Texas A&M Football
Sponsored by

Reed Would've Beaten ND

5,713 Views | 44 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by The Zookeeper
Bill Superman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:09a, 9/15/24
AG
Change my mind.

Elko whiffed on that one, especially since CW was injured during the game.

We might have a legit QB controversy on our hands niw though.
Reply Quote
78
Loftin
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:32a, 9/15/24
AG
There is no controversy. Reed is much better right now.
Reply Quote
91
LB12Diamond
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:49a, 9/15/24
AG
I learned a long time ago playing the "what if" game is a total waste of time.

Reply Quote
23
Ol Rock
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:00a, 9/15/24
AG
I think that's what made that game so frustrating. We could see from the stands that CW was struggling, but no change was made. I get you want to build confidence in your QB, but if he doesn't have it have a good backup come in or run the ball more.

Do you know what hurts your QB more than sharing snaps? Losing.

Congrats on the strong WIN by Elko and the team.
Reply Quote
32
jenks
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:55a, 9/15/24
AG
He gets paid to put the best talent in the right places to make plays and to win games. That was accomplished yesterday but wonder why that wasn't done in the second half if not for 2 series at least. Reed can scramble which gets receivers open and gives us options with a dual threat QB in the SEC.
Reply Quote
18
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bill Superman • 6:54a, 9/15/24
Bill Superman said:
Change my mind.
Maybe.

Maybe not.
Reply Quote
4
The Grinder (99)
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LB12Diamond • 6:55a, 9/15/24
AG
But what if it wasn't?
Reply Quote
3
Honolulu Blue
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:05a, 9/15/24
Argument for reed losing that game: you never really know how a young QB will respond against a great D like Notre Dame


Argument for reed winning that game: any QB performance better than worst in the nation likley wins that game
Reply Quote
27
WhataMaroon88
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:31a, 9/15/24
AG
Transitive property does not work in football. Every game. Every situation. Every preparation is different. ND just btho Purdue, who would beat NIU 8 of 10 times. It never works with what if questions either.
Reply Quote
3
LB12Diamond
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Grinder (99) • 7:35a, 9/15/24
AG
Double what if. Yikes
Reply Quote
3
WaldoWings
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:42a, 9/15/24
As Boston rob of the gameshow Survivor says, "always trust your gut". Intangibles are just as important as stats and analytics. Reed has a good deal of what wiggy has on the mechanics and all that, but just watching the team's body language with reed vs wiggy tells the tale of who has the spark and the things you can't see and quantify. That's something we can't really get without watching it when it matters. It mattered against ND and it mattered last night. We saw both of those games and know alot more now.
Reply Quote
8
spherical
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bill Superman • 7:47a, 9/15/24
AG
Bill Superman said:
Change my mind.

Elko whiffed on that one, especially since CW was injured during the game.

We might have a legit QB controversy on our hands niw though.
Given that folks weren't super excited about Reeds performance against McNeese-

Tho I agree…not so much because he would necessarily have gone off, but because we just needed a couple of first downs to win
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Notjavlane
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bill Superman • 7:57a, 9/15/24
Bill Superman said:
Change my mind.

Elko whiffed on that one, especially since CW was injured during the game.

We might have a legit QB controversy on our hands niw though.
I cant recall a game I have seen, where Conner played that well. Maybe I am wrong. But My son and I from 2nd third and long conversion on were calling for Reed to be the starter.
Reply Quote
1
Kraft Punk
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:00a, 9/15/24
Of course Reed would've beaten Notre dame


Conner put up one of the worst performances of any Ag Qb ever....



Now knowing he had a bum shoulder it's even more irritating that Reed wasn't played
Reply Quote
15
1 edit
MyComputerCareer
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:03a, 9/15/24
Look I don't disagree, which is what made that loss so frustrating. At the same time I'm also glad we have a staff that isn't going to die on Everest with their sunk cost bias. If this change was inevitable, better to get it out of the way early. We did what we needed to do, now let's move forward. The team obviously responds really well to Reed, you could see it.
Reply Quote
1
OilManAg91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:04a, 9/15/24
AG
During the rain delay, the TV announcers basically said the same thing…that given our extremely poor QB performance against ND and the way MR is playing today…what if MR had come in the play the 2nd half of the ND game?

If we go on a run and have a shot at the top 12, this will be the primary argument to get us in the playoff. I recognize it's a long shot, but not completely out of the question.
Reply Quote
4
QB1
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:13a, 9/15/24
AG
Controversy?

Reply Quote
halfastros81
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:16a, 9/15/24
AG
There''a a strong argument supporting it but we will never know.
Reply Quote
rootube
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to WhataMaroon88 • 8:33a, 9/15/24
AG
WhataMaroon88 said:
Transitive property does not work in football. Every game. Every situation. Every preparation is different. ND just btho Purdue, who would beat NIU 8 of 10 times. It never works with what if questions either.



