Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

QB situation poll

What QB situation would you prefer?

  • Status quo - This job is SR's unless he gets hurt no matter what the W/L record looks like

    Votes: 95 47.7%

  • Situational Rotation - Rotate SR/Lanning/Rohach as situation dictates (ie Lanning on short yardage s

    Votes: 20 10.1%

  • Series Rotation - Give both SR/Lanning full series

    Votes: 24 12.1%

  • Bench SR, Play Lanning

    Votes: 52 26.1%

  • Bench SR, Play Rohach

    Votes: 8 4.0%
  • Total voters
    199
  • Poll closed .
Clonefan94 said:
Wait, you are sick and tired of bad play from a QB, but you think the solution would be to put in one of two guys who isn't even as good as the starter?

So how is your solution going to do anything to improve the product?

This is it people, live with it. If there was even a remote chance either of our back-ups were able to compete, we'd have heard about it like we have the previous years. The sooner everyone stops thinking the QB is the sole problem for all of our woes and the product on the field, the easier this season will go down for you.
Click to expand...

Because I'm sick of seeing the same crap. I would rather watch different crap with the possibility of it being better or worse. I supported Richardson until this year. If this is as good as he is going to get I would rather have something else. I keep drinking the kool-aid of this offense only to learn instead of lemon flavor I keep getting a cup of urine.
 
Me State said:
Because I'm sick of seeing the same crap. I would rather watch different crap with the possibility of it being better or worse. I supported Richardson until this year. If this is as good as he is going to get I would rather have something else. I keep drinking the kool-aid of this offense only to learn instead of lemon flavor I keep getting a cup of urine.
Click to expand...

It will be the same crap, just a worse version. This has been proven time and time again with Backup QBs under Rhoads.

What amazes me is how quickly people want to jump on the QB and blame it all on him. I'm certainly not saying Sam had a good game, but I don't see any threads about the drops that Lazard had. A couple that were pretty costly. Consistent lack of a running game, which imo, is the biggest problem this team has. When you can't run, it allows the D to focus only on pass and shut that down. No QB alive is going to have a good game if we can't find a way to run the football.
 
Clonefan94 said:
It will be the same crap, just a worse version. This has been proven time and time again with Backup QBs under Rhoads.

What amazes me is how quickly people want to jump on the QB and blame it all on him. I'm certainly not saying Sam had a good game, but I don't see any threads about the drops that Lazard had. A couple that were pretty costly. Consistent lack of a running game, which imo, is the biggest problem this team has. When you can't run, it allows the D to focus only on pass and shut that down. No QB alive is going to have a good game if we can't find a way to run the football.
Click to expand...

He has been the same for a couple years!! This isn't people ******** after 2 games. This is people tired of giving him the benefit of the doubt just to be let down again and again.
 
Clonefan94 said:
It will be the same crap, just a worse version. This has been proven time and time again with Backup QBs under Rhoads.

What amazes me is how quickly people want to jump on the QB and blame it all on him. I'm certainly not saying Sam had a good game, but I don't see any threads about the drops that Lazard had. A couple that were pretty costly. Consistent lack of a running game, which imo, is the biggest problem this team has. When you can't run, it allows the D to focus only on pass and shut that down. No QB alive is going to have a good game if we can't find a way to run the football.
Click to expand...

Meh. If you know you don't have a running game and execute properly in the passing game using it as a pseudo-running game it can work. But we don't do that. We just pound it in to the back of our lineman with young undersized RB's.
 
Beyerball said:
I voted to keep SR but I would like to see what Lanning can do from a wildcat formation in the running game possibly.
Click to expand...
This reminded me about Mangino saying that he'll find a way to utilize Lanning on offense. I guess that was just BS?
 
tazclone said:
Agree with all this but Lanning.

  1. short routes- iowa did a good job not letting our WRs off the line and defending the short stuff. even when we had Wesley on a LB and Daley with a S
  2. WRscreens- see above but we should have done more
  3. should have run the ball off the left side because in both games, that is where we get our yardage. One play off the left side in the second half
  4. Sam has to start keeping onthe zone read. I don't know if they aren't allowing it or what but he needs to start keeping. iowa had a back up DE in th egame....should have ran zone read at him all day
Click to expand...

I don't think we've run much, if any, zone read.
 
Honestly I wouldn't mind seeing Lanning. I've supported Sam and think he could have developed into a good QB, but he's had too many OC's and most of his time here he didn't have a QB coach(who wasn't tied down as OC also). Lanning is bigger so he might be able to handle hits better, he's got a bigger arm... So he might be more willing to get the ball to our WR's.
 
Mangino is a guy that sticks to his guns. Richardson will start every game barring injury.
 
We play a snap back to the QB with a back to either hand off to or block. Why? Guessing so we can have a bunch of receiver options to throw to, right? But Iowa didn't respect our run game so sat back in a zone that SR couldn't pick apart. Having a runner at QB like Lanning would or could force the defense to play the run and give the QB the option to sprint or drop back and throw. I realize Ankeny 4A HS ball ain't Big12 but if you saw Joel Lanning in HS and the State Championship game he confused the D with fake handoffs, quick runs and drop backs to slanting receivers. ISU didn't give Lanning a scholarship to become a pocket passer. He is a Tim Tebow type runner with drive and leadership quality. Tebow isn't NFL quality but tore up defenses in the SEC. I'd take that right now cause what we're playing ain't workin'.
 
Clonefan94 said:
Wait, you are sick and tired of bad play from a QB, but you think the solution would be to put in one of two guys who isn't even as good as the starter?

So how is your solution going to do anything to improve the product?

This is it people, live with it. If there was even a remote chance either of our back-ups were able to compete, we'd have heard about it like we have the previous years.
The sooner everyone stops thinking the QB is the sole problem for all of our woes and the product on the field, the easier this season will go down for you.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

OK. The whole offense sucked the second half. That sucks.
 
EvolSwing said:
We play a snap back to the QB with a back to either hand off to or block. Why? Guessing so we can have a bunch of receiver options to throw to, right? But Iowa didn't respect our run game so sat back in a zone that SR couldn't pick apart. Having a runner at QB like Lanning would or could force the defense to play the run and give the QB the option to sprint or drop back and throw. I realize Ankeny 4A HS ball ain't Big12 but if you saw Joel Lanning in HS and the State Championship game he confused the D with fake handoffs, quick runs and drop backs to slanting receivers. ISU didn't give Lanning a scholarship to become a pocket passer. He is a Tim Tebow type runner with drive and leadership quality. Tebow isn't NFL quality but tore up defenses in the SEC. I'd take that right now cause what we're playing ain't workin'.
Click to expand...

We have a runner at quarterback. Sam is actually a pretty good runner. If you've watched any games this year though, it's painfully obvious the coaching staff is specifically coaching him not to run with the ball. Clearly it's not something they're wanting with their quarterback.
 
I think each offensive drive they should each pick a number between 1 and 10, then whoever is closest gets to play that drive.
 
You are half right. Sam is quick and can run when there's an open hole. Lanning is a fullback in QB clothing. Big diff. Ask yourself who you would rather hit a tight hole? SR or Lanning? The ability to be a fullback forces defenses to play up and gives the QB the option to fake the run and let receivers sprint to open space. Tebow at Florida froze linebackers and D-Backs afraid he would run. SR only runs as a last resort. We don't have a quick thinking quick release QB like Texas Tech or Baylor have had. K State had a runner at QB the last few years. We need a threat at QB and if Sam can't locate our terrific Receivers he's not gonna win games with his legs. Might as well give Lanning a chance. He was absolutely a leader in HS and pounded the line with his running. Big kid at 230 plus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back