Poll: What is more important to you? Passing Yards or winning?

[RUInsanityToo]

no you know why, you're just being retarded here and creating more strife on the board

we are very one dimensional, playing good teams will be expose this. We've played on solid team all year (thought we looke very good for the most part fyi)

We've already played good /top ranked teams (Wisconsin/Michigan) and lost with Wimsatt throwing 35x and 21x. Could make the argument that the Wisconsin game was winnable & within reach even with our offense as is. If we're being honest....throwing for more than 39 yards on 12 attempts against Indiana will have no impact for the rest of the schedule. Wins against OSU and PSU will be very difficult this year regardless of passing game. A win against Iowa is within reach even with the current passing game. A win against Maryland will likely come down to on how the Defense fares against their passing game and can produce turnovers.

All the threads and posts about GW and balanced Offense seem like piling on to me from posters who were already down on the guy coming into the season. The passing game has limitations beyond GW with recievers who have troube separating and fairly invisible tight ends. Maybe its just me, but I see a good skillset in GW and with reinforcements at recieving skill positions - he can continue to advance in coming years.

 

[Dpgru]

One I don't care if an apposing player at any position stinks. Why do you bring that up?
Please improve you reading comprehension as I've raved about his big running day yesterday. Yes you are making things up. You keep trying to say he is a good passers as do others. This is his 3rd season. Injuries happen, getting benched happens but this was a guy that was supposed to be a great, automatic winner. Stop with dropped passes it happens to every QB. The review of his passes is stupid because it doesn't account for time, distance or situation. Making a great 9 yard throw is meaningless if it 3rd and 20 and a minute to go. Stop with the excuses. He had a dynamite game yesterday. Stop defending what he didn't do and applaud what he did great

reading comprehension? When did I mention an opposing player stinking? I only referenced opposing qb’s who would run against us and kill us were praised. You talk distance and situation. I pointed out when we needed a good pass and kept the TD drive alive. He did not need to pass on Saturday. We won running the ball. I simply said his stats were not reflective of his passes. You make it sound as if his Saturday performance is what he always does. It is not. Clearly if a game requires more passing saturdays stats won’t get it done. Why do you assume that Saturday’s stats are all he is capable of. What is wrong with a QBs who does what it takes to win.

 

[RUtix4me]

no you know why, you're just being retarded here and creating more strife on the board

we are very one dimensional, playing good teams will be expose this. We've played on solid team all year (thought we looke very good for the most part fyi)

No, I am proving a point, winning is what matters, each game plan is different.

Retarded?, i guess Is know the level of discussion this will be.

why do we need five separate threads on passing? We won the game!

 

[Bagarocks]

We've already played good /top ranked teams (Wisconsin/Michigan) and lost with Wimsatt throwing 35x and 21x. Could make the argument that the Wisconsin game was winnable & within reach even with our offense as is. If we're being honest....throwing for more than 39 yards on 12 attempts against Indiana will have no impact for the rest of the schedule. Wins against OSU and PSU will be very difficult this year regardless of passing game. A win against Iowa is within reach even with the current passing game. A win against Maryland will likely come down to on how the Defense fares against their passing game and can produce turnovers.

All the threads and posts about GW and balanced Offense seem like piling on to me from posters who were already down on the guy coming into the season. The passing game has limitations beyond GW with recievers who have troube separating and fairly invisible tight ends. Maybe its just me, but I see a good skillset in GW and with reinforcements at recieving skill positions - he can continue to advance in coming years.

this is called hitting the nail on the head

 

[RUforJERSEY]

This is as stupid as the guy on the RT who spent part of the game complaining that Wimsatt got the touchdowns instead of Monangai.

 

[newell138]

Of course winning , but if we want to beat a fairly above average team, we need passing along with the run
The top three teams in league stuff our running, so we need more

I'll take a win even if we had negative passing yards anyday

 

[RUTGERS95]

No, I am proving a point, winning is what matters, each game plan is different.

Retarded?, i guess Is know the level of discussion this will be.

why do we need five separate threads on passing? We won the game!

no you are failing to see the stupidity of the poll as it misses by a wide margin

hell, now you've got guys saying we lost throwing 20x etc without taking into account the quality, timing, etc of the throws

NOTHING is a vacuum here. Wisc is an avg team and we're one dimensional. Until we have an effective passing game, we cannot be a good team

 

[wheezer]

I'll take a win even if we had negative passing yards anyday

Understood
But if you can't pass well in a win against the lesser, it will be very hard to beat the three or four best teams in league, because the run will be less reliable

 

[RUTGERS95]

Understood
But if you can't pass well in a win against the lesser, it will be very hard to beat the three or four best teams in league, because the run will be less reliable

not even the three or four as Gav was 45% with 35 attempts against wisconsin. Wisconsin, surprisingly, didn't put too much pressure on him either. With a better passing game, we should win that game.

no one is saying they don't want the win but the we're putting a lot, a LOT of lipstick on a pig here

 

[Yeah Baby]

The Nancies are pissed because we keep winning. They predicted a 2-3 win season and instead of being happy they are doubling down on their unhappiness right in front of our very eyes.

