TBT-Should Peters have been the starter from 1st game of season?
Here's a topic that's rarely been discussed. /s The board is so busy right now, but there will still be a lot of replies. /s If this was the old board, I'd get a ton of upvotes for starting this topic. /s
On to the topic.
Should Peters have started?
Yes. Reason? Because.
Thoughts? Comments?
The offense didn't play well overall, not just Peters. Also, the team was up 19-3 midway through the 3rd quarter and then defense proceeded to give up 3 straight TD drives. The offense had struggled most of the day, but giving up a 16-point lead in about 7 minutes of game time is absolutely on the defense. Which happens to every team, but blaming it on the offense and effectively absolving the defense isn't correct either.
Yes. The offensive woes last year had a lot to do with predictable play calling, an o line getting coached two by two very different guys, and essentially no one coaching receivers. That being said I thought o’korn and speight were making horrible reads/plays when they were in. Peters played within himself during he regular season. In the bowl game, the defense got lazy and the higdon fumble forced him to try to make plays when there were no plays to make. Receivers got no separation, RBs whiffed on pass pro and the line was beaten on every snap. He made some stupid plays trying to get his team back in the game when they had no momentum. He’s the type of kid that needs his coaches to show confidence in him to really reach his ceiling. I don’t think it’s a bad work ethic I just think some people respond to different forms of motivation. I would say we beat Sparty and OSU, possibly Wisconsin if he had more game time experience heading into the game.
So your answer to predictable play calling is a RS freshman QB who clearly didn't have the full playbook down?
Isn't that the achilles heel of Harbaugh's style of offense though? It's an extremely complicated and complex offense that's highly effective when you have upper classmen with several years of experience but very ineffective when starting new/young/fresh players who have yet to learn the system?
This is where I would almost favor a power spread style offense like Clemson, PSU, or OSU. It seems like those style offenses are much easier for players to learn and master and it seems like it's easier to plug in young athletic players and actually have them contribute. This would also lend to an easier ability of "reloading" every year rather than having your seniors graduate/get drafted then having to start over from square one and take another 2-3 years for everyone to get back on the same page.
Or am I off on my time-tables it takes for players to learn Harbaugh's system relative to a more spread oriented look?
I believe he is realizing that. When he had rudddooccckkk and Chesson+Darboh hosing fools it was all peaches. Young guys can't just pick it up fast so I believe he is buying into RPO. Doubt he'll change it majorly but FINALLY Michigan has continuity and depth (unless we start believing his flight risk to NFL) and players in a system. I think starting this year we will be seeing competitive to make playoff Michigan from here on out.
I also hope that since his system is NOT power spread, it starts giving fits to OSU and PSU (less time for them to practice against unique style)
So, this is where I get hung up.
After seeing the potent and lethal effectiveness, year after year after year, of these power spread type offenses, wouldn't it be provide more consistent returns than trying to run the under center, TE and FB style offense?
I mean sure our complex offense might give OSU and PSU fits every 2-3 years when our guys finally "get it", but what about in the mean time? Would not a more spread concept (not RR style) akin to Clemson enable us to maintain high efficiency on the offensive side of the ball each year more so than our current offensive scheme?
So, for me, I look at what Franklin was running at Penn St his first two year. He had a world beater QB talent and still couldn't win more than 7 games or so and had a very sluggish and ineffective offense. Then Moorhead comes in and installs their power spread system and the offense explodes and they post back to back 11 win seasons. It just seems like, for college, that kind of spread makes more sense when accounting for year to year consistency in offensive output.
Does that make sense? Am I off-base?
It also helps to have the most dynamic athlete in CFB in your backfield, does it not?
It doesn't matter how simple or complex a scheme is, when you have the kind of production turnover that Michigan experienced from 2016 to 2017 there are ALWAYS going to be struggles. The problem is, IMO, not the scheme, it's with the fans who demand an explanation for what was a KNOWN and EXPECTED roster lull/rebuilding year.
This idea that the scheme is too complex and is only going to thrive when every single play on the roster is a 4th or 5th year player is erroneous. The issue is the rebuilding and maintenance of the recruiting and developmental pipeline. Teams that never seem to miss a beat year after year do so because they DO NOT experience HC's changes -- and the subsequent recruiting/development lulls -- three times in less than a decade. A spread offense isn't some panacea that guarantees offensive production in and of itself -- the player still must make the plays.
We saw it over and over from Wilt, even with the veteran WR/TE corp -- plays (game winning at times) there to be made (because of the scheme) and him being unable to make them. Whose fault is that? The coaching staff, via the scheme, put the players in a position to make plays, but the PLAYERS have to make the plays. Last year was and expected down year and yet they still won 8 games.
