Stone Earle deserves to be the starter

[Jonnyeagle]

 

[Glory to the Green]

I’m good with fall competition. Whoever gives us the best chance to win is who I’d prefer to start. 

[NT93]

He deserves to be the starter if he beats out Chandler Morris.  

[greenminer]

Right.  Just like he deserved to be the starter last year @ Cal.
 

[Tom McKrackin]

[jtm0097]

I hope you're not basing this on playing well in practice against our defense. Stone could be the guy this fall, but Chandler is the more talented QB. I think after fall camp Chandler will be the QB. Let's pray that he can stay healthy.

[Big Z]

Put the best player out there…period 

[DentonLurker]

Care to elaborate on why you think he deserves to be the starter?

[rojomojo]

Tf?

[Big Z]

On 4/9/2024 at 1:24 AM, DentonLurker said:

Care to elaborate on why you think he deserves to be the starter?

Who knows? lol 

After seeing Stone last year and not being handle business against FIU, this guy doesn't deserve anything until he has earned it. 

[GreenBacker]

1 hour ago, Big Z said:

Who knows? lol 

After seeing Stone last year and not being handle business against FIU, this guy doesn't deserve anything until he has earned it. 

You do remember that we had benched multiple starters for the first half right before this game for violating rules?  Wasn’t pretty but we were winning at half, and then lost the game after the starters returned in the 2nd half.  

[Jonnyeagle]

1 hour ago, GreenBacker said:

You do remember that we had benched multiple starters for the first half right before this game for violating rules?  Wasn’t pretty but we were winning at half, and then lost the game after the starters returned in the 2nd half.  

Good point.  Again, the secrecy of this regime is part of the problem.  Morris really limits access and info unlike any other coach I have ever seen.  He supposedly got this from Leach but I didn't notice it as much with Littrell.

[Big Z]

1 hour ago, GreenBacker said:

You do remember that we had benched multiple starters for the first half right before this game for violating rules?  Wasn’t pretty but we were winning at half, and then lost the game after the starters returned in the 2nd half.  

Stone had a bad game regardless 

[emmitt01]

3 hours ago, GreenBacker said:

You do remember that we had benched multiple starters for the first half right before this game for violating rules?  Wasn’t pretty but we were winning at half, and then lost the game after the starters returned in the 2nd half.  

You're talking about this game, right?  I just want to make sure your explanation of "starters came in and ruined it for Stone Earle" is referring to THIS game...

[GreenBacker]

8 minutes ago, emmitt01 said:

You're talking about this game, right?  I just want to make sure your explanation of "starters came in and ruined it for Stone Earle" is referring to THIS game...

Quite the opposite.   I’m saying Chandler played with the starters and Stone didn’t.  

[GreenBacker]

2 hours ago, Big Z said:

Stone had a bad game regardless 

Yes.  I agree.  My point is that it is a very small sample size in less than ideal conditions.  If he was good enough to beat out the guy they brought in to be the starter last year, odds are he showed lots of promise.  By all accounts they wanted it to be Rodgers last year, but Stone kept outplaying him in summer/fall camp.  He also put up 3 touchdowns against Cal in 1 half(1 more than Auburn did in their game the next week) when Rodgers couldn’t do much.  Stone now has another year in the system.  I just think the fanbase has made up their mind off a small sample size since the coaching staff is always so hush hush on the day to day.  I’m sure the new Chandler will get the job, but QB play is the least of my worries whether it’s Stone or Chandler. 

[MeanGreenTexan]

4 minutes ago, GreenBacker said:

Yes.  I agree.  My point is that it is a very small sample size in less than ideal conditions.  If he was good enough to beat out the guy they brought in to be the starter last year, odds are he showed lots of promise.  By all accounts they wanted it to be Rodgers last year, but Stone kept outplaying him in summer/fall camp.  He also put up 3 touchdowns against Cal in 1 half(1 more than Auburn did in their game the next week) when Rodgers couldn’t do much.  Stone now has another year in the system.  I just think the fanbase has made up their mind off a small sample size since the coaching staff is always so hush hush on the day to day.  I’m sure the new Chandler will get the job, but QB play is the least of my worries whether it’s Stone or Chandler. 

Honestly, after I read this, I chuckled because... no way.
Then I thought about it a little bit, and I chuckled again because I agree.
Then I thought about it some more, and I began sobbing.

[bstnsportsfan3]

April Fools was last week

[Big Z]

2 hours ago, GreenBacker said:

Yes.  I agree.  My point is that it is a very small sample size in less than ideal conditions.  If he was good enough to beat out the guy they brought in to be the starter last year, odds are he showed lots of promise.  By all accounts they wanted it to be Rodgers last year, but Stone kept outplaying him in summer/fall camp.  He also put up 3 touchdowns against Cal in 1 half(1 more than Auburn did in their game the next week) when Rodgers couldn’t do much.  Stone now has another year in the system.  I just think the fanbase has made up their mind off a small sample size since the coaching staff is always so hush hush on the day to day.  I’m sure the new Chandler will get the job, but QB play is the least of my worries whether it’s Stone or Chandler. 

 

Against one of the worst college football teams ....