Starting QB Present or Future View

[np_husker]

We need to play the best QB regardless of whether he's a freshman or a senior.

Best players on the field at all times!

 

[robsker]

Too much over-analyzing here. You start the guy who gives you the best shot at winning, be it Ganz, Lee or whoever. Ganz may be gone the next year but most of the other guys on the team will still be there and if they get used to winning during Ganz's last season, they're going to develop a winning attitutde that's going to carry on to the next year.

So, if Ganz is the best you've got, you start Ganz and work the younger guys in for a series here or there throughout the season to get them some real-time experience.

I hope it is more than a series here or there --- but significant time in building up a future QB.

Does anybody really think NU with Ganz at the helm next year will win the B12 North? I can't imagine it. And we won't with Lee or Witt either --- but our chances the following year (2009) with Lee or Witt go up proportionately with how much Lee of Wit play next year (2008).

I would agree with some of the thinking posted here if I thought next years record would be much different with Ganz at the helm than it would be with a young QB. It might be different but I'd doubt much. I'd expect that NU will not beat OU, VTech, Missouri, Kansas, or Colorado next year no matter who plays QB. I'd think we'll be much more competitive with these better teams than we were last year, and likely will not get blown out too often (or as often) --- but it is also doubtful we beat any of them. As for the rest of the schedule, who knows. As people say its a crapshoot. I just hope that the young QB's (or a young QB) get major playing time next season or we are looking down the pike at, at least two rebuilding years in a row.

 

[junior4949]

If Ganz starts next year then that would make 4 different starting QB's in four seasons --- a disaster. We had Taylor, then Keller, then Ganz next year, and then someone else the year later. To build you need the same QB for two years --- at a minimum --- three is better. If Pelini is smart and is planning for the long haul rather than being short sighted, he'll go with a young QB (unless none of the young QB's are good). Even if Ganz is better for next year than all of the young QB's he needs to prep a QB for the future. NU is going nowhere next year with Ganz or anyone else (if by anywhere one means winning the B12 North or anything beyond that). If you play Ganz next year (exclusively or near exclusively) then the following year NU will again go nowhere (with a new QB). If we take our lumps next year (which we will do anyway) and prep a new QB then the following year there is a chance for NU to maybe take the North (at least a MUCH better chance).

NU is starting from scratch --- and no one in their right mind rebuilds with a senior QB. Poor Ganz --- he is in the wrong place at the wrong time. What Pelini does with the QB situation will be enlightening --- it will reveal whether he has long range or short range goals in mind (or, perhaps that he is handcuffed so-tospeak with no young QB that can be the future). He would be a fool not to give significant playing time (or start) the best of the young QB's.

This perspective is based upon several assumptions. 1) NU next season will be second or, much more likely, third or lower in the B12 North irrespective of who is at QB 2) The first year for any starting QB (with few exceptions) is typically far less productive than year two (and especially year three) 3) that the real target years are not the 2008, or maybe even so much 2009 --- but the 2010 season and 4) the 2008 NU football should be all about setting the stage for the future.

Thoughts?

I don't think it's fair to throw Ganz under the bus simply because he just has one year of eligibility left. It's not his fault that Clownahan brought Keller in for one year (which was stupid btw). It's not his fault Clownahan got fired. If he's the best we have, then he should be the starter. I will say that I do agree that one of the young guns does need to see some significant playing time next year, but I believe we need to have the best on the field at the beginning.

I will also say that Leach at Texas Tech does a pretty good job with one year starting QB's. We all know they don't have a defense year in and year out, but his offense is very explosive even with only one year players.

 

[Cy the Cyclone]

Too much over-analyzing here. You start the guy who gives you the best shot at winning, be it Ganz, Lee or whoever. Ganz may be gone the next year but most of the other guys on the team will still be there and if they get used to winning during Ganz's last season, they're going to develop a winning attitutde that's going to carry on to the next year.

So, if Ganz is the best you've got, you start Ganz and work the younger guys in for a series here or there throughout the season to get them some real-time experience.

I hope it is more than a series here or there --- but significant time in building up a future QB.

