Butch Jones press conference tomorrow at noon

[sjt18]

Shaq Wiggins pretty low on the depth. Is it the injury or what Ainge said about not grasping Shoops D?

He's been injured. Not sure if there's anything else.

 

[KBVol]

why is the place kicker an OR? I just always thought Medley was there despite some issues because of the experience and National stage....has the other outperformed in camp? I just don't remember seeing anything...do you think its real that it wont be Medley Monday night?

Been talked about for a few weeks now that it's a legit battle between Medley and Cimaglia.....and that's a very good thing imo. Medley either needs to get much better this year or replaced.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Are you intentionally being obtuse or did I give you more credit that you deserve?

WHY... if it is a DESIRABLE THING... do coaches avoid using 2 QB's? You keep pointing to exceptions as proof that it works. If it worked as a way of doing things then someone would do it.

You do this as if you are supporting that it be used now. Is it not your bias that motivates you to support this idea?

Pointing to the exceptions does NOTHING to support the notion that both of UT's QB's should play. One should be the starter. One should be the back up. I'm fine with either guy. It would be foolish to play two guys with similar games if one guy has won the job.

Already answered that question. You can't refuse to acknowledge the answer given, then claim I never answered. Doesn't work that way, SJT.

But thanks for calling me obtuse.

Here's the answer again:

Coaches generally use one QB because that's the best QB on the team. A clear advantage. When there is no advantage to choosing one, but there is an advantage to naming two, coaches do that.

Look, coaches tend to use 2 QBs under two conditions: (1) when the two are very closely matched in skill level and it would be disadvantageous to the team to name just one as starter ... or (2) when the two QBs bring different skill sets to the position. In the first case, coaches typically keep alternating the QBs until one establishes himself in game conditions as the better. In the second case, the coaches may keep running with both all season long.

In either case, the 2-QB system can work, and work well.

You keep trying to paint me into a corner as if I think 2-QB systems are the bomb and should be used all the time. I've never said that. I don't believe that. But you're creating a straw man to argue against, which I would think is beneath you, SJT.

I've always said that 2-QB offenses can work, and have proven very successful at times in the past.

It's not the end of the world if Butch goes with it this season, whether for a game or three until he sees separation, or all season long if he's alternating them situationally for their differing talents.

Now, your turn. Tell us the "less than 20" cases of 2-QB offenses that you remember, and how they did. Still waiting.

 

[wesleydmartin]

Been talked about for a few weeks now that it's a legit battle between Medley and Cimaglia.....and that's a very good thing imo. Medley either needs to get much better this year or replaced.

everytime he trots out, i cringe......

 

[IluvdoubleD's]

LoL people it's called depth. I know it's been a while. We got guys EVERYWHERE. And guess what? We are playing very talented freshmen, and they are going to make mistakes. They are not going by be perfect, but they are about to have an eye opening life changing experience. It is time for YOU to get behind them. This season is going to go a whole lot better if you decide to enjoy the ride and stand behind your guys. If they feel you standing with them instead of against them they will have a better understanding of what it is they are doing on the field. All we have to do is outscore them. Let the kids play!

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Been talked about for a few weeks now that it's a legit battle between Medley and Cimaglia.....and that's a very good thing imo. Medley either needs to get much better this year or replaced.

Based on what Butch said in the press conference, I wouldn't be surprised to see these things happen early in the season:

(1) Kickoffs: Medley and Cimaglia alternating until one becomes the clearly better choice.

(2) Field Goals: If the ball's inside the 25-yard-line (42 yard punt), expect Medley. If it's outside the 25 (43+ yards), expect to see Cimaglia come in.

That's what it sounded to me like Butch was hinting.

 

[LA Vol]

They had hoped to RS Cimaglia. The fact that he's still competing for PT makes a statement about Medley's progress. We need a FG kicker who's reliable beyond 40 yds. Not having one could cost us a game.

