For those who say play Ballenger one or two series...

[Deleted member 807]

What I liked about Matt is that you couldn't hear an echo of the snap count from the center's ass.

Nice sentiment, Limmewinks. LOL

 

[Sexton Hardcastle]

Like Lefty said. Play both, and stick with the hot hand.

I say Cody will get the start, but if he fails to move the offense then Ballenger will get his shot. We've gone up against 2 great defenses. KU is good, but not in the same league as the previous 2. We should be able to establish the run on them. imho.

 

[buffaholic]

Teams do it ALL the time. Florida and Mizzou are the most successful recent examples of giving the freshman playing time without disrupting the team. It's good for building experience. If over several games, he wins the job, great.

I still say Cody gives us the best chance to win THIS year, due to experience, but I'm not convinced he has an edge in any other departments. Playing a 2nd QB builds experience to insure us against injury (likely with our OL play). It also helps even out the "experience" advantage and allows the staff to accurately judge who is best for the future of CU football. You can't keep Ballenger or Hansen on the bench forever because they don't have game experience.

Two years ago Mangino ripped the redshirt off of Reesing at halftime of the CU game in disgust and they kicked our butt the 2nd half and KU has been on a roll ever since.

I'm not ready to do that. Just play the game a pre-determined amount, say 1 series per half, in the name of "gaining experience" in case he needs to take over some day. That we we have some experience and we get to see what that will do for maturing him. If Cody is better and can retain the job - great! If not, we move on with a capable backup.

 

[Bone Buff]

So, for those too tired to read the rest of the posts:

Are we basically saying we should employ 2 QB's like Florida did a few years ago with Chris Leak and Tim Tebow, where Leak/Cody ran most of the plays, Tebow/Ballenger for pre-described situations?

 

[Buffarino]

I like the 1 series a half thing, too. And if he does well (and if Cody is struggling), you play him more. If Cody is doing well and Ballenger is struggling, he still needs the game experience in real situations, IMO.

 

[buffaholic]

What we are saying is that Cody has taken all the meaningful snaps now for the last 18 games and we haven't seen ANY progress. He is likely the best QB on the roster, or they wouldn't be playing him. But his experience (both growing up on the Boise State playing field) and the last 18 games appears to all observers to be the edge.

Ballenger may not be the future. Perhaps CU coaches have already decided he will never mature in to a starter - we don't know much about what is actually happening.

What we do know is that our backup has almost no experience, that Football wasn't his main sport until last year, and that he looks like a pro QB on the field in the 2 series we have seen and the spring game last year.

Due to experience alone, Cody gives us the best chance to win NOW.

Due to inexperience, we have to get Ballenger in the game. Hawk stated yesterday that he planned to play Ballenger earlier but it didn't work out. That tells me the coaches are thinking the same thing. Get this guy some experience and keep Cody from getting killed.

Ballenger's total lack of experience alone will probably translate into some painful moments and could cost us.

But we have to do it. He needs reps in case he is needed in the short term. He needs reps so that we can quit second guessing Hawk.

This is a difficult situation at best and the best move from here is to start to get Ballenger in the game and see how he reacts and start to at least get him enough experience to be a capable backup.

 

[buffaholic]

What we are saying is that Cody has taken all the meaningful snaps now for the last 18 games and we haven't seen ANY progress. He is likely the best QB on the roster, or they wouldn't be playing him. But his experience (both growing up on the Boise State playing field) and the last 18 games appears to all observers to be the edge.

Ballenger may not be the future. Perhaps CU coaches have already decided he will never mature in to a starter - we don't know much about what is actually happening.

What we do know is that our backup has almost no experience, that Football wasn't his main sport until last year, and that he looks like a pro QB on the field in the 2 series we have seen and the spring game last year.

Due to experience alone, Cody gives us the best chance to win NOW.

