- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Fletcher’s rant on starting QB
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:37 pm
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:37 pm
10
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:42 pm to Ghost Of Bristow
He’s wrong. Teams do it all the time. I’m all for giving Rattler half a season, but if he stinks or is not playing well and we are 2-7. Then yes you bring in Shough.
If Rattler is playing good and we around .500, then yes he should remain the starter.
If Rattler is playing good and we around .500, then yes he should remain the starter.
This post was edited on 8/25/25 at 9:43 pm
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:44 pm to Ghost Of Bristow
I just lost a little respect for fletchers opinion
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:51 pm to Ghost Of Bristow
I sort of get what he’s saying. Not his worst work at all.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 10:08 pm to Chad504boy
He's absolutely not wrong. If people want to assume Rattler will be so bad he will be benched that's one thing (but also why start him at all if people believe that?). But people saying to start Rattler for a month to then put in Shough just because are absolutely wrong.
I guess it all depends on the perspective you are coming from, but whoever they choose to start, that will be the guy until it's absolutely proven he isn't. That might take 1 game, 6, or maybe he goes the whole year.
There is no magical "start Rattler 4 or 5 games then bench him for Shough so you see what you have" formula like I've seen parrotted here again and again. You either believe in Rattler to get it done, or you believe in Shough to get it done, and not start Rattler "just because". It's such a dumb take.
Edit:
Also, he DEFINITELY reads Saints Talk. xD
I guess it all depends on the perspective you are coming from, but whoever they choose to start, that will be the guy until it's absolutely proven he isn't. That might take 1 game, 6, or maybe he goes the whole year.
There is no magical "start Rattler 4 or 5 games then bench him for Shough so you see what you have" formula like I've seen parrotted here again and again. You either believe in Rattler to get it done, or you believe in Shough to get it done, and not start Rattler "just because". It's such a dumb take.
Edit:
Also, he DEFINITELY reads Saints Talk. xD
This post was edited on 8/25/25 at 10:11 pm
Posted on 8/25/25 at 11:11 pm to bonethug0180
quote:I’m not a big Fletcher fan, but this point is spot on. And not surprisingly it will go over half of ST posters heads.
But people saying to start Rattler for a month to then put in Shough just because are absolutely wrong.
You don’t start a QB like Rattler with the pre-intended notion of letting him go take the licks for the first 4-5 games “just because” and then it’s Shough time. It’s a ridiculously simplistic and nonsensical thought.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 12:31 am to bonethug0180
i dont think the sentiment is "pull Rattler after 4-5 games" for whatever. I think most here think you start Rattler and assuming he does suck we pull him after giving enough time to evaluate (around 4 or 5 games)
Posted on 8/26/25 at 1:01 am to BlacknGold
That's part of the issue, that most are just assuming he will suck and have no faith, so why even "push" for him to start at all in that case? It's just a very odd way to look at things.
That goes equally to the "need" to protect Shough from starting right away, as if he is going to be some fragile rookie who can't handle adversity. If that is the case why even switch from Rattler to him?
The whole logic behind it is fricked up. There is no true thought behind it. We are just assuming everything and everyone is going to fail anyway.
Instead, let's just start the guy we think gives us the best chance to win and try to fricking win. And run with that until it's proven, not assumed, it isn't going to work.
That goes equally to the "need" to protect Shough from starting right away, as if he is going to be some fragile rookie who can't handle adversity. If that is the case why even switch from Rattler to him?
The whole logic behind it is fricked up. There is no true thought behind it. We are just assuming everything and everyone is going to fail anyway.
Instead, let's just start the guy we think gives us the best chance to win and try to fricking win. And run with that until it's proven, not assumed, it isn't going to work.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 1:16 am to bonethug0180
quote:That’s the real problem with the thought. We’re going to suck anyway so let’s protect Shough for a few games “just because”.
The whole logic behind it is fricked up. There is no true thought behind it. We are just assuming everything and everyone is going to fail anyway.
And then use examples of Mahomes sat for a year behind Alex Smith or NYG Wilson might give way to Dart during the season. It’s not the same thing. Those could be considered plans, especially KC, because that was the plan. This narrative is more like Rattler sucks, Saints suck, might as well start him for a month, go ahead and suck, and then put in Shough.
Like, what? When is recess?
Posted on 8/26/25 at 3:02 am to Ghost Of Bristow
It should be Shough.
We know what Rattler is.
You passed on an excellent TE in Mason Taylor to invested a 2nd Round pick in Shough. You thought so much of him and we had a glaring need, so we selected him. Now we have to find out if you were right in selecting him, and see if this guy is a player.
