Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Samuel S" data-source="post: 129394185" data-attributes="member: 1754664">Not &quot;all good,&quot; but significantly better.&nbsp; Give this team a great QB and it would be good, not great but 9-3 would be a lot more likely than 6-6, and 10-2 would not be hugely surprising. That said, recruiting and developing a QB is always a primary responsibility of any coach, let alone a coach who employs an offense that obviously places a high premium on QB play. Even conservative, power running teams are better with good QBs, but one with our style&nbsp; is obviously at a greater relative disadvantage with weak QB play. It's not high praise to say that a coach whose success is heavily dependent on QB play is failing primarily because of bad QB play. It's more in the vein of saying he has failed at something at which&nbsp; he could not afford to fail. The fact we don't even have an average QB let alone a&nbsp; good but not great one is our biggest problem. No matter which side of the Dana divide one is on, that would seem obvious.Also, TCU, with Boykin, hasn't yet proved it is a great team either. If TCU goes 12-0 or 11-1 then they can be considered great or at least close to it. Thus far, they really haven't played anyone. If they win out the regular season that's enough to be considered &quot;great&quot; even if they lose to another great team in round 1. 11-1 and it will be a good topic to debate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Samuel S, post: 129394185, member: 1754664"] Not "all good," but significantly better. Give this team a [B]great[/B] QB and it would be good, not great but 9-3 would be a lot more likely than 6-6, and 10-2 would not be hugely surprising. That said, recruiting and developing a QB is always a primary responsibility of any coach, let alone a coach who employs an offense that obviously places a high premium on QB play. Even conservative, power running teams are better with good QBs, but one with our style is obviously at a greater relative disadvantage with weak QB play. It's not high praise to say that a coach whose success is heavily dependent on QB play is failing primarily because of bad QB play. It's more in the vein of saying he has failed at something at which he could not afford to fail. The fact we don't even have an average QB let alone a good but not great one is our biggest problem. No matter which side of the Dana divide one is on, that would seem obvious. Also, TCU, with Boykin, hasn't yet proved it is a great team either. If TCU goes 12-0 or 11-1 then they can be considered great or at least close to it. Thus far, they really haven't played anyone. If they win out the regular season that's enough to be considered "great" even if they lose to another great team in round 1. 11-1 and it will be a good topic to debate. [/QUOTE]

Name