I’m happy as a pig in ****! Put your lipstick on that lol.

 

[NickRU714]

This is as stupid as the guy on the RT who spent part of the game complaining that Wimsatt got the touchdowns instead of Monangai.

Don't have premium but I'm calling fake news on that.
That didn't happen. No way.
Did someone really complain about who got the rushing TDs?

Was it a "college fantasy football" thing?
Is it some "but we need the Big Ten TD leader" thing?

 

[newwavedave1]

I can't believe anybody voted for something other than winning.

 

[RUTGERS95]

Don't have premium but I'm calling fake news on that.
That didn't happen. No way.
Did someone really complain about who got the rushing TDs?

Was it a "college fantasy football" thing?
Is it some "but we need the Big Ten TD leader" thing?

yes it did

 

[RUTGERS95]

The Nancies are pissed because we keep winning. They predicted a 2-3 win season and instead of being happy they are doubling down on their unhappiness right in front of our very eyes.

I’m happy as a pig in ****! Put your lipstick on that lol.

lol ignorance is truly bliss

 

[NickRU714]

I can't believe anybody voted for something other than winning.

There is an argument when evaluating short term results v. long term process.
Getting a short term result (win) using a bad process doesn't set you up for long term success.

Quick trip back to 2017. We beat Purdue 14-12.
There was similar rejoicing "Stop complaining. A big ten win is a big ten win."
There was also push back " Yes it's great we win. But this isn't sustainable. Can't expect to win with Gio going 9/18 for 87 yards. Scoring 14 pts a game isn't a winning strategy."

There are "good losses" (good process but bad result) and "bad wins" (bad process but good result).

If we win a game 7 - 6 with zero offense (rushing and passing get shut down) but score on a pick 6 - that's not a great process to keep winning.
It would make perfect sense for people to say "We got lucky and need to improve the offense."

If we won a game with 25 yards rushing a LOT of people would say "we need to rush more to balance out the offense. need to establish the run better. can't expect to win without a running game."
It seems only when people say we need to improve passing that other people flip out and circle the wagons.

 

[Yeah Baby]

lol ignorance is truly bliss

Seems backwards in this case but good comeback. Hope you find happiness when we win our bowl game!

 

[Yeah Baby]

There is an argument when evaluating short term results v. long term process.
Getting a short term result (win) using a bad process doesn't set you up for long term success.

Quick trip back to 2017. We beat Purdue 14-12.
There was similar rejoicing "Stop complaining. A big ten win is a big ten win."
There was also push back " Yes it's great we win. But this isn't sustainable. Can't expect to win with Gio going 9/18 for 87 yards. Scoring 14 pts a game isn't a winning strategy."

There are "good losses" (good process but bad result) and "bad wins" (bad process but good result).

If we win a game 7 - 6 with zero offense (rushing and passing get shut down) but score on a pick 6 - that's not a great process to keep winning.
It would make perfect sense for people to say "We got lucky and need to improve the offense."

If we won a game with 25 yards rushing a LOT of people would say "we need to rush more to balance out the offense. need to establish the run better. can't expect to win without a running game."
It seems only when people say we need to improve passing that other people flip out and circle the wagons.

Part of the long term process is getting to a bowl game. Agree we want to be more balanced if we want to be a Top 15 team. We’re climbing now and the example you give above is really not a good one because we were nowhere near the team we are today.

 

[ru66]

Was this a poll to expose dumb posters ? It worked.

 

[NickRU714]

Part of the long term process is getting to a bowl game. Agree we want to be more balanced if we want to be a Top 15 team. We’re climbing now and the example you give above is really not a good one because we were nowhere near the team we are today.

100% agree. And we made a bowl. We reached that level.
Maybe it's me, but I'm kind of checked out on results for the year now.
We could lose out and this year is still a success because we are a competent team now.
Won the games we were supposed to win - which is an improvement.
To me, more "process than results" now that we won 6.

Personally, I'd prefer we use the rest of the year to start planning for next year - give Wimsatt chances to grow as a passer.
Similar to "we have 7 losses and need to start planning for next year" in prior seasons.
Start planning for "competitive with the top of the Big Ten" for next year as a goal.
Start thinking "Top 15ish" (not sure that's reasonable but why not?)

