Trev is in over his head

[Enhance]

I think the problem is our willingness to let running quarterbacks start for us, when they probably wouldn't start for other college teams. We call them dual threats because they are passers, but they are never good enough passers to play in the NFL and can be liabilities against good college defenses, too. 

I don't know, IMO, we're kind of a wash here. We've certainly had some quarterbacks that would fall into the 'running QB' category that we asked to throw (Taylor Martinez, Armstrong, Sims) but then we also had guys like Tanner Lee, Casey Thompson, and Adrian Martinez, all QB's that started for other college programs and were certainly perceived as at a minimum dual-threat (Martinez) or in Lee and Thompson's case they were definitely more valued as passers. Our track record for getting them to the NFL as QB's is poor although AM did make a roster this past season.
 

A lot of great quarterbacks are mobile quarterbacks, but not what we call dual threats. The guys you listed all work well and often in the traditional pocket, but have the green light to run as needed.

They tend to run less as their career goes on.

While the bolded is true, I view dual-threats as threats with both their arms and legs in the simplest term, which is what those guys are and was the crux of your original post. I think we if we start trying to define what makes someone a runner vs. a dual-threat vs. a 'mobile pocket passer' then that goes a bit outside the scope of what I was responding to.

Edit - somehow part of my post got deleted.

 If you're an offensive lineman with NFL ambitions, scouts will need to see you protecting traditional deep drop QBs. 

I agree, but I also think we've had quite a few QB's that gave our linemen opportunities to shine, and I think most scouts are probably savvy enough to isolate good individual o-line play down to the o-linemen vs. holding them accountable for something stupid the QB did.

 

[gobiggergoredder]

We are not hiring the right guys for this job.  I have watched KU and KSU over the last few seasons.  There is better talent, and better overall play right now on both of those teams.  Sure KU is battlling lack of defense, but we would take there offense or many of there offensive players on our roster.  KSU has always had better QB play for the most part in the last 20 years.  Better skill players overall during the last 20 years.  Point is Kleiman and Leipold are program builders and player developers.  I am sure we thought we were getting that with Rhule, but nothing yet has shown me he is the same coach who got Temple and Baylor going.  I think the $40 mill he received from Carolina has maybe him less hungry and more fat and happy.  Were an easy payday, simple.

You realize Liepold won 2 games his first year right?  You understand Kleiman was 8-5 (5-4 in conference) after taking over a 5-7 Bill Snyder team right?