OuldSod

January 6th, 2022 at 10:39 AM ^

He had at least one BAD INT in limited time. I didn't see anything overly positive but the sample size was limited.

I also don't think Villari was ahead of him on the depth chart but got more playing time due to length of tenure on the team and being primarily a runner. Running is the diplomatic option in blow outs where back ups play. 

JonnyHintz

January 6th, 2022 at 7:18 PM ^

Texas Tech is a power 5 school. So yes, I’d say a former starter at a power 5 school is serviceable as a backup.
 

O’Korn lost his starting job at a group of 5 school to a converted WR. But even still, O’Korn would have been serviceable as a backup. The problem with O’Korn was he was in a “starter” scenario in far too many key moments, and he is by no means a starter.

blue in dc

January 6th, 2022 at 10:16 AM ^

If this tells us about anyone, it is probably Bowman.   Presumably Villari is smart enough to realize that we could lose 1 of Cade and JJ and thus that the #2 qb slot is possibly open.   If he believes Bowman is ahead of him and he doesn’t have a real shot, this makes sense.

LeCheezus

January 6th, 2022 at 10:04 AM ^

This is no shot at Villari - I wish him the best and hope he gets to start somewhere.

I do wonder that if you miss out on the top 1-2 QB's on your board if it is even worth expanding the board and signing one.  The whole thing with a guy like Villari was that he'd be in the program forever and be available in case of emergency - or maybe change positions if he was clearly never needed at QB.  Seems like at this point you're better off just looking through available players in the portal instead of trying to sign a guy that will never really be a plan A starter.

Wolverine In Exile

January 6th, 2022 at 10:10 AM ^

I think what you hit on is going to be the "new business model" going forward. Get your top 1-2 guys per season, and then hit the transfer portal for either experienced starter/back-up transition player if your room is full of young guys (the 1 yr rental model, i.e. Jake Ruddock or ), or hi-star guy in the transfer portal who has 2+ yrs available if you strike out on your top target and hope you can find the way to unlock the guy's potential (O'Korn, Patterson). I think the end state is that for a lot of mid-level P5 teams, you're going to see QB3's who are the 3-4 yr walk-ons instead of the out of cycle 3-star recruit that's been on campus for multiple years. QB1 and QB2 will still be scholarship players that the coaches want unless it's a transition year situation like described above.

treetown

January 6th, 2022 at 10:36 AM ^

Maybe the new model can extend to just recruiting, but actually playing time.

I get that the tradition has been to stick with one QB as your starter and then have a backup(s). But in this new era of running QB, especially if the running is an integral part of the attack, why is there a fear of having two or more QBs? 

The play calling is no longer done by the QB but from the sideline.

Nearly all running QBs get dinged up if not missing games if they are part of the running game.

There are so many good servicable run-pass QBs. Alternate series, or sub in and out, but play two or three. It doesn't seem to hurt the development of RBs or receivers.

Just wondering if maybe it is time to create a new model of how to use QBs. 

NeverPunt

January 6th, 2022 at 10:14 AM ^

It’s why you should be gunning for 2 qbs in every class unless you have generational talent in there. I don’t even coaches having to balance roster management these days. No knock on the kids - glad they can move around now and do what’s best for them. Gotta be a nightmare figuring all this out now though

bronxblue

January 6th, 2022 at 10:04 AM ^

Wish him luck.  I do wonder sometimes with guys transferring if they have a place in mind, since leaving a major P5 program (even as a backup) to try your luck elsewhere could lead to guys being left out in the cold due to roster crunches elsewhere.

But such is life - I can see him wanting to give it a go elsewhere especially if he feels he can compete.  

bronxblue

January 6th, 2022 at 10:48 AM ^

I can't find the article but it's also weird with COVID years giving guys extra eligibility while incoming classes remained the same.  So over time that should even out a bit and the number of guys transferring should roughly equal the number of spots available but as we see with roster management coaches will oftentimes over-recruit expecting guys to transfer and so there will be fewer spots available than guys who gave up spots at their current teams.