Discussion in 'University of Colorado Recruiting Archive' started by Hi.O, Sep 2, 2012.
Other side of that is that when a freshman starts you know he's a player. At QB, it usually means 1 tough "growing pains" season -- but that's often worth it in the long run.
I guess so, but goodness, how many scholarships did we waste then?
I've read things like this in the past, and I really don't get it. Would you really prefer to watch another year of Webb, or someone like Dorman to" validate" that scholarship, than watch Liufau or Dillon, who are clearly the higher upside options? Personally, I'd rather turn the page on the old and bring in the new era of CU football.
Re: '13 WA QB Sefo Liufau (Verbal to Colorado)
Why is it a waste to have backup that has snaps at a division 1 level. Not every player works out that is just how it works. If sefo starts next year it will be because he earns it and really shows something to the staff.
No, I don't want the coaches play bad players to validate their scholarship decisions. I want them to evaluate talent better and to not bring these guys here in the first place. If Dillon starts, we wasted scholarships on Dormon, Wood, Hirshmann (not their guy), and Webb. That's 4 scholarships. If Liufau starts that 5 scholarships. You can't waste 5 scholarships on one position like this. Plus, I really hate the idea of a freshman starting at QB. They're rarely ever the answer. Also, what makes you think Liufau and Dillon have more upside than Wood or Hirshmann? I don't understand why so much optimism is put on guys that have yet to play a down for us.
So every school that starts a fr. or soph. is wasting schollies. Virtually every school in the country tries to bring in at least one QB per class. Obviously not all these guys end up as starters, a lot of them never see significant time on the field. I like Dillon as a QB prospect and if he earns the job then great, Sefu can develop behind him and take his turn when Dillon finishes. On the other hand if Sefu comes in and wins the job then that means we have a better QB than Dillon starting and a quality back-up.
Coaches have to play the best player, regardless of class. If they don't they lose credibility with their players. Ideally your QBs are good enough that the new guys coming in have to sit for a year or two and develop but if a guy is good enough to play then he plays.
All we have seen from Sefu is short highlight clips which don't tell the full story but from what I have seen I am impressed. Let's let it be decided on the field.
There many are positions that require depth and allow multiple players to play. QB is not one of them. You can start freshman or sophomores running back, for example, and still have and upperclassmen play a role that the freshman hasn't adequately learned yet.
Yes, teams do tend to bring in a QB per class, but upperclassmen usually start and freshman tend to be redshirted and groomed. I have no problem taking a QB per class. A few just need to transfer out or change positions come their third year. Out of Webb, Wood, Hirhsmann, and Dorman, I'd like to see 2 of the four transfer out or change positions.
Again, Yes. Play the best players. But if the best QB is a freshman and there are plenty of upperclassmen on the squad, then this reflects on the staff's ability to evaluate talent. Dillon and Liufau won't be stepping into a situation next year where the starting QB has just graduated and the remaining QBs have left. They step into a situation where there is a RS-senior QB, 2 RS-junior QBs, and a RS-Sophomore QB. That's a 5th year player, 2 4th year players, and a 3rd year player. If there happens to be little depth or just one upperclassmen destined to be the backup, I can l live with a young QB. This won't be the case next year.
Also, the damage of misevaluating talent like this hurts other positions on the team. If one of these upperclassmen QB doesn't contribute, then we will have wasted 2 to 3 scholarships over 2 years. These 2 to 3 spots could have been used over the past few years to take and develop players at other positions. Even if these guys don't become your #1, that's fine. Back-up players on the D-line, OL, at RB, WR, CB, and LB can all contribute and help the team without starting. They might come in on special packages, or just give guys breathers. That's a positive impact that multiple backup QB's won't ever have.
I certainly wouldn't object if Doorman or even Hirsch were to transfer out. That stated the QB position is a different thing than other positions. Fact is that on a frequent basis most programs including the very best have senior QBs on there roster who will not play. It is simply the way it works.
