(11-04-2017 05:52 PM)Reggie Favre Wrote:  its very simple. we would have won the kentucky game with Griggs for 4 (or 3) quarters. i dont think anyone can reasonably dispute that. would you? in short, Griggs played THAT much better than Keon, so we woulda won had he started.

i don't think we would have beaten UNT had Keon played all 4 quarters. in short, Keon has not demonstrated that he can play THAT much better than Griggs. therefore, I think we would have lost that game regardless. do you disagree? tell me if you think we would have beaten UNT with Keon starting that game. whats your honest opinion?

i also think we would have beaten UAB with Griggs at QB for 4 quarters (i can only assume he was healthy enough to play...or they wouldn't have played him at all that game). certainly, Keon didn't do anything outstanding other than not miss a wide open Ito on a trick play, the first play of the game. my opinion, from what i have witnessed all year, is that Griggs is the better QB. nothing more and nothing less. outside of the fact that it looks like Hop may be playing favorites - and thats what pisses me off. play the best QB. we could be 7-1 going into a game against a wounded, beat-up, bad Tenn team, had Griggs started against Kentucky and UAB. thats just my opinion.

Everyone may agree about Kentucky, but a lot has happened since then. Continuing to pound a drum and draw conclusions based upon one half of football 7 games ago is questionable to say the least. A lot’s happened since then. Griggs has gotten hurt and both QBs have had their ups and downs. There’s an awful lot of conjecture in your post above. What did Griggs do when he was in vs. UAB that leads you to think starting HIM would have been an automatic W?

(11-04-2017 06:35 PM)HarborPointe Wrote:  

(11-04-2017 05:52 PM)Reggie Favre Wrote:  its very simple. we would have won the kentucky game with Griggs for 4 (or 3) quarters. i dont think anyone can reasonably dispute that. would you? in short, Griggs played THAT much better than Keon, so we woulda won had he started.

i don't think we would have beaten UNT had Keon played all 4 quarters. in short, Keon has not demonstrated that he can play THAT much better than Griggs. therefore, I think we would have lost that game regardless. do you disagree? tell me if you think we would have beaten UNT with Keon starting that game. whats your honest opinion?

i also think we would have beaten UAB with Griggs at QB for 4 quarters (i can only assume he was healthy enough to play...or they wouldn't have played him at all that game). certainly, Keon didn't do anything outstanding other than not miss a wide open Ito on a trick play, the first play of the game. my opinion, from what i have witnessed all year, is that Griggs is the better QB. nothing more and nothing less. outside of the fact that it looks like Hop may be playing favorites - and thats what pisses me off. play the best QB. we could be 7-1 going into a game against a wounded, beat-up, bad Tenn team, had Griggs started against Kentucky and UAB. thats just my opinion.

Everyone may agree about Kentucky, but a lot has happened since then. Continuing to pound a drum and draw conclusions based upon one half of football 7 games ago is questionable to say the least. A lot’s happened since then. Griggs has gotten hurt and both QBs have had their ups and downs. There’s an awful lot of conjecture in your post above. What did Griggs do when he was in vs. UAB that leads you to think starting HIM would have been an automatic W?

you didnt answer my questions, but ill answer yours.

its not what he did when he was put in the game in the 4th quarter, down two scores, deep in his own territory. its what he didn't have the chance to do, in the 1st quarter bc he didn't start. try to keep up.

calling HarborPointe