Word is in

Ok gotta throw a new one on my last one versus an edit... running isn't talent - so you say - WTF.... running when you could be throwing an Int or giving the ball up on 3 and out... oh ok - I'll take no talent then...

 

he doesn't have accuracy. he doesn't have the amount of arm that Weinke does. He's inconsistent.
He throws well on the run, and no, he doesn't look to run first. He's a good quarterback. But he runs to escape pressure and he runs because it's easier to read a defense on the run - or rather read the relationship between a receiver and his defenders, which is easier to read.

he's not the more talented quarterback by any NFL standard. That doesn't make him a better or worse player, but I don't believe that he's a more talented quarterback. he's more athletic, and that guarantees nothing.

 

Dude, what the fuck are you two even arguing this point about. Neither Weinke nor Fasani have the "expierence" that matters in this offense. It's like the Presidancy. Those under 35 need not apply.

In all serousness, it's looking like all three will start. In all likelyhood, none will get a rythem and all will struggle. And Fox will get his guy next year.

 

In another thread, you will find that my argument for Fasani is in more words that needed he has more tools... thats it.

You are right neither have the experience... that is why at this point I would rather "see" Randy... Winky is the worst "type" you could have with a lack of experience... you see - game day is not an open book test... Fasani does better when the text book is closed, IMO...

 

>>running isn't talent - so you say - WTF.... running when you could be throwing an Int or giving the ball up on 3 and out... oh ok - I'll take no talent then..

Sure, if you're in high school that makes a lot of sense. Or, if your talent levels are higher running than passing, sure, that makes sense. On the other hand, you're expecting me to believe that one quarterback is supposed to convert third down four, even six times a game?

There's nothing wrong with running for a first down when the rush is behind you and your receivers aren't open.

The problem with running this much is that it's not for benefit of positive yardage much of the time. It's not always in the best interest of the play. The play was called to serve specific tasks and by running, that's giving up on three or four options to allow one option. I can't honestly look at the situation and say that Fasani read that three or more of his targets were covered well on every play he ran off. I can see numerous times where Fasani ran off and had to throw across his body to get a ball to an open receiver he would have seen had he been in the pocket.

And that's where my beef is. A quarterback with vision, with the ability to read a defense without stopping to look at the rush, is valuable. I'd have no beef with Fasani if he hung in the pocket more.

 

Ok MvM, I am revived from a few days off and a little R&R... I can not argue that the principle behind what you say (edit) is not flawed.... ok?

But what I argue or not... is that Winky has not proven to the mass that he fits the bill either... Winky does not have tremendous vision, he does not look to multiple recievers that often... Winky hangs in the pocket too long, Fasani to little... so what is worse? Niether perhaps...

I'll revert to my previous multiple statements... our coaching staff decided to bench Winky... that I love... it shows they are looking for more than what is in the book "QB for Dummies" ----

 

He would struggle, Sandy, in this situation. You might see more of the type of things you want to see, might pull out a game like McMahon did for the Lions last year, but we would still struggle. For similar reasons. He needs to develop before he can play, and that's why he's 3.

The way this was handled, little good comes of it. If a guy isn't your guy, then don't pussyfoot around with him. Put him #3. Trade him. If he is, I'd rather play him, until you don't think he can be.

Doing it this way, we will end up with 3 QBs, which means we have none.

 

no doubts at all Piper.

 

Last year, I said after about game 4 or 5 that Winky needed to take a seat... if not for a quarter, for a game... everyone looked down on me, said no.... Winky needs the experience, leave him in, he will learn....

I ask everyone to review last preseason... my boy and a few others.. thougth Lewis was the heat... he totally fucked up, he was standing on the sidelines with no one to talk to but himself.

Now... Winky got the job because he was stable, yet not very exciting... the media loved him, cause they hated Lewis and Craig, both not the media friendly type... when they arrived in Charlotte.

The thing I keep waiting on here is for someone to explain why Winky is any more deserving than Grandaddy Peete, or New Daddy Fasani? Saying Winky has a better "arm" is not enough... hell my ole buddy Steve B had a great arm... he just did not have the rest of the package...

 

I disagreed with you then, and I disagree now.

The position is different. Changing your QB, at this point in the season, is like changing captains 5 minutes before you go to war. It's a recipe for disaster.

We seem to be wanting to have our cake and eat it to. It'd be one thing if Peete had played well. Or Weinke had played so poorly that Fox does not believe he can get it done. And maybe the latter is the case. But if so, the divorce should have happened long ago, and two, Fox should not be pussyfooting with him. Put him #3, trade him, something. Maybe elevate him later, but don't do this shit. Not this early.

More QBs are ruined this way, and I mean Fasani and Weinke could degenerate. And that's a shame.