re: A case for Lindsey Scott...you know coach O watched the game.

Please stop!! Scott will not start for LSU!

quote:

---

Well, I doubt Les and Cam would have been willing to get fired simply to protect Scott's redshirt, so I will propose that he wasn't the best QB available early in the season.

---

Well that was obvious. He was a QB coming out of high school and I doubt that Les and Cam would put him on the fast track to try to take over the job his first year, as most of the time most coaches try to red shirt QBs when possible for the obvious reason that it is a far more difficult position to master. Not to mention that we also had two experienced junior QBs and a red shirt freshman ahead of him and one that had started the previous year that you have to assume will improve even though hindsight reveals now that he didn't.

quote:

---

That's more believable, it's like what we heard about Jamarcus.

---

Well, of course, it is more believable because that's how it occurred. As he learned the offense and progressed he started showing what he could do, and apparently that impressed both coaches and players alike.

quote:

---

Still, I don't know that an interim staff will hold anyone back. They're coaching for their jobs, maybe careers.

---

You are making some very strange and idiotic assumptions. Why would they try to fast track a freshman three star QB when they already have two junior QBs with experience and a red shirt freshman QB? I can't understand that reasoning.

quote:

---

And we lost 2 games where Etling wasn't effective, pretty late in the season. Close games, and the interim tag seemed to be on the line. If Scott seemed ready to play against Alabama or Florida, and looked like the best prospect, I think he would have played then.

---

Nah...that's not correct, we loss one game where Etling like most previous LSU QBs wasn't very effective against Alabama, which was due far more to the Les Miles antiquated offense, more than it was due to anything else.

The Florida loss was a fluke loss. We never should have loss that game, and that wasn't Etling's fault. Etling didn't make those critical fumbles. Etling didn't run the ball the wrong way. Etling didn't allow a 99 yard pass completion for a touchdown. Etling didn't attempt to let LF get one more touchdown when he was hurt against the second best run defense in the SEC, and it wasn't Etling who made the other critical mistakes as well. Not to mention that we had around 425 yards of offense to Florida's like 287.

Indeed, there was no reason to replace Etling at the QB spot, as he was playing far better than Harris, and there is no way Scott would have been ready to make that leap unless he would have been fast tracked for that express purpose and that didn't happen.

quote:

---

A lot of teams have won championships with similar kind of QBs to

---

Name them (last 10 years only)...

quote:

---

If Scott wasn't the best choice vs Florida, I just don't think he passes Etling this spring. Etling stays the starter, and we transition to Brennan or Narcisse the following year.

---

We see it differently. If I'm orgeron, and I'm trying to get the job, I do exactly what he did. Conservative on offense. Play sound D. Go with the current favorite at QB. Don't gamble with a true freshman when, I can get the job without running the table. If I lose to Bama and one other, I have a chance. If I lose with DE (as oppose to anyone else), cool. If I take a chance on BH (or anyone else), and lose the same games, I'm thinking people will emplode. All he did with DE, was win games we were supposed to win.

I have a new OC now. Let him make the call. Smart play by Coach O.

quote:

---

Ugh. Rant, rant, and rant some more. I know the coaches will pick the best guy. I trust them to do so. And I don't think it'll be Scott. Just saying his duel threat ability going into the Spring will be taken into account and maybe ...just maybe...

---

You can be right as rain and you will find all the know it all nincompoops in the fanbase. I agree with you that Scott's talent profile will raise eyebrows but he will have to show some ability to convert that to skills on the field.

The issue here with the haters is they only believe what they hear from pundits and internet sites. He is listed as a dual threat QB but he is one that is an accomplished passer and one that can run some. Does anyone here think that Jalen Hurts is an accomplished passer - hell no. Is Brandon Harris a passer - hell no. Is Etling an exceptional passer that can run - not really. So what do you think Scott could do if he can execute the passing game and run...

People here want to anoint Brennan as the next coming but he will have to do the same thing as I said Scott needs to do - prove it on the field. Brennan will have to show that he is not one dimensional. If he is not mobile then the SEC pass rushers will eat him up even if he is a good arm.

Duplicate.

quote:

---

My assumptions are actually quite logical. They take the current situation and context into consideration.

---

Your assuming that Les Miles was logical, he never was. Les Miles was Les Miles and nobody could ever predict what Les Miles would do. In any event, there was no way that Les was going to risk letting Cam take time away from continuing to develop two junior quarterbacks to attempt to develop a 5 ft. 11 in three star fresh out of high school, when it was imperative to improve the offense. Had he been smart, he would have told Cam to install his own offense in the spring and today he might still have his job. Although I’m very glad he doesn’t still have his job today, because I have been wanting Les gone for years. He’s a nice guy and all of that and I like that. He just isn’t a good coach, which I thought was more than obvious for many years.

