He was brought in to make an immediate impact.

bearsandgiants said:

---

He was brought in to make an immediate impact.

---

On the ground? Or the football impacting linemen's heads?

bearister said:

---

I prefer Finley's passing game. Is that crazy talk?

---

I agree. That is crazy talk

I expect Udub to stack the box tonight and dare Jackson to beat them throwing the ball. I don't feel he can. And by stacking the box and bringing multiple defenders should J5 attempt to pass he won't have time and will throw up some gimme INTs.

That said, I feel Finley (perhaps Mendoza) gives us a better "chance" at winning. The OL has improved but are still below average as a unit. Spav needs to call better plays for whichever QB he puts in there.

Also, Earby needs to start at DB over LM Hearns, Hearns is having a tuff year.

ducky23 said:

---

Goof Ball Bear said:

---

I don't get the responses regarding SJV's game. Here's a guy who's basically about to play in his third game. For all intents and purposes, he didn't play against North Texas. He's done enough to win his games and whose only loss is to an undefeated Auburn team who was outplayed by Cal. (I know Auburn hasn't beaten anyone of note either but they are giving up points to their weaker opponents either) He's still learning the game and probably the intricacies of the offense. And we want to play a less talented guy who can't beat out a guy who's still learning the game? That say more for Finley than it does for Jackson.

I noticed posters continue to want to see Mendoza. Okay. Here's a guy who has been third string by two completely different OCs. He's been behind four different QBs. The little I saw of him against NT did not suggest to me that he's anything special. Why would you want to see him?

I am not on the coaching staff, but it seems logical to me that you'd want to develop your talented players before developing less talented players. As other posters mentioned, Finley is less mobile, has a weaker arm, and forces the ball. Maybe he understands the offense better and goes through his progressions better. That could be. But if that's his only advantage and potential, then there's not much to develop there.

In order to develop your talent, you have to let them develop their games. That's why you play a Goff early in his career. He got better didn't he?

If you had a more talented or a well established QB, then you start him over Jackson. If Plummer or Garbers were still around, that would be your starter, no questions asked. We don't have that. Let's see what he can do. Finley can get some reps as a backup. I get that. But you have to develop your talent. That's SJV.

---

I'm not going to argue with any of that. But in this new age of NIL, programs simply don't have the luxury of developing quarterbacks (especially programs on the edge of extinction). Every year needs to be win now.

It's very possible Jackson turns into a great QB 2-3 years from now. But we don't have that time. We should've bought in a QB with actual experience and actual pelts on the wall already (the Idaho QB comes to mind). But this is a conversation for a different day.

As far as this year, I'm afraid the writing is already on the wall. Jackson is talented but extremely raw. And no matter what changes the staff makes, nothing is going change that this year. Unfortunately, by choosing to bring in an inexperienced QB, the staff has basically already said to its fans, "wait till next year". Which is Wilcox's favourite motto.

---

Sometimes the guy you need isnt available.

That said, now that we are in conference play, and will gameplan with Jackson in mind (I'm not sure we did that with auburn), I'm expecting to see a lot more roll outs. It limits the exposure of the line, simplifies the passing game, and provides greater opportunities for Jackson to use his legs.

Let's also reiterate, Jackson is currently:
29 - 54 (54%) with 3 TDs and 2 Ints.

These numbers include several throw away, several plays where the QB and wr think a different route is being run, numerous bubble screens where the wide receivers cant block, and a few drops. It should also be noted that the 2 ints came off end of half desperation plays.

Point being, it's too early to make a definitive statement one way or the other.

I think the absolute worst thing the coaching staff can do right now is play rotating QBs. They need to choose someone and ride or die with them for at least two full games before re-evaluating.

Well we also did play the two worst defenses we will see all season

I do agree though we need to just pick a QB and go all in

bearister said:

---

I prefer Finley's passing game. Is that crazy talk?

---

Coaches don't think it so crazy.

bearister said:

---

I prefer Finley's passing game. Is that crazy talk?