He didn't earn QB2 last year and in his limited game time was unimpressive, so no.
No.
That offense was so young and inexperienced that an upper-classman was desperately needed under center. It's why O'Korn was ahead of Peters. He played OK when his number was finally called and was having his best game against Wisconsin until he got hurt. His bowl performance was absolutely befuddling given he had 4 weeks of 1st string reps to prepare.
Yes 100%. Last season would have turned out 100% better in my opinion
I don't know about start but he should have at least been number 2. He should have been getting all the backup reps so he was more ready when Speight got hurt.
i think speight was probably the correct choice for having mastery of the play book and experience BUT i think the injury to his shoulder impacted his throwing motion and confidence more than anyone foresaw. watch speight's throwing motion before the injury and after and you'll see something isn't quite right about it after the injury.
No, because you had a proven starter in front of him. Once Speight was injured, it should have been Peters instead of O'Korn. I believed it when it happened and I still do now. After reading the round table in HTTV where one of the members talks about Bo's young QB theory I feel even better about my stance.
No.
Voting on board posts can't come back soon enough.
At the time, I figured using the bye week before MSU was the perfect opportunity to insert him in the starting lineup. JOK was always better suited for an in-game sub than preparing as a starter.
In retrospect, it probably wouldn't have mattered. Last year was just a cyclone of suck at the QB position. Thank God we have Mineral King and McCaffrey to save us this year. BP will only be a "break glass in case of emergency" QB from here on out.
I almost spit out my drink here at work when I read "cyclone of suck" - can I borrow that term? That might be the most accurately concise description I've seen on our QB play last year. Kudos!
Since Iowa State football seems to be improving since Matt Campbell took over the program, I think "Cyclone of Suck"may no longer apply to them and should be available to borrow.
After watching the Amazon series, I am
(a) Amazed at how uninspiring of a leader BP is in the huddle
(b) Convinced that, even with that most glaring of weaknesses, he was O'Korn's superior by more, and earlier, than I had thought before. Poor O'Korn kept trying to talk himself and others into hoping that he was good the entire season long.
From the start of the season? No he shouldn't have. Speight had earned the starting spot even though for the most part Speight was quite average as a QB in 2016. Against Power 5 Bowl Eligible teams in 2016 Speight was 131-220 (59.5%) for 1454 yds (6.61 ypa) 8 TDs 6 ints.
Whether Speight or Peters would have started the season I think we would have ended the season at 8-4 in either scenario (probably some variation in the games we lost). The way Speight was playing against Purdue there is a good chance we would have lost that game.
Idk about 8-4 no matter what. I mean, MSU, Wisconsin, and OSU were all winnable games with a competent QB not named John O’Korn taking the snaps. Only PSU was really out of reach.
Not saying we WOULD have won all of those three, but I certainly can’t say we would have still lost them either.
Clearly OP, you meant to say "backup" and not "starter".
So, yes.
No. We had a starting QB returning who had a pretty good season the year before.
No.
Speight regressed when he should have grown (remember him playing way more snaps than expected in the spring game?) but he knew the whole playbook and was the best QB at executing it.
Peters was not ready to run the whole offense when he came in and was even further behind at the beginning of the season. He did not rise to the challenge when he wasn't the first out of the blocks in preseason. He wasn't ready.
He responded pretty well later, and you could tell that he earned the respect of his teammates by the Wisconsin game, but he wasn't ready to go at the beginning of the season.
No...I personally struggle to get behind a guy that shows zero..negative 3...fire. You are playing D1 major football, get jacked up just a little man.
I think he has all the QB skills to be a great QB..but he has to get that mind right.
I expect that to change this season
I think the fire factor had a lot to do with Coach Harbaugh not having more confidence in him.
I think we could have played musical chairs with all of the QBs last season, but what we were looking for wasn't there. There were obviously offensive line and wide receiver issues, but I don't know if we had a guy that could have really changed the results. This is my own opinion, but the playbook seemed a bit complex during the first half of the season considering the experience of the team. Had he been healthy I still think Wilton was our best bet.
No way. Speight had hiccups but don't forget he beat MSU and had OSU on ropes (til he fumbled on goalline that is) . I do wonder if his demise was the injury or was just weak, it if Harbs shuttled him out.... Am amazed how fast he went from good starter about to be older and seasoned, to a transfer.
Had osu on the ropes? Not only did he fumble on the goal line but he threw 2 picks, one was a crucial pick 6. I never thought I'd see a QB getting a pat on the back for turning the ball over 3 times against osu. But yes, he was able to not turn the ball over more than once to help us beat a shitty (3-9) msu team.
No, clearly Gentry should have
Absolutley ?.