Due to inexperience, we have to get Ballenger in the game. Hawk stated yesterday that he planned to play Ballenger earlier but it didn't work out. That tells me the coaches are thinking the same thing. Get this guy some experience and keep Cody from getting killed.

Ballenger's total lack of experience alone will probably translate into some painful moments and could cost us.

But we have to do it. He needs reps in case he is needed in the short term. He needs reps so that we can quit second guessing Hawk.

This is a difficult situation at best and the best move from here is to start to get Ballenger in the game and see how he reacts and start to at least get him enough experience to be a capable backup.

 

[CityBuffT]

Reality is with Cody behind center we have a chance for 1-2 big plays a game through the air, a for sure 1-2 fumbles, at least 1 pick, and 5 balls thrown away because he cant see the recievers. Tell me, would it be absolutely horrible to throw and bigger guy with a better arm in there to give us a shot at the Big 12 North? Im not saying Ballenger is our answer but hell, it wouldnt hurt... I want to go in to games knowing there's a chance to win. Not going in hoping our QB doesnt lose it for us.... Cmon daddy Hawk, have some guts and make the move!!!

 

[sackman]

Reality is with Cody behind center we have a chance for 1-2 big plays a game through the air, a for sure 1-2 fumbles, at least 1 pick, and 5 balls thrown away because he cant see the recievers. Tell me, would it be absolutely horrible to throw and bigger guy with a better arm in there to give us a shot at the Big 12 North? Im not saying Ballenger is our answer but hell, it wouldnt hurt... I want to go in to games knowing there's a chance to win. Not going in hoping our QB doesnt lose it for us.... Cmon daddy Hawk, have some guts and make the move!!!

We have no shot at the B12 North. Forget that right now. We're playing for 2nd in the North, which is still well within our grasp, IMO. Once Daniel and Maclin are gone at Missery, things might change. Until then, Missery is the team in the North.

 

[CityBuffT]

Agreed, but there's always a shot. What if Daniels goes down and the offense disappears? MIssery drops 2 Big 12 games?

We just keep losing games because we dont have the guts to try another QB? This team can compete, weve all seen some shining moments this season but turnovers by our undersized QB has killed us. We should have beat FSU but our QB couldnt hit WIDE OPEN recievers to put them away early and force the pass when our secondary has played... eh decent.

Cody has a huge passion for the game we can see that, but lets make him another Hawkins helping form the sidelines and let the big boys go out there and get the job done.

Although all this seems a waste of breathe due to the fact that i guess it doesnt matter who's back there if we keep losing an OL every week.

Im just frustrated with seeing wide open recievers not getting the ball because we dont have the kid in there that can make the play.

Either way- GO BUFFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BuckinFuffs]

What I liked about Matt is that you couldn't hear an echo of the snap count from the center's ass.

now that's funny... :lol:

 

[iggy]

simplifying the offense by implementing more TE formations, I's, and dual pro ace, will put less pressure on the line IMHO.

We are not going to win games on Qb play. Put the onus on the RB threat we have in speedy, scott, sumler, lockridge. we can outmuscle the rest of the north imho.

Simplifying the offense does these things for the buffs right now.

1.Gives us more possesion time with a more run based balanced attack.

2. Gives the defense well rested.

3. Tires out the soft spread stopping defenses of the north.

4. Allows us to experiment with Ballenger.

5. Opens up all parts of the passing feild for big plays because we will have more of a pro style QB in MB to challenge the opposing defense.


The ball is in control of the strongest unit we have on offense, RB.

And QB wont be a turnover liability.

 

[SJBuff]

simplifying the offense by implementing more TE formations, I's, and dual pro ace, will put less pressure on the line IMHO.

We are not going to win games on Qb play. Put the onus on the RB threat we have in speedy, scott, sumler, lockridge. we can outmuscle the rest of the north imho.

Simplifying the offense does these things for the buffs right now.

1.Gives us more possesion time with a more run based balanced attack.