Does anybody really think NU with Ganz at the helm next year will win the B12 North? I can't imagine it. And we won't with Lee or Witt either --- but our chances the following year (2009) with Lee or Witt go up proportionately with how much Lee of Wit play next year (2008).

I would agree with some of the thinking posted here if I thought next years record would be much different with Ganz at the helm than it would be with a young QB. It might be different but I'd doubt much. I'd expect that NU will not beat OU, VTech, Missouri, Kansas, or Colorado next year no matter who plays QB. I'd think we'll be much more competitive with these better teams than we were last year, and likely will not get blown out too often (or as often) --- but it is also doubtful we beat any of them. As for the rest of the schedule, who knows. As people say its a crapshoot. I just hope that the young QB's (or a young QB) get major playing time next season or we are looking down the pike at, at least two rebuilding years in a row.

I really think you have it wrong. Your QB has to be THE leader of the offense (regardless of age or experience). He has to inspire faith in the rest of the team that no matter how bad things are going, he is going to lead them to a win. Putting someone in there to get experience for the next year is not going to set well...especially with Seniors who won't HAVE a next year. The players want to win and they want to win NOW...not two or three years down the line. That's like telling someone that if works for you today, you'll let him see you pay someone else for the job you did tomorrow....

Like I said...you start your best and work the younger guys in throughout the season when the opportunity arises so they can build from that for the next year.

 

[Overland Park Husker]

I don't know what the magic formula is but I am comfortable knowing that 'lil Hawk will be our QB for the next 3 years.

Beach --- you have validated my point. CU is well ahead of NU in the rebuild prosess. Why? They invested in their really young players and took their lumps and are now about to reap the benefits. I am a diehard Husker fan but also a realist. 90% of my brethren on this board will disagree with me but truly NU next year will not hand with Missouri, Kansas or Colorado --- and Colorado might crack into the top two in the north.

Unless the coach comes in, like Hawkins did, and roll up his sleeves and say that the goal is to win --- with a sustained winning --- and I will need to invest in youth and really develop and hope that down the road we can SUSTAIN winning. CU will be there next year and will be a very, very solid team --- again because two years ago and this past year Hawkins went with youth who are now developed. I assure you that next year was the year that Hawkins had in view when he started --- a goal of where he wanted to be.

You build companies that way. You build departments in universities that way. You have long range sustained winning in view. Short term thinking is what facilitates the next leadership team to come in take over in a few years.

Again, next year with Ganz or anybody else at QB the Huskers will not better Missouri, Kansas, or Colorado --- and their best chance of getting past any of them the following year is predicated upon who they develop next year. If they develop few young players next year then they become more deeply entrenched behind the leaders in the B12 North.

The only reason not to go with Lee or Witt or a new QB is if the staff sees what they have and are certain that none of them have the stuff to be the future QB --- and man, I hope it is not that bad.

Maybe I'm reading into this too much or maybe I'm just stupid, but if you start off your team with A LOT of freshmen and sophmores (it seems that's what your saying we should), then when all of those guys graduate you start all over again. It'd just be a 3-4 year cycle of sucking, getting better, then dominating, then sucking again cause no one has any experience.

 

[robsker]

If Ganz starts next year then that would make 4 different starting QB's in four seasons --- a disaster. We had Taylor, then Keller, then Ganz next year, and then someone else the year later. To build you need the same QB for two years --- at a minimum --- three is better. If Pelini is smart and is planning for the long haul rather than being short sighted, he'll go with a young QB (unless none of the young QB's are good). Even if Ganz is better for next year than all of the young QB's he needs to prep a QB for the future. NU is going nowhere next year with Ganz or anyone else (if by anywhere one means winning the B12 North or anything beyond that). If you play Ganz next year (exclusively or near exclusively) then the following year NU will again go nowhere (with a new QB). If we take our lumps next year (which we will do anyway) and prep a new QB then the following year there is a chance for NU to maybe take the North (at least a MUCH better chance).

NU is starting from scratch --- and no one in their right mind rebuilds with a senior QB. Poor Ganz --- he is in the wrong place at the wrong time. What Pelini does with the QB situation will be enlightening --- it will reveal whether he has long range or short range goals in mind (or, perhaps that he is handcuffed so-tospeak with no young QB that can be the future). He would be a fool not to give significant playing time (or start) the best of the young QB's.

