QB Competition 2018

[B1GTide]

We totally disagree here... the numbers also don't support it. As I've pointed out earlier in the thread, the "1992 Jay Barker" wouldn't have been called "an above average QB" because he didn't lose a game that year.

What would the numbers have looked like for any other "below average" QB? I mean, pick a guy like Etling. Put him in your offense in any of those games and Alabama loses them all. With Jalen, you only lost 2. Sometimes you have to tip the cap to the other team for doing its job.

 

[RollTide_HTTR]

I would say that he is an above average college QB against tough competition. He has played a lot of games against tough competition and only lost 2 of them. Not many below average QBs could do that - if any. So he is good, but not very good, against tough competition - he is not an AJ type QB - and it is fair that Alabama fans worry that you might need that kind of QB to win every once in a while.

The question - will a "good" Jalen be enough against Clemson? I think that it will.

I think the question is more "Will the rest of the team play well enough that Jalen doesn't need to win the game passing and on 3rd downs?" I think this game will be won by whoever has the most success running the ball unless Tua does play. Basically, whoever puts their QB in the best situation most consistently wins. I don't think this game will come down to JH vs Bryant unless Jalen has a realllllly bad game.

 

[BamaInBham]

The problem with comparing the situation with GMac and AJ in 2010 is that AJ, as a redshirt freshman, didn't offer a different skill set in the passing game/game management department that was employed at that time. In other words, they were the same kind of qb.

Sure, in hindsight, we see that AJ was a more talented passer, but in 2010, it probably wasn't that obvious.

The sitation now between Jalen and Tua is totally different. JH is a running back playing qb. A slightly better Nick Marshall. Tua, on the other hand, is a totally different skill set. He's not a bad runner on a RPO, but his skill set is basically a drop back, pocket passer.

The thing that makes sense about allowing Tua to play right now is that the type of offense we run actually fits Tua better than Jalen. Tua can run the RPO aspect, but he also can drop back in the pocket, go thru progressions of more than one read and then he can deliver the football on time and accurately.

I'm not saying Tua ought to start over Jalen against Clemson, but I'm just pointing out this isn't like a Gmac/AJ situation where both basically have the same skill set. Jalen and Tua are just two different types of Qbs.

I wasn't comparing the GM/AJ situation with Jalen/Tua, I was answering his charge that Saban has a "blind spot" regarding QBs, when in reality the opposite is true. It had nothing to do with Jalen/Tua other than that we are justified in trusting CNS.

Btw, I agree with almost everything you said. And I think Tua is underrated as a runner. But in the end we have no choice but to trust the fallible CNS. Rather than having a blind spot, my contention is that history has proven that he is very much in tune with what is going on. Having said that, it can be an extremely delicate matter and no one gets it right every time.

 

[CrimsonForce]

You're missing my point though... Clemson's offense WILL dictate to some degree how their defense plans for this game. For instance, if you have a quick strike, explosive offense, then you can afford to take more chances on defense (i.e. blitz more). However, if you lack that ability, then you normally are more conservative on defense. It's not just about stopping the other team, it's about putting yourself in a position to score points yourself. I fully expect Clemson to be more conservative - that probably means less man-to-man and less blitzing (with their front being better than AU, they may not have to anyway). I'd also expect they're going to put a spy on Hurts on 3rd downs.

I think you're overthinking this. I'll be shocked if Clemson doesn't crowd the LOS and try to make Jalen beat them by consistently completing passes. Guess we disagree on that so we'll have to see how it unfolds on Jan 1st..

 

[JustNeedMe81]

I heard we sent 9 plays to the SEC office after the game about the Barn muggings on Calvin and others so they would not give up the big play but only 1 or 2 were called. If the refs call it fairly I will love for Clemson to imitate that strategy and you can bet Saban will tell the refs to look for it during pre-game.

Heard the same. But the difference is We'll have PAC Officials.... I think they will watch for that closely.

 

[BamaMoon]

I would say that he is an above average college QB against tough competition. He has played a lot of games against tough competition and only lost 2 of them. Not many below average QBs could do that - if any. So he is good, but not very good, against tough competition - he is not an AJ type QB - and it is fair that Alabama fans worry that you might need that kind of QB to win every once in a while.

