Burning Worley's redshirt

#126
#126
The people who are complaining about burning Worley's redshirt are the same people that would be complaining that we should have given Worley a shot after watching Simms struggle the whole time Bray was out.
 
#128
#128
GAVol said:
I agree. In hindsight it was silly to put the best player on the field. We would have been much better off just giving up and mailing it in. Maybe then we could have lost the games AND lost the team.
Click to expand...

Even with Worley on the field, I'm pretty sure that happened anyway. Didn't you watch the Arkansas game. Maybe he postponed losing the team by a couple of weeks, but that's all he accomplished.
 
#130
#130
Chances are good that Simms would have gone down in one of the games and we would have had to bring in Worley anyway. Would it have been better for him to come in part way into the USC game with only 2nd string snaps in practice? I say that would have been worse on him and the team and it was better to give him the 1st team snaps, get his mind ready and see what he could do as a starter. We still need him to win this year and will definitely need him to win some games next year.
 
#131
#131
At least we will have a qb with some experience if Bray were to have a huge year next year and enter the draft. You have to play for wins now, even if that means burning his redshirt. Its a dead issue :bash:
 
#133
#133
NEOCON said:
Just asking what the team gained by it now that it looks like he's sitting back down for the next game and the next two years.

Just asking what the gain was.
Click to expand...

Gained experience for the guy who will very possibly be a guy who has to win games for us someday. I, for one, would rather have that jittery SoCar game behind us, buried in this season than somewhere out in front of us. I suppose others might prefer to have it in the future, but I can't fathom that.

The flip side of the argument might be this: How much would we have gained by getting Simms more experience instead? How would that help us? The answer is very likely, not at all. So, when you compare the option of helping to get Worley ready to play someday to getting Simms more experience (and thereby accomplishing nothing), it's an easy choice to me. Would have been a hard decision if Simms were performing better.

If it were up to me, I'd play Worley all we can next year, behind Bray. Get him enough reps during the year so that he is a viable starting QB should Bray get hurt again or should he light things up and go to the NFL in 2013 (I don't expect that necessarily, but it could certainly happen). Then, in 2013, if Bray is back, look to redshirt Worley then. By then Peterman has a redshirt year in and can give you plenty of 'get Bray the heck out of the game' snaps.

You use Worley in 2013 only if Bray goes down with an injury or has left for the NFL. Presto - redshirt year restored and many risks have been mitigated in the process. And, you've seen Peterman/gotten him some snaps, too.
 
Last edited:
#135
#135
Dooley didnt play Worley for him to get "experience." He played him because he thought that gave us a better chance at winning games. He was wrong. I said he was would be wrong before he was wrong. Go read my posts before it happened. No hindsight needed. The only way this Worley thing will work out is if Tyler doesnt play against Vandy and Worley lights it up and wins a game. If that doesnt happen then the Worley experiment failed because we did NOT win more games than we would have with Simms. You can say that our coach made a bad decision. Its ok people make bad decisions. This was Dooley's first major bad decision. imo at least.

PS still dont see how people dont think Simms would have done better against the Cocks.
 
#136
#136
10NCVol88 said:
Dooley didnt play Worley for him to get "experience." He played him because he thought that gave us a better chance at winning games. He was wrong. I said he was would be wrong before he was wrong. Go read my posts before it happened. No hindsight needed. The only way this Worley thing will work out is if Tyler doesnt play against Vandy and Worley lights it up and wins a game. If that doesnt happen then the Worley experiment failed because we did NOT win more games than we would have with Simms. You can say that our coach made a bad decision. Its ok people make bad decisions. This was Dooley's first major bad decision. imo at least.

PS still dont see how people dont think Simms would have done better against the Cocks.
Click to expand...
I've not seen one argument that shows this to be a bad decision. Not one. We know he didn't play him for just the experience, that was just a bonus.
 
#137
#137
Orange Maniac said:
I've not seen one argument that shows this to be a bad decision. Not one. We know he didn't play him for just the experience, that was just a bonus.
Click to expand...

We lost the SC game. Worley was pulled for Simms in both SEC games (confidence problem). Redshirt burned. Those are just 3.

Now show me how it was a good decision without using the future which is unknown. Worley heaven forbid could not be with us next year or the year after for all you know.
 
#138
#138
10NCVol88 said:
We lost the SC game. Worley was pulled for Simms in both SEC games (confidence problem). Redshirt burned. Those are just 3.

Now show me how it was a good decision without using the future which is unknown. Worley heaven forbid could not be with us next year for all you know.
Click to expand...

if Bray makes it through next season Worley can still redshirt.

How is playing the guy that gives us the best chance of winning ever a bad thing? Some people just search for something to complain about
 
#140
#140
utvolpj said:
if Bray makes it through next season Worley can still redshirt.

How is playing the guy that gives us the best chance of winning ever a bad thing? Some people just search for something to complain about
Click to expand...

