Tyler, Tyler, Tyler...
- Thread starter fingerdisco
- Start date
All during the 3rd Quarter, I was saying to bring Tyler in. He could have sparked a light. Luke gave his worst performance of his college career. I would have brought in Tyler with a chance to win the game.
Those comeback wins were in games where the offense showed they had a heartbeat. This team was dead on the slab, so what does he have to lose, other than another game with a zombie QB?
I disagree. A tree is known by it's fruit. For whatever reason, Falk did not look like the same guy we've seen most of the year. I'm highly intuitive, (hate to brag, but it's actually true), and my intuition was telling me to give Hillisnki a shot.
I had that EXACT feeling. I don't remember when it was, but I think it was one of the 3 and outs during the 3rd quarter where I was like pull him and put Hillinski in. There was just something really off about him the whole game. He just wasn't crisp, and like I know he's the starter, but sometimes you have to just realize the guy isn't in the zone to play and rip it, and Hillinski is a guy who could give the team energy or at least a spark to get it going.
I for one hope that Falk turns pro. I would like to see a QB with a little more fire under center. Tyler can run a little bit which may fire up the offense.Most people are overjoyed about the prospect of Falk returning ,i am not one of them.
No hate involved, Falk has had a great career. I would like for him to turn pro and make it. i would have liked to have seen what Tyler could do. Leach ,for better or worse,will and has always stuck with his starting QB. The backups get few precious snaps.
OMG, you do NOT bring in Tyler in a tough, hard fought bowl game. Are you kidding me? Falk was in the P12 POY discussions throughout the season, and you're going to bring in Hilinski against a very good Big-10 defense. Goodbye locker room.
I'll pretend that I didn't read the comments made by some of you suggesting that we sub-in Hilinski.
I'll pretend that I didn't read the comments made by some of you suggesting that we sub-in Hilinski.
Yeah, 3-and-outs and sacks were much preferred to bringing in someone who might actually move the ball.OMG, you do NOT bring in Tyler in a tough, hard fought bowl game. Are you kidding me? Falk was in the P12 POY discussions throughout the season, and you're going to bring in Hilinski against a very good Big-10 defense. Goodbye locker room.
I'll pretend that I didn't read the comments made by some of you suggesting that we sub-in Hilinski.
How do you know? Maybe he actually gains yardage and points, unlike what we were getting. And if not, then we still lose, no change in the outcome. Watching the same sh!t drive after drive would compel some people to actually try something different. Was there any point in that game where you felt things were going to make a dramatic 180-degree turnaround for Falk?
--edit to add: this wasn't a one-game anomaly, he stunk the prior 2-games as well, so it wouldn't exactly be a snap judgment on Leach's part to give Hilinski a shot after 3 quarters of Falk throwing out of bounds or otherwise uncatchable balls, taking sacks, three-and-outs, not utilizing our RB's, etc., etc., etc.
Last edited:
You don't know, that's why you don't make that move. Despite his absolutely abysmal performance last night, Falk is the still #1, most important player on our team and in our locker room. Odds, strictly odds say that Falk gives you the best chance to win last night.
So you bench him for Tyler. Why does that help? We're still running the same offense. The same offensive line is getting beat. The same WRs aren't getting open. It's not like Tyler is a Sefo Liufau or some other running QB who is going to change our look.
If you make that substitution and we don't win, the locker room is a disaster heading into Spring ball. UW is not benching Browning if Alabama stifles them. The Patriots are not going to sub in Garoppolo for Tom Brady. Russell Wison is not getting benched.
No, we're not running the same offense. Hilinski might read the defense differently and use different plays, maybe run more. And there were several times the commentators noted open RB's and receivers that Falk wasn't seeing. And that's hyperbole to say the locker room will be a disaster. Maybe it will be because the team is pissed Hilinski doesn't get an opportunity? To just keep pounding your head against the wall with Falk--especially after seeing what he did the prior 2 games--is stupid IMO. There's been many a time a starter has been benched with the backup doing a better job, so to say you never, ever, under any circumstances do that is flat wrong.
Edit to add: Falk is no Tom Brady. How's Robert Griffin doing in the the league these days? How come Kaepernick isn't starting anymore? Gabbert, Fitzpatrick, Geno Smith? When it aint working, you try something else, at least in the NFL.
Considering that Hilinski has played approximately zero meaningful snaps, why do you think he's going to do anything other than run the play Leach signals in?
You seem to be operating under the assumption things could not have gotten worse. I disagree.
Well as everyone is quick to point out, Leach gives his QB the opportunity to call a play based on the defense. Regardless, lets say TH does run every play as called in by Leach. You think he's going to do EXACTLY as Falk and throw the ball out of bounds where the receiver can't catch it, or underthrow it, or not throw it at all because he won't see the open RB waving his arms for the ball like Falk did? Maybe it would get worse--I suppose he could've thrown a pick-six rather than "just" an interception with the game on the line. Oh well. I guess we're just fundamentally different: you don't want to risk making things worse and will accept the status quo, and I'm not willing to sit and watch the same crap over and over again without trying to do something different.