You only find this out by allowing him to play, grow, mature and gain valuable experience as the season plays out under the tutelage of his new coach, that hand selected him. You have to find out if this is your guy and you have 1 season to do it. His time needs to begin NOW.
If he is not the guy, we should find ourselves in prime position to select a new franchise QB in the 1st round next year.
Rattler is a good kid, trying hard, but he is at best a career backup. Stop wasting time. Focus in on the process.
We know what Rattler is.
You passed on an excellent TE in Mason Taylor to invested a 2nd Round pick in Shough. You thought so much of him and we had a glaring need, so we selected him. Now we have to find out if you were right in selecting him, and see if this guy is a player.
You only find this out by allowing him to play, grow, mature and gain valuable experience as the season plays out under the tutelage of his new coach, that hand selected him. You have to find out if this is your guy and you have 1 season to do it. His time needs to begin NOW.
If he is not the guy, we should find ourselves in prime position to select a new franchise QB in the 1st round next year.
Rattler is a good kid, trying hard, but he is at best a career backup. Stop wasting time. Focus in on the process.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:29 am to bonethug0180
quote:
There is no magical "start Rattler 4 or 5 games then bench him for Shough so you see what you have" formula like I've seen parrotted here again and again. You either believe in Rattler to get it done, or you believe in Shough to get it done, and not start Rattler "just because". It's such a dumb take.
You skipped the most important part.
One plausible reason not to go to Shough now is because the coaches just don't think he's ready. If a QB isn't capable of handling the pass protections it can actually be counter productive to play him. You could actually hurt his development. QBs that consistently get hit pick up bad habits and sometimes never recover.
Rattler isn't starting because they like what they see from him.
This should be obvious.Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:40 am to moneyg
What if Rattler is good and we are 2-7?
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:58 am to moneyg
quote:That’s why teams will sign a seasoned veteran to start until they believe their rookie is ready. The Saints have not done that. Whomever starts will be because that’s who the coaches believe is going to make the team the most successful, not some arbitrary preset amount of games. That’s Fletcher’s whole point speaking about Rattler, even though he thinks Shough starts.
One plausible reason not to go to Shough now is because the coaches just don't think he's ready. If a QB isn't capable of handling the pass protections it can actually be counter productive to play him. You could actually hurt his development.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:01 am to Bayou
quote:what if rattler is good and 7-2 and it’s still clear that shough is passing him up in practice and doing better than him.
What if Rattler is good and we are 2-7?
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:03 am to Chad504boy
Don't see a change then.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:26 am to drizztiger
quote:
That’s why teams will sign a seasoned veteran to start until they believe their rookie is ready. The Saints have not done that.
I agree that's why teams will do that. And, I agree that the Saints didn't do that.
quote:
Whomever starts will be because that’s who the coaches believe is going to make the team the most successful
Your first statement doesn't support this one. I'm saying the opposite. Neither QB has shown that they are going to make this team successful in the short term. If Rattler starts, it's because they don't believe Shough is ready.
quote:
not some arbitrary preset amount of games
It will be based on when they think Shough will be ready...and could theoretically tie it to an off week, specific opponent, etc to make the transition easiest.
quote:
That’s Fletcher’s whole point speaking about Rattler
If Rattler were to somehow play better than we've ever seen him play, and he's legitimately playing like a quality NFL starting QB, obviously he's not going anywhere.
That's unlikely to happen. The coaching staff doesn't expect it to happen. But, the coaching staff will probably still start him to protect Shough until he's ready.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:27 am to Bayou
quote:
What if Rattler is good and we are 2-7?
In that scenario, I think it's 100% they would make the change.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:27 am to Chad504boy
quote:
what if rattler is good and 7-2 and it’s still clear that shough is passing him up in practice and doing better than him.
The longest of shots. Both of our QBs are elite.
In the scenario where Rattler is playing well and we are 7-2, we are 100% not making a change.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:31 am to moneyg
quote:Which is simply your opinion which you
Your first statement doesn't support this one. I'm saying the opposite. Neither QB has shown that they are going to make this team successful in the short term. If Rattler starts, it's because they don't believe Shough is ready.
at the coaches possibly preferring Rattler now as giving the team best chance at success. You have no idea what the coaches are thinking, let alone laugh at the contention.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:32 am to Ghost Of Bristow
He has some of the absolutely worst takes and exceptionally terrible suggested trades [mostly on the pelicans side]. He’s awful.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News