Trestman names Franklin starter

[R.J]

https://www.tsn.ca/trestman-names-franklin-week-4-starter-1.1129045

I get the feeling it'll be a short leash though.

[Argo57]

https://www.tsn.ca/trestman-names-franklin-week-4-starter-1.1129045

I get the feeling it'll be a short leash though.

Tough call in regards to Franklin having a “short leash”, young QB’s tend to have growing pains along the way and need playing time to gain experience to improve and learn.
Hopefully Franklin shines in his Argo debut and removes any questions in regards to their future QB.

[lazycro]

What's a short leash defined as? In the Week 1 not much yardage was put up until the 4th quarter but because it was Ray he stayed in.

I don't feel like Trestman is the type to be trigger happy with his QB

[matthew]

Forward. Let’s move forward and give Franklin the chance the team signed him for. I myself am looking forward to the potential future of the team starting his journey.

[paulwoods13]

The brass have shown the opposite of a short leash to this point, with Tyms getting a start in Week 2 despite contributing nothing visible on offence vs. Sask, and the DBs all playing again in week 2 despite some rough outings in Week 1. I get the sense that Trestman is going to stick with vets until the evidence against them is overwhelming. Franklin, as more of a veteran (CFL, that is) will have a relatively long leash, I think.

[OV Argo]

The brass have shown the opposite of a short leash to this point, with Tyms getting a start in Week 2 despite contributing nothing visible on offence vs. Sask, and the DBs all playing again in week 2 despite some rough outings in Week 1. I get the sense that Trestman is going to stick with vets until the evidence against them is overwhelming. Franklin, as more of a veteran (CFL, that is) will have a relatively long leash, I think.

IF some receivers drop a bunch of passes on Franklin, and he makes a few mistakes or bad reads = he should be yanked at half-time and Noah Picton should go in as his replacement - signed: Chris Jones ;o)

[Shatto]

If I were Franklin, I'm not sure I would consider Trestman's statement that it was a "figurative coin toss", as to was named starting QB, as a resounding vote of confidence.

[Rich]

If I were Franklin, I'm not sure I would consider Trestman's statement that it was a "figurative coin toss", as to was named starting QB, as a resounding vote of confidence.

Yeah, he's treading a fine line between lighting a fire under Franklin and making the poor guy look over his shoulder every time he makes a bad throw. I think it's all for show and I still think they are pumping Bethel-Thompson's tires to make him better trade bait, although there's not quite as much desperation for QBs around the league as there was in the last couple of weeks.

[PullTogether73]

If I were Franklin, I'm not sure I would consider Trestman's statement that it was a "figurative coin toss", as to was named starting QB, as a resounding vote of confidence.

I had the same thought when I read the statement.

While I believe that Trestman probably meant that he has equally high confidence in both Franklin and Bethel-Thompson, it sounded more like he the opposite.

[Argo57]

Yeah, he's treading a fine line between lighting a fire under Franklin and making the poor guy look over his shoulder every time he makes a bad throw. I think it's all for show and I still think they are pumping Bethel-Thompson's tires to make him better trade bait, although there's not quite as much desperation for QBs around the league as there was in the last couple of weeks.

Agree with the first part of your statement but the Argos are in no position to be trading QB’s at this time.
Trestman is riding the line between keeping Franklin sharp and focused while at the same time keeping Bethel-Thompson engaged in the process knowing that he may have a chance to start down the road.

[R.J]

I had the same thought when I read the statement.

While I believe that Trestman probably meant that he has equally high confidence in both Franklin and Bethel-Thompson, it sounded more like he the opposite.
I don't think Trestman is high on Franklin for whatever reason - seems to love Bethel Thompson though.

[Will]

I don't think Trestman is high on Franklin for whatever reason - seems to love Bethel Thompson though.

I get that feeling too -- unless it's the "tough love" mentality.

[R.J]

I get that feeling too -- unless it's the "tough love" mentality.
We'll see when Thompson eventually starts - I doubt he'll get the same "tough love".

[Shatto]

Thompson, seems to be the type of QB Trestman prefers--big, good arm strength, purely a drop back passer but not particularly mobile .

[Rich]

Thompson, seems to be the type of QB Trestman prefers--big, good arm strength, purely a drop back passer but not particularly mobile .

Why do people keep saying this? Is it because Trestman had the good fortune to have coached 2 Hall of fame QBs who fit this description? Would he have passed up on a Ray or a Calvillo who could also run like Kaepernick? I don't think so. Everything else being equal, QB mobility adds value to any offence, and there's not a coach anywhere who wouldn't agree.