This perspective is based upon several assumptions. 1) NU next season will be second or, much more likely, third or lower in the B12 North irrespective of who is at QB 2) The first year for any starting QB (with few exceptions) is typically far less productive than year two (and especially year three) 3) that the real target years are not the 2008, or maybe even so much 2009 --- but the 2010 season and 4) the 2008 NU football should be all about setting the stage for the future.

Thoughts?

I don't think it's fair to throw Ganz under the bus simply because he just has one year of eligibility left. It's not his fault that Clownahan brought Keller in for one year (which was stupid btw). It's not his fault Clownahan got fired. If he's the best we have, then he should be the starter. I will say that I do agree that one of the young guns does need to see some significant playing time next year, but I believe we need to have the best on the field at the beginning.

I will also say that Leach at Texas Tech does a pretty good job with one year starting QB's. We all know they don't have a defense year in and year out, but his offense is very explosive even with only one year players.

Leach has a system and is a brilliant offensive X's and o' guy. He also tends to get really good QB's. And also tends to lose --- or at least he has not really built anything with a sustained excellence. Not sure he is the best example. But I know where you are coming from. Still we should not get in that loop. Though, it could be argued that once Ganz is gone we will be out of that loop because at that time we will have Lee still with two years, Witt with three and whoever we get this year with four. I would like Lee or Witt however enter with some real experience.

One last point --- there is the issue of magnitude of difference. If Ganz is much better --- quite a bit better at the outset of next season then that is one thing. If he is only modestly better or they are comparable --- then play the kid.

As to comments about fairness to Ganz. I concur. But the program is bigger than the individual and things like this happen all the time.

Part of my mindset perhaps comes from my profession. I am brought in to rebuild floundering units in my field. My task is to set the unit in the right direction with the expectation of excellence within 3-5 years. Usually the first year or two is rough on personnel. But the 3-5 year goal is met every time.

I see the NU football program as uncompetitive and floundering. Moment by moment short sighted decision making will not get it done.

 

[Cali Sker (in Boston)]

Can somebody please explain this attitude NU fans seem to have regarding how low our program has fallen and how it's going to take years to rebuild because the cupboard is so bare? Aren't we one year removed from playing for the conference title? I felt like we outplayed both OU and Auburn at the end of last year and I always heard about how great Callahan recruited, but all of a sudden we've fallen so hard that we have to expect to "rebuild" and "fall on hard times" before we can expect to win again? Until the MU and OSU games this year I thought NU was still on the rise, not going through a 10 year spell of crappiness after a big scandal a-la OU in the '90s. This "rebuilding" attitude sucks and is horrible - that will only lead to a sustained attitude of mediocrity. It's THAT attitude that is the FIRST thing that needs to go and if Ganz can help NU win next year and get back some swagger and confidence, then he needs to start. Period.

How many more games would NU have won this year with even a semblance of defense? I honestly think that Texas, KU, and CU would have been wins if NU's D had been even remotely good (look at how many points NU scored in those games). Weren't we ahead of CU at halftime? Are they really THAT much better? Didn't we go toe-to-toe with KU until our defense just rolled over? Don't you think a Pelini coached defense could have stopped KU's offense a few times out of 11? Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the cupboard being so bare, and I don't think NU's talent level and overall program has fallen so far that any "rebuilding" is necessary and if there's a defense next year (and I think we all know what Bo can do on defense) that can go along with the numbers Ganz and the offense are capable of putting up (18 total TDs and 1400+ passing yards in only 3 games) then why should NU have to settle for anything? Why can't they EXPECT to WIN? Why do we need to start "rebuilding" and conceding whole seasons before we can get better?

 

[BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA]

:clap Well said!

I've always said concede nothing in advance!

 

[Spiderman]

Colt McCoy and JD Booty come to mind as young guys that can have pretty good first years.

Fact of the matter is, the defense is what let down this team this year. The offense was good MOST of the time. But even great defenses have bad games, or bad stretches. It makes you wonder what would have happened if they'd have been able to count on their defense to make a stand occasionally.