Not to mention, that if my job is on the line, there isn’t any way in hell that I’m going to put all my money on a 5 ft. 11 in. three star true freshman. Maybe you would, but not me, and apparently not Les either. The better bet for Les would have been for him to tell Cam that the offense was all his and to install his own offense in the spring.

quote:

---

Same thing with Orgeron. He wasn't just finishing the season out, he was trying to win the job permanently. If he felt that Scott was a better option than Etling or Harris, he'd have played the kid.

---

Well first, nobody knows if Scott is good enough right now to start. I mean all we’ve heard was Coach O and Coach Aranda say that Scott is going to be a very good dual threat quarterback for us. He did have a good game in that scrimmage the nonstarters played that week off they had, and that’s probably when they first started noticing that he can play. However, before that, I doubt he knew the offense well enough yet to start showing what he was capable of doing. Of course, this dude graduated high school with a 3.8 g.p.a., so no doubt, he is pretty damn smart.

Not to mention, that Etling was playing pretty good and improving, so there was no reason to seek to replace him and destroy his confidence at the same time. You know maybe if the situation would have been different and they would have been desperate for a better quarterback that can play, they may have decided to take a chance on this kid to see if he can play. Nonetheless, our offense improved significantly as soon as Miles and Cam were gone. Thus, there was no reason to remove Etling. Etling isn’t bad. He’s no Heisman candidate, but I’ve seen far worse than Etling. Heck, we averaged what; about 475 yards a game the rest of the season after Miles and Cam were gone? That’s pretty damn good and far better than we did with Harris.

In addition, Etling struggled with Alabama, just like Harris struggled last season with Alabama, but that was far more the problem of Les Miles’ old and dilapidated offense more than it was anything else, as they knew the plays coming even before we snapped the ball. Hence, I don’t care if Desean Watson would have been our quarterback that night, under those conditions we weren’t going to move the ball on Alabama no matter what.

Again, on Florida, which was a fluke loss, by the way, that was not Etling’s fault whatsoever. There was plenty of blame to go around, but none of it belonged to Etling in that game. We didn’t lose because of Etling. We lost because of other stupid reasons. In any event, we were good enough to blow out Florida, but we just didn’t get the job done that night.

Thus, when you say that would have been the perfect time to transition to Scott during the Florida game, I’m going to have ask you what you are smoking because I want some of that stuff. Here’s my email: br549@heehaw.com, send me a little please.

I mean, why, Etling didn’t have a good game against Arkansas the week before or something, give me a break, and he sure in the hell wasn’t having a bad game against Florida either. Indeed, why remove a quarterback who is playing well? I don’t get it. Indeed, he passed for over 300 yards the following week against A & M. With the exception of the lone Alabama game, Etling was steadily improving, yet you want to remove him for some reason, and you said your assumptions were pretty logical. My goodness, when?

quote:

---

We all assumed Orgeron had lost the job when he lost to Florida, if not Bama... so again, why not try with your best player at the helm?

---

Wait a minute, who said Scott is LSU’s best player? How does saying after the season is over with during the post-game Citrus Bowl press conference that Scott is going to be a very good dual threat quarterback for us, all of sudden translate into Scott is LSU’s best player. Please explain that one to me. Wow…I’m confused.

quote:

---

If Scott wasn't the best choice vs Florida, I just don't think he passes Etling this spring. Etling stays the starter, and we transition to Brennan or Narcisse the following year.

---

Well first, at that point of the season the only thing anyone knew about Scott was that he had had a pretty good game in the scrub’s scrimmage. Yet still nobody at least at that time was aware of how highly thought of by some of the coaches he was. Second, there was absolutely no reason to remove Etling in that game because Etling was having a pretty good season and he sure in heck didn’t have a bad game in the Florida game. We didn’t lose that game because of Etling. I mean we averaged what; 475 yards a game after Miles was gone. Hence, I have no clue where you are coming from on that line of reasoning, which you claim is somehow logical. Maybe it is somehow to you, but it sure isn’t logical to me. In fact, it’s kind of whacko if you ask me.

I actually don’t care who plays quarterback next year. I just hope that Canada and O choose the player they feel gives us the highest probability of winning, and if Scott turns out to be as good as the coaches suggest he is, then heck yeah, so much the better. I wouldn’t mind having a Russell Wilson type dual threat quarterback that can run the ball, and Scott can run. Indeed, he ran the ball for 1961 yards his senior year and passed it for another 3036 yards, and he also had 61 touchdowns altogether, not too shabby if I may say so myself.

quote:

---

There is no way that that same team would have scored those points with LSU's quarterback.

---

Post repaired.

quote:

---

We won championships in 2003 and 2007 with similar kinds of QBs to Etling

---

What? White guys?

Etling is nowhere near as strong a runner as Mauk, and Mauk probably also had a stronger arm. Flynn was a million times the passer Etling is. They are not similar at all.