The question - will a "good" Jalen be enough against Clemson? I think that it will.

It's not just the 2 he's lost but it's the "trends" in the other games and how we kinda "ignored" those trends as long as we were winning.

Anyway you look at it, he hasn't had a good game passing the ball against the tougher competition. MSU, last year is the exception, but against the tougher defenses our offense just looks average. Better than most teams in the country? Probably, but the "worry" is if the Bama offense that played against Washington and Clemson from last year and MSU, LSU and Auburn this year shows up against Clemson, Georgia or OU, we likely don't win those games.

 

[BamaInBham]

That is easy to say from Spurrier s point of view, jealousy, he had same talent difference in his hay day at UF and did less. The key point he skips in that silly statement, is in many past years others had all the blue chips and did no better. having a ton of talent is great, but no sure fire assurance of wins and titles. Imagine trying to get 85 KIDS all playing as a team every week when everyone gives that game the attention of a national title. Talent alone does not win games. Sorry but Spurrier had gobs more talent in SEC than anyone back in his day and he won 1 title, and never went undefeated not one time. So forgive me if I do not take his account of Saban and his accomplishments to heart. On any given Saturday at least half of the SEC can beat Bama, even with talent levels what they are. College is the best for upsets, why I love it. This is not the pros, college kids are not as reliable week to week. remember back when you were 18-22 and how you emotions would ebb and flow, not the same as an adults. School issues,grades, girls, parties. yeah talent alone should guarantee 12 wins a year according to spurrier HA

Great post. When Spurrier made that statement it was dripping with green.

Yes, there have been numerous teams that had enough talent on their starting 22 to win against Saban's Bama or any top team, especially when you consider the importance of the QB position. Bama's record against top teams demonstrates that Saban is much more than a "collector of talent".

Spurrier 11 years, Saban 10 years (not counting their first year).
Ranked: SS: 43-24, NS: 52-14
Top 10: SS: 17-15, NS: 25-9
Top 5: SS: 10-10, NS: 13-7
#1: SS: 1-3, NS: 5-1
​

 

[BamaMoon]

I think the question is more "Will the rest of the team play well enough that Jalen doesn't need to win the game passing and on 3rd downs?" I think this game will be won by whoever has the most success running the ball unless Tua does play. Basically, whoever puts their QB in the best situation most consistently wins. I don't think this game will come down to JH vs Bryant unless Jalen has a realllllly bad game.

The big unknown about how well the team will play around Jalen OR how well Jalen will play around the team is what is the state of attitudes that exists in the locker room.

We've heard it is an issue and we'll just have to wait and read the tea leaves during practice and CNS press time and then see what it looks like during the game.

 

[B1GTide]

It's not just the 2 he's lost but it's the "trends" in the other games and how we kinda "ignored" those trends as long as we were winning.

Anyway you look at it, he hasn't had a good game passing the ball against the tougher competition. MSU, last year is the exception, but against the tougher defenses our offense just looks average. Better than most teams in the country? Probably, but the "worry" is if the Bama offense that played against Washington and Clemson from last year and MSU, LSU and Auburn this year shows up against Clemson, Georgia or OU, we likely don't win those games.

The trend started early last year and has been consistent against every solid defense that you have played with Jalen at QB. My point, which I am making poorly, is that Alabama (as a team) is good enough to win with Jalen playing like this against pretty much anybody.

If Alabama plays well and Jalen plays to his demonstrated abilities (even those demonstrated against the tougher defenses), you will win. If Alabama plays poorly, you will need more than Jalen. So, as a few have said, what you need from Jalen depends heavily on how well those around him play (and on the plays called).

 

[TiderJack]

I keep having deja vu over and over.

 

[B1GTide]

I keep having deja vu over and over.

This is life this time of the year.

 

[BamaMoon]

I keep having deja vu over and over.

At least your hindsight is 50/50!