 

[robsker]

Can somebody please explain this attitude NU fans seem to have regarding how low our program has fallen and how it's going to take years to rebuild because the cupboard is so bare? Aren't we one year removed from playing for the conference title? I felt like we outplayed both OU and Auburn at the end of last year and I always heard about how great Callahan recruited, but all of a sudden we've fallen so hard that we have to expect to "rebuild" and "fall on hard times" before we can expect to win again? Until the MU and OSU games this year I thought NU was still on the rise, not going through a 10 year spell of crappiness after a big scandal a-la OU in the '90s. This "rebuilding" attitude sucks and is horrible - that will only lead to a sustained attitude of mediocrity. It's THAT attitude that is the FIRST thing that needs to go and if Ganz can help NU win next year and get back some swagger and confidence, then he needs to start. Period.

How many more games would NU have won this year with even a semblance of defense? I honestly think that Texas, KU, and CU would have been wins if NU's D had been even remotely good (look at how many points NU scored in those games). Weren't we ahead of CU at halftime? Are they really THAT much better? Didn't we go toe-to-toe with KU until our defense just rolled over? Don't you think a Pelini coached defense could have stopped KU's offense a few times out of 11? Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the cupboard being so bare, and I don't think NU's talent level and overall program has fallen so far that any "rebuilding" is necessary and if there's a defense next year (and I think we all know what Bo can do on defense) that can go along with the numbers Ganz and the offense are capable of putting up (18 total TDs and 1400+ passing yards in only 3 games) then why should NU have to settle for anything? Why can't they EXPECT to WIN? Why do we need to start "rebuilding" and conceding whole seasons before we can get better?

Realize that many of the points that the NU offense scored were in games where they were way behind and the opposition was scoring at will. The opposition played a pseudo-prevent defense or a prevent defense and were less than intense --- allowing cheap meaningless points in blowouts. people see the Ganz numbers and their eyes light up. Well. Wait and see. Those numbers were good and I do not want to take anything away from Ganz or the offense --- but context matters.

How anyone can not see that NU is rebuilding and is nowhere near the level of Missouri or Kansas and likely behind Colorado as well --- well, I do not get that.

If you watched any bowl game this year at or around new years, then did you not notice how much faster and more explosive the skill position players were than ours. Did you not notice the guns on the LB's and the lineman on other teams? Then see our LB's (in physical terms) or our big-bellied soft lineman (not all of course --- but generally speaking). No, in terms of sheer physicality, NU is way, way, way behind.

Callahan's recruits that initially signed on had horrific attrition rates. Much of the recruiting hype came from the ones NU were in on --- but most of those we did not get. There has been, I think, more hype than there has been production from Callahan's recruits. That said, it is still early and some of the younger guys may be the real deal. We just do not know.

Anyway. A 5 - 7 team that has gone to only two bowls in four years and has a new, unproven coach (and an unproven staff) coming off of the #100 something defense. Well.... yeah, rebuilding is an appropriate description.

 

[clone]

Can somebody please explain this attitude NU fans seem to have regarding how low our program has fallen and how it's going to take years to rebuild because the cupboard is so bare?

hmmm..

Let's begin by saying that NU has indeed fallen. I don't think many would argue that point. How far is a matter of opinion.

Bare cupboards? Recruiting ratings would say not. I personally think there is plenty of talent at NU.

Problem is... lots of teams have talent. It's how you use it that counts.

2008 starts a new coaching regime, starting with a 5-7 team. They have a lot of work ahead, evaluating the players, the offense and defense they want to run (given the players they have).

The players, even the "old-timers" will have some new things to learn from new coaches with different coaching styles than the old regime. Learning curves suck.

The top teams of the B12 north (MU, KU, CU), seem to have left the others behind. OU and TX are always tough.

So??

So that makes the climb to the top longer and harder.

Teams have been turned on a dime before, but as KU and CU can attest, sometimes it takes a while. They took 5-6 years.

NU is starting at a higher level than they did. Maybe Bo can do it faster.

Bo will do ok. But it ain't likely to be a quick fix.

but opinions vary.

GO BO!!

 

[robsker]

:clap Well said!

I've always said concede nothing in advance!

