Climer thinks QB battle is a sham

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by SawdustMan, Jun 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JCBRAVE

    JCBRAVE goTitans 2019 Survivor Champion

    82,274
    26,649
    1,509
    Fingers crossed Locker goes off during the preseason and makes it easy for the coaches.
     
  2. Fry

    Fry Welcome to the land of tomorrow!

    42,307
    15,453
    1,389
    David Climer is and always has been a clown.
     
  3. SlidePiece

    SlidePiece Starter

    1,368
    693
    219
    Oh right, because Hasselbeck showed so much promise last year right? Because everyone sees that we're going places with him right? Wrong.

    Hasselbeck would provide an 0-4 start, and an undoubtedly LOSING season. There is no question that this team would have a losing season trying to start him against this schedule. Why do we have to actually see that before we make a change? Can we not do like the other 31 teams in the league, and actually move forward with our young franchise QB. They did draft him 8 overall to be the franchise QB didn't they?

    Does it instill optimism in the fanbase to know that we're just waiting for a 37 yr. old QB to hit rock bottom before we can finally go with the guy we drafted to get us to a superbowl. I thought that line of thinking left with Jeff Fisher. They had to actually see and experience Kerry Collins hit rock bottom. So I guess Mike Munchack has to actually experience the same play from Hasselbeck this year before he makes the switch...Why? How does that not do anything but hold this team back while others are moving forward?

    I could understand that thinking if we actually had an older QB here that really provided the opportunity for a superbowl, i.e. Peyton Manning or Brett Favre. But we don't. Seatle was content to move on to Tavarious Jackson, they were content moving forward because they knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that Matt Hasselbeck wasn't taking them anywhere. That's the type of progressive thinking that has taken hold around this league. You don't sit your #1 pick on the bench when theres nothing but an 0-4 start and a 5-11 season in front of him. That is a waste of time, and you will be passed by the rest of the teams in this league and the division (i.e. see Texans and eventually the Colts). Stop the madness and get with the 21st century NFL, start viably competing with Rodgers, Brady, Brees and the like. We know Matt Hasselbeck can't do that.....

    NOW MOVE ON! FIND SOMEONE THAT CAN!
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  4. TitansWrath

    TitansWrath Pro Bowler

    5,313
    3,054
    779
    Bull. He was brought in here to be a bridge and a mentor to Locker, not to be our long term starting quarterback. That was the deal. He knew it, we knew it.

    He did not display enough last year to keep the #8 pick off the bench, especially when, in my eyes and many other fans, Locker outplayed him in limited opportunity LAST year.

    It is time. If Munch starts Hass, I lose most of my respect for him.
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  5. Scarecrow

    Scarecrow All-Pro

    30,719
    13,964
    1,459
    are we really having another one of these threads?
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  6. TitansWrath

    TitansWrath Pro Bowler

    5,313
    3,054
    779
    Yes, seeing as how that is THE number one story of the offseason, and the future of this team. I imagine that is what we will be talking about all preseason too.
     
  7. Thaddeus43

    Thaddeus43 Sunshiner President

    7,660
    3,779
    779
    "All signs point to Hasselbeck" ... what signs?? The only thing he brought up is that the schedule is rough starting out, and Hass having started more games (then he also mentions Rusty having started more games like his experience matters, so it is obvious that this guy is a complete joke)

    I think there are more signs pointing to Locker.

    #1 - If the FO wanted Hass, they would not be changing the offense to a more pass heavy/explosive style (and from what we hear/see, that appears what is coming). That fits Locker not Hass.

    #2 - If you want to keep Hass at starter, you don't split the reps 50/50. It is so much easier to say "open competition, but since Hass was the starter last year he will take the majority of the starting snaps" ... you don't take away starting snaps from the starting QB unless you are really contemplating change. They will say that every job is "open competition" but I seriously doubt they take away starting reps from Jmac, Griff, Ayers, Britt (when healthy), Nate, Roos, Stewart, ect.

    The only positions that you will see multiple players getting a good share of starting reps will be at QB, C, and maybe CB/S. Thats because those are the postions that are really open (notice QB is one of those positions)

    #3 - Hasselbeck deserved to lose his job late last year. They kept him in to avoid any controversy, and to avoid throwing Locker to the wolves with playoff hopes still alive. I think Locker could've handled it, but I understand the reasoning then. Now Locker will have plenty of time to prepare and will know what he is getting into ahead of time. But anyone who thinks that Hass did enough to keep a firm grip on the starting job, especially with a 1st rd QB on the bench either didn't watch last years games, forgot the bad and only remembers the good, or is just stupid. (I think most people are just forgetting)

    I think there are still a lot of people that have the same philosophy that Fisher had (I guess to many years of him is hard to shake off), but just because someone was the starter last season does not in any way entitle them to keep the job the next year. And these local guys really seem to love the vet QBs. Remember these are the same people that thought we would/should retain KFC for another year. :rolleyes:

    I am really not worried about it though, this FO has gone with the younger more talented players so far, and I expect that they will continue to do so.
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  8. SlidePiece

    SlidePiece Starter

    1,368
    693
    219
    This is what I don't get. Are their standards that low? If they were fine with going the KFC route last year(would have provided maybe 1W) then of course they'll be fine with going the Hasselbeck route this year (would provide 5W's)... Much improved right?
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  9. TitansWrath

    TitansWrath Pro Bowler

    5,313
    3,054
    779
    At this point, I wish we had just signed McNabb instead of Hass. Locker would have some experience now, would be the unquestioned starter, and we'd have had a better draft pick.

    This "controversy" is absurd. Starting Hasselbeck is just dumb. He's a great asset as a backup, but that's it. No way we make the playoffs with this schedule with him under center limp wristing the ball around.

    And it retards the long term development of this team. We have assembled an offense with amazing potential around Locker. The window won't stay open forever. The sooner we get the Locker era rolling, the better.
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  10. SawdustMan

    SawdustMan #ChampChamp

    22,670
    11,707
    1,239
    Well, I mainly started it to get everyone's opinion on how legit they think the "competition" really is. I didn't intend for it to be another "do you prefer Locker or Hasselbeck" thread. But I'm not surprised that's what it has turned into. Like TitansWrath said, it is by far the biggest Titan-related story of the offseason.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  • Welcome to goTitans.com

    Established in 2000, goTitans.com is the place for Tennessee Titans fans to talk Titans. Our roots go back to the Tennessee Oilers Fan Page in 1997 and we currently have 4,000 diehard members with 1.5 million messages. To find out about advertising opportunities, contact TitanJeff.
  • The Tip Jar

    For those of you interested in helping the cause, we offer The Tip Jar. For $2 a month, you can become a subscriber and enjoy goTitans.com without ads.

    Hit the Tip Jar