AuroranHusker
Special Teams Player
I-Z really boggles one's mind...... Nebraska was getting run out of Memorial Stadium by Okie St and aTm, but Cally doesn't bother to throw Ganz in there until Keller goes down for the season (in the next ballgame).
Joe Ganz
- Thread starter huskerdude171
- Start date
HuskerKing130
Banned
There are 22 different positions, QB is just 1. Just cuz a team loses a quarterback doesnt automatically make it a rebuilding year.
I do indeed think that since Cally was endeavoring to rebuild a team to have competitiveness with continuity he should not have brought in a guy for one year. It was a crapshoot and he lost. He bet on one seasons hopeful results (that did not come to fruition) and did so at the expense of the future. If Keller had not gotten hurt, Ganz would not have played a down this year. Next year would have again been a year with a QB w/o any experience. That was a foolish plan. NU got lucky, in an odd sense, that Keller got hurt --- this way at least one QB has some experience next year.
well, if you support that argument, you must also agree Keller should never have played a down this year, we should have been grooming Ganz for 2008......:madash :madash
I would have played Ganz from the beginning in hopes that this year he would have worked out the kinks so that next year he would be great. He did, by complete accident (not by design) get some experience this year because of an injury.
I would have never brought in Keller (nothing personal, I actually like the kid). But it is not wise to bring in a 1 year QB to a team trying to rebuild. In direct answer to your question, since we had Keller and Ganz last year --- I would have played Ganz as the starter and Keller in mop-up.
Next year will be a new system and we have 3 QB's --- a senior, a sophomore, and a freshman. At the very least, for the sake of continued competitiveness the better of the younger two should (so long as they are viable players for the future --- which they may or may not be) play as much as is possible. If they are relatively close to Ganz in effectiveness then start the young one and have Ganz play some as well. But you really need a QB that will have 2 -3 years of continual play to expect the offense to really have a shot at excellence.
whoever. Bringing in a QB for one year was foolish. But I surmise that Cally
Licensed to Ill
Starter
I'm almost thinking it's a good thing Gabbert isn't coming to Nebraska. We've got a stable of good QBs
HuskerTrucker
All-Conference
I think he got shell shocked at Colorado...everything had gone too well for him...then all of a sudden he throws back to back interceptions....you could tell it affected him.... He is good as long as things are going the Husker's way...but if he screws up, he hasn't figured out how to mentally deal with it yet. I like him a lot, but he has soooo much growing to do, and I am not sure I want another Keller (starting a QB for 1 year) again. It might be worth it to take one of the freshmen and start developing them for the future. Look what Colt McCoy was able to do...his only problem now is he don't have a o-line to protect him.
Bleeding Husker Red
Starter
Here's a fun thought.. in 3 games 1435 yards passing, 16 TDs.. 89 completions on 152 attempts for a final QB rating of 163.38...awesome! Plus 20 rushes for 93 yards and 3 more TDs.
Stretch that out to 12 regular season games- 80 Rushes for 372 yards and 9 TDs plus 356 completions out of 604 passes for 5740 yards and 64 TDs..
Keep going at the rate he's going and he might score 73 friggin touchdowns.... I know it won't happen but isn't it fun to imagine?
sCrUmptious!
Five-Star Recruit
I think you're being far too pessimistic, Husker Red... I'd prefer to multiply the last half of football he played this season to a 12 game performance: 48 touchdowns with 72 interceptions.
Now THOSE are some numbers I could get behind! :lol:
If you were to look at the % of teams that win 9 or more games in a season that have 1st year QB's I'd bet it would be less than 20%. In 80% of the teams with 9 or more wins, a 2nd or 3rd year QB is at the helm. Then, take a look at the # of wins that a 1st year QB has and follow that QB into his 2nd year and I'd be that the vast majority of the time (again probably 70% of the time at least) the # of wins go up.
So, while in the literal-most sense a 1st year QB does not 100% of the time mean its a rebuilding (or building up year) I'd feel safe to say that in 80% of the occasions it is.
Tha axiom that "you never go into a rebuilding year with a senior QB" is not mine. I have head that from many coaches over time. It is simply a statistacally reasonable reality. If you try to rebuild on the shoulders of a senior QB this year, then, by definition, the next year you rebuild again (when a new QB comes in).