Honestly I’ve wondered for the last year almost, what Harbaughs problem is with Peters. I felt like it was very evident with just a simply eyeball test that Peters was the future. I’ve convinced myself that Harbaugh has a fundimental distaste for Peters. Am I alone here??
All that being said, Patterson is going to be amazing and I’m hitching to that wagon...hopefully for a couple years!
Peters was hands down the most talented of the 3 last year. My guess is Peters doesn't show the type of leadership Harbaugh craves from the QB position.
I am all aboard the Patterson hype train!
The issue with Peters is that he has all the arm talent you look for in the QB position. It’s the other areas of his game where he’s severely lacking.
I know you’re looking at this from a fan perspective, but in reality there is a lot more that goes into the QB position than arm talent.
Speight clearly deserved to start. I'll be asking myself for a long time, "How could JOK possibly have been that bad and how did he end up as the starting QB at Michigan?"
No. Ridiculous to have thought he could unseat Speight who had a pretty decent 2016. Even the decision to go w/ O'Korn first was the right one, although they probably stayed w/ him too long.
I don’t think he has the head for QB. Not saying he’s not smart but he’s not vocal and a poor communicator. I don’t see him starting ever again at UM. He’s a great talent physically just couldn’t handle the mental part of QB. No knocks on him, I’m sure he could start somewhere and do well...just doubt it’ll be at UM.
You are saying this 100% because of his personality, which is bullshit. He's probably not going to be the team leader, but he still could be a good QB.
As a person who has been fired from a job for this exact same reason(and then went on to that exact same job with another company and absolutely killed it), you are very wrong.
I think your memory of 2015 is a bit fuzzy. Rudock struggled through the first half of the season. He was pretty much lights out (save for maybe OSU when he got knocked out of the game) after the bye week following the MSU game.
I agree. I believe the kid has the talent and the coaches have done a very poor job of coaching to his strengths. At the time I thought they should have started him from the beginning and use the early season to have him up and running for the meat of the schedule. Otherwise, no one can possibly know what the "truth" is here. Today I can claim that my strategy would have been the correct one...but I would be wrong :) ...except for the part that the coaches have likely failed him.
He 100% should have been in front of O'Korn......he legit looked good against Wisconsin on the road in a tough environment until he got hurt.
No he shouldn’t have. Speight was a proven, experienced QB who helped get the team within inches of a likely spot in the CFP. He was a top-3 QB in the league in 2016, and before his injury at Iowa he was phenomenal.
Had a very young team going into 2017, and you wanted an experienced, steady hand at the most important position on the field.
No when speight was healthy he was their best option. But he should have started after speight went down.
No! Speight was clearly the #1 qb on the roster last year and frankly, I believe JOK was clearly #2. Sadly, I believe that Peters is a bust. He's probably a great kid but I don't think he plays another game at Michigan.
Kinda hard to call a redshirt freshman a bust... dontcha think?
Kinda hard to call a redshirt freshman a bust... dontcha think?
A little maybe. But considering that Patterson is now the front runner, and Peters still has to deal with McCaffrey and now Milton (who we hear nothing but raving about), and considering our recent QB history where injury early tends to derail the rest of the player's future progress, if I were a betting man, my money would be that Peters never starts at Michigan again.
Obviously this is all speculation, but that's where my money would be. There are always fresh guys coming up behind you. QBs have to seize the starting job when they get the opportunity otherwise someone else likely will. Peters had his chance to firmly cement himself in 1st place and failed. I'll be surprised if he gets a realistic shot again.
But again, you’re making that assumption about what you saw from a redshirt freshman. As if he is as good now as he will ever be.
Youre also making the assessment that McCaffrey and Milton are better than Peters, without having ever seen either of those two play.
Whether Peters ever amounts to anything as a QB remains to be seen, but calling a kid who just finished his redshirt freshman season a bust (when he was at least comparable to two upperclassmen) seems extremely premature.
My god no.
Hey, if we are going back in time to change history, I should have bought AMZN back after the internet bubble burst in the late 90s when AMZN dropped to the $6 range.
Nothing in Brandon's resume supports the idea he should have started over Speight at the beginning of last season. Even after Speight went down and O'Korn struggled, Coach Jim was reluctant to send Brandon onto the field --- until, that is, when he finally (Maryland?) decided he had no choice.
Brandon's exit from the field in Madison was partly on him and partly on the O-line. Pocket awareness, especially behind an O-line that was less than fully protective, is as much the QB's responsibility as the guards, tackles, TEs and Rbs who are supposed to keep blitzing LBs away from him. And finally, Brandon's bowl game performance hardly convinced anyone, let alone the coaching staff, that he should have started the season under center.