If we end up next year with a fr. or rsfr. starting it is still not a bad deal having an upperclassman as depth even if he doesn't play much. I would not be surprised to see the senior leaving but if he stays thats a not to honoring commitments, also needed to build strong programs.
By the way look at the rosters of most quality programs in the country and you will see players at almost all positions who will occupy a schollie for 4 years without ever making significant contributions. It is going to happen when you are looking at 16-17 year old HS kids and try to project them into major college player.
If Sefu starts early in his career it doesn't mean that the upperclassmen were failures, it means he is a greater success. That is not a bad thing.
I'm fine with having an upperclassmen for depth. I said as much: If there happens to be little depth or just one upperclassmen destined to be the backup, I can l live with a young QB.That is why I said 2 to 3 scholarships are wasted not all 4.
To the point that the QB position is the same as other positions. This is not true. The only other position I would compare the QB position to is K/P. If the starting Kicker is healthy, the backup kicker has no impact on the game. The same this is true with the back-up quarterback. The same is not true with pretty much every other position. The back-up running back can be a valuable change of pace back. There are multiple positions that a wide receiver can play. The D-line always needs depth. Those guys will get worn out throughout the game if they're in there every play. Putting the depth issue aside, different D-linemen bring different assets as well. Nobody puts their heavy DE on a third and long (if they do they move them inside). That's when you bring in your pass rush specialist or a jack linebacker. Similar things can be said for linebackers and corners. I don't see substitutions made with safties though. Maybe I'm not watching close enough. The point is, multiple backups at QB is not going to benefit your team. Multiple backups at other positions, especially the D-line, can be very beneficial.
I've also wanted to ask this: How do people put pictures under their names?
OK, so let's go with 3 QB's and see how that works out. You think things are bad now? They'd get a whole lot worse in a hurry! Between injuries, transfers, and guys who just don't pan out, you have to have a solid pipeline at the QB position in order to be successful. You have to have enough arms for spring and fall practices. Are we over where most of us would like us to be right now? Yeah, and it's in the current sophomore class. As Mtn said, I don't think anyone would be upset if one of the back-ups transferred, but the staff had to build up the numbers and hope one panned out this year. Otherwise, Hirschman was the only real option we had this year. But that doesn't mean we're loaded with a bunch of big-time upperclassmen that can't be challenged by a freshman QB. IMO, the best thing that can happen to this program is to see Dillon emerge as the starter next year.
Thanks for moving this. Is there a bcs team in the country with only 3 scholarship qbs? Qb is a weird position where only one guy plays but it is the most important position. You gotta keep recruiting them because an Andrew luck or Vince young can make your team great.
Multiple back-ups help your team imensly when you have the inevitable injury bug hit. It is very rare that a team has the same QB make it through a season healthy. Get one QB hurt and you are on QB number two. He gets knicked even for a few plays and you are on QB #3. This year if your QB has his helmet pop off in a pile the back up is in for at least a play. Not having at least three solid QBs is an invitation to lose games.
Also your back-up QBs also serve as the guys who simulate upcoming opponents in practice preparing for upcoming plays. Even if they will never play they can provide value to the team.
If it made sense to go with only 2-3 QBs you would see more winning schools doing it. Ohio State has a soph QB who isn't going to be beat out by the upperclassmen but still maintains a full compliment. Lots of other schools doing the same thing. Why? because it works.
Most teams have 3 to 4 QBs on their roster. Next year we'll have 6 unless people start transferring out. You said you'd be happy with some transferring out, I've said the same. We agree there. We don't need 7 QBs next year for practice. That's way too many. Many of them won't get any reps anyways, so it'll be a waste. As for injruies and such, that's just a risk that we're going to have to live with. Every team lives with it. That's why you have a QB. I don't know of any team that prepares for 2 quarterbacks going down. Where would Boise have been without Moore, Stanford without Luck, Michigan State without Cousins, Auburn without Newton, etc. I think we've seen the results so far: decent at best. Those are the results of backup QBs replacing starters a year later. The results would be worse if it happened midseason. These teams, by no means, lack depth at QB. Having 2 to 3 extra QBs will also not mitigate the dropoff they experience. So no, having more QBs here will not help us either. Why would it? How often does the 4th or 5th string QB ever help? So yes, while injuries at QB hurt, extra QBs are unnecessary.
