Did you watch the Wagner game? Blaming it on subbing in and out is BS. That’s like playing a high school team. You don’t prep a kid by putting them in a BIG game and allowing them to throw picks and fumble the football. I don’t know where he’s at now, but based on where he was when we last saw him he was not ready to be out there. As someone else pointed out, we have seniors on the team trying to compete for a bowl bid for their last time. You do not simply hand wins to the opposing team hoping it helps a young QB learn for future years.
Now GS commented that Wimsatt is improving at practice. How much of that is true vs him trying to dangle hope out there to the fans who want him to play to keep them engaged? I have no idea. But the one thing he’s most certainly being straightforward about is focusing on winning now. If you watched the Wagner game you ought to know Gavin at that point was not likely to be able to play a clean enough game help us win yet as the main QB. At least not then.
I watch every game and usually more than once.
You can hand over the job to a young QB and win. It often happens in college football. The difference is the development and support. That hasn't been the case here. I've played with Ray Lucas (RS frosh), and he delivered. I've played with Darian Hagan (Colorado), who finished 6th in the Heisman after having 25 snaps the year before as a frosh.
The staff hasn't developed other aspects of the game for Wimsatt or Simon.
Simon is pass-heavy even though he can run. The few times Rutgers has run RPO with Simon, his gains have been substantial. Defenses don't think Simon will run because Rutgers seldom uses him in that capacity. When it comes to Wimsatt, it's RPO, with him keeping it 95% of the time. Then the majority of his passes are deep down the field. How many easy passing plays have they run for Wimsatt? How many RPO plays do they run for Simon when the defense is keying the RB in a running situation?
The bottom line, the football team, is a large organization where everyone will have different views and opinions on how to succeed. Gleeson didn't get the job done, and he apparently set the QB room back by not developing the QB. I'm not a Vedral fan, but I thought the play-calling Saturday better matched his abilities. Rutgers cut the field in half to make it easier to read the defense and limit mistakes. Vedral had either one or two options on a pass, throw it away if nothing is there or he could run it. What's to say something similar can't be done for Simon or Wimsatt?
