I didn't say Drew gets credit for other players on his team being good--where do you think you see that
Trout is capable of winning a title. Like Allar. Unlike Beau
Tough conversation: is Allar good enough?
- Thread starter TheWizardofCamelot
- Start date
-
- Tags
- megaboard
Trout is capable of winning a title. Like Allar. Unlike Beau
The argument being made was: "Drew has a chance to win and Beau does not."
That argument seems to be that if you're on a better team, you must be a superior individual player, and if you're on a bad team, it means you, personally, suck.
It's a logical fallacy. Drew is undoubtedly on a better team than Beau, but that doesn't mean he's a better QB.
How is Mike Trout capable of winning a title? The Angels are in 4th place, and 10 games under .500. Again.
This is my point. You seem to be conflating individual talent with team performance...? Penn State is better than Mizzou, yes. But right now:
Allar: 41-59, 417y, 3 TD, 0 INT, 145.6 RTG
Pribula: 53-67, 617y, 5 TD, 0 INT, 181.1 RTG
It's a small sample size, but Pribula has outplayed Allar through two games.
You got it now. It’s a potential 17 game season. Why go so hard on everything, especially easy games to win. Enjoy the season now.
The player is capable of winning a title surrounded by talent. No one can win a title alone in a team sport.
Drew can while Beau can't. If Drew went to the NFL last year we wouldn't be contenders this year with Drew.
Add Beau's fumble--add Drew sat out a quarter--add our team is uninterested as these are glorified scrimmages to them unlike Missouri who's battling to try to win 6-8 games.
The fact you're even trying to say Beau is better is one of the dumbest arguments being said--and, yes, trying to use two games as a comp is doing that.
I'm honestly done with people, like you, that don't understand the game at all
Drew is infinitely better--that's reality--when you'd like to join me in reality you're welcome to do so.
This would be like listing all the RB with better numbers than Singleton through 2 games--it's beyond stupid. But you be you
I’m all in. We get bumped off in final 4. But know O is doing a full court press getting tuned up for us. I’d like to see the same. We have 1aa Villanova then a bye, will our heads be right or will we be unprepared for the intensity? Sleep walking v FIU is the wrong play (imo YMMV)
A few years ago I was excited about Allar, but it is very apparent that he is not the guy. I compare him to Hackenberg, He struggles to see the field and will not pull the trigger unless the receiver has full separation. His mental toughness is also questioned when he gets into verbal altercations with the fans on more than one occasion. Drew will have a couple years in the NFL and that will be it. Again I hope for the best but unfortunately I believe we will get what we have had for the last few years.
Several people texted me yesterday during the game that if this team continues to play flat that JF should look to bench Allar for a few series to wake people up. Allars issue continues to be IMO not the long or short ball it's the intermediate routes the 15-20 yard in/out patterns to the WR. He seems to be afraid to cut it loose and either throw the receiver open or trust the receiver to make a play. He has the talent and skills to do it but for whatever reason it's always been his achilles heel. He does loose his mechanics at times on short throws but seems to be able correct that himself. Not sure if he can change his way now this many years in to cut it loose on those routes. In the NFL he is going to have to do those throws regularly. Be interesting when he is gone next year to see how Grunk handles those throws.
This team comes out and plays as flat as they have the last 2 weeks in the first half Oregon is going to light up the score board against PSU and the halftime score will be ugly. This team is not good enough to play to level of their competition and flip a switch against good teams. This is on the coaching staff and captains to how flat they have started in both games
This is special pleading.
The facts are what they are. Pribula didn't play the full game against Central Arkansas in week-1. He played the full game in week-2 because they were actually playing a decent opponent.
I mean, sitting here contending the team is intentionally playing poorly...? I've played a LOT of sports in my life, and I've never phoned it in when I thought my opponents were not on my level.
I didn't say Beau is better than Drew-- that is a strawman. I said he has outplayed Drew through the first two games. That's an indisputable fact.
Maybe you don't understand the game as well as you think you do? Is that possible?
Better to burn out early with nothing games, than rest up for what’s coming.
He missed about 3 snaps because the co-winner of the QB competition got injured. And, yes, Central Arkansas which you left out of your comparison of the teams played because how bad are they? You're desperate because you dislike Allar contrary to your ridiculous claims
You contending Allar is the issue and Beau would be better. Then you weren't a great athlete. I played hockey at a high level. Having lived in Canada for years when I came back here to play high school we absolutely took garbage teams lightly because we knew we'd win if we'd show up. That's a trait of a great athlete--which you clearly were not.
You did--repeatedly--claim Beau was better. It's not an indisputable fact. How many turnovers has Drew coughed up? How many games was Drew throwing late in the game because they weren't up big.
You're the one that doesn't understand what you're seeing on the field. Which is why you'll be lost when Drew gets picked early and Beau is selling cars with his masters in Comminications.
I didn't "leave out" Central Arkansas.
You disputed that Kansas was a superior opponent to Nevada and FIU and I showed you that they are, in fact, better by a wide margin.
"You are desperate because you dislike Allar"
Strawman fallacy.
"You contending Allar is the issue and Beau would be better."
Strawman fallacy.
"Then you weren't a great athlete."
Red herring/ad hominem fallacies.
"The trait of a great athlete is that they phone it in."
Yeah, Sidney Crosby famously plays at 25% against the Islanders. Oh wait... no, he doesn't.
"You did repeatedly claim Beau was better."
False. This is a strawman you created in your own head and now you've tricked yourself into believing it's true.
"It's not indisputable fact."
And yet the empirical evidence says otherwise. Gee, who should I believe...? The hard data, or your emotional narrative? I just can't decide...
