- 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
re: "Game Managers" Do Not Win Championships
Posted on 9/22/09 at 6:06 pm to Tiger Voodoo
Posted on 9/22/09 at 6:06 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
Jesus Christ why do people on here have to be such assholes.
Of course every QB "manages the game" because they touch the ball every play, regardless of whether they hand the ball off or throw it downfield.
But quit playing dumb as though you don't know that referring to a QB as a "game manager" carries a negative connotation. Generally, when that term is used it is to describe a QB that for whatever reason (lack of arm strength, inexperience) the coaches do not feel comfortable enough to throw the ball regularly. He plays in a run first system and his job is to limit turnovers and get an occasional first down on 3rd downs. Its pretty much a nice way for the coaches or media to say the quarterback is not very good and they are going to have to limit what they do on offense to try to hide him because they don't have anyone else better that is ready to play.
That is the connotation, and you all know it, and by that definition, none of the championship QBs being discussed in this thread fit the bill except for Krenzel. While many idiotic fans try to lump Mauck or Flynn into that category because they weren't physical freaks like JR or VY, they were just as dangerous running our offense as JR was, and JR was just as effiecient at running the offense as they were. It doesn't have to be one or the other.
And no, Dorsey wasn't either. He may not have been able to throw the ball 60 yards downfield or beat you with his legs, but he was QB of one of the most dangerous offenses of all time. He threw the ball all over the field to AJ, Wayne, Shockey, etc. He was not the type of QB that limited what you could do on offense. They scored points at will and in every way imaginable. Sure he managed the game by spreading the ball around, by the very rules of the game EVERY QB does that, but that doesn't make him a "game manager" in the context it is usually used.
The bottom line is what the QB is allowed to do in the offense, and all of the QBs discussed in this thread were allowed to attack the entire field at all times, not just when down and distance dictated that it was necessary.
If you aren't willing to admit all of that, then you are just flaming and playing semantics.
+1
0
Posted on 9/22/09 at 7:22 pm to Hot Carl
How I wish I had saved the article...
Mack Brown actually did a study of this issue a few years ago (published in ESPN.com). The conclusion was emphatically that in the college game, QB "game makers" were not really relevant. The study concluded that when it comes to winning national championships in college football, the most important rule was to have a QB who didn't make costly mistakes. Of course, there are exceptions, but that was the general conclusion.
Mack Brown actually did a study of this issue a few years ago (published in ESPN.com). The conclusion was emphatically that in the college game, QB "game makers" were not really relevant. The study concluded that when it comes to winning national championships in college football, the most important rule was to have a QB who didn't make costly mistakes. Of course, there are exceptions, but that was the general conclusion.
Posted on 9/22/09 at 8:15 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
Its pretty much a nice way for the coaches or media to say the quarterback is not very good and they are going to have to limit what they do on offense to try to hide him because they don't have anyone else better that is ready to play.
so really the question is 'can a team win a national championship with a QB who is not very good' .
So with that I would say no, you need a half way decent QB to win a NC. You can't win it with a god-awefull terrible QB.
Posted on 9/22/09 at 8:17 pm to sml71
quote:
Mack Brown actually did a study of this issue a few years ago (published in ESPN.com). The conclusion was emphatically that in the college game, QB "game makers" were not really relevant. The study concluded that when it comes to winning national championships in college football, the most important rule was to have a QB who didn't make costly mistakes. Of course, there are exceptions, but that was the general conclusion.
Mack Brown, Mack Brown, Mack Brown....Oh yes. That's the coach whose only national championship occured as a result of the super human play of one Vince Young. Right?
Posted on 9/22/09 at 9:44 pm to Tiger Voodoo
quote:
Jesus Christ why do people on here have to be such assholes.
I don't mind them being assholes, but I very much mind them being stupid. And there are only about 4 people in this thread who are not being completely fricking stupid. I thank you, good sir, for being one of them.
Posted on 9/22/09 at 10:09 pm to Hot Carl
Damn, I thought we won the NC in 03 & 07..
Posted on 9/22/09 at 11:19 pm to Ray Ray Rodman
quote:
Damn, I thought we won the NC in 03 & 07..