If I was the AD, I would tell HC Schiano: "Mission accomplished for this year. If you want to start working and laying the groundwork for next year even if it tanks the rest of the season - fine with me and won't reflect badly on you."
Maybe tell Wimsatt - take some more chances. Get the kinks out this year (throw an INT or two) and be ready to rock it next year. If you throw a couple INT against OSU or PSU trying to make a play - not the end of the world.

 

[Bagarocks]

Wimsatt Stats show he has 181 pass attempts through 8 games
passes/game avg 23
35 against Wisc.
29 against North
28 against Mich st
21 against Temple
21 against Mich

3 games were less than 20 passes per game ALL WINS!
So Im wondering how many Passes per game do we need? we had over 20 passes in each of our 2 losses,
Should we have thrown over 30 per game in our losses?

Michigan JJ McCarthy has 169 pass attempts in 8 games Team Total is 196 pass attempts.
Michigan has 15 more Pass attempts than Rutgers! Yet we dont pass enough.
Does Michigan meet the standard of our board posters for pass attempts per game or is their run to pass ration out of whack also?
We are talking 15 pass attempt's difference which amounts to 1.8 more passes per game.

 

[Dpgru]

There is an argument when evaluating short term results v. long term process.
Getting a short term result (win) using a bad process doesn't set you up for long term success.

Quick trip back to 2017. We beat Purdue 14-12.
There was similar rejoicing "Stop complaining. A big ten win is a big ten win."
There was also push back " Yes it's great we win. But this isn't sustainable. Can't expect to win with Gio going 9/18 for 87 yards. Scoring 14 pts a game isn't a winning strategy."

There are "good losses" (good process but bad result) and "bad wins" (bad process but good result).

If we win a game 7 - 6 with zero offense (rushing and passing get shut down) but score on a pick 6 - that's not a great process to keep winning.
It would make perfect sense for people to say "We got lucky and need to improve the offense."

If we won a game with 25 yards rushing a LOT of people would say "we need to rush more to balance out the offense. need to establish the run better. can't expect to win without a running game."
It seems only when people say we need to improve passing that other people flip out and circle the wagons.

Convince me please how executing a game plan which is run heavy, controls time of possession and wins 31-14 is a bad process with a good result.

 

[yesrutgers01]

no you know why, you're just being retarded here and creating more strife on the board

we are very one dimensional, playing good teams will be expose this. We've played on solid team all year (thought we looke very good for the most part fyi)

Well- we did throw for 180 and ran for 77 against Michigan. And threw for 211 and ran for 64 against Wisc...

I think this proves your point. right? :YesNo

 

[RUBlackout7]

The only people complaining about passing yards after Saturdays game are people with a football IQ of 0.

I can see if we were struggling running the ball and lost, but this is just people who like to complain.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Wimsatt Stats show he has 181 pass attempts through 8 games
passes/game avg 23
35 against Wisc.
29 against North
28 against Mich st
21 against Temple
21 against Mich

3 games were less than 20 passes per game ALL WINS!
So Im wondering how many Passes per game do we need? we had over 20 passes in each of our 2 losses,
Should we have thrown over 30 per game in our losses?

Michigan JJ McCarthy has 169 pass attempts in 8 games Team Total is 196 pass attempts.
Michigan has 15 more Pass attempts than Rutgers! Yet we dont pass enough.
Does Michigan meet the standard of our board posters for pass attempts per game or is their run to pass ration out of whack also?
We are talking 15 pass attempt's difference which amounts to 1.8 more passes per game.

Eh - that’s kind of deceiving. Our strategy has mostly been to keep the ball on the ground and eat clock when we’re winning. When you play from behind, the clock is not on your side and so you need to throw.

 

[Bagarocks]

Eh - that’s kind of deceiving. Our strategy has mostly been to keep the ball on the ground and eat clock when we’re winning. When you play from behind, the clock is not on your side and so you need to throw.

Im trying to figure out this threads premise, that our pass to rush ration is outta whack.
So yer point is that our passing to rushing ratios in the games we have played so far were just right for our team trying to win each game. just as they were for Michigan trying to win each game?

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Im trying to figure out this threads premise, that our pass to rush ration is outta whack.
So yer point is that our passing to rushing ratios in the games we have played so far were just right for our team trying to win each game. just as they were for Michigan trying to win each game?

I’m just saying that on average, the chance of losing when your playing from behind is always greater. You give yourself a better chance for a comeback by throwing once your down.

