This is the statement I don't get right here. We played Georgia last game and we ran for 58 yards at 2.6 yards per carry as far as backs are concerned. Clemson ran for 71 at over 6 yards per carry as far as backs are concerned. Their offense barely had any penalties and as a team they had 5 for 65 yards. Our offense had quite a few holding calls and as a team we had 11 for 94 yards. Klubnik operates out of a sideline to sideline, QB friendly, 4 wide offense, with better receivers than we have that simply just doesn't run the ball much. Quinn operates out of a ball control offense that asks him to save us in long yardage situations after it gets itself in trouble not being able to run. These are the 3rd down situations for both QBs. We won't put names on them.
3rd and 3 3rd and 1
3rd and 3 3rd and 2
3rd and 4 3rd and 3
3rd and 4 3rd and 4
3rd and 5 3rd and 5
3rd and 5 3rd and 6
3rd and 5 3rd and 7
3rd and 9 3rd and 7
3rd and 10 3rd and 7
3rd and 10 3rd and 14
3rd and 14 3rd and 15
3rd and 14 3rd and 16
3rd and 15
3rd and 15
3rd and 17
3rd and 22
3rd and 26
3rd and 27
6-18 rate 3-12 rate
Which list performed better on 3rd down? 6-18 is Quinn.
Given the situations and what kind of offenses they both operate in, how do you come to such a wildly different conclusion? If we don't drop a TD pass and miss two field goals Klubnik scored 24 and Ewers scores 29. Both against relatively equal defenses. Klubnik threw for 332 and Quinn for 358. Then you can go back and look at how Klubnik performed vs Georgia. 18-29 142 yards and 1 interception. They had 66 yards rushing and were 4-14 on 3rd downs scoring 3 points total. 3 total points. I honestly don't get it. From my perspective I saw TWO quarterbacks who didn't play perfect, but both were doing everything they could to keep their team in it. You other guys see one guy who played great and the other guy who played shitty even though the output is roughly the same.