Hypothetical Question

Submitted by Coach Nero on

So let's say Peters plays OK.  Has his good moments and his bad moments.  A typical redshirt freshman.  What does Harbaugh do in a couple weeks if Speight is cleared to play?  Does Wilton have a chance to get back into the mix?  Harbaugh has always been a meritocracy person, so what if Peters hasn't ourperformed pre-injury Speight?  

FauxMo

October 30th, 2017 at 12:09 PM ^

I think this is probably right. Mix together the "next generation" of QB now starting, and the risk of re-injury to Speight with the most awful potential consequences (eg. a broken back or neck), and I doubt we ever see him take a snap again. 

azian6er

October 30th, 2017 at 8:46 PM ^

I think you are correct. It is highly unlikely that speight re-injures his previous fractures. Bone heals well and it is incredibly doubtful that the previous fractures place him in any more danger than he was pre-injury. That said, no one but Jimmy H. knows what will happen. I am now understanding that Jim likes a big personality at QB (well, big in the sense that they are talkative and passionate about ‘something’ ) which is not what Brandon Peters is according to multiple reports. This being the case, if Speight practices well and is healthy prior to OSU, I find it very difficult to believe that Peters will get the nod at QB for the OSU game - especially considering what Wilton did last year in Columbus. TBH, I don’t care who plays, I just want our coaches to make the right decision.

ijohnb

October 30th, 2017 at 12:13 PM ^

think it is way too early to declare that.  We saw 2.5 quarters from Peters against a bad opponent.  Speight v. Rutgers would have looked very similar.  You could be correct, but I don't think we have a big enough sample size out of Peters yet.

In reply to by ijohnb

FauxMo

October 30th, 2017 at 12:20 PM ^

Do you really think Speight will start again? Let's say Peters plays even just average the rest of the year - not world-beater great, but signs of very good play (i.e. Rutgers) mixed in with normal growing pains, which I would say is about what we've seen from Speight the past few years. Under those circumstances, which is precisely what I'm expecting, do you think Harbaugh will bench a player who could be our starting QB for 3 more years for a player with one year of eligibility left who just suffered a very dangerous injury that could resurface?

You could be right, but I very seriously doubt Harbaugh would risk alienating the future at QB at UM... 

ijohnb

October 30th, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^

a lot of assumptions.  What if Peters gets hurt or has some really rough games down the stretch?  What if Speight's injury heals just fine and there is no enhanced risk of re-injury?  Speight struggled for a few games this year but he quarterbacked a really good team the brink of a BIG title a year ago.  He fell short but he has a wealth of experience to draw from.  Peters may be the most likely option going forward but I think it is somewhat crazy to state "Speight will never play another down at Michigan" as though it is that cut and dry.

FauxMo

October 30th, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^

Oh, we agree I think. There are 1000 possibilities that could see Speight start again. But all other things being equal, I think the Peters era has begun and it will continue BARRING UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES, like Peters getting hurt, getting in trouble, etc. 

xtramelanin

October 30th, 2017 at 1:39 PM ^

what if there was more than one shooter in dallas, that fateful november day in '63?

what if there was a tsunami coming within mintues of you saying your wedding vows, would go through with the ceremony and then run, or would you flee immediately?

what if the refs properly called charlies white's fumble in the rose bowl?  

any others....

Double-D

October 30th, 2017 at 11:58 PM ^

If Peters plays like he did Saturday the rest of the way Speight will back him up next year and won’t see the field this year. I honestly think something was wrong with Wilton the way he was playing. He regressed. Possibly the hit in Iowa shook him up. He did not look the same this year.

Mr Miggle

October 30th, 2017 at 12:41 PM ^

If Speight shouldn't play agian for medical reasons, he won't, and he won't be cleared to play. Harbaugh should have nothing to say about that. He also shouldn't be afraid to play Speight if he's cleared and wants to play.

As far as whether Speight could win his job back, based on performance. Who can tell? If Peters is just so-so, then Speight should have his chance. If one player is looking clearly better, you should play him. That's my expectation.

Robbie Moore

October 30th, 2017 at 6:52 PM ^

...it's Brandon Peters. We can use the Minnesota and Maryland games to get Peters settled in. By the time Wisconsin and OSU roll around Peters will be no worse that what would get from Speight.

So, do we play Speight because his experience might make him marginally better or do we play Peters because he will hold his own against Wisconsin and Ohio State, his upside might actually matter and the experience will be invaluable in 2018?

 

azian6er

October 30th, 2017 at 8:44 PM ^

How in the hell do you “know” this? You, my friend, as am I, are full of pure, unadulterated, hypothetical poo-poo. I hope you are right, but don’t act like you “know” Peters will be better than a rehabilitated Speight prior to OSU. The truth is that no one knows, including Harbaugh, Peters, and Speight.

Blue Know It

October 30th, 2017 at 1:04 PM ^

I think Harbaugh will start whichever QB gives us the best chance of winning the next game on the schedule. Say Wilton isn't back till next season, he's not going to start Peters and have Speight the backup just becasue he's looking at being better in 2019. He's going to do what gives us the best chance of winning in the 2018 season.

I'm Batman

October 30th, 2017 at 5:07 PM ^

a championship next year, do you really think he will play Peters instead because he has more eligibility left? 

Seriously, i usually like your hot takes. But cmon man, the best player reguardless of eligibility left will play each positiion on the field next year. That is what a meritocracy is all about. You earn positions, not annointments.

In reply to by ijohnb

ska4punkkid

October 30th, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^

ugh that's why it is a hypothetical question assuming "Peters plays OK". Read the OP dude, he never said based on what we saw from Peters against Rutgers...

In reply to by ijohnb

Commie_High96

October 30th, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^

Coach can slow play it this year, but Harbaugh will want Speight here next year no matter what, even as a backup. Don’t think for a second Harbaugh makes this seem like anything but a competition for next fall

In reply to by ijohnb

Kevin13

October 30th, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^

then 2.5 quarters from Speight and he has shown he should not be starting. It is time to play the young kid and let him learn and make his mistakes. The team will be better for it next year.

HAIL-YEA

October 30th, 2017 at 1:57 PM ^

please, don't throw out the record like that is a meaningful stat, out side of maybe 2 games last year Speight has basically been equal to Tyler Oconner at MSU in every meaningful metric like ypa and qbr. I have never understood why Brian and many others thought he was a good starter other than the hope he would improve, but he didn't.

OC Alum91

October 30th, 2017 at 3:46 PM ^

Wins are a very meaningful stat, perhaps the most important. But wins are not very specific. One could be a mediocre QB and ride on the coattails of a great defense to many wins. HAIL is saying you need more position specific stats, to assess. JOK was 10/20 for 58 yards vs. IU. we won that game. say we pulled out a win vs MSU (the game was close, yes?), he was 16/35 for 195, 3 INT....a win doesn't undue the fact that stats indicate JOK played poorly in those games. good enough to win, but still poorly.

JTGoBlue

October 30th, 2017 at 12:06 PM ^

Reasonable to expect he will continue to play well, unless our O line has pass protect issues again. It would be interesting to see if he deals with that better than O'Korn or Speight.