While this may be true it's hard to imagine our offensive struggles against ND and not think any spark would have been huge for us.
Reply Quote
3
Escobars army
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:49a, 9/15/24
With how he was running today and avoiding hits, I don't think he finishes that game.
Reply Quote
Bill Superman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Loftin • 10:04a, 9/15/24
AG
Loftin said:
There is no controversy. Reed is much better right now.
There's no controversy at least until CW is 100%. I wouldn't expect a throwing shoulder injury to go away too quickly.

If Reed continues to play at this level and winning games then the decision gets a little easier. But he's likely going to be on a short leash once CW is ready, at least that's how I'd roll with it.
Reply Quote
4
jsc8116
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:40a, 9/15/24
AG
Wonder if Weigmam didn't disclose the injury ? Regardless he should have been benched in 3rd quarter, painfully obvious he wasn't getting it done.
Reply Quote
5
Muy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LB12Diamond • 10:41a, 9/15/24
AG
LB12Diamond said:
I learned a long time ago playing the "what if" game is a total waste of time.



But what should have happened in the 3rd quarter when it was clear nothing was improving with Conner is give Reed the rest of the 3rd quarter and see what he could do.
Reply Quote
3
Bill Superman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Loftin • 11:59a, 9/15/24
AG
Loftin said:
There is no controversy. Reed is much better right now.
Couldn't help but notice "right now" being the key word.

Regardless of what happens, a QB controversy is more than welcome.
Reply Quote
1
halfastros81
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:27p, 9/15/24
AG
Being a better qb is not necessarily the same as being a better fit at qb for Klein's scheme
Reply Quote
5
LB12Diamond
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Muy • 1:29p, 9/15/24
AG
It appears you don't understand the definition of a "what if".

And clearly don't understand the point I was making.
Reply Quote
1 edit
AgLA06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Kraft Punk • 1:34p, 9/15/24
AG
Kraft Punk said:
Of course Reed would've beaten Notre dame


Conner put up one of the worst performances of any Ag Qb ever....



Now knowing he had a bum shoulder it's even more irritating that Reed wasn't played


It's truly amazing how fixated this fanbase gets, yet misses so much.

Reed wasn't ready. He wasn't better than a healthy Wiggy. He wasn't ready last week either, but the staff made an effort to get him experience and playing time for this week and the rest of the season if needed.

Fans bagging on Wiggy because he gutted it out unable to throw and kept us in the game into the fourth quarter against ND are disgusting. And those same "fans" will turn on Reed as well.


Reply Quote
2
DFCURT
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:15p, 9/15/24
A QB having a really bad day could have won that game. Weigman had a disastrous day.

Highly highly likely the 2nd and 3rd string QB would have beat Notre Dame.

Weigman may carry on as the starter and ball out the whole rest of the season but there is no denying he single-handedly lost that game. He just needed to have a damn pulse and it would have been enough.
Reply Quote
3
SABUILDERAG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to halfastros81 • 2:19p, 9/15/24
halfastros81 said:
Being a better qb is not necessarily the same as being a better fit at qb for Klein's scheme
This
Reply Quote
Aggie Dad 26
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LB12Diamond • 2:44p, 9/15/24
LB12Diamond said:
I learned a long time ago playing the "what if" game is a total waste of time.



https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3489357/4#discussion
Reply Quote
1
rshar
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:45p, 9/15/24
As I was watching the ND game something was off with Weigman.. He's a great QB, had a great game against LSU, tremendous amount of sacrifice with coming back from a major injury. But he needed a break, his body language and anxiety were off the charts. I was thinking just put in MR, with his energy and electricity and more than likely we win the game. It's a reset to calm CW down, what he needed at that time.


Reply Quote
Ag_EE_88
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:10p, 9/15/24
AG
Don't know if we would have won but the few times Conner scrambled, if it had been Reed, he'd have gotten at least another 20 yards. There was lots of open field with the receivers running off the dbs. Also, Reed would have at least seen a few of the wide open receivers unlike Conner. Reed doesn't play scared and knows how to lead apparently.
Reply Quote
Muy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LB12Diamond • 3:24p, 9/15/24
AG
LB12Diamond said:
It appears you don't understand the definition of a "what if".

And clearly don't understand the point I was making.


And my point being we would have known IF Reed was put in during the 3rd like I said.
Reply Quote
Divining Rod
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:26p, 9/15/24
i like Weigman- but Reed has played great in every situation/chance. You can't change horses now- gotta ride the momentum. I think Henderson needs to stay ready though- Reed may get bent i two.
Reply Quote
LB12Diamond
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Muy • 3:29p, 9/15/24
AG
LOL

Got it, so still a what if. What if we would have known. Thinking about changing the past is a what if.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.