Most QBs make it through the season. Don't spend scholarships trying to anticipate the injury bug. Accept that if your QB goes down your season's outlook has changed for the worse. That's what the backup is for. If the backup gets injured then the guy that you're trying to groom for the future gets his start a little early. If he gets hurt then you go with your walk-on (in our case is would be Shrock). But honestly, how often have you ever seen 3 quarterbacks go down? You just don't need this many QBs on scholarship. You need 3 with one coming in next year. If you have 4 you run one off or move him to another position. Simulating the other QB can be done with 3 QBs, no need for 7. I believe Ohio State has 3 or 4 QBs on their roster. Let's see what Meyer does with them.
I don't see a lot of disagreement here. I want 3 QBs on the roster. Webb as the backup or starter, Wood or Hirshmann to take his place after he leaves (or to take his spot), Dillon. Next year, 4 will be fine, because there will be a gap between Wood/Hirshmann and Dillon. Tell me if you disagree with that. If you want to keep more, then who do we keep and why? Dorman brings nothing Shrock doesn't. Wood and Hirshmann will be going into their 4th year next year. Figure out which one is worth keeping already. If they're both really worth keeping, get rid of Webb.
Most NFL teams carry 3, college is a different game. I did a quick count of PAC 12 QB's, by team. I didn't bother to count scholarship vs. non-scholarship QB's, but here are the numbers: 5 teams have 7 QB's on their roster, 4 have 6 QB's (CU included), 2 have 5, and 1 team (Oregon State) carries only 4. So, 75% of the conference is carrying 6 or 7 QB's, and CU is right in the mix. You're missing the point here: quality depth improves your practices, improves competition for PT, gives you more opportunities to hit on a stud (the shotgun effect) and mitigates your risk against the myriad of issues that can plague college teams: injuries, transfers, suspensions, academics, etc. It's not necessarily about playing your 5th string QB, but building a quality pipeline of talent to compete at the BCS level.
Hi-lo nobody is arguing that they want 7 qbs on scholarship.
Again, this isn't the NFL. You don't just "get rid" of these kids. Because of that, sometimes you end up carrying an extra kid that likely will not have the opportunity to play. For the record, I don't see Dorman or Hirschman playing, so I wouldn't be overly upset if one or both decided to go elsewhere. But that would still leave us with at least 5 next year, which is the minimum I'd be comfortable with. As for OSU, they have 5, one per class. And they're recruiting a much higher caliber of athlete in general than CU, so there's a little more safety from the bust factor there.
I've made my position clear. I've also said that there doesn't seem to be much disagreement. I've also not accused anyone of saying that.
Okay good we got past that one hurdle. Now do think we should take one qb every class?
Most kids want to play. The backup can at least think that they're one play away from starting. The backup's backup (and I'm not talking about the guy being groomed) almost never gets that chance. It's best to try to get them down to a level where they can start or have them move to a position they can contribute at. I see nothing wrong with that. As for OSU. They have 5 all on scholarship? Or just 5 in total? I think if they have 5 on scholarship this year Meyer will cut that down quickly. Some of those guys were dual-threat quarterbacks, I suspect they'll play other positions if they can. It's sorta like when you see a big, semi-mobile quarterback. The coaches want him to be tight-end. They'll give him a shot at QB, but they know he's a tight end.
