Your saying if "we couldn't get anything going, sub the QB's out." I think that's wrong in this sisusation. Did you see Auburn subbing in for Cox when they only had 1 good drive the entire game? The fact is subbing QB's would have brought in a cold QB and put a ton of pressure on him, and then got JMarc out of any rythem he might have developed. Changing QB's would not have done anything. Like has already been stated, our running game was not there. What point would bringing a RUNNING QB in done? He wasn't going to break anything open. All that does is hurt our throwing game, which was the only thing that Auburn seemed to not be able to stop.
Ah, I remember just a few years ago, when Marcus Randall was our QB, everybody was yelling about how they needed to pull Randall and put in our new star QB, Jamarcus Russel. The more things change the more they stay the same.
Yep. I got more green then the one red from my one post in this thread. The anonymous rep points is crap.
Should Matt Flynn have played? No. Take out your 269-yard starter in a close, important game? Not a chance.
putting in younger players, regardless of position, generally results in MA's in such a huge road game. At home, it's prolly a different story, but when you put a less-experienced player in a key position (QB,RB) into the game, it's getting away from a conservative gameplan. If you'd consider putting a younger, less-experienced player into such an environment, then why have a conservative gameplan at all? Just my $0.02, but I would've ridden JR all the way too. Good decision by Miles/Fisher, IMO.:thumb:
Whoa, someone has no balls. 2 of my posts were disapporved w/ the message "flynn should start." Have some balls and man up. Whoever did it obviously is the type of person that gets beat up everyday in highschool. If you don't have a valid argument as to why Flynn should start grow and pair instead of hiding behind rep.
