Volsfaninva917
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2009
- Messages
- 21,163
- Likes
- 33,476
I think Butch is messing with South Carolina's game plan.
Not arguing with you, just starting conversation so please dont take this as me bashing your statement. But what is there really to prepare for with Worley? When Worley is in the game its a very basic offense mixed in with a few shots down field, what would be your scheme against a Worley led offense? Mine would be blitz like crazy because he doesnt have the pocket awarness or the athletic ability to move and escape pressure.
Lots of speculation with this, is it "game plan" is it to protect Dobbs if Jones knows he likely can't go on the road and play mistake free from everything Jones has seen of him every single day in practice or is it just sticking to a senior who's stuck with the program through the toughest stretch its possibly ever been through and giving him the keys to the vet?
I'm okay with letting Worley start but after a sack and a couple 3 and outs I wanna see Dobbs come in and move that pocket and get us rolling... However if we get OK Worley or UGA second half Worley I like worley to play.
So those of you ok with Worley starting, what was the point of burning Dobbs redshirt? Why not just roll Peterman out there grin and bare it? So you've wasted a whole year of eligibility for 3 quarters? Not arguing just asking
Really this is a terrible pinch for Butch. If he does the right thing and puts Worley out there. The younger half of the fans are going to lash out no matter what. If he puts dobbs out there and dobbs loses the game they will still lash out at the coaches because it will obviously be the play calling.. not dobb's fault.
We needed two QB's ready. That's all it was, Worley couldn't go and we needed two QB's. That's all there was to it.
If it's the Worley we saw against Utah St, Ark St and UGA then I'm for it.
If it's the Worley we saw against UF and Ole Miss then I say no.
Doubt he will play but possibly seeing both in USCjr game "could" be beneficial. "Could" be......