 

[sjt18]

Already answered that question. You can't refuse to acknowledge the answer given, then claim I never answered. Doesn't work that way, SJT.

But thanks for calling me obtuse.

With great respect, you didn't answer that question. You only go back into "well it has worked" on a few occasions.

Here's the answer again:

Coaches generally use one QB because that's the best QB on the team. A clear advantage. When there is no advantage to choosing one, but there is an advantage to naming two, coaches do that.

OK. If that's your answer... you're just wrong. LOTS of coaches every year choose between two guys who are neck and neck and have done enough to start. If coaches used a 2 qb system every time there was no clear winner of the competition then you'd see it a lot more than you do. I haven't seen any suggestion that UT's competition is that close. Maybe it is something contrary to the tendencies of the bits and pieces we've gotten... but the signs point toward Dormady and not by a coin flip.

Look, coaches tend to use 2 QBs under two conditions: (1) when the two are very closely matched in skill level and it would be disadvantageous to the team to name just one as starter ... or

What is your successful example of that? It isn't UF under Spurrier. He didn't have a planned system for playing 2 guys... he just yanked guys who made mistakes. Benching guys isn't a 2 QB "system".

(2) when the two QBs bring different skill sets to the position. In the first case, coaches typically keep alternating the QBs until one establishes himself in game conditions as the better. In the second case, the coaches may keep running with both all season long.

If they're willing to bench one of them then it is indecision and a competition... not a "system".

I think it would be a TERRIBLE mistake for Jones to let the QB competition extend to the field. Give one guy his shot and if he doesn't perform then replace him.

In either case, the 2-QB system can work, and work well.

In the second case it has worked... rarely.

You keep trying to paint me into a corner as if I think 2-QB systems are the bomb and should be used all the time. I've never said that. I don't believe that. But you're creating a straw man to argue against, which I would think is beneath you, SJT.

Then what is your purpose? In honesty, are you pulling for one guy or the other? I'm sincerely not. May the best man win.... but let the winner be the winner. Make a decision!

We may be talking past one another but I'm not building straw men knowingly.

It's not the end of the world if Butch goes with it this season, whether for a game or three until he sees separation, or all season long if he's alternating them situationally for their differing talents.

End of the world? No. A huge mistake? Yes.

Now, your turn. Tell us the "less than 20" cases of 2-QB offenses that you remember, and how they did. Still waiting.

Again, you simply haven't made it worth my while to go back and do the research. I think you know I'm not a liar. I have many flaws but that isn't one of them.

I have seen two QB's used at ECU. UF has done it other than Tebow/Leak but I can't remember the names. IIRC, Fulmer played Stewart and Manning both for a couple of games. Iowa used Beatherd and that other kid.

I'm just having a hard time remembering them all but most of the time it was a running QB complimenting a passing QB when it actually worked. Often it was really big kids who gave the O a short yardage package with at least a threat to throw.

I said less than 20 because I didn't count them or realize at the time I was watching them that you'd need the information so badly.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I have seen two QB's used at ECU. UF has done it other than Tebow/Leak but I can't remember the names. IIRC, Fulmer played Stewart and Manning both for a couple of games. Iowa used Beatherd and that other kid.

I'm just having a hard time remembering them all but most of the time it was a running QB complimenting a passing QB when it actually worked. Often it was really big kids who gave the O a short yardage package with at least a threat to throw.

I said less than 20 because I didn't count them....

Okay, we're making progress.

The other Florida example you're probably remembering is Wuerffel and Dean in '93 and '94.

So you seem to remember about 5-6 cases:

• ECU -- remember how they did?
• Florida, Tebow/Leak '06 -- went 13-1, national champs
• Florida, Wuerffel/Dean '93 -- went 11-2, SEC champs
• Florida, Wuerffel/Dean '94 -- went 10-2-1, SEC champs
• Tennessee, Stewart/Manning -- don't remember Peyton sharing QB position with anyone after his freshman year taking over from Helton-->Colquitt. If that's the year you mean, I wouldn't call that a 2-QB system. I'd call it a series of injuries, playing whoever was left, heh.
• Iowa, Beatherd/?? -- Just looked this up for you, think you're probably talking about the '14 season, Beatherd/Rudock. The year we played them in the TaxSlayer Bowl. They went 7-6 that year.