So a true freshman gave us a better chance at beating SC with 1 week to prepare? You truly believe Simms would do worse or no better than 3 points against SC at home? After watching these past 3 games not once did you think Simms would be a better option at all? The coaches did thats why he got in both games. If you are siding with the coaches decisions here then they too admitted by playing Simms in both games that they potentially made a mistake.

Still no proof of Worley experiment being successful. Not complaining here just stating realities about our situation. People are living in this fantasy world of what ifs talking about the future like its promised or something.
 
#141
#141
10NCVol88 said:
So a true freshman gave us a better chance at beating SC with 1 week to prepare? You truly believe Simms would do worse or no better than 3 points against SC at home? After watching these past 3 games not once did you think Simms would be a better option at all? The coaches did thats why he got in both games. If you are siding with the coaches decisions here then they too admitted by playing Simms in both games that they potentially made a mistake.

Still no proof of Worley experiment being successful. Not complaining here just stating realities about our situation. People are living in this fantasy world of what ifs talking about the future like its promised or something.
Click to expand...

it doesn't matter what any random fan thinks since the coaches know more about the QB situation than anyone else and felt their best chance to win those games was with Worley. There's truly no other way to see it for anyone being honest
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#143
#143
Its very laughable that people think that we would have won with Simms starting against usc.......the same guy that almost lost to UAB the year before. Not even convinced we beat MTSU with Simms starting.
 
#144
#144
10NCVol88 said:
We lost the SC game. Worley was pulled for Simms in both SEC games (confidence problem). Redshirt burned. Those are just 3.

Now show me how it was a good decision without using the future which is unknown. Worley heaven forbid could not be with us next year or the year after for all you know.
Click to expand...
I think you just made my argument. The 3 reasons you gave aren't reasons that the decision was bad.
 
#145
#145
10NCVol88 said:
So a true freshman gave us a better chance at beating SC with 1 week to prepare? You truly believe Simms would do worse or no better than 3 points against SC at home? After watching these past 3 games not once did you think Simms would be a better option at all? The coaches did thats why he got in both games. If you are siding with the coaches decisions here then they too admitted by playing Simms in both games that they potentially made a mistake.

Still no proof of Worley experiment being successful. Not complaining here just stating realities about our situation. People are living in this fantasy world of what ifs talking about the future like its promised or something.
Click to expand...

Worley sucked. Simms sucked. The difference is that Simms had proven that awful was as good as he was ever going to be, whereas Worley still has some upside and a chance to do better. Dooley picked the question mark over the known steaming turd.

The only rational way to evaluate decisions is based on the information people had at the time. Dooley benched a QB who was playing at one of the worst levels in UT history and gave a talented freshman a shot. It's ridiculous once you know how it turned out to say, "Oh well, we only scored three points so obviously Dooley was a dumbass and he should have just left the QB who was playing horribly in to begin with." That's second-guessing at its most unreasonable.
 
#146
#146
Vercingetorix said:
Worley sucked. Simms sucked. The difference is that Simms had proven that awful was as good as he was ever going to be, whereas Worley still has some upside and a chance to do better. Dooley picked the question mark over the known steaming turd.

The only rational way to evaluate decisions is based on the information people had at the time. Dooley benched a QB who was playing at one of the worst levels in UT history and gave a talented freshman a shot. It's ridiculous once you know how it turned out to say, "Oh well, we only scored three points so obviously Dooley was a dumbass and he should have just left the QB who was playing horribly in to begin with." That's second-guessing at its most unreasonable.
Click to expand...

The only issue I took with playing Worley and losing the redshirt was the back and forth with the decision and inserting Simms when you knew he was no better. I understand the want to give yourself the best opportunity to win, but when you make a decision like that to insert Worley, stick with it and stop with the back and forth when ultimitely, it wont make a bit of difference in the outcome of the games.
 
#147
#147
What's the problem with playing Worley? It gets him experience so if next year Bray goes down again we actually have a QB with some skills and some experience as opposed to a frosh who has never taken a snap coming into the game.

Either way, I'm betting you and others would have ripped Dooley for not playing Worley this year if that were the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#148
#148
Amazing how people will pick out one thing and construct it in a way to support themselves. Sure decisions are not good or bad before/at the exact moment you make them. The results of the decision are what is good or bad. So you want me to say the decision produced bad results. Is that a better statement for you. The decision produced at minimum 2 bad results. Im asking what the good results were/are. Experience I get that but he only threw 1 TD in 3 games. He was held back in 2nd half of MTSU according to Dooley but still 1 thrown TD? I guess its good that he threw a TD at all.....

I personally would not have slammed Dooley for playing Simms. I have been hoping Simms would get a shot against people other than the #1 and #2 team in the country.

Also i thought I should mention that I like Dooley and hope he succeeds. I just dont agree with a decision he made. Some people seem to think you cant disagree with a guys decision and still like him as a coach.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top