10-03-2012, 11:53 AM
If Shaw thinks that Nunes played well in the San Jose State and very well against Duke, we should all be very concerned. He was 16/26 for 125 yards against SJSU, and 16/30 for 275 yds against Duke. Those should not be benchmarks for good QB play.
It would've been a lot better for Shaw to say that Nunes was playing poorly, but that they were working to improve, or that despite Nunes poor performance, he still gives the best chance at winning. That could be believable. Now we all know that Shaw is either lying to us all in order to protect his quarterbacks ego, or that he's got blinders on.
Every position on the field should be dictated by performance. QB is no different.
Fun Fact! Stanford had a Spike Factor rating of 41% against UW. Meaning, that Stanford would've been just as well served or better off, if we had just spiked the ball in the turf after the snap.
I guess the good news is at least we're not kal, who had a 50% against ASU...
http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/...tor-week-5
It would've been a lot better for Shaw to say that Nunes was playing poorly, but that they were working to improve, or that despite Nunes poor performance, he still gives the best chance at winning. That could be believable. Now we all know that Shaw is either lying to us all in order to protect his quarterbacks ego, or that he's got blinders on.
Every position on the field should be dictated by performance. QB is no different.
Fun Fact! Stanford had a Spike Factor rating of 41% against UW. Meaning, that Stanford would've been just as well served or better off, if we had just spiked the ball in the turf after the snap.
I guess the good news is at least we're not kal, who had a 50% against ASU...
Quote:We almost feel bad for piling on, but right now Jeff Tedford is to quarterback development as pool chemicals are to things you should feed a baby.
http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/...tor-week-5