http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MeMdk8zNuH0/TsK_VqEukDI/AAAAAAAAABk/3DFL0_cY9jY/s1600/Hispanic_boy_crossing_fingers_BLD034323.jpg

 

Any of you think it would be wise to explore a 2 qb offense? While I feel part of our passing games problems are the wideouts it's pretty clear brandon is weak in the passing game. He makes poor decisions, he looks in on one guy, he's not accurate, and his passes have too much air under them. It doesn't have to be a pass when book comes into the game but it could keep the defense honest. As of now you really don't even need safeties against our pass attack.

I actually agree with you. A small dose of Book. Many will disagree.

If you have 2 QB's, you don't have a QB.

If you have 2 QB's, you don't have a QB.

 

Yeah I've never been a fan of it, we just need Wimbush to improve to the point where he's completing 60%. I was very disappointed with the passing vs BC, the only nice touch pass with accuracy was the one to Smythe. So he can do it but he needs to be consistent.

 

People will bring up 2012 but we got tons of breaks that year, Rees was an experienced vet and the defense was light years better.

Wimbush needs to improve, we will all agree there but I don't think taking him off the field gives us a better chance to win.

Ian Book looked less accurate than Wimbush, so a less accurate QB without the running ability makes me think it would be a very bad idea..

If you have 2 QB's, you don't have a QB.

 

History proves this. Also... why not just light up a sign on the sideline and let the defense know what your scheme for that play is. Ridiculous

I actually agree with you. A small dose of Book. Many will disagree.

 

LOL, why do you sound shocked to agree with me? Some people will disagree but many of them will just be looking on the surface and not thinking deeper.

 

If you have 2 QB's, you don't have a QB.

 

That's more of a case when you can't decide on a qb. This would be different.

 

Ian Book looked less accurate than Wimbush, so a less accurate QB without the running ability makes me think it would be a very bad idea..

 

Too soon to make that judgment.

 

History proves this. Also... why not just light up a sign on the sideline and let the defense know what your scheme for that play is. Ridiculous

 

History proves a change is good. In the NFL a change in qb is often a spark. Even looking what zaire did in the bowl game. Ohio state with cardelle jones. If you think a qb change is like lighting up a sign then I hope every team we play has a coach with your football IQ.

 

we're all gonna wish book had a few more snaps if/when wimbush gets knocked out of a game.

I wouldn't go that route, a spark in 1 game is different then having a 2 qb system and historically speaking a 2 qb system fails more then it succeeds.

If you have 2 QB's, you don't have a QB.

 

LOL, why do you sound shocked to agree with me? Some people will disagree but many of them will just be looking on the surface and not thinking deeper.

 

 

 

That's more of a case when you can't decide on a qb. This would be different.

 

 

 

Too soon to make that judgment.

 

 

 

History proves a change is good. In the NFL a change in qb is often a spark. Even looking what zaire did in the bowl game. Ohio state with cardelle jones. If you think a qb change is like lighting up a sign then I hope every team we play has a coach with your football IQ.

 

we're all gonna wish book had a few more snaps if/when wimbush gets knocked out of a game.

 

A QB change in game is different than a QB change for a game. I don't see a lot of NFL teams running 2 QBs out there in packages that suit their skill sets. If you are advocating a DUAL QB situation then my comment stands. Is your memory that short? It doesn't work at ND.

Edited September 18, 20177 yr by VCDomer

Ian Book looked less accurate than Wimbush, so a less accurate QB without the running ability makes me think it would be a very bad idea..

I was expecting a lot more honestly. Realize it was a small sample but didn't see anything good. Kid is small too. Not even close to giving up on him but not the most dazzling debut.

I want a QB that is 6'3" minimum and is a pocket passer lining up under center. Period. **** this offensive scheme and the fake who rode it into town on a donkey.

A QB change in game is different than a QB change for a game. I don't see a lot of NFL teams running 2 QBs out there in packages that suit their skill sets. If you are advocating a DUAL QB situation then my comment stands. Is your memory that short? It doesn't work at ND.

 

Malik and kizer was a joke. I'm not talking about swapping a qb's each possession. Read my post and respond to that and not reply to your own assumptions.

 

My thought process in using 2 qb's is closer to the wildcat. just a change of pace that gives the defense a new wrinkle can anyone can see that teams are not going to worry about our passing going forward.

 

Can't wait for you to take that out of context.

 

You add that to the fact that I think wimbush is a one dimensional qb that puts himself at risk. Heck yeah I want another qb who has played some meaningful reps. it's smart and pro active.

I want a QB that is 6'3" minimum and is a pocket passer lining up under center. Period. FU€k this offensive scheme and the fake who rode it into town on a donkey.

 

Want in one hand and **** in the other and see which one fills up faster. You can't win games or gameplan with players you don't have.

 

Tom Brady has a job already.

Not a fan. Develop the guy you have.

 

If he proves in the long run to not be the guy make the change, but it's only 3 games.

Ian Book is 0-3 in his career. Wha has he done that makes you think he can keep a defense honest? If Wimbush looks bad after 7-8 games maybe you consider options, but he has played 3 games.

 

Not apples to apples, but to look at Clausnes first year stats. Horrific. I know the team has uses, but he didn't light it up and needed time to develop. Most QBs do.

Malik and kizer was a joke. I'm not talking about swapping a qb's each possession. Read my post and respond to that and not reply to your own assumptions.

 

My thought process in using 2 qb's is closer to the wildcat. just a change of pace that gives the defense a new wrinkle can anyone can see that teams are not going to worry about our passing going forward.

 

Can't wait for you to take that out of context.

 

You add that to the fact that I think wimbush is a one dimensional qb that puts himself at risk. Heck yeah I want another qb who has played some meaningful reps. it's smart and pro active.

 

Your opening post is very vague about how you want to use Book.

Brandon runs often and its obvious that's not going to stop

 

How long before a ding or dong forces him to sit a week or two

 

The last thing we need is to RUSH BOOK into the game....

 

We need the staff to find ways to improve passing production from Wimbush

 

aloha

Ian Book is 0-3 in his career. Wha has he done that makes you think he can keep a defense honest? If Wimbush looks bad after 7-8 games maybe you consider options, but he has played 3 games.

 

Not apples to apples, but to look at Clausnes first year stats. Horrific. I know the team has uses, but he didn't light it up and needed time to develop. Most QBs do.

 

Quite frankly, if he doesn't throw better then wimbush--then he don't need to be on scholarship. 3 passes with the second unnit is not an honest indicator.

 

Clausen was a freshmen his struggles are understandable. Brandon is a junior, and im sorry but there is no elite qb in him waiting to be developed.

Quite frankly, if he doesn't throw better then wimbush--then he don't need to be on scholarship. 3 passes with the second unnit is not an honest indicator.

 

Clausen was a freshmen his struggles are understandable. Brandon is a junior, and im sorry but there is no elite qb in him waiting to be developed.

 

Well, Nick Saban and Urban Meyer thought there was a QB waiting to be developed, so I'll take their word for it.

 

Wimbush makes enough good throws that it is just a matter of time before he figures it out. It isn't as though he never puts the ball where it is supposed to be.

 

Will he be a top 10 passer? Likely no. But he will certainly be serviceable enough to build an offense around.

Terrible idea. What Wimbush and the team needs is more game reps, not sharing reps with another QB. He's got two years of elegibility left after this season and will only get better.