Thursday, September 24, 2009

New starter? and other links

The big theme in Thursday's reports is a possible change at QB. Shinskie got reps with the first team and is the likely starter. I don't love the idea given how he has played in the games, but really don't care as long as we win.

Mike McLaughlin is ready to play also and will start at MLB.

Matt Ryan's return to New England to face the Pats is also getting plenty of press with links here, here, and here.

Motivation and confusion have been issues for our offensive line.

Here is a link to the podcast I did with the BC Draft guys.


Claver2010 said...

Really questioning Spaz here. It's obvious Tuggle wasn't the problem last week, and Shinskie's turnovers are a problem.

Eagle1 said...

From the Herald: "Red-shirt freshman Tuggle went 4-for-20 for 23 yards and three interceptions."

I'm ready to try anything else. Do we have any cheerleaders who can throw?

Raj said...

Shinskie is not a college QB. He threw an INT against Kent St. And couldnt get the ball from under center at Clemson. He has zero football IQ, running around with the ball flailing loose around his waist.

Tuggle was not as bad as the 3 INTs seem. Don't get me wrong , he was bad. But one of the INTS was off a WR hands and the other was a desperation long ball with 3 mins left. quick outs/slants and he'll be fine. Im not sure Shinskie can handle the speed of this game in ACC play. At least tuggle can tuck and run...

You know what would also help, is a running game this week.

BCMike said...

Thanks for joining in on the podcast, Bill!

Lally said...

Shinskie is not likely to look any better than Tuggle if our line blocks air again this week.

Also nice to see that Shinskie, as a true freshman on campus for three months, is already feeling comfortable enough to criticize and call out other players and units on the team to the media. Not a fan.

CT said...

"Yesterday, Shinskie was talking about how the running game needed to improve to make the passing game work better, prompting center Matt Tennant to jokingly respond, “Freshmen.’’

Tennant then explained to Shinskie that the running game would improve if the passing game showed any signs of life."

Agree with Lally...this is teetering on the precipice of arrogance. As a freshman, you keep your mouth shut and do what you're told. Earn something before you withdraw from the bank, so to speak.

And wasn't Shinskie, in the paragraph above that, noting how, as a freshman, there's so much to get acclimated to?

How about acclimating to the "keep-your-mouth-shut" attitude noted above?

mod34b said...

Shinskie might start??.. Super!! Shinskie might even be cocky.. even better for a QB.

Speaking of cocky, who was it that the suggested (to basically boos from the board) that Tuggle struggled and Shinkie was would be worth a nother try.

my post from last week is below:

ATl -- great analysis on O-Line and D, but let me disagree with you on Tuggle.

Tuggle's stats were not bad, they were pathetic. 4/20 for 23 yards, 1 td and 3 pics. Using the pro QB rating system, that amounts to a rating of 16.66. Had he not gotten the TD (which was really just good luck, albeit luck he capitalized upon), his rating would have been 0 -- that is right a zero. Billy Flutie would have done better with no practice at all!

As far as him having a sense of the D, as you note, that did not appear to be the case from my vantage point. Its funny because Tuggle plays against the BC D all the time and should be better. BC's defense is as good as Clemson's D, so it should not have been so bad, but it WAS!!

In short, ATL, I think with Tuggle you are selling your hopes, not your usually hard-headed facts.

Bring back Shinskie!!


matthew2 said...

mod34b --

Shinskie would still appear to be the wrong choice, as he looked awful. Most football people that watched this game saw both QBs play poorly, but saw some potential with Tuggle. Shinskie just looks like he is a boy amongst men (age withstanding) as far as football IQ and "college-readiness" goes. When he establishes himself as a solid starter over the course of time, and Tuggle flames out to nothing, then you can gloat.

Also, it is hard to give credit to a source that continues to bring up the name Flutie in the same breath as a QB conversation. You are really making yourself look silly when you do this, and it's not the first time.

Big Jack Krack said...

Tuggle should start and play as long as he is showing improvement and performing well under the circumstances (little to no protection).

Nothing against Shinskie personally, but I questioned at the time why we were bringing him in here. I said it would potentially cause confusion and dissension. I guess he improved quite a bit the past couple of days, because at Clemson he had no clue how fast football at this level really is. Is he really that much better than Codi Boek?