Instead I would argue that Trestman's history shows that he know how to exploit the strengths of his QBs, and i fully expect him to do so with Franklin as well.

[PullTogether73]

Thompson, seems to be the type of QB Trestman prefers--big, good arm strength, purely a drop back passer but not particularly mobile .


Why do people keep saying this? Is it because Trestman had the good fortune to have coached 2 Hall of fame QBs who fit this description? Would he have passed up on a Ray or a Calvillo who could also run like Kaepernick? I don't think so. Everything else being equal, QB mobility adds value to any offence, and there's not a coach anywhere who wouldn't agree.

Instead I would argue that Trestman's history shows that he know how to exploit the strengths of his QBs, and i fully expect him to do so with Franklin as well.

I would argue that Trestman's history shows that Shatto's comment above is correct.

Calvillo in Montreal.
Cutler in Chicago.
Flacco in Baltimore.
Ray in Toronto.

All known for being pocket passers with limited mobility skills for running/extending plays.

[paulwoods13]

I would argue that Trestman's history shows that Shatto's comment above is correct.

Calvillo in Montreal.
Cutler in Chicago.
Flacco in Baltimore.
Ray in Toronto.

All known for being pocket passers with limited mobility skills for running/extending plays.

Was there someone more mobile but as good, or even almost as good, as any of those guys? If there was, a case could be made that Trestman favours pocket passers. But clearly Ricky Ray and Anthony Calvillo were better than any other QB those two teams had. I can't speak about Cutler and Flacco, but I doubt Trestman kept a more-mobile-but-nearly-as-good QB on the bench because those two guys suited his supposed pocket preference.

[lazycro]

McCown was also in Chi, pocket passer.

[Antwon]

I don't think Trestman is high on Franklin for whatever reason - seems to love Bethel Thompson though.

Trestman should give Franklin a reasonably long leash. He’s done this in the past. And it may have been too long on Ray last game. A quick leash on Franklin this week would all but kill any confidence the coach has in him.
I truly believe Franklin is the QB of the future!

[ArgoGabe22]

I think everyone is over blowing Trestman's coin flip comment, and thinking he doesn't like Franklin. He's inherited the QBs he's worked with, and it's up to the GM to make a trade. I doubt the Bears would've traded Cutler at that point, and the Ravens signed Flacco long term before Trestman. Its not like Trestman benched the QBs for someone he preferred. He played the best QB on the roster. Not sure he had much say, especially as an OC. And why wouldn't he want to work with Calvillo, arguably one of the greatest. Yes, he likes a pocket passer but i still think everyone is looking into this way too much.

[Rich]

I would argue that Trestman's history shows that Shatto's comment above is correct.

Calvillo in Montreal.
Cutler in Chicago.
Flacco in Baltimore.
Ray in Toronto.

All known for being pocket passers with limited mobility skills for running/extending plays.

All four were established starters before Trestman arrived to coach them. That is what he was given to work with, I don't see what his "preferences" have to do with it. It's like saying Mike Babcock "prefers" elite offensive talent and a weak defence. A coach has to play the hand he is dealt.

[Ron]

Reading this thread you'd think that Trestman had no input into trading for Franklin. Now how likely is that? Seriously.

And there's no guarantees. 3 years from now BT may the best QB in the league and Franklin a journeyman backup. Coaches need to keep an open mind. And if Franklin is too mentally weak to have BT behind him pushing him ... then he'll never be the one to win a GC for us anyway.

[RB957]

Was there someone more mobile but as good, or even almost as good, as any of those guys? If there was, a case could be made that Trestman favours pocket passers. But clearly Ricky Ray and Anthony Calvillo were better than any other QB those two teams had. I can't speak about Cutler and Flacco, but I doubt Trestman kept a more-mobile-but-nearly-as-good QB on the bench because those two guys suited his supposed pocket preference.

You are bang on, and with the type of salaries that Cutler and Flacco had, there is no way that they are not playing.

Whatever the reason, Trestman's comment was just odd. If Franklin is now "the guy" then he has to be given a chance. I would hate for him to be yanked if things don't go smoothly right from the beginning.

[jerrym]

Putting inexperienced QBs on short leashes is likely only going to lead to the development of none of them.

[paulwoods13]

Just as reminder, it was the OP, not the HC, who suggested Franklin is on a short leash. And it's all apparently based on the first four words of a Trestman quote: "We're not anointing him," and another statement where he apparently said it was a "figurative coin toss" as to who started. That's a lot to read into a couple of remarks.

