Nathan Vs. Riley

forevereagle · February 3, 2010

And he doesn't. I made no statistical argument between the two. You asked if 303 was enough, making a straw man reference to Riley. But to the point, Tune doesn't have an appropriate sample size. You've made nothing to counter that argument except to say that he's thrown the ball 1/3 the number of times Riley has, which only serves to prove my point.

And you are incorrect. Your own numbers actually point to exactly why. He played in only 1/5th the number of games. And only threw the ball 1/3rd the number of times. Tune didn't even play 1/3rd of the season, and you want to make a statistical comparison, which is ridiculous. Also, he's a senior. I would honestly at least respect the Derek Thompson idea because that's one that could pay off for more than a year.

If someone really wanted to make a statistical comparison, an easy and interesting one would be one of Vizza's seasons to Riley's first. Those are at least CLOSE in play time.

And my point is that, in terms of statistics and being able to project future performance based on past performance, his sample size is plenty large. You can assume, based on the 100+ pass attempts, that his statistics would be within a small range of what we already see. There has been enough play time by Tune to make that comparison. You do not need to have a full season of performance to make a comparison, just a large enough body of work to compare.

For what you are arguing to be true, in order to compare Vizza and Riley, Riley could not have sat out the number of games that he did because the number of games played is not the exact same. But that is not the case because there is sufficient data to make the comparison.

CaribbeanGreen · February 3, 2010

We can debate this all we want, but this situation is far clearer than most any other position on the field. Say we assume that Canales will have as much control as any offensive coordinator reasonably would.... okay, then, as others stated before me, it's awfully clear that Riley is awfully similar in style to Matt Groethe, Canales' most successful QB. On top of that, Riley has three more years in the system, seemingly being a better choice as far as laying the foundation for the future. Hell, while we're at it, Riley has more experience at the collegiate level and more experience working with this line and these WRs... which I don't think even matters, considering Canales' stylistic leanings and Riley's eligibility.

Now, let's consider that Dodge is making all the final decsisions as the head coach and still basically running the show. If Dodge so much as has a little veto power on any of Canales' decisions, there isn't any question Riley will play.

Basically, this isn't an issue. IIf you like Nathan Tune's ability, be thankful we have a solid backup. Because like it or not, that's what he'll be - no matter what. And there's little doubt Riley gets injured next year, so we'll need him dearly, regardless of what the depth chart says.

Edited February 3, 2010 by CaribbeanGreen

All About UNT · February 3, 2010

Where did I say anything about 303? Do you see me making a statistical argument? What I'm saying is clamoring for a senior with limited experience to start based on a statistical argument is silly to me. He doesn't have stats on which to base an argument. We had to pass the ball more when Tune was in because:

a) if he had come into a game, we were usually already behind.
b ) he doesn't have the legs to run the ball himself, which cuts down on the rushing attempts (and limits the offense)
c) two of his starts did rightly come against our toughest competition, and there was little choice.

My point has always been that I don't know who the best QB on our roster is, but that it's honestly not my biggest concern after seeing the offense we run. And I'm personally of the opinion that we likely don't have "that guy" on the roster anyway. That, and everyone always loves the backup. Both Tune and Riley's QB ratings are pretty weak, TBH. Sadly, still better than Vizza/Meager ever did.

If you're changing QBs at this point, he HAS to be the difference between 2 or 3 wins and going to a bowl game, because you're putting in a guy with no eligibility left, so you get to do it all over again next year. It better be worth it.

The only teams that get by without having long-term consistent starters are the occasional BCS teams that have 3 and 4-star backups. They groom them, get them a couple of years to start, move on. We don't have that luxury.

I mean, if we don't care about sample size, then Derek Thompson!!!! He's 100% completion rate, 20 yards/attempt. 378 QB Rating. He's perfect. Okay, I probably shouldn't stir the pot, since people will come in here riding those numbers.

I for one am more than anxious to see how Derek Thompson (a dual threat QB) will rank against Riley in practice this spring. May have to show up for some of the sessions!

Cr1028 · February 4, 2010

Tune should of played more after his performance in the tide game.

Did any of you even watch the Alabama game? SERIOUSLY?? The offense was awful and one-dimensional since Tune has no wheels. If you take away Dunbar's fantastic TD catch and run, Tune didn't even pass for 100 yards in this "performance" that should have earned him more playing time. Get real man. The grass is always greener. Whoever the backup is will always be the better quarterback. It was Meager, Phillips, Wilson, then it was Meager, Vizza, then it was Vizza, Riley, and now it is Riley, Tune. How about you accept that a redshirt freshman took his lumps and will have experience and another qualified coach working his technique. There is no need to bash on maybe the highest rated recruited we have had simply because he had to play earlier than a large program would call for. His athletic ability gives us the best chance to win, plain and simple. If Baine has better arm strength/accuracy, equivalent running ability, and an equal grasp of the offense, he should get the nod. The same goes for Thompson, but from what I have SEEN, actually SEEN, on the field, Riley gives us the best chance to win. Until Tune can run a 4.5 give me the speedster for 1000 Alex!

GoMeanGreen1999 · February 4, 2010

We can debate this all we want, but this situation is far clearer than most any other position on the field. Say we assume that Canales will have as much control as any offensive coordinator reasonably would.... okay, then, as others stated before me, it's awfully clear that Riley is awfully similar in style to Matt Groethe, Canales' most successful QB. On top of that, Riley has three more years in the system, seemingly being a better choice as far as laying the foundation for the future. Hell, while we're at it, Riley has more experience at the collegiate level and more experience working with this line and these WRs... which I don't think even matters, considering Canales' stylistic leanings and Riley's eligibility.

Now, let's consider that Dodge is making all the final decsisions as the head coach and still basically running the show. If Dodge so much as has a little veto power on any of Canales' decisions, there isn't any question Riley will play.

Basically, this isn't an issue. IIf you like Nathan Tune's ability, be thankful we have a solid backup. Because like it or not, that's what he'll be - no matter what. And there's little doubt Riley gets injured next year, so we'll need him dearly, regardless of what the depth chart says.

This.