LOL!!!

For all the stupid stuff that goes on in the zoo, the posters that take the time to post they didn't read a long post is by far the dumbest.

Why do reporters keep asking Sumlin about Starkel I wonder? What a dumb question, everybody knows this is Mond's team now. Wonder why they waste their one question on something so stupid?

I think it's a worthwhile question. What do you think the answer is, merch?

Good one. Obviously I say that tongue in cheek. Of course it is a legit question (not for anybody in the zoo apparently).

The answer? Why Starkel is the backup now.

On serious note it is a shame the same question gets asked. It has been asked and answered and wastes everybody's time. The right question would be a follow up to the one already asked or something like when you say Starkel is the backup now is he the kind of backup like Mond was in game 1 or the kind of backup that won't play barring an injury to the starter kind of backup?

As far as I'm concerned, gameplans against our inexperienced offense have been effective in the past 3 SEC games. Gameflow might suggest that three 3-and-outs by Mond or 2 turnovers in the first half would open the door for Starkel to come in and change the tempo and give Mond a chance to view the game from a different angle, while giving Starkel a chance to utilize players not exploited in Mond's game. Since Mond is a true freshman, the option to use two QBs, while not being ideal, could be an option to create confusion among the opponent defensive calls, as long as the OL snap and alignment doesn't create confusion on our own game plan. I'm assuming the coaches would have a set of plays scripted for Starkel to have brief success, just as they did to bring in Mond early vs UCLA. Just look at how easy it was to score for Starkel after they subbed Mond in the latter part of the 2nd Q. One play, one pre-snap read, TOOOOOUUUCCCCHHHHHDOOOOWWWWWN /Dave South.

TLDR version, both QB's are still relatively inexperienced, this is not Mond's team outright, it's his until the hot hand goes cold.

merch said:

---

But tell him for the good of the team and out of fairness to Starkel, we need to give Starkel some snaps too?

---

There is absolutely no care or sense of fairness from any coaching staff in Division 1 sports. The best players in the eyes of the coaches will play. Right now that is Mond.

Starkle will transfer. He's learned he's good enough to win the starting job at a major football program so it should be no problem for him to go to a school just as good as us or slightly lower tier and become their starter. He has a great pro build and could be successful at the next level. We need to end qb controversies before they start because we know sumlin doesn't handle them well (I.e. two qb's leaving within weeks of each other)

Starkel, when FULLY healed, should definitely get a hard look at being the starter again, unless Mond just really begins tearing it up. Offense has been sputtering and inconsistent ever since he took over. Mond is talented, obviously, but that in and of itself doesn't just hand him the job. His performance as a passer is critical to the success of the offense. A 50%-ish completion rate is no where near good enough in an offense that focuses on short and intermediate passes.

Pocket passer qbs in 2017

Especially if people want to complain about not beating bama. It has been a long time since a pocket passer qb beat them

VikingNik said:

---

I'd like it if Starkel could take a medical redshirt

---

Not if he can help win games this season. It's asking a lot for a freshman QB to sweep the SEC West (less Bama).

But then you run the risk of transfers. If theyre going to pick Mond, it has to be 100%, sam with Starkle. There cannot be a 2 QB system.

You start whoever puts you in position to win the game. I think that's why Sumlin started Starkle week 1. Mond clearly wasn't ready for that role but Sumlin wanted to still get him meaningful minutes to develop him so he put him in early in the UCLA game. He was obviously then forced to play Mond more than he wanted to and it's been a work in progress but also a positive one for the long term.

This thread:

"I have very little knowledge of the actual situation, but I have very strong opinions on what should happen!"

Ronnie Mund said:

---

This thread:

"I have very little knowledge of the actual situation, but I have very strong opinions on what should happen!"

---

But that's every thread on the Zoo.

Tosul said:

---

But then you run the risk of transfers. If theyre going to pick Mond, it has to be 100%, sam with Starkle. There cannot be a 2 QB system.

---

D-1 football is a risky bidness, and not for the faint of heart. Managing talent is just one of the prerequisites for the job he's being paid $5 mm per for. Earn it!

fieldtrailer said:

---

Never heard iof Starkel while he was in high school and we were going after Martell. Was he a highly ranked qb? With the qbs in the que, have to wonder if his chance just came
and went. I guess Mond could get hurt or just fall apart next few games.

---

Lord knows we don't need Mond's eyes to get any bigger

CFBCommenter said:

---

To long did not read!

---

tl;dr

Wow how so many of you change your minds in 1 week.

I prefer the quarterback with a 33% completion percentage!

Starkel throws too many downfield passes! I like the sideways ones Mond throws better!

Remind me . What was the score at the half vs UCLA when Starkel was the QB ?

Get Fro$t. Now.

merch said:

---

Wow how so many of you change your minds in 1 week.

---

Interesting bump. It wasn't overly kind on you either.

Dumlin = Rumlin. No other explanation.