Your analysis is simply flawed data - and I’m the biggest support of our conservative play there is. We threw more on Michigan and Wisconsin because we were losing and needed to try to put together a comeback with time not on our side. It’s not true that we would have had a better chance of winning those games by keeping the ball on the ground more.

 

[Bagarocks]

I’m just saying that on average, the chance of losing when your playing from behind is always greater. You give yourself a better chance for a comeback by throwing once your down.

Your analysis is simply flawed data - and I’m the biggest support of our conservative play there is. We threw more on Michigan and Wisconsin because we were losing and needed to try to put together a comeback with time not on our side. It’s not true that we would have had a better chance of winning those games by keeping the ball on the ground more.

I’m just saying that on average, the chance of losing when your playing from behind is always greater. You give yourself a better chance for a comeback by throwing once your down.
Well I agree.
As far as throwing more against Michigan, we threw 21 vs Temple, 19 vs Wagner.
Well once behind both Michigan and Wisconsin if we threw 60x's its not true that our chances of winning would have been any different.
It just seems everyone wants a High flying pass now run later offense, But what we got is a Vince Lombardi grind it out offense.
Ya cant change our offense anymore than ya could Change Lombardi's offense.
And both styles of offense passing or running have been greatly successful and not.
And my analysis, since it was trying to show the absurdity of being more balanced would make us a better team some how when we are a running team plain and simple. We are gonna lose and have lost if we are passing out of necessity and not within our game plan.

 

[RUtix4me]

What’s funny is 7 people put passing is more important than winning. I assumed that people who felt we need to pass to win would check they are equally important.

 

[yesrutgers01]

Eh - that’s kind of deceiving. Our strategy has mostly been to keep the ball on the ground and eat clock when we’re winning. When you play from behind, the clock is not on your side and so you need to throw.

And the same thing would have happened on Saturday if we needed to go to the pass.

I feel like I am talking down to some people(not you) when I try in 57 different ways over the past few days to explain that Greg wanted to win.

IF we could not run at will with the B1G leading rusher and a QB that did run for 143- well- Greg would have told KC to pass the damn ball.

We sometimes have a bunch of idiots that just want their opinions heard as truth of everything on this board

 

[wisr01]

Seems kind of a stupid simplification of the positions of those who think 39 ypg passing might need some improvement.

But the poll should be a winner for those that aren't able to grasp the subtleties of winning WITH a respectable passing game.

But hey, keep beating that straw man. Have your fun.

I got your strawman right here buddy. #2 Michigan is 8-0 with the #1 ranked pass defense in the nation. Who had the best game against them so far this year? GW and it is not even close.

 

[yesrutgers01]

I got your strawman right here buddy. #2 Michigan is 8-0 with the #1 ranked pass defense in the nation. Who had the best game against them so far this year? GW and it is not even close.

Here is the thing with GW- there is always a chance if you ask him to throw 40 times- he may do some **** that amazes you. But...at 19 and this stage of his career, very better chance he throws 3 int and we get our asses handed to us.

This is not an inditement of him and would really suck for us if we did not have a superior running game, an elite defense and a OL that has gotten better at run blocking quicker than pass protection.

So- we don't ever have to ask him to do that. At least, not this year.

But the kid has made passes that can make even national announcers just say "wow"

Last year- I would not have bet that he could win a single game with his arm or his feet.

 

[RUScrew85]

I got your strawman right here buddy. #2 Michigan is 8-0 with the #1 ranked pass defense in the nation. Who had the best game against them so far this year? GW and it is not even close.

I have no idea how that is a response to what you quoted or two what I was referring to.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

And the same thing would have happened on Saturday if we needed to go to the pass.

I feel like I am talking down to some people(not you) when I try in 57 different ways over the past few days to explain that Greg wanted to win.

IF we could not run at will with the B1G leading rusher and a QB that did run for 143- well- Greg would have told KC to pass the damn ball.

We sometimes have a bunch of idiots that just want their opinions heard as truth of everything on this board

Exactly - I try to be fair with both sides of an argument though so when I saw a post commenting on our better win record when we throw less, I jumped in because I also don’t believe it’s true that we’re always better off just running. Different situations call for different play calling. Against better defensive fronts we will throw more - win or lose.

 

[yesrutgers01]

Exactly - I try to be fair with both sides of an argument though so when I saw a post commenting on our better win record when we throw less, I jumped in because I also don’t believe it’s true that we’re always better off just running. Different situations call for different play calling. Against better defensive fronts we will throw more - win or lose.

We may go into Iowa saying that we outrush them and we stop the run better and plan for a Indiana type game. And then we fumble twice, muff a punt, etc and find ourselves down by two scores.