My Account
Sign up, and you can customize which countdowns you see.
Sign up
Report problem with this ad
Start a related thread
Start a related poll
Reply via Boardmail
Dec 18, 2024
1:35
:29
pm
tacallaway
All-American
This. We failed Slovis, not the other way around.
Start a related thread
Start a related poll
Reply via Boardmail
Report problem with this ad
tacallaway
Bio page
tacallaway
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Last login
Dec 18, 2024
Total posts
2,576 (0 FO)
Report problem with this ad
Messages
Author
Time
I love CB that will argue over the craziest things. It is not slander to say that Slovis was not good for BYU.
kimdaddy35
Former Fly Half
1:23pm
But BYU would have been better with a healthy Slovis than newbie JR in the final
mudpupper
1:25pm
Not sure about that at all
2FarGone
1:31pm
Long term yes. But for that year, Slovis was easily the better option
mudpupper
1:37pm
Slovis did take over during a time of pathetic OLine play
donnerstag
1:29pm
This. We failed Slovis, not the other way around.
tacallaway
1:35pm
I am not trying to make Slovis a scapegoat. I know our O-Line was crap. But even
kimdaddy35
1:38pm
It’s much more likely both were true. It was a ba offensive line and Slovis was a bad QB
TCuz
1:38pm
In retrospect, it was a mistake for both BYU and Slovis
donnerstag
1:49pm
For being a senior, I was surprised at some of his bad habits
Huge Manatee
1:34pm
For how highly touted he was ... I was surprised how inaccurate he was.
AsianCoug
1:51pm
Yes, I think a big part of that was his footwork
Huge Manatee
2:04pm
He was putrid in ARod's system.
BlueFever
1:37pm
Someone not afraid to say the truth.
kimdaddy35
1:38pm
Interesting how a player can look both bad and good in a “system” — almost as though there isn’t a “system” but rather
Zach Morris
1:43pm
Slovis is almost strictly a pocket passer; Retzlaff is almost the opposite.
BlueFever
1:47pm
It’s not a “system” but it is skillset oriented. Slovis just wasn’t very good regardless of the “system”. It’s similar
Zach Morris
2:36pm
A coach has to have some kind of system or there's no point in having a coach.
BlueFever
3:04pm
If 122 is putrid is 139 bad?
Charles Darwin
1:48pm
No it is 55th out of 119 qualifiers. A 122 rating would be 103rd.
kimdaddy35
2:00pm
Just looking for cutoffs in these categories
Charles Darwin
2:06pm
A rating isn't like yards where it is a 14% increase in production.
kimdaddy35
2:17pm
The rating is explicitly based on production. The NFL uses a different one than
Charles Darwin
2:52pm
Did 81% mean GMs rating? It’s not a percentage.
Charles Darwin
3:26pm
Report problem with this ad
Posting on CougarBoard
In order to post, you will need to either
sign up
or
log in
.
Report problem with this ad