[R.J]

Thompson, seems to be the type of QB Trestman prefers--big, good arm strength, purely a drop back passer but not particularly mobile .
I don't think either Calvillo nor Ray have ever been considered big or with good arm strength (maybe Calvillo...... maybe). Their strength is/was football IQ.

I would argue that Trestman's history shows that Shatto's comment above is correct.

Calvillo in Montreal.
Cutler in Chicago.
Flacco in Baltimore.
Ray in Toronto.

All known for being pocket passers with limited mobility skills for running/extending plays.
Trestman isn't known for having players "go off script". I think that's the biggest reason why he prefers pocket passers. As Ray stated in the past: "there's very little freelancing in this offence".

[R.J]

Just as reminder, it was the OP, not the HC, who suggested Franklin is on a short leash. And it's all apparently based on the first four words of a Trestman quote: "We're not anointing him," and another statement where he apparently said it was a "figurative coin toss" as to who started. That's a lot to read into a couple of remarks.
You're assuming a lot here, and at best are only partially right.

[Will]

Just as reminder, it was the OP, not the HC, who suggested Franklin is on a short leash. And it's all apparently based on the first four words of a Trestman quote: "We're not anointing him," and another statement where he apparently said it was a "figurative coin toss" as to who started. That's a lot to read into a couple of remarks.

Did R.J's post cite those first four words and the additional statement as the reasons he felt that way?

[Rich]

Trestman isn't known for having players "go off script".

lol. Unlike all those other coaches who let their QBs do whatever the hell they want whenever they want.


I think that's the biggest reason why he prefers pocket passers.

Trestman has more experience coaching pocket passers but you have provided no evidence that he "prefers" them.


As Ray stated in the past: "there's very little freelancing in this offence".

There was little freelancing because Ray was not a freelancer. Are you saying that Trestman would rather see his QB take a sack than use his mobility to make something happen?

[Shatto]

The observation/conclusion by some, that based on passed history, Trestman appears to lean toward the more classic drop-back passing QB rather than a more mobile running type QB, should not be interpreted as a criticism of his coaching style. It is simply a comment on the style of QB that he seems to prefer running his style of offense.

[ArgoRavi]

I think everyone is over blowing Trestman's coin flip comment, and thinking he doesn't like Franklin. He's inherited the QBs he's worked with, and it's up to the GM to make a trade. I doubt the Bears would've traded Cutler at that point, and the Ravens signed Flacco long term before Trestman. Its not like Trestman benched the QBs for someone he preferred. He played the best QB on the roster. Not sure he had much say, especially as an OC. And why wouldn't he want to work with Calvillo, arguably one of the greatest. Yes, he likes a pocket passer but i still think everyone is looking into this way too much.

Completely agree, Gabe. The Argos wouldn't have traded for Franklin if Trestman didn't like him. The reality is that any QB has to be able to throw from the pocket. Mobility is an asset but if you can't throw from the pocket, you can't play at this level.

[Argo57]

Putting inexperienced QBs on short leashes is likely only going to lead to the development of none of them.

Bang on Jerry, we are now in transition to our younger QB’s to which there will be hiccups along the way.
Start pulling guys out early when the going gets rough would be counterproductive to say the least.

[Argo57]

The observation/conclusion by some, that based on passed history, Trestman appears to lean toward the more classic drop-back passing QB rather than a more mobile running type QB, should not be interpreted as a criticism of his coaching style. It is simply a comment on the style of QB that he seems to prefer running his style of offense.

More like the style of QB he inherited during various stops (Rich’s post#21 summed it up nicely).

[Argo57]

Just as reminder, it was the OP, not the HC, who suggested Franklin is on a short leash. And it's all apparently based on the first four words of a Trestman quote: "We're not anointing him," and another statement where he apparently said it was a "figurative coin toss" as to who started. That's a lot to read into a couple of remarks.

Agreed Paul, simply a coach keeping both guys sharp, motivated and involved with one statement.
No doubt Popp and Trestman looked at film on Franklin and had lengthy discussions before trading for him.
Let’s actually see him play before manufacturing any type of QB controversy.

[paulwoods13]

Did R.J's post cite those first four words and the additional statement as the reasons he felt that way?

No -- all the original post contained, aside from the opinion about the short leash, was a link to a story in which only those four words implied a short leash. The later statement about a "figurative coin toss" was made by a different poster. I erroneously suggested that the OP had cited both statements, for which I apologize.

[jerrym]

Franklin and other Argos talk about his making his first start with the Argos below.

https://www.tsn.ca/cfl/video/full-of-self-esteem-franklin-looking-forward-to-start-with-argos%7E1433979