Firstly, it's evident that you are relatively indelicate when it comes to the logistical and appreciable basis behind team development and structure. Establishing a fundamental and effective system in the first year as a Head Coach is a difficult task and to be so arrogant as to not realize this has clearly provided you with that deficient judgement it takes to criticize such an issue.
How delightful.
Ironic, considering how much effort you put into sounding educated, that you start off with an entire paragraph of one of the primary logical fallacies.
Since you clearly are a man of letters I'm sure you can figure out which one.
Bringing in Gus was done for a number of reasons -
- Our system was raw and impartial. Coach Saban felt it was necessary to implement new schemes (and rightfully so), including Linehan as our Offensive Coordinator. Due to the invariability and large intake of new coaches and players, a period of haste and unfamiliarity was always going to lead to 'growing pains' of some kind. Assuming that any other Quarterback was not going to experience these growing pains is supercilious and unreasonable. Gus was the right fit for RIGHT NOW in regard to primarily having a familiarty with Linehan's system.
That "famialiarity" has goten him a whopping 70.3 quarterback rating and ranking him among the very worst in football.
And any quarterback that couldn't, given an entire offseason to prepare, "be familiar" with Linehan's system shouldn't even be in uniform.
He is here because Linehan, unwisely, vouched for him.
He has failed.
But again, if his advantages could only bring him up to "one of the worst in the NFL", how big of an advantage are they, really?
-
Another property of Nick Saban's new role and responsiblity involves the injection of youth and depth into the team. Granted, Gus isn't young but by signing Gus, we were able to focus on other areas of need, namely Running Back and Offensive Line. Signing Gus was also a cap friendly option. This helps with the future development, structure and depth of our team.
There were other options with the same advantages and with the further advantage of not being Gus Ferotte.
None of that either applies to Gus alone OR, which was the point, justifies your original post.
It is obvious from your irreverant post with a judgementally insolent tone that you're a Sage fan with an overbearing disability to accept the larger picture -- the importance of developing this team, finding a solid base for consistency and a resonating understanding amongst players and coaches as to which direction we are heading.
I am not a Sage fan, actually. I am a Dolphin fan. I don't think Sage is the answer. But I know for certain that Gus isn't. And, thanks for the condescension, but I understand all of that perfectly. What you do not understand is this:
None of that requires that you use one of the worst quarterbacks in football. None of it. You make a flawed assumption that Gus helps with anyone's development or helps the team as a whole.
Gus is wildly overvalued right now, for no good reason.
And Gus has been anything but consistent.
And the last four games disprove your point entirely. It has been the most INCONSISTENT period of the season and it has also been when we have performed the best.
My post related to the certain aspect of team chemistry that has led to our success, not the individual accomplishments of Gus and the comparative nature of this season's chemistry to last season's.
Ah, the old I'm losing this argument so I'll pull out an unprovable assumption trick.
You have absolutely no basis for claiming that GUS had anything to do with it. All we know for sure is that he, personally, has been terrible. To make some unjustifiable claim that "yeah, he's terrible, but he makes everybody else better" is unfounded.
To conclude that with an insinuation of cause and effect is demeaning and illogical. One player does not decide a game, but the aforementioned team chemistry can change the entire organization who can have the greater ability to win games.
That's why we start a winning streak almost as soon as he isn't playing regularly, right? Becuase he's important to the team chemistry.
It's just coincedence that he goes 3-7 and then when we start to see less of him the team goes 4-0.
Yeah, Go GUS!
I'm still uncertain as to why you demean Nick Saban's judgement relating to this issue. We're a 7-7 .500 organization at the moment. I ask you to not make crude judgement and moreso deliberate the relevance of unspoken topics before using a weak frame of reference to beseech mine. I never gave detriment to Sage for any of his accomplishments this season; Again, I was merely making reference to the aspect of team chemistry amongst the players and coaches due in the relative large part of the consistency with our Quarterback -- The players know what to expect and have more of a rythym created due to this.
Again... as soon as we were off of the "Gus starts every game" we did much better... you see how that disproves your entire thesis?
And let me get this straight... as soon as I disagree with Saban's judgement I am demeaning him? Get real. No one is infallible. Not Shula, not Lombardi, not Saban.
Your "how dare you!" tone is laughable.
I think Saban is one of the best things to ever happen to this team. Do I think that means he will never make a mistake? Of course not. He will make many. No one doesn't.
We are currently in the important faze of finding our identity as a football team. In order to do this, we must ignite an overt reaction in the period between stimulus and response. To take greater action in finding a quarterback in Coach Saban's first season is an unfounded and unneeded action -- As Coach has said, what happens this season doesn't matter. Finding our identity; building a foundation for the future that will result in long-term success, and the intromittent synthesis of that which builds the nature of the team are the acts that are emergent and relevant at this time.
Many words that say nothing. there is no reason that must be done with a bad quarterback. No reason at all.
And I find the premise that everybody else needs to figure stuff out, but we'll deal with the quarterback later totally ridiculous.
I ask only for you to not take irrational, sophistic tone when providing a basis of opinion unrelated to the actual comment. If you choose otherwise, I am more than willing to debate any obtuse remark you brand my opinion with.
"Unrelated to the actual comment"? Good grief. I replied EXACTLY to your original comment.
You're very welcome.
And I just re-read my original post. There was nothing at all rude or offensive in it, not sure why your dander is so up.
By the way, if you're original post had been true, and we had used Gus iall game, every game this year, our record would be 5-9.
So I guess you could argue that starting Gus is the best thing for this team because the more he plays the better our draft position gets. That would be reasonable.