2. Gives the defense well rested.

3. Tires out the soft spread stopping defenses of the north.

4. Allows us to experiment with Ballenger.

5. Opens up all parts of the passing feild for big plays because we will have more of a pro style QB in MB to challenge the opposing defense.


The ball is in control of the strongest unit we have on offense, RB.

And QB wont be a turnover liability.

It also makes us more predictable which makes it easier for teams to defend against us which will result in more 3 & outs and puts the weight of the game solely on the shoulders of our D.

We just got done doing this for two years. Call me crazy but this is a step back I don't want to take, especially since I expect our turn over rate to go up due to Ballenger's learning curve in your scenario.

I still think Cody is our best shot for this season but we must get Ballinger meaningful snaps in most/every game from here on out. Not only because he's likely the future but also because, with our Oline troubles, there's a reasonable chance Cody goes down and Ballenger becomes 'the guy' and we need there to be as small a drop off in the O as possible if that happens.

 

[BlackNGold]

simplifying the offense by implementing more TE formations, I's, and dual pro ace, will put less pressure on the line IMHO.

We are not going to win games on Qb play. Put the onus on the RB threat we have in speedy, scott, sumler, lockridge. we can outmuscle the rest of the north imho.

Simplifying the offense does these things for the buffs right now.

1.Gives us more possesion time with a more run based balanced attack.

2. Gives the defense well rested.

3. Tires out the soft spread stopping defenses of the north.

4. Allows us to experiment with Ballenger.

5. Opens up all parts of the passing feild for big plays because we will have more of a pro style QB in MB to challenge the opposing defense.


The ball is in control of the strongest unit we have on offense, RB.

And QB wont be a turnover liability.

Lockridge is our for the year with an injury, sumbler is a step slow out of the blocks and Scott showed up out of shape and has nagging injuries. I don't think our rb department is all that powerful. Texas had no problem stuffing it.

 

[Rraalph 3000]

simplifying the offense by implementing more TE formations, I's, and dual pro ace, will put less pressure on the line IMHO.

We are not going to win games on Qb play. Put the onus on the RB threat we have in speedy, scott, sumler, lockridge. we can outmuscle the rest of the north imho.

Simplifying the offense does these things for the buffs right now.

1.Gives us more possesion time with a more run based balanced attack.

2. Gives the defense well rested.

3. Tires out the soft spread stopping defenses of the north.

4. Allows us to experiment with Ballenger.

5. Opens up all parts of the passing feild for big plays because we will have more of a pro style QB in MB to challenge the opposing defense.


The ball is in control of the strongest unit we have on offense, RB.

And QB wont be a turnover liability.

I don't think it's possible to simplify the offense any more than it already is....other than 2 plays in the last game they're about as predictable as can be already

 

[iggy]

Lockridge is our for the year with an injury, sumbler is a step slow out of the blocks and Scott showed up out of shape and has nagging injuries. I don't think our rb department is all that powerful. Texas had no problem stuffing it.

Texas has a top 4 d line front four.

 

[iggy]

Lockridge is our for the year with an injury, sumbler is a step slow out of the blocks and Scott showed up out of shape and has nagging injuries. I don't think our rb department is all that powerful. Texas had no problem stuffing it.

Sumler is a strong rb in shortyardage, you don't need a reggie bush at all times.

Scott will do fine if we give him more touches.

 

[iggy]

It also makes us more predictable which makes it easier for teams to defend against us which will result in more 3 & outs and puts the weight of the game solely on the shoulders of our D.

We just got done doing this for two years. Call me crazy but this is a step back I don't want to take, especially since I expect our turn over rate to go up due to Ballenger's learning curve in your scenario.

I still think Cody is our best shot for this season but we must get Ballinger meaningful snaps in most/every game from here on out. Not only because he's likely the future but also because, with our Oline troubles, there's a reasonable chance Cody goes down and Ballenger becomes 'the guy' and we need there to be as small a drop off in the O as possible if that happens.

We are already predictable on offense..