Someone earlier said that this mindset says that we should never play a senior. It most certainly does not mean that. Of course, play seniors --- just do not predicate your REBUILDING process on the shoulders of seniors. Once the rebuilding process is initiated and momentum has been gained (by investing in the young players) as they mature the great years are when those seasoned, experienced players are seniors. The whole notion is of continuity in the process.
I dont really care who the starter is as long as they win the job through fair and open competition.
Someone earlier on this thread said "our most experienced and talented" QB in reference to Ganz. Please, lets all try and be honest. He is the most experienced but as far as talented, he is behind Lee and Witt.
That doesnt mean Ganz wont start or shouldnt start, but as far as talent, he is not the most talented in the group at all
another quote i loved " it was the defenses fault that we lost to CU" While the Defense played horribly overall, they were playing fairly well in the 2nd quarter and to start the 3rd, then back to back picks and a punt block and the wheels fell off. The facts are we were up 11 with the ball and Ganz throws 2 absolutely horrible passes that put CU back in the game and completely changed momentum. 3rd start or not, it cant be denied that he threw some terrible terrible passes in his 3 starts. He should have had 9 picks vs. KU.
Again if he wins the job in open competition fine but when talking about all of this lets try and be honest, He is NOT our most talented QB.
Someone earlier on this thread said "our most experienced and talented" QB in reference to Ganz. Please, lets all try and be honest. He is the most experienced but as far as talented, he is behind Lee and Witt.
That doesnt mean Ganz wont start or shouldnt start, but as far as talent, he is not the most talented in the group at all
another quote i loved " it was the defenses fault that we lost to CU" While the Defense played horribly overall, they were playing fairly well in the 2nd quarter and to start the 3rd, then back to back picks and a punt block and the wheels fell off. The facts are we were up 11 with the ball and Ganz throws 2 absolutely horrible passes that put CU back in the game and completely changed momentum. 3rd start or not, it cant be denied that he threw some terrible terrible passes in his 3 starts. He should have had 9 picks vs. KU.
Again if he wins the job in open competition fine but when talking about all of this lets try and be honest, He is NOT our most talented QB.
I won't matter who's playing QB if our defense keeps playing in the low 100s range.
The new coach should build the program slowly but focus on his best chances for winning now. If they anointed me coach tomorrow, I would keep Watson/Gilmore and work on finding a Defensive staff that can get the defense back in the 50s range next year and 25 the year after.
Let the offense (with Ganz) that put up 40, 73, and 51 in their last three games continue. If it ain't broke don't fix it. The D is broke. Then slowly change the offense over the next couple of years by changing your plays/playcalling to suit the new players.
A new O and D scheme next year screams 5 or more losses and no bowl (see 1st year Callahan); especially with the confidence this team has in itself after last year. The staff should keep anything positive and build from it.
The new coach should build the program slowly but focus on his best chances for winning now. If they anointed me coach tomorrow, I would keep Watson/Gilmore and work on finding a Defensive staff that can get the defense back in the 50s range next year and 25 the year after.
Let the offense (with Ganz) that put up 40, 73, and 51 in their last three games continue. If it ain't broke don't fix it. The D is broke. Then slowly change the offense over the next couple of years by changing your plays/playcalling to suit the new players.
A new O and D scheme next year screams 5 or more losses and no bowl (see 1st year Callahan); especially with the confidence this team has in itself after last year. The staff should keep anything positive and build from it.
Last edited by a moderator:
huskerintexas
Walk-on
We scored 39 against KU & 51 against CU. Is there anyone who can look at those numbers while realizing we LOST those games and not KNOW that the offense did its job while the defense didn't even show up?
Obviously the offense overall did a good job in the game...and the defense did not. However, if those picks aren't thrown, we win the game, period. They gave the buffs quick scores and all the momentum. If we could have mounted any sort of drive, they would have given up.
junior4949
All-American
I think some are also overlooking the 5 turnovers against KU. 4 of them being INT's and 1 being a fumble that directly led to 35 points for the Jayhawks. Our defense was bad, but the offense did have a knack of making them look worse than they really were.