Yes, take a QB each class, but when you're convinced they can't play QB for you, move them, either off the team or to a different position. This happens everywhere. Go look at Rivals, Scout, ESPN, or 247 sports. Many teams take one QB a class, some take two, rarely does anyone take none. Most of these QBs don't play QB for the team they signed with. They transfer to a lower level or change positions. This happens a lot, and I'd argue that it's good. If you can contribute somewhere else, then do so, and quickly. Your time in college is limited.
Five total, I didn't bother to check walk-on vs. schollie, but does it really matter? You're arguing that "most" programs carry 3-4 QB's, yet of the 13 teams we've looked at (the entire Pac-12 + OSU), the only one carrying 4 is Oregon State, which isn't exactly a model program. Yes, if one transfers, we'll be OK, but the numbers at QB aren't a major issue right now. And going back to your initial argument, who shouldn't we have given a schollie to that has one now? Dorman is an obvious choice, since he seems to be buried, but at the time he signed, Hirschman was the only other scholarship QB for 2012, basically forcing the staff to take someone in that 2011 class. Wood? Maybe, but given the situation I just mentioned, I really liked the gamble. He's still the most physically gifted of our QB's (with the possible exception of Dillon). Webb? This would be another obvious choice, since he was the last one to come aboard, but he's now the starter.
In the future, if things go right, I don't think we'll see multiple QB's stacked in one class, but for now, the staff did what they had to do to bring in some competition. Hopefully we're now in the cycle of bringing in one per class, redshirting kids their first year on campus, then hosting an open competition between a number of talented kids.
I didn't make it clear in my posts. I'm only counting scholarship QBs. I have no problem keeping walk-on QBs. If 2 of the 6 (I miscount before) scholarship QBs on roster next year want to become walk-ons and stay here, I'd have no problem with that. Frankly, I'd be delighted. We get the benefit of depth and extra scholarship.s Win-win for us.
Yes, Dorman is the most obvious. Hirshmann should be looking at other options or Wood shouldn't have been taken. One of the two. Since Webb is playing for us, he isn't a wasted scholarship. If he becomes the backup, I think I'd still be content. So for this year we should have two fewer QBs. Dorman + Wood or Hirshmann. Also, didn't Hirshmann break both of his feet? Medical scholarship maybe?
Again, yes. Hopefully the staff will begin redshirting players in the future, as they're doing with Dillon. But in the meantime, they need to cut down the number of QBs on scholarship. If we don't we'll end up with 6 players next year. 5 (if we don't take a QB, which we should) the year after. 5 the year after that if we don't take a QB for 2 years in a row. We will either take a QB each year (giving us 7 scholarship QBs in a few years), a QB one year (giving us 6 scholarship QBs), or none (leaving us with a 2 year gap). If we don't cut the QB numbers down next year we face one of the three situations above (unless Wood becomes a TE). I don't like any of them (except for Wood becoming a TE).
The guy who is third on this depth chart will most likely transfer.particularly if they don't see the field. Right now that looks like Hirshman as this staff did not recruit him and he will see that Dillon is the heir apparent and Sefo will be coming in to challenge as well. I would also expect the staff to "urge" that Stevie Joe seek a lower division school where his talents are better suited.
I don't think the 3rd string guy will transfer out, as long as he is still young and is expected to be the next starter.
Which is not the case. I'd be very surprised if Hirsch or Wood weren't gone by this spring. Both know they're good enough to start at a college football program and it's unlikely they'll stick around to hold a clipboard.
That's true. I guess I kinda took it for granted that one of those two would transfer out, Dillon or Liufau would become our next future starter, and Webb and the remaining player would battle it out for the next two years. The guy that doesn't transfer out could still be the starter his 5th year. I wouldn't really mind that.
It will be tough for Wood to transfer to a Div 1 school unless he graduates. He has already used his RS year and has set out a transfer year. He will be a 4th year Junior next year - so he will not be attractive to other programs if he is only eligible for one year with no experience.
Doubt they would be able to transfer to a FBS school. Likely choices are FCS or they hang around until they get their degree.
Separate names with a comma.