 

[UAH]

I said Hurts is slightly better than Nick Marshall. Did you look at the stats? He's slightly better. Marshall played DB before he played QB. The fact he was a redshirt sr and JH is a true soph. means nothing, especially since Jalen has played QB his whole college career. Jalen is "supposed" to be the qb that came to Bama to learn to be a pocket passer. At least people admitted Marshall was really a DB turned QB who was decent.
Oh, and can you drop the complaint that every time someone critiques Jalen as a passer that they are "biased?" What is your claim founded on?

The justification that JH is 25-2 and is above question or possible criticism is off the mark to me as well. Bama had one of the greatest defenses ever in 2016 with 16(?) defensive touchdowns and a number of outstanding punt returns. Add to that a near defensive touchdown against Clemson if not for a game saving tackle. As many people have said it is how the offense performs against tough competition particularly without an all NFL defense to back it up. Being such an outstanding athlete I continue believe JH can be much more effective with the right offensive scheme to fit his talent.

 

[gtgilbert]

Marshall as a 5th year senior had a lower passing rating than Hurts as a true sophomore. I think that about sums it up.

Secondly, to a point made by another poster, having better passing abilities and being a better passer are two different things. Sam Darnold was a turnover machine and blew his team's chances of a title. He is a great talent, but he screwed up, and those screw up makes their way into the stats. Same with Rosen, for instance he completely blew the Arizona game. That counts, and there is I think the blind spot some posters here have. It's not about what you can do, it's about what you actually do. If Hurts had a 0/3 game and Alabama lost, everyone here would be quick to say he's not a real quarterback. Rosen does that and he's still a real quarterback right?

The simple fact of the matter is Hurts is a good college quarterback, period. The fact that some people here won't give him that simple respect is both mind boggling and obviously born of some deep seeded bias. He has issues, very real, very important, potentially destructive issues. But that doesn't make him unable to play the position and if you can't start with admitting some basic truths about the abilities he does have, you're not going to have a very productive or objective discussion.

QBR is likely the worst possible statistic to use to discuss what the issue is with Jalen.

Why?

It does absolutely nothing to take into account a called pass play where the QB takes off after a single read or does not progress through his reads. In fact, it would reward that behavior. If Jalen makes one read and takes off, even though the second receiver is WIDE OPEN just as soon as Jalen bolts, it has no impact on his QBR. In fact, a QB taking a loss on a sack is more beneficial to a high QBR rating than getting outside the pocket and throwing the ball away. Now, which would be a better football play? The play against AU where he ran out of bounds instead of throwing the ball away - that HELPED his QBR. Was that a good play?

Even you have admitted there are components of Jalens game that have not developed as well as they need to. Quote "He has issues, very real, very important, potentially destructive issues." No one is saying he doesn't have some very good skills. The challenge is that right now, the issues, as you mentioned, are very visible, and very, very easily exploited by above average defenses. They can essentially bait him into a bad play by playing press coverage on ridley, pushing hard on the right side of our OL so jalen won't get past his first read, and having the rest of the DL soft rush to contain with an LB shadow. I for one, hope like mad he can get the issues fixed. He's an amazing athlete, and by all accounts an outstanding representative of the university and a smart, hard worker. That said, fi for whatever reason he can't/won't/doesn't get the issues fixed, he'll be a decent QB with a ceiling that will prevent the team from reaching it's maximum potential and overall goals.

As others have said, this thing with accusations of bias is getting tiresome. You admittedly know the issues are there just like everyone else. There's really nothing more to it than that.

 

[BamaInBham]

I see this differently. See, Spurrier is an offensive guy while Saban is a defensive guy. They both want balance, but they each want to win in a different way. Saban wants to take as few risks as possible and win on the strength of his defense. Spurrier wants to take chances on offense and needs his defense to be good enough to bail them out, but not good enough to win the games, because he expects his offense to win the games for him. The results with respect "patience" for players is pretty predictable:

Saban is very patient with offensive players as long as they do not turn the ball over, but he lacks patience for defensive players who cannot play consistently. No defensive player is guaranteed a starting spot from week to week. They have to perform consistently to see the field on defense. He expects the defense to stop the other team from scoring every time (though he understands that this is not possible). He does not place the same expectations on the offense.

Spurrier - well, flip it around. If a QB plays poorly in a game, he gets yanked - even if his replacement is not proven. Spurrier expected his offense to score on every possession, and he demanded the same kind of play from his offensive players that Saban expects from his defensive players, with similar consequences for inconsistent play.

