re: Lowell Narcisse is starting to shine..

quote:

---

You still never answered my question. Who else, other than Bama, has done it?

---

Why would I answer a question that has nothing to do with the discussion? The statement was you can't win without a mobile QB anymore. That statement has been proven wrong, and by the person who originally stated it no less.

ETA: This is also ignoring the fact that the 2017 SEC Champs, and national runner ups, ad a QB who rushed for 79 yards. The 2017 SEC West champs had a QB who rushed for 153.

This notion that you can't win without a mobile QB is just plain false.

quote:

---

Do you have anything to prove otherwise

---

Well, if you've watched even a smidgeon of video from their HS days, it's pretty obvious. But hey, you believe whatever you want. We'll just have to agree to disagree. May the best man win.

I can recall Jordan Jefferson.... I know.

I also recall Mett.... I'll take the arm over the legs any day.

And we don't need 2 NFL caliber receivers, just some creativity on offense and timing.

quote:

---

Lord Narcisse

---

What is your name for Brennan? Or does only certain QBs get nicknamed?

quote:

---

You have to love the fans who get personally attached to one player over another.

---

For the most part it appears to be a type QB rather than a particular person at QB. There is a part of the fan base that is against “dual treat” QBs. They label all of them as inaccurate, incapable of reading defenses and unable to progress through the route tree. That, despite overwhelming evidence in college football to the contrary. Over the last decade or more the Heisman Trophy has been Home to many more dual threat QB than pocket passers. Yet this wing of the fan base don’t want them.

There is no alternative group of LSU fans who are against LSU having a “pocket passer” at QB. There are some who argue that a dual threat causes a defense more problems. But none I have come across who would state they don’t want a pocket passer as LSU’s QB? Or unlike the first group, they don’t want LSU to recruit pocket passers.

quote:

---

For the most part it appears to be a type QB rather than a particular person at QB. There is a part of the fan base that is against “dual treat” QBs. They label all of them as inaccurate, incapable of reading defenses and unable to progress through the route tree. That, despite overwhelming evidence in college football to the contrary. Over the last decade or more the Heisman Trophy has been Home to many more dual threat QB than pocket passers. Yet this wing of the fan base don’t want them.

There is no alternative group of LSU fans who are against LSU having a “pocket passer” at QB. There are some who argue that a dual threat causes a defense more problems. But none I have come across who would state they don’t want a pocket passer as LSU’s QB? Or unlike the first group, they don’t want LSU to recruit pocket passers.

---

So you honestly believe this is just a one sided argument and that there is only hate for dual threat QBs?

quote:

---

What is your name for Brennan?

---

Beanpole Brennan

It’s amazing how our fans never forget how the spring works

Lol good job at moving the goals posts there! Stidham is definitely mobile in the pocket. Proved it against Bama. Did either win a natty? Nobody remembers who came in second.

Oh I forgot to say that Stidham is a Dual Threat! Lmao!

Here's a fun fact:

LSU has had similar QB rushing numbers to Auburn's Jarrett Stidham (153 yards) and Jake Fromm (79 yards) in 3 of the last 4 seasons. LSU had more QB rushing yards than Stidham in 2 of the seasons (2014 & 2015) and more rushing yards than Fromm in all 3 of those seasons (2014, 2015 & 2017).

If Stidham is considered a dual threat, then LSU has had a "dual threat" under center in each of the last 4 seasons.