Plummer vs. Johnson

http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/9823256

Interesting stats here. Plummer is getting benched in favor of the rookie, yet BJ is still here. 2006 Stats:

Plummer:

Yearly Total





Passing








Rushing









Fumbles



Att Comp Pct

Yds
TD Int Rate Sac Yds Att Yds Avg Lg TD Fum Rec



276 150
54.3 1778 10 11 69.7 15
98
32 100 3.1 19
1

6

1

Johnson:

Yearly Total






Passing









Rushing












Fumbles




Att Comp Pct

Yds
TD
Int
Rate Sac Yds
Att
Yds
Avg
Lg
TD
Fum
Rec



332 207
62.3 2139
5

10
73.4 22
153
19
54

2.8
9

0

9

1

Plummer with 10TD and 11 INT, 6 Fumbles

Johnson with 5 TD and 10 INT, 9 Fumbles

Do the math. If Shanahan, (who I think everyone will agree at this point is a better coach than Childress), is willing to start his rookie QB with a WINNING season, then maybe we should try with a LOSING season. You know, mobile QB able to get away if the line sucks and all.... Just my opinion.

I don't know ... I am not a BJ lover by any stretch, but I think we have to go with him against Arizona to make sure of no rookie mistakes costing us a win (hopefully not veteran mistakes for a change too!). I also don't think we can plan on Tarvaris getting his first start the following week at Soldier Field ... that just would not be right ... if we come out of these two games 4-8, then I think Tarvaris should get the nod for the rest of the season ... if we come out 5-7 and still have a shot at running the table and sneaking in ... I doubt we make the move.

I think it's because their coaching staff decided to trade up for a rookie QB who they had confidence could perform this year vs. our coaching staff, that traded up for an apparent project.

Not putting down Tarvaris, it's just it was clear we didn't have a strong QB corp, and yet we drafted someone who may not be able to really help for a year or 2 (according to them) rather than trade (probably similar value) to move up in the first round.

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

Quote:

---

I think it's because their coaching staff decided to trade up for a rookie QB who they had confidence could perform this year vs. our coaching staff, that traded up for an apparent project.

Not putting down Tarvaris, it's just it was clear we didn't have a strong QB corp, and yet we drafted someone who may not be able to really help for a year or 2 (according to them) rather than trade (probably similar value) to move up in the first round.

---

Touche. I agree with most of that, but what better time to start a rookie. Give him an "easy" game against the Cards and go from there. I hate the posts about starting a QB against a "Very Tough" team. Every team is tough in the NFL from week to week. If we didn't start rookies against tough opponents ever, would we ever start them? Being on the bench for four years doesn't technically make you a rookie, but they are all the same. We need to do something!!!

"darkflood" wrote:

Quote:

---

"ItalianStallion" wrote:

Quote:

---

I think it's because their coaching staff decided to trade up for a rookie QB who they had confidence could perform this year vs. our coaching staff, that traded up for an apparent project.

Not putting down Tarvaris, it's just it was clear we didn't have a strong QB corp, and yet we drafted someone who may not be able to really help for a year or 2 (according to them) rather than trade (probably similar value) to move up in the first round.

---

Touche. I agree with most of that, but what better time to start a rookie. Give him an "easy" game against the Cards and go from there. I hate the posts about starting a QB against a "Very Tough" team. Every team is tough in the NFL from week to week. If we didn't start rookies against tough opponents ever, would we ever start them? Being on the bench for four years doesn't technically make you a rookie, but they are all the same. We need to do something!!!

---

Then you're getting into a different topic altogether.
The fact is, everyone in charge doesn't think Tarvaris is ready, whereas everyone in charge of the broncos seems to hink Cutler is.

Thoughts.......

If our coaches wanted a rookie to start this year, they should have traded up for Cutler or Lienert or Young.

Maybe Cutler is ready and T-Jack is not. WE DON'T KNOW!
Our coaches don't want to come to a PC and start telling us that the QB they drafted is deficient or lacking in areas.
If he isn't listed as the No2 QB, then he is deficient enough to be behind Bollinger.
3rd string QBs are meant to hold clipboards,not take up to much cap room and come in for emergency situations only.

As far as Plummer, he has a track record of poor play for Shanny plus Shanny has high expectations. Plummer had a stretch of games last year where he was ON FIRE, but the rest of the time he has been with Shanny, it has been below the level of SB caliber.


It also comes down to if you can pull the change of without loosing the faith of the players on the field.

Dallas was ready and maybe Denver is ready.
Both of those teams had their number two guy in practice all season and probably saw him make the throws in practice that give them a feeling to say "this guy" can play. TJ was injured and lost reps.
In our case, both Bollinger and TJ are in there first year MN.
Bollinger has experience but didn't go through the preseason or camps with us.
TJ went through camps and preseason, but is a rookie and was injured.

Just some thoughts!