins are wins. Margins don't change how I see a game" coach speak for "please give me credit for coaching wins versus cupcakes and doormats, but excuse my blowouts and ass-kicking losses to legitimate B1G, AAC, and Big East teams"?
Both QBs have seen time on the field this season, so we've all been able to see them in action--and there is no reason to believe either one is unquestionably better than the other, which means our coach is lying when he pulls out the tired cliche that one of them "gives us the best chance to win."
In reality he doesn't know, nobody does, but he's placing all of his chips on one QB. The truth slipped out when he and his staff said the QB needs a lot of snaps to get good at the system. He made his choice and he's going to give that choice a million plays if need be for his choice as coach to be vindicated. In the meantime, he's perfectly willing to sacrifice game after game to let his experiment run.
He must feel like he has great job security. I fear he's right.
In reality he doesn't know, nobody does, but he's placing all of his chips on one QB. The truth slipped out when he and his staff said the QB needs a lot of snaps to get good at the system. He made his choice and he's going to give that choice a million plays if need be for his choice as coach to be vindicated. In the meantime, he's perfectly willing to sacrifice game after game to let his experiment run.
He must feel like he has great job security. I fear he's right.
If three and outs should get you off the field, we'll you know.
75% of Laviano TDs connected with Carroo. Without him, he's got THREE. Hell Rettig has TWO, and he never got on the field with Carroo.
Again....WOW !
While I will admit that one could certainly call the Ohio St. and Pedd St. games "debacles", the idea of referring to the Wash. St. game or the Kansas game as such is ridiculous. Look, some posters here have some valid critiques of the current state of the Rutgers football program. But characterizing a win over Kansas and a close loss to a better-than-everyone-expected WSU team as "debacles" is just stupid. If those games are debacles then Rutgers football must be one debacle after another to you. So many that you must have come to expect the next game to be a debacle. And the next. And the next.
Being a fan of a team with so many debacles has to be tough , eh ?
Now you are starting to get it :
"we have seen both on the field but no reason to believe either is better"
So if that is true. What is the tie breaker? it's the thousands of reps during practice that our coaches have seen and you have not.
And do you want your coach playing a player that he feels is worse than the other?
Oh yeah I forgot flood sux, doesn't know his ass from his elbow, not qualified to make the decision blaa blaa blaa
Worrying about the starter at QB right now is equivalent to worrying about the arrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Why does there have to be a tie breaker OFF the field? Do you think Kyle Flood knows more as a coach than Urban Meyer?
Please stop with this conference rating BS we are 1-4 in the conference, the only stat that matters are "w's".
and we are not getting them. Every time you post conference rating you look like a horses a$$. Our offense has done nothing except for 2 games and 1 was a terrible FBS team
and we are not getting them. Every time you post conference rating you look like a horses a$$. Our offense has done nothing except for 2 games and 1 was a terrible FBS team
It would be nice if the coach was perhaps not so rigid in his philosophy.
And we know the competition was very close through camp, it is why naming a starter was delayed so long. The stats through summer were very close, any reporter or analyst who was around camp said it was close. So I disagree with whomever above that Flood saying "it was close" was merely coach speak.
As per Flood not knowing his ass from his elbow, a fair analysis would conclude he has had a bad run of it this season, but even if we put that aside, we have seen good coaches make bad decisions before. Even the best coaches are not perfect.
Coach Flood (aka Slyker) is trying to make good points but the best point he could ever make is to start Rettig and give him 3 quarters (or even one half) and hope he fails miserably. If he does, his choice of Laviano would make far more sense.
So come on Laviano lovers - make it happen! Make Flood prove how much better Laviano is over Rettig!!
So come on Laviano lovers - make it happen! Make Flood prove how much better Laviano is over Rettig!!
Not only wasn't "Far and Away" the better QB but Flood went 10 days past his projected date to name a starter. So it was really close.
And that makes not giving Rettig a try that more frustrating and all Flood's statements since the beginning of the season on the QB situations total BS.
If so, that will require an oline that allows him that time. May need some designed roll outs. Unfortunately it's easier to roll right for a righty...but that's Denman's side.
No you wouldn't. Not if those 3 TDS did not win the game. Then you'd be asking for a QB who could sustain drives, complete more passes, even short ones, etc.
Laviano has had 3 3TD games. He didn't get better against MSU or Indiana and he didn't suddenly get worse vs OSU and Wisc. Same player...different surroundings.
Similar threads