If I were a player I'd agree. But I am not a player -- and I surmise neither are you. So you and I have nothing to concede or not concede. We are fans in the mode of analysis. While I'd hate to think that the players themselves would see little chance to beat KU or MU or CU --- I, as an analyst and fan can readily look at what is to be seen and say... won't happen --- NU is not (any longer) at that level.

 

[Danimal]

1. Cody redshirted, he was not rushed into service, and that was with Jackson at qb in '06. Jackson had no more business at qb than Jammal Lord. Ganz is way better than Jackson, why rush Witt/Lee?

2. CU was working with the results of the date-rape scandal classes, Hawkins might as well have used youngsters. We had solid classes and have more to work with than Hawkins did when he came in.

We have significantly more talent on-hand than CU did when Hawkins took-over. That comparison doesn't work, the coaches were in two different situations.

 

[Hunter94]

Too much over-analyzing here. You start the guy who gives you the best shot at winning, be it Ganz, Lee or whoever. Ganz may be gone the next year but most of the other guys on the team will still be there and if they get used to winning during Ganz's last season, they're going to develop a winning attitutde that's going to carry on to the next year.

So, if Ganz is the best you've got, you start Ganz and work the younger guys in for a series here or there throughout the season to get them some real-time experience.

spot on. you play the best guys and try to win every game, every year. any other approach would be foolish.

 

[Cali Sker (in Boston)]

Realize that many of the points that the NU offense scored were in games where they were way behind and the opposition was scoring at will. The opposition played a pseudo-prevent defense or a prevent defense and were less than intense --- allowing cheap meaningless points in blowouts. people see the Ganz numbers and their eyes light up. Well. Wait and see. Those numbers were good and I do not want to take anything away from Ganz or the offense --- but context matters.

Midway 2nd quarter: NU 21; KU 28 ----- After that: 48-18

Halftime: NU 35; CU 24 ----- After that: 41-16

Final: NU 73; KSU 31 ----- After that: xx

Nebraska was way behind when they scored most of their points? WTH? It sure seems like the other teams were the ones scoring most of their points in a blowout. And I guess it wasn't too clear, but my comment on the offense only concerned the Joey Ganz games (which is what this thread is about). NU scored 163 points (!!) in those games, and were still in them for 129 of those points. Psuedo-prevent defense? That's pretty stupid when you're down 11 at half time or are getting blown out.

How anyone can not see that NU is rebuilding and is nowhere near the level of Missouri or Kansas and likely behind Colorado as well --- well, I do not get that.

I'll concede that NU is behind (hell, they lost the games), but this defeatist attitude stinks and I just can't understand suggestions that we need 3-4 years in order to compete again.

If you watched any bowl game this year at or around new years, then did you not notice how much faster and more explosive the skill position players were than ours. Did you not notice the guns on the LB's and the lineman on other teams? Then see our LB's (in physical terms) or our big-bellied soft lineman (not all of course --- but generally speaking). No, in terms of sheer physicality, NU is way, way, way behind.

Callahan's recruits that initially signed on had horrific attrition rates. Much of the recruiting hype came from the ones NU were in on --- but most of those we did not get. There has been, I think, more hype than there has been production from Callahan's recruits. That said, it is still early and some of the younger guys may be the real deal. We just do not know.

Anyway. A 5 - 7 team that has gone to only two bowls in four years and has a new, unproven coach (and an unproven staff) coming off of the #100 something defense. Well.... yeah, rebuilding is an appropriate description.

I'll still contend that if NU's defense could stop ANYONE that the KU game (and the entire 2007 season in general) would have gone much differently than 5-7. Bo Pelini took a #54 defense in 2002 and, using mostly the same players, brought them up to #11 in 2003. Coz then took them back to #53 (or thereabouts). What does that say about Pelini's coaching ability? You don't think he can take these guys and get them up to top 50? That's not too much to ask at all. I mean, top 50!! How many fewer points does that amount to? Most of the offense is coming back, and it seemed to only get better with Watson behind the wheel, so a dropoff in scoring shouldn't happen.

So seriously, how far behind MU and KU are we REALLY? What about Colorado? And don't all three of those teams come to Lincoln next year? How many points is that worth? Aren't we just ONE YEAR REMOVED from beating all three of these teams? Why the defeatest attitude? Why are we conceding that we're SO FAR behind?