You know who started the year last year with two terrible games? Oregon….and it didn’t stop them from winning the Big 10. Apparently you need to be an Oregon fan since you keep getting on your knees for them in all your posts because they beat a crappy team who lost 52-0 to Colorado in last year’s opener.
They scored on nine out of nine possessions in the opener….and that’s flat? Come on.
You did leave them out. That's not proof that Kansas is better. It's stats based on 2 weeks. It's like those that claim X is good after 1 week then they go 3-9.
Crosby plays 25% in preseason games which these are.
None of those are strawman arguments. It's exactly what your saying. You're just focused on implying it instead of being an actual man and owning it. Which is why you like Beau.
This is actually a decent argument-- pointing out that a very good Oregon team started slow last year.
Survey says...! True.
They won 24-14 over Idaho, and then struggled to put down Boise State, prevailing 37-34.
So, yeah... maybe we'll be on the same track this season? I hope so.
"That's not proof Kansas is better"
Another goalpost move. JFC, man, learn about fallacious arguments.
What evidence are you presenting to support your position that Kansas, with a significantly higher FPI than Florida International and Nevada isn't a better opponent than the two teams we have played?
"Crosby plays 25% in the preseason"
False equivalence fallacy.
"None of these are strawman arguments..."
All of the fallacies I labeled as strawmen are accurately labeled. Your argument from ignorance is also a fallacy. If they are not strawmen, then you should be able to quote me directly saying the things you are accusing me of saying. But you can't because... you just conjured strawman arguments and attacked them because that's easier to do than engaging honestly with the argument that is actually being made.
How did they do yesterday? If you think they can play like these 2 games energy wise against a Oregon they will get flat out boat raced. If you feel.comfortable with their efforts the last 2 weeks we just differ on how this team will do this year. I gave them a pass the first week and yesterday's game was 20-0 in the 4th qtr. Going to be very interesting to see how they do against Oregon.
I love Drew. I just didn't know why Franklin keeps deciding to stick with the QB who is NOT the best for for his offense. Watching Beau, watching Mateer... My God, they would tear the field up in this Kotelnicki offense. Whatever. I appreciate the loyalty as well, it's a tough position to be in but my opinion is that Levis and Pribula would have been the better decisions. That's my opinion and I'm an expert at my opinion.
These two games have nothing to do with Oregon…and if they in fact were “flat” as you claim, do you really think they will come out against Oregon in a white out the same way they did against Nevada and FIU? Really?
But only they're not fallacies.
Finish the statement and prove me wrong
"when comparing Beau and Drew, I believe..."
Because we all know how you'd finish that based on your posts. The fact you can't own this is just comical. Grow a set dude and stop playing games like a 12 year old girl.
Funny you mention Levis because do you know what Kentucky fans say about Levis? That he choked in the games against good competition and he only looked good against weak teams. Sound familiar? So their fans say the same thing about Levis that our fans say about Allar, yet Levis would have been the better answer. It’s comical.
Missouri will win 8 games easily, their schedule is not good. Unless Alabama resurrects itself, their toughest game is against South Carolina.
The thoughts of Kentucky fans were never that high on my list of concerns. Thanks for the update, however. Glad someone is paying attention.
You're giving them way too much credit for beating Kansas--a mid-tier Big XII team at home
I promise you Arkansas, Vandy and Mississippi State also think they're good right now and will win 8 games
You not understanding fallacious arguments doesn't make them "not-fallacious". What you are doing here is called "argumentum ad ignorantium" -- an argument from ignorance. You do not understand the terms I am using, so you simply engage in denial.
You: "Who says Kansas is a better opponent?!"
Me: They have a higher FPI (by a wide margin) than either of the teams we've played.
You: That's not good enough.
That's called "special pleading", AKA: "moving the goalpost". I have shown through an unbiased metric that Kansas is, in fact, a better quality opponent than FIU and Nevada. You are unable to substantively counter this argument, yet you demand MORE evidence, while offering none of your own to support your position.
"The fact that you can't own this..."
This is a strawman. You're creating an argument in your head that I didn't make because it's an argument that *you prefer to argue against*. You can't engage honestly with the substance of what I actually said, so you have to make up things and then accuse me of saying them (even though I didn't).
"Finish this sentence..."
Oof! You NEED to try to breadcrumb me into a bear trap because you suddenly realize, "Oh crap... he didn't actually make the argument that I'm accusing him of making."
"Stop playing games like a 12-year old girl."
This is called an "ad hominem fallacy". It's typically the last resort of a person who realizes that they have no argument. You can't engage with substance, so you attack the person's character.
Here's how I respond to your clumsy bear trap:
"When comparing Beau and Drew, I believe..."
Nothing. I don't "believe" anything. Belief is the state of being convinced of a conclusion. What I said is that Beau has played better than Drew up to this point in the season. That's it. That's all I said, and I made no allusions to anything more than that. Beau has looked good, thus far. Drew has looked... kinda "meh" thus far. I can point to specific things. He's missed a few easy throws. He's thrown off his back foot a bunch. He's still not stepping into his throws consistently. He throws with his feet under his hips. He doesn't respond well to pressure. He doesn't always see the blitz pressure coming... etc.
The rest was the same nonsense
We both know why you won't answer it--actually we all do
You 100% are making the argument I'm claiming or otherwise you'd respond to that
Yeah, me crushing you because I know how to make logically valid and sound arguments.
It amazes me the things that some people on this board worry about.
You aren't you--there's nothing sound about your arguments. In fact, your arguments lack such validity that you can't finish the sentence because I'm right.
I can imagine how frustrating it is to be called out--you must be devastated.