I give up. Y'all are just too fricking stupid.
Posted on 9/23/09 at 12:46 am to Hot Carl
I think Mauck was a playmaker and Flynn was a manager. That's just how I see it.
Macuk made more deep TD throws than any LSU qb I have ever see and that includes Rohan and JR. I think he "managed" a game very effectively, but he made some big plays when he had to. I wouldn't call him strictly a "manager" because he did some bone headed things that almost cost us a bunch - first offensive play from scrimmage at Ole Miss and letting OU back in the game in the '04 NC when we were a hair away from doing to them what '92 Bama did to Miami. Overall, Mauck was a playa.
Flynn on the other hand relied on a ton of other people to help; not to mention he was taken out for Perrilloux in many situations. Flynn benefited from seriously taking every practice of every year from '03-'07 as if he was the starter and learned a ton backing up Mauck, Randall, and Russell. His smarts and dedication made him a game manager. he also benefited from an ungodly turnover margin thanks to the INTs from Steltz, C Jackson, C Taylor, Zenon, and co. Yes, Flynn was a manager who used his decision making to get things done.
Whereas Mauck had a soild WR corps, he also had an inconsistent, but deep stable of rb's. Even though JV rushed for 1,001 yards in basically 8 games, he was still young and didn't carry the team. Mauck was one of the top 3 or 4 offensive weapons on the team. Flynn, meanwhile, was behind Doucet, Hester, K Williams, Byrd, Dickson, and at times - even Perrilloux. Flynn's job was to not turn the ball over and allow his studs to do good work...but yes, Flynn still had to and did make great plays.
And finally, I will say this...if both were black guys, along with Hester, both would be looked upon as big time play makers. That's society and sports for you.
Macuk made more deep TD throws than any LSU qb I have ever see and that includes Rohan and JR. I think he "managed" a game very effectively, but he made some big plays when he had to. I wouldn't call him strictly a "manager" because he did some bone headed things that almost cost us a bunch - first offensive play from scrimmage at Ole Miss and letting OU back in the game in the '04 NC when we were a hair away from doing to them what '92 Bama did to Miami. Overall, Mauck was a playa.
Flynn on the other hand relied on a ton of other people to help; not to mention he was taken out for Perrilloux in many situations. Flynn benefited from seriously taking every practice of every year from '03-'07 as if he was the starter and learned a ton backing up Mauck, Randall, and Russell. His smarts and dedication made him a game manager. he also benefited from an ungodly turnover margin thanks to the INTs from Steltz, C Jackson, C Taylor, Zenon, and co. Yes, Flynn was a manager who used his decision making to get things done.
Whereas Mauck had a soild WR corps, he also had an inconsistent, but deep stable of rb's. Even though JV rushed for 1,001 yards in basically 8 games, he was still young and didn't carry the team. Mauck was one of the top 3 or 4 offensive weapons on the team. Flynn, meanwhile, was behind Doucet, Hester, K Williams, Byrd, Dickson, and at times - even Perrilloux. Flynn's job was to not turn the ball over and allow his studs to do good work...but yes, Flynn still had to and did make great plays.
And finally, I will say this...if both were black guys, along with Hester, both would be looked upon as big time play makers. That's society and sports for you.
Posted on 9/23/09 at 12:59 am to Hot Carl
I'd say Mauck was a game manager. Lots of short passes, ran the ball a lot, etc.
But Flynn was a playmaker. I mean hell, the guy is a backup quarterback in the NFL, and nobody thought he would even be that good. He was a player and he will always be underappreciated for what he did at LSU. People don't know how good he was.
But Flynn was a playmaker. I mean hell, the guy is a backup quarterback in the NFL, and nobody thought he would even be that good. He was a player and he will always be underappreciated for what he did at LSU. People don't know how good he was.
This post was edited on 9/23/09 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 9/23/09 at 5:21 am to Hot Carl
quote:Interesting observation. On the other hand, since you have refused to give any example of the difference between your definition of "game manager" and "playmaker" beyond Krenzel is a game manager and no one else (apparently in the history of football) is.