Hope I'm wrong about the confusion and dissension. If he starts, I wish him the best, but Tuggle should be the guy in my mind.

Go BC - Let's go Coach Spaz and staff.

mod34b said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mod34b said...

Matthew, Matthew ... lighten up, dude...

As for your Flutie comment, perhaps you should re-read my comment about Billie Flutie (4th-5th String QB) and keep in mind the intended irony.

Yes, alas, I am no longer a real football guy who makes football decisions (i was back in the day) and I suspect you are not one either.

I am just a guy in the stands, a guy on a couch with a remote and a guy at a key board looking at blog who loves football. For better or worse a real football person is the head coach of BC and he wants to go with Shinskie. If a real football guy seems to agrees with me, my suggestion can't be that bad, can it? Does that mean Shinskie will save the day. of course not, but it says Shinskie was worth another shot, which was all I was suggesting. Just because he muffed a few plays does not mean he is forever horrible. He can be coached! And let's hope he was coached well. Tuggle really was not a good passing QB and I have serious doubts he can be one any time soon. His accuracy just was not there.

See you in the stands Saturday! Go Shinskie! Go BC!

blist said...

The one thing that worries me with Tuggle is it looks like he lacks the touch for passes 10 yards and up - is that the reason they won't just name him the starter? Otherwise, at ATL has pointed out, he playued with passion Saturday and has nice mobiliy. Shinskie sure sounds younger than his age, especially for a guy who was a pro athlete for 6 years and should be better able to manage his emotions about playing before the Clemson crowd, for instance.
Does anyone get the sense they really want Marscovetra to emerge as the guy but are afraid to admit it? I'm probably seeing what isn't there.

Raj said...

let's look at shinskie's stat line and then tell me if he should even be able to talk at press conferences let alone put on a jersey. I'm for M squared if they cant make tuggle work.

ATL_eagle said...

mod34b, neither has given me much to go on but Tuggle's teammates dropped or didn't catch seven catchable ball. That influences his stats.

mod34b said...

ATL -- True enough, but, of course, a QB's job is to throw accurate and catchable balls. I am not sure Tuggle does that well, although his TD pass was a beaut!

I've got a good Shinskie vibe . . . maybe its irrational, but for a guy at 25 to agree to be a lowly freshman, does say something positive to me...

mod10aeagle said...

How many plays was Shinskie actually in the game for? I remember him holding the ball too long and getting sacked, completing a dink to Anderson, and fumbling the snap, but that's about it. Maybe he handed off a couple of times. Granted the sack and the fumble looked horrible, but that wasn't enough to kick him to the curb. Maybe I missed something? I believe he needs to speed up, but his throwing mechanics are lightyears ahead of Tuggle's, for whatever that's worth.

BC78LH said...

First time I checked in this week and am very surprised to see Shinskie's starting, even the TV guys commented on how inept he was and maybe the QB battle was finally settled.

CT said...

This is like arguing whether you want herpes or the clap.

Truth be told, I don't think the staff is doing any one of these guys any favors. We know little more about them than we did three weeks ago. How is this progress?

And I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that Shinskie doesn't come back to play college ball at 25 to be second-string for four years.

Honestly, this is like being a Pole in WWII. You want Hitler from the West, or Stalin from the East?

AlbanyEagle said...

I am surprised and disappointed that Shinskie might/will start this week. Spaz keeps saying he wants to make a decision sooner rather than later, but it keeps dragging on.

Guess we've just got to give Spaz/Tranq more than 3 games to start condemning them for decisions many of us don't agree with. Hopefully whatever direction they choose to go is based on some very promising things they've seen or figured out in practice that we're not privy to. I just hope they've put more thought and energy into getting the O-line straightened out than they have in the Tuggle-Shinskie issue. If not, the latter point is moot. It won't matter who they put back there.

Brablc said...

Glad to see mclaughlin is starting but hope it doesn't come at the expense of keuchly, who has been great as a true freshman.

I wonder if we'll see them on the field at the same time.

eagleboston said...


I'll take the clap. It goes away after treatment. Herpes is for life. But, I have been married for 18 years so I don't worry about either.

I have a weird feeling we may see Marscovetra under center before the season is out.