Practice reps and additional QBs
I have read several post about how an additional QB would take away reps from Tate/Denard and it is simply not true. I've played college football so I know what a standard pratice consist of and the more QBs you can have the better!
Most of the time when you are working on routes with the QBs/Wrs you divide the field in half and have guys running routes on both sides with two QBs throwing at the same time. So because Sheridan was out the latter part of spring, that part of pratice would basically consist of 3 QBs doing all the throwing which is not good for sore arms. The more guys that are able to throw, the more routes that can be run and the more balls that can be caught...that is a good thing!
Also, having several QBs to work hand handoffs with the running backs is beneficial...the more guys you have, the more pratice you get. And Tate will still be the one working with Minor/Brown/Grady.
Tate/Denard are still going to get all the reps with the 1st and 2nd team...everyone knows Cone and Kenndey aren't taking these reps and an additional wouldn't either. While I have mixed feelings about bringing in Paulus, I don't believe RR is thinking anything other than bringing in an additional arm...he would be using Paulus as much as Paulus would be using us. That is the reason NFL teams have like 6 QBs in training camp and probably why the Packers worked Paulus out in the first place.
play college ball?
Also, there was a comment that Paulus' presence would distract Tate or put undue pressure on him. If Tate can't hadle a lil stress in camp, how is he going to handle Happy Valley under the lights?
This whole Paulus thing is interesting at best, but is just further proof that this is the worst part of the year of CFB fans.
I played football at Augustana College in Sioux Falls, SD. It was a small ass school but we played against the likes of the North and South Dakota schools as well as Northern Colorado. The majority of that conference is Division I one now but was tough as hell when I was playing there. Vincent Jackson of the SD Chargers played at Northern Colorado and ate us up!
Anyways enough of the glory years, I agree if Tate can't handle some washed up hoops player, he doesn't have a chance!
We have a half dozen QBs on the roster to throw routes to receivers, practice handoffs, etc. Maybe having less of them be walk-ons or part time slots is a good thing, but it's not that we don't have enough live bodies to make a practice run - we do.
My practice reps point is the direct teaching. Our staff (RR & Smith) stands behind the QB during scrimmage-type action, giving constant instruction. It may be just as easy to watch someone else be corrected on how he runs a play, or perhaps not.
I do appreciate your perspective as a former QB though.
actually, a question: our practice method of having coach behind QB is described as though its unique - do you think this is true? Is what we do in that regard unusual?
Coach standing behind QB is a great way to coach because you get the exact same view as the QB and see exactly what he sees. You can immediately instruct him on where he should have went with the football and also stop him before taking the snap and have him tell you the defensive coverage and so on...very helpful in my opinion.
I think half a dozen is like 3 guys too high. With Sheridan out, our spring QB roster consisted of Kennedy, Tate and Cone. We had to move guys back from the slot because we didn't have enough guys which proves my point...we need more! The coaches think Feagin is better suited at the slot position and it is not beneficial to him to have to move back to QB just so he can throw. If we had additional QBs he could stay and work in the slot, a position I think he could be succesful at.
To have a good pratice you need at least 4 QBs (2 of which could win you ball games). This spring we had 1!
It's entirely possible, given Tate's build and his affinity for scrambling around, that he could miss a game or two to an injury this fall.
RR is rightfully paranoid as to whether he has sufficient ratchets in the toolchest, because when you run this style of offense, you're definitely going to "break" a few in two.
For what it's worth, I can't see Paulus coming to UM from Duke. I just don't see how that makes any sense.
any more than pocket passers do. in fact i'd say pocket passers get hurt worse because they get blind-sided. dual threat guys can see who's trying to tackle them and generally know how to get down or out of bounds to avoid big hits.
biggest thing though, injuries are freak occurences. the system doesn't dictate that a player will get hurt more or less.
Somene please assure me that paulus will get no snaps this fall.Because I saw this topic on jim Rome is burning and around the horn. They pretty much just bashed UM for being "desperate" at qb.
Aren't we?
No, but I think we will be desperate if Tate and Sheridan go down - all respect to D-Rob but he has to be nominally behind those two. And I think we will be equally desperate with or without Greg Paulus.
it was also on pti, but they were not bashing michigan as much as relating how weird of a story it is...
April 15th, 2009 at 10:23 PM ^
That's the part of the story I hate the most. We are getting bashed for just thinking of adding a guy for depth. Weird turn of events considering the positive press we were getting lately. None of those shows think it is reasonable because none of them really know the state of the program now. The uninformed UM bashing reminds me a lot of last year and I'd really like to forget about that.
With the additions of Tate and d.rob??
Yes! We still don't know for sure that EITHER will pan out, or that either will make it through the season unscathed. When your hopes are pinned on two true freshmen, there is reason to be worried. Three games into the season, we may know a lot more, but at that point, it would be too late to add depth. If we're going to put our faith in an inexperienced quarterback either way, why not have more inexperienced quarterbacks from which to choose? The one who makes the smoothest transition into the role plays first. If he gets hurt, the second best one goes into the game. Many people here have already stated this, but it seems ludicrous to me to argue that we shouldn't take a talented athlete to add to our depth. Sure it's just one year, but it gets us through the one year where we have the biggest unknown.
This is my first visit to the site and the first time I've ever posted a comment on any blog. I heard about this Paulus story and was excited enough by the potential QB help that I've been searching for more color and comments. I agree with Restive Neb's comment above. The biggest question facing our 2009 season is whether we can get it done with a QB roster consisting of two true freshmnn and an injured former walk-on. Next year our QB's will be bigger, stronger and more experienced - plus we'll add Devin Gardner and one or two more recruits. We have a serious depth issue this year - and Paulus has one year to contribute. He's formerly a #1 ranked spread QB with a quick release. He's from a great sports family and a great school. Either he helps to push Forcier and Robinson along, spells them if they are injured or beats them out. Worst case he'd make a great spread QB for the scout team. He has a legitimate shot at playing time - in a system suited to his skills - at a great school with a great tradition and national exposure every week. More people will know him from this story than from his four years as a Duke point guard. What's the downside - potential impact on team chemistry? Get this done - it makes too much sense for both sides.
because the problem last season was that we had too many quarterbacks in practice taking reps and thus Threet and Sheridan were totally unprepared for the season.
Let's see, there was Threet, Sheridan, Cone, Feagin, and I need help naming more...