I give up. Y'all are just too fricking stupid
Yes, there is a difference between Krenzel and Vince Young, Matt Leinart and Tim Tebow. The problem is, there are MANY differences between Krenzel and the rest of them. Players like Mauck, Leak and Flynn share MANY of those differences but don't share some others. Mauck, like Krenzel, did not have a particularly strong arm. Leak, like Krenzel, was not particularly dangerous with his feet. Flynn, like Krenzel, did not often hurt teams with the deep ball.
Which differences, specifically, are unique to Krenzel and make him a game manager where all the rest are "playmakers"?
Posted on 9/23/09 at 5:25 am to BayouBengals03
quote:
I'd say Mauch was a game manager. Lots of short passes, ran the ball a lot, etc.
Then he was officially one of the worst game managers ever.
Game managers don't make many mistakes. Mauck threw 14 INTs. That's a lot.
And I know he threw 3 INTs in at least 1 big game, and I think he may have done it in 2 big games.
Plus he threw 28 TD passes, a school record.
Mauck was the anti-game manager.
Posted on 9/23/09 at 6:04 am to Hot Carl
matt mauck, matt flynn.
bitch.
bitch.
Posted on 9/23/09 at 7:02 am to Hot Carl
quote:
"Game Managers" Do Not Win Championships
You are so right!
Signed,
Matt Mauck
Matt Flynn
Posted on 9/23/09 at 8:06 am to WreckinRams05
quote:
So what happened with Jamarcus on what was supposedly the most talented team LSU assembled in 06?
Ummm....we won 11 games. Did I miss something? Is that a bad season?
Posted on 9/23/09 at 8:28 am to sml71
quote:
The study concluded that when it comes to winning national championships in college football, the most important rule was to have a QB who didn't make costly mistakes.
ok NOW we can bring up mauck and flynn as an example of guys who don't fit the bill
Posted on 9/23/09 at 8:33 am to Hot Carl
98: don't remember
99: hell no
00: yes
01: no
02: yes
03 (LSU): no
03 (USC): no
04: no
05: hell no
06: maybe
07: no
08: hell no
so in the past 10 years (i'll count LSU as the 03 champ) we've had
2 maybes
2 yeses
6 nos
and if you don't have a non-game manager, you better have a D filled with 1st day NFL talent who is great in college
mauck and flynn were not game managers. they both threw the rock around (mauck still has the friggin single season TD record) and threw a lot of picks. they also had a good # of "wow. that was bad" games when they were cold
by no definition were mauck or flynn game managers
99: hell no
00: yes
01: no
02: yes
03 (LSU): no
03 (USC): no
04: no
05: hell no
06: maybe
07: no
08: hell no
so in the past 10 years (i'll count LSU as the 03 champ) we've had
2 maybes
2 yeses
6 nos
and if you don't have a non-game manager, you better have a D filled with 1st day NFL talent who is great in college
mauck and flynn were not game managers. they both threw the rock around (mauck still has the friggin single season TD record) and threw a lot of picks. they also had a good # of "wow. that was bad" games when they were cold
by no definition were mauck or flynn game managers
Posted on 9/23/09 at 8:34 am to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
Let's just erase the last decade of college football and be naive.
i ran out the last decade. 60% of QBs on title teams were clearly not game managers, and the non-game manager clique may be 80%
if we don't consider leak a manager, i don't think a manager has won a title since 2002. CFB has change a lot since then
Posted on 9/23/09 at 8:36 am to Hot Carl
quote:
I think our fans constantly referring to Mauck and Flynn as just "game managers" does them a disservice.
it is
but what's funny is they think they're complimenting them by calling them game managers
Posted on 9/23/09 at 8:38 am to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
JPW is one of Bama's all time leading passers.
because he played for 4 years
and he was not a manager under shula, but became that under saba, notably in 2008 when they were stout
Posted on 9/23/09 at 8:42 am to King Joey
quote:
Who, in your opinion, is an example of a "game manager" in today's game
on major teams they aren't too common b/c CFB has changed to an offense-led game
barkley for USC is a game manager for sure
you can make an argument for bama's QB, but the past 2 weeks he's been lighting it up passing
Page 7 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News