---

Do you still prefer Finley's passing. THREE INT including one Pick six. Several other near INTs. He looks lost in the backfield Bad decision after bad decision.
I'm
What I don't understand is why Jackson is not playing. Is he hurt?

Ben Finley has now thrown 7 TDs and 9 INTs on his career.

He was a legacy and given every chance at NC State and could not keep the starting job due to his poor arm and poor decision making resulting in too many turnovers.

He has started half the games and has taken the majority of the snaps at Cal. There is zero upside with him. Isn't that clear by now? He should have been the backup, period. Jackson just has more upside, I don't know if he will get a chance to realize it at Cal, we may be just too dysfunctional.

I was right about sticking with Jackson. It couldn't get worse than this and at least you have upside. Or just play Mendoza.
Best options:
1. Try to develop Jackson.
2. Rotate all QBs including walkons.

Yes. Very much yes.

Jackson looking great. Yet another scoring drive with him in there. We have yet to be out scored with him at QB.

golden sloth said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Goof Ball Bear said:

---

I don't get the responses regarding SJV's game. Here's a guy who's basically about to play in his third game. For all intents and purposes, he didn't play against North Texas. He's done enough to win his games and whose only loss is to an undefeated Auburn team who was outplayed by Cal. (I know Auburn hasn't beaten anyone of note either but they are giving up points to their weaker opponents either) He's still learning the game and probably the intricacies of the offense. And we want to play a less talented guy who can't beat out a guy who's still learning the game? That say more for Finley than it does for Jackson.

I noticed posters continue to want to see Mendoza. Okay. Here's a guy who has been third string by two completely different OCs. He's been behind four different QBs. The little I saw of him against NT did not suggest to me that he's anything special. Why would you want to see him?

I am not on the coaching staff, but it seems logical to me that you'd want to develop your talented players before developing less talented players. As other posters mentioned, Finley is less mobile, has a weaker arm, and forces the ball. Maybe he understands the offense better and goes through his progressions better. That could be. But if that's his only advantage and potential, then there's not much to develop there.

In order to develop your talent, you have to let them develop their games. That's why you play a Goff early in his career. He got better didn't he?

If you had a more talented or a well established QB, then you start him over Jackson. If Plummer or Garbers were still around, that would be your starter, no questions asked. We don't have that. Let's see what he can do. Finley can get some reps as a backup. I get that. But you have to develop your talent. That's SJV.

---

I'm not going to argue with any of that. But in this new age of NIL, programs simply don't have the luxury of developing quarterbacks (especially programs on the edge of extinction). Every year needs to be win now.

It's very possible Jackson turns into a great QB 2-3 years from now. But we don't have that time. We should've bought in a QB with actual experience and actual pelts on the wall already (the Idaho QB comes to mind). But this is a conversation for a different day.

As far as this year, I'm afraid the writing is already on the wall. Jackson is talented but extremely raw. And no matter what changes the staff makes, nothing is going change that this year. Unfortunately, by choosing to bring in an inexperienced QB, the staff has basically already said to its fans, "wait till next year". Which is Wilcox's favourite motto.

---

Sometimes the guy you need isnt available.

That said, now that we are in conference play, and will gameplan with Jackson in mind (I'm not sure we did that with auburn), I'm expecting to see a lot more roll outs. It limits the exposure of the line, simplifies the passing game, and provides greater opportunities for Jackson to use his legs.

---

Yet Wilcox(?) went with Finley and stuck with him even after 3 Interceptions in the first half. Fortunate the 4th was called back. Jackson again looked great for a guy who has only had two college starts. I still don't see why there has been so much criticism of his passing. He has a strong arm and is accurate. Most incompletes are throw sways to avoid sacks. His only two interceptions (against Auburn) were forced throws on 4th and long with time expiring.

True. But you have to go with who's on the squad today. What your best shot? You may NOT recruit a better QB in the future. That's not a guarantee. We have to develop somebody because we don't have anybody else. Maybe the lightbulb comes on the 5th or 7th or whatever game for SJV or maybe it doesn't. I'm not saying it's ideal, but short of having a Plummer or Garbers around, it is what it is... developing lesser talent simply makes less sense.