Rich Rod on QBs Saturday

Submitted by jimmyh on

Rich Rod  said that he is going to get all three QBs playing time regardless of the score, what are your thoughts ?

mgohopkins

September 24th, 2010 at 1:23 PM ^

this is one thing I've wondered about. We (and others) debuted the rugby punt a couple of years ago, and it seemed like an amazing thing because the odds of getting it to bounce off of one of the opponent's players went up at least 15-20%, and if it didn't you usually still got the roll anyway and reduced chance of a return. Why don't we (or others) still do that more?

UMAmaizinBlue

September 24th, 2010 at 12:12 PM ^

Obviously if the game is close in the waning moments, RR isn't going to jeopardize a win just to "keep his word". HOWEVA, this might also be a hidden message to the team:

 

1) Defense, get the job done this week and stuff these jokers.

2) Offense, keep doing what you're doing, sans field goal tries (aka - Endzone or BUST!)

 

I'm sure that we all feel a bit more comfortable about BGSU than we do about UMass (hindsight), and this game should (hopefully, for the love of God) be a blowout.

maizenbluenc

September 24th, 2010 at 12:52 PM ^

I think now is the time to do it. We need to figure out where we stand if Denard gets hurt or if we get in a jam, and need to put a different style on the field to change things up.

ituralde

September 24th, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^

I just want to see Denard throw some quick slants.  We very rarely call slants and I don't know why, but they could really be nice to pull people out of the middle and take the edge off the pass rush. 

funkywolve

September 24th, 2010 at 1:04 PM ^

if UM is losing or involved in a tight game, it will be the Denard show.

I bet RR was hoping to get all 3 QB's some time against UMass but unfortunately UM fell behind and then wasn't able to maintain a comfortable cushion.  I think RR said after they went up 35-17 that if the defense would have been able to get the UMass offense off the field without scoring, he was going to start doing some substitions.

TheOracle6

September 24th, 2010 at 1:47 PM ^

If we don't see all 3 quarterbacks then it means we still suck royally on defense.  I know what Tate can do so I'm not worried if he comes into the game if it's semi-close but Devin doesn't have any extended playing time under his belt and we don't need him coming into a close game and throwing a pick six or something along those lines.  Get the game in hand and then give each one a series or two unless we continue to pull away.

ElGuapo

September 24th, 2010 at 2:39 PM ^

I think at some point we have to acknowledge that Devin Gardner has feelings and emotions too.   In 2 games so far, he was next up off the bench if Denard couldn't play.   That has to build up an expectancy in a young player's mind.   He now likely expects to be called 2nd.   In all likelihood he has prepared himself mentally as the 2nd string quarterback.   And unless he has done something to warrant demotion, you have to give him the call 2nd up or risk hurting the young guy's confidence.   

Monocle Smile

September 24th, 2010 at 3:07 PM ^

These kids are 18 years old at least. They aren't pieces of glass whose confidence will be shot unless handled with a big "fragile" stamp. Athletes who don't know how to eat humble pie don't get to start in D-1 football.

The utter condescension you show applies to five-year-olds and makes you look incredibly ignorant.

ElGuapo

September 24th, 2010 at 3:39 PM ^

I think that would be a classy move.    The kid has done a lot for this University.    And I think it will happen too.   

I think we can do both.... help Devin maintain his confidence and show our appreciation to Tate.    I don't think they are mutually exclusive.    Hopefully we get up on the opponent enough so that both see plenty of action.