True or False? If Dobbs started against Florida, UT wins the game.

[mgu7]

UT would have won comfortably. Dobbs is elusive and he doesn't get sacked. His stats against much much better defense looks very impressive.

Alabama Crimson Tide vs. Tennessee Volunteers - Box Score - October 25, 2014 - ESPN

 

[IluvdoubleD's]

meh.

 

[GAVol]

False

 

[Catbone]

True.

 

[armchair]

no doubt.

 

[LittleCat]

Who cares. Future seems brighter with Dobbs.

 

[CagleMtnVol]

Truth!

 

[mgu7]

UT had negative rushing yards against Ole Piss last week. Bama only outrushed UT by 2 yards today. What a difference a running dual threat QB makes. OL didn't look all that bad today.

 

[Shocker0]

UT would have won comfortably. Dobbs is elusive and he doesn't get sacked. His stats against much much better defense looks very impressive.

Alabama Crimson Tide vs. Tennessee Volunteers - Box Score - October 25, 2014 - ESPN

No, with Dobbs in the Vols MURDER Florida. 27-3

 

[1972 Grad]

No idea. Water under the bridge. That ship has sailed. A card laid is a card played.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

He didn't.

You'll never know, so why dwell on it? Does it make you feel better to pretend it happened?

 

[orange parmejohn]

Fruitless argument.

 

[Col_Cathcart]

Make it a poll.

true.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Make it a poll.

true.

Poll changes nothing.

 

[Aesius]

True, easily. Hell, we would have beat Florida with Hurd running the wildcat exclusively, IMO, especially if Driskel still gifts us three picks.

 

[Orangeslice13]

False

Agreed.

 

[volinduval]

Florida wouldn't have given any looks in the passing game. He would have been able to scramble but the defense has to play lights out to beat them.

 

[turambar85]

If Dobbs started against Florida, and played half as well as he did today, we win. If he plays as well as he did today, we win by 20. But, the problem is that we don't know how well Dobbs would have played that early in the year. He could have been an absolute dud, blowing his confidence and shattering any momentum that we had been building (with the close game against Georgia in particular).

Had Butch started Dobbs over Worley against Florida, as well as Worley played the previous few games, then we would have had his head had we lost. Hypotheticals can be a lot of fun, but the fact is that we really don't know how it would have worked out, and it wouldn't have been a reasonable decision for Butch to make prior to the last week or two.

 

[f77f00]

Day late and a dollar short. Moving along.

 

[GOVOLS 1]

True. If he can put up 20 against Alabama, surely he could have done better than 10 against Fla.

 

[connor]

He didn't.

You'll never know, so why dwell on it? Does it make you feel better to pretend it happened?

I agree. I wish people would just stop talking about that game.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

True. If he can put up 20 against Alabama, surely he could have done better than 10 against Fla.

Except that's not how things work.

 

[UTProf]

True and not just because he's elusive - that amazing throw to North that he somehow caught doesn't get any better.

 

[HHH]

True.

 

[turambar85]

Except that's not how things work.

It isn't a matter of direct entailment, no. But the argument doesn't require that, and it's disingenuous to pretend that it does. The idea, obviously, is that the offense looked much better with Dobbs than with Worley, and that we would have beaten Florida had our offense not completely sh*t the bed.