RoseInBlue

August 6th, 2017 at 12:33 PM ^

A redshirt freshmen would have to make insane strides or basically be a no doubt All-American to unseat an incumbent starter.  It's Speight under center unless Peters makes some serious noise between now and September 2.

Everyone Murders

August 6th, 2017 at 3:16 PM ^

It being a "battle" is also harmonious with Harbaugh running a pure meritocracy. The only variable being that between Lorena's "battle" (which sounds like a parroting of Harbaugh/Drevno's coach speak) and UMBig11's "looks like Speight's well ahead".

(Unless you're just noting it's funny how quickly the reports from camp change, which I agree with 100.)

JonnyHintz

August 6th, 2017 at 3:48 PM ^

Because experience isn't the only factor. Just like arm talent isn't the only factor. It's part of it, sure. But Speight won't be QB simply because he was the starter last year. It'd be because he went out there and showed that he's the QB that runs the offense the best and gives the team the best chance to win. Experience can certainly be an aspect of that, but it's far from the reason he would start.

Hail-Storm

August 7th, 2017 at 9:22 AM ^

Henson was as good a prospect as you can get, but Brady was the better player at the time and won out over Henson easily his senior year, and second year starting.  Henson killed it as a Junior, but QB is a very tough position to come in young and unseat an incumbent. 

I think this speaks less of how Peters is doing and more of how well Speight has continued to grow.  Hopefully he has the down field stuff figured out by the season.  With this group of recievers, there are going to be people open down firled and we need a QB to take advantage. 

bamf16

August 7th, 2017 at 9:31 AM ^

I take issue with the vague descriptors used when we all know the two individuals in question. 

If the two players are of comparable talent and skillset, then yes, your assertion is likely correct in just about every case, but I think to many fans who are rooting for Peters over Speight, this scenario is undeniably different because of a few undeniable points, primarily that to a lot of fans and those posting here, they've concluded that Peters is more talented.

Speight was recruited by the old staff that's not held in high regard, wasn't a big name recruit, and had his struggles last year on a team with big aspirations, while Peters was recruited by the current Head Coach, was a big name recruit who's presumed to be more talented, and who outplayed the incumbent starter on TV this past spring.

That's where the conversation is, not a general topic about redshirt freshmen and incumbent starters.

 

bamf16

August 7th, 2017 at 9:35 AM ^

This team was good enough to make the College Football Playoff, and you want to compare the QB play to just QBs within a conference bereft of good Quarterback play?

And yes, it is painful to play football with an AC joint injury. But I'll lead the charge in contending that if you're healthy enough to make the Overtime touchdown throw in Columbus, you're healthy enough to not throw the interceptions in the same game.

stephenrjking

August 6th, 2017 at 10:54 PM ^

He had things he did well and things he did badly. He was, after all, a redshirt sophomore with only average physical tools. It's not unreasonable to believe that he will improve incrementally year over year. More consistent mechanics, better reads, etc. Harbaugh wants to run a complex offense. Speight seems best equipped to do it given his experience and aptitude. Peters may we'll throw a better deep ball, but if he can't make the right read it won't matter.

WichitanWolverine

August 6th, 2017 at 9:11 PM ^

Don't even act like Speight's play was good enough to win the conference. He was a major factor in the Iowa and OSU losses. And I think it's safe to say his ceiling is definitely lower than Peters'. The best qb should play, regardless of who it is, but some people think Speight's job is secure because he's a great qb and he was not last year.

Sten Carlson

August 6th, 2017 at 10:26 PM ^

WS is a better QB than Peters is right now. You don't play QB's based upon ceilings. If Peters is to supplant WS, which I think is unlikely, it's not his potential that's going to get him the nod, it's his ACTUAL that going to do it. Similarly, last year is irrelevant -- good, bad or indifferent. All that matters is RIGHT NOW! You can rant and rave about how WS played last year, but coach has said it's a level playing field ... roll the balls out and see who takes the position.

If WS's job is secure, which we're all speculating upon after one report on the first week of camp, than it's because he's that far ahead of his closest competitors. Complain all you want, but that's the way it is.

schreibee

August 6th, 2017 at 10:45 PM ^

Just on a count of ALL CAPS used, I'd say it's YOU RANTING & RAVING!

Here's where last year is relevant: For game 1 vs Florida, at a neutral site, Speight has GAME EXPERIENCE!

Think how much better Peters would have to play in camp to overcome that... for THAT game.

I have said and will again, after that game (or Hell during it, if Speight were to really struggle or get dinged) Speight will have to continue to a) excel and b) stay healthy.

I saw - we ALL saw - in a quasi- game environment in Spring, Peters looked not just a bit better, but vastly superior. But Speight is starting vs Fla, so no use muddying the water now.

It's after Fla the true competition begins, I believe. We'll see, won't we?!

WichitanWolverine

August 7th, 2017 at 1:23 AM ^

It seems like you are agreeing with me without realizing it. I do think Speight will start the entire season barring injury. My only point was that Peters isn't trying to dethrone a great quarterback. He's trying to dethrone a mediocre one (based on 2016 data). That isn't impossible if the kid is as good as we all hope he is.

FauxMo

August 6th, 2017 at 12:36 PM ^

Are you really "very surprised" that an established starter who performed in the top 1/3 of B1G QBs last year isn't getting beaten out by a redshirt freshman with no experience? Because I would be very surprised if this is very surprising to you.

uncle leo

August 6th, 2017 at 3:36 PM ^

In the conference last season??

McSorley had good stats, but he's been called arm-punt for a reason.

Barrett's good in the ground attack, but he can't throw.

Who else is there? O'Connor, Perry Hills, whatever guy was behind center at Rutgers, Wes Lunt? 

Outside of 3 or 4, the QBs in this conference suck. 

Speight's a solid option, but he benefitted from a TON around him, both offensively and defensively. He was never asked to really put this team on his back, and quite honestly, I do not think he has that capability.

tbeindit

August 7th, 2017 at 8:33 AM ^

If you think Barrett and McSorley are bad college quarterbacks, I have no idea what game you've been watching. Are they perfect? No way, but at the *college* level, there's a reason why both of those guys are rated as top 10 guys right now.

On top of that, CJ Beathard was a third round pick and Clayton Thorson had a really nice year for Northwestern. Mitch Leidner's numbers regressed last season, but I don't think he's nearly as bad as some people like to joke about. Just a consequence of that crazy way too early NFL Draft projection a few years back.

Should people have been overjoyed with what Speight did last year? No, the revisionist history continues to amaze me. Personally, I was more disappointed with an upperclassmen line and upperclassmen backs that couldn't run the ball against competent defenses.