Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

QB in the 2013 class

White_Rabbit

White_Rabbit

Well-Known Member
I might be jumping the gun here, but doesn't it seem like we're not offering any QBs this cycle?

Of the QBs we have offered, I would classify Kincade and Solomon as athletes and definitely not what I'd expect our staff to target as QBs. The other three we have offered (Olson, Browne, and Bateman) are absolutely top notch recruits that you take no matter what.

So, assuming I'm right about this, I doubt we end up taking a QB this cycle. Good move? Bad move?
 
We'll sign a QB. We didn't offer many last cycle either.

Like you, I have been surprised by a few who seem more athlete than pocked passer.
 
I think you hit it on the head. With the limited numbers we have for this year and with the depth we have we only take a QB if he is either a guy who is to good to pass up or a guy who can contribute as more than a QB.

Normally you want to have at least one guy in each class but we are very young at the position. Of the guys who have a chance to contend for playing time Hirsch and Wood will both be third year Sophs. Dillon is likely to RS this year as a FR, as emergency guys Schrock and Dorman will both be RSFr. as well.

With the limited number of schollies we have we can't afford to take someone just to have someone. If a guys is going to really compete in the future take him but just having another depth guy doesn't help us as much as someone at another position.
 
Buffnik said:
We'll sign a QB. We didn't offer many last cycle either.

Like you, I have been surprised by a few who seem more athlete than pocked passer.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right, I guess I just figured we'd have offered some more QBs by now. Maybe they're just being extra careful this year, but I would have thought guys like Tyler Bruggman, Brandon Cox, Hayden Rettig, etc. would have received offers from us by now.
 
Could this mean that the coaching staff feel pretty good about their chances with the current offers?
 
It is essential we take a QB in this class. Absolutely essential.

Numbers at a position does not equal depth and I think the QB position looks much different after spring ball (or at least I hope so). I look at it this way: if we fail to land a QB in this class, we are basically banking on Shane Dillon being legit. That seems too risky to me (and I like Dillon as a prospect).
 
lawdogg said:
Could this mean that the coaching staff feel pretty good about their chances with the current offers?
Click to expand...

Not to be all debbie downer, but I sure hope the staff doesn't think they're going to haul in Browne or Olson. Bateman I could maybe see, but doubt that one too. That would be an absurd recruiting coup if they managed that at this juncture of the program.
 
I've noticed the athletic QB thing too. I wonder if the staff has a dream of being a little more creative offensively than your typical pro-style system? And if there is a raw/athletic QB that will take time to develop into a successful passer, this is the year to do it because (hopefully) this year's QB won't have to see the field right away.
 
Darth Snow said:
I've noticed the athletic QB thing too. I wonder if the staff has a dream of being a little more creative offensively than your typical pro-style system? And if there is a raw/athletic QB that will take time to develop into a successful passer, this is the year to do it because (hopefully) this year's QB won't have to see the field right away.
Click to expand...

Maybe the athletic QB is a safety net of sort. With Rip's name coming up more frequently for jobs in the pro's, it might make sense to recruit someone who more than just a pure passer, someone who would be better able to adapt to a different coaching style/philosophy if a change took place.
 