And we can add '04 Ainge-Schaeffer to that, of course -- 7-1 as long as the 2-QB system lasted (Schaeffer broke his collarbone the middle of the 8th game).

So between us, we remember 6 cases of a dual QB system being used (not counting Manning/Stewart unless you insist). 4 of those were very successful (FL '93, FL '94, TN '04, FL '06), one was a winning season but not particularly good (Iowa), and the last we don't know about (ECU).

Right?

So in both our memories, the 2-QB system has generally worked well when used.

You seeing that, too?

 

[sjt18]

Okay, we're making progress.

The other Florida example you're probably remembering is Wuerffel and Dean in '93 and '94.

Nope. Later than that. I think it was also during Meyer's tenure.

Wuerffel and Dean wasn't a system if I remember it right. Spurrier just benched switched back and forth.

So you seem to remember about 5-6 cases:

• ECU -- remember how they did?
• Florida, Tebow/Leak '06 -- went 13-1, national champs
• Florida, Wuerffel/Dean '93 -- went 11-2, SEC champs
• Florida, Wuerffel/Dean '94 -- went 10-2-1, SEC champs
• Tennessee, Stewart/Manning -- don't remember Peyton sharing QB position with anyone after his freshman year taking over from Helton-->Colquitt. If that's the year you mean, I wouldn't call that a 2-QB system. I'd call it a series of injuries, playing whoever was left, heh.
• Iowa, Beatherd/?? -- Just looked this up for you, think you're probably talking about the '14 season, Beatherd/Rudock. The year we played them in the TaxSlayer Bowl. They went 7-6 that year.

And we can add '04 Ainge-Schaeffer to that, of course -- 7-1 as long as the 2-QB system lasted (Schaeffer broke his collarbone the middle of the 8th game).

So between us, we remember 6 cases of a dual QB system being used (not counting Manning/Stewart unless you insist). 4 of those were very successful (FL '93, FL '94, TN '04, FL '06), one was a winning season but not particularly good (Iowa), and the last we don't know about (ECU).

Right?

So in both our memories, the 2-QB system has generally worked well when used.

You seeing that, too?

No. I wouldn't agree that it usually works for a couple of reasons... one I understand is unprovable. First, we don't know how much progress was lost to one or both guys or if the team would have been better or worse without the split. Two, the ones where the guys run the same gameplan (have similar skill sets) seldom "work" in any continuing sense. It usually ends up where it should have started with one guy being chosen.

What point are you trying to prove? What is your purpose in trying to prove the viability of what even you admit is a rare exception?

Most of the guys here suggesting that 2 will play want JG to start and realize that he probably won't... so they imagine a scenario where he gets his chance to win it "on the field". Again... that would be a mistake if one guy has won the job in practice even by a sliver.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

The only point I'm making, SJT, is that there's no reason for us to collectively run in fear if Butch and Larry Scott choose to use both QBs in the first few games of the season.

It isn't inherently a bad idea. It can, in fact, be very successful. As we've now proven, together, in several cases.

So no reason to panic, no reason to throw tomatoes at the coaching staff, no reason to start drinking bleach and lighting our shirts (or our mattresses) on fire.

It might not hurt at all. It might be fun. It might even--gasp--be successful.

That's all I've meant the entire time.

Painless, isn't it?

 

[Behr]

Good thing he didn't have the time to spend arguing.

 

[butchna]

Shaeffer was actually the starter ahead of Ainge. When Ainge had that great second half against Florida, Fulmer quickly named him the starter for game 3 and he looked lost.

Still in my mind, one of the great mistakes in Fulmer's career that carried over into 2005

Could've done great things with him...like they did at Ole Miss.