So each is patient and impatient in the same way - they just apply those characteristics to opposite sides of the ball. Both could have improved with an equal demand for consistent performance from the other side of the ball.

I agree with several points you made, but I think you are overlooking an important difference between offense and defense. On defense, with only a couple of exceptions players can be and are subbed throughout most games. On offense the OL and QB for different reasons are almost never substituted for. And Spurrier's subbing of his QBs at times was ludicrous. And IMO, this philosophy hurt his program.

 

[BamaInBham]

Marshall as a 5th year senior had a lower passing rating than Hurts as a true sophomore. I think that about sums it up.

Secondly, to a point made by another poster, having better passing abilities and being a better passer are two different things. Sam Darnold was a turnover machine and blew his team's chances of a title. He is a great talent, but he screwed up, and those screw up makes their way into the stats. Same with Rosen, for instance he completely blew the Arizona game. That counts, and there is I think the blind spot some posters here have. It's not about what you can do, it's about what you actually do. If Hurts had a 0/3 game and Alabama lost, everyone here would be quick to say he's not a real quarterback. Rosen does that and he's still a real quarterback right?

The simple fact of the matter is Hurts is a good college quarterback, period. The fact that some people here won't give him that simple respect is both mind boggling and obviously born of some deep seeded bias. He has issues, very real, very important, potentially destructive issues. But that doesn't make him unable to play the position and if you can't start with admitting some basic truths about the abilities he does have, you're not going to have a very productive or objective discussion.

You are good at accumulating numbers and looking at them, but you seem to have difficulty incorporating nuance into your reasoning. I agree that Jalen is a good college QB, but not many agree that he is a good college passer. Stats can be misleading. It's without question to anyone who watches games, even us "watch the ball" types, that Jalen lacks patience in the pocket, pocket presence, quick decision capability and relatedly often does not pull the trigger on time. Those are serious drawbacks when facing defenses with a pulse which is why his numbers drop so precipitously when facing them.

Your judging of people's motives, "obviously born of some deep seeded bias", is wrong and completely out of line. You have no clue about my motives or anyone else's. Hate to be so blunt, but you've made this charge several times in the past and I don't remember anyone else saying anything. You are simply wrong.

Edit: I obviously had not read all of the posts in the thread when I commented that no one had responded to your charges of bias. I'll just add that you've shown that you are better than that.

 

[BAMARICH]

I think you're overthinking this. I'll be shocked if Clemson doesn't crowd the LOS and try to make Jalen beat them by consistently completing passes. Guess we disagree on that so we'll have to see how it unfolds on Jan 1st..

When I was on a HS coaching staff years ago, we put a game plan into place with several variables in mind. One top priority was "don't take chances when you don't have to take chances to win a game". Crowding the line and playing man in the secondary, in my opinion, is a chance Clemson doesn't have to take because of their DL talent. I'd think they look at us and say "until you show us you are committed to the run and hurt us there, we're going to be content to see if you can work your way down the field and see how many 3rd downs you can convert" (3rd down conversion being an Achilles Heel of our's). If we show we can do this consistently on a couple of drives, then I'll agree they'll make this adjustment. No need, however, to start out this way - especially when your offense isn't as explosive as last year's.

 

[BAMARICH]

The trend started early last year and has been consistent against every solid defense that you have played with Jalen at QB. My point, which I am making poorly, is that Alabama (as a team) is good enough to win with Jalen playing like this against pretty much anybody.

Last year... yes. This year... no. Clemson and Oklahoma, IMO, can't be beaten without solid QB play (as a passer).

 

[TiderJack]

Last year... yes. This year... no. Clemson and Oklahoma, IMO, can't be beaten without solid QB play (as a passer).

Agreed and solid is all we need from the position. We don't need great with our other weapons.

 

[B1GTide]

Last year... yes. This year... no. Clemson and Oklahoma, IMO, can't be beaten without solid QB play (as a passer).

Those teams have both lost to teams that could not beat Alabama even with Jalen playing worse than he did against Auburn. I guess that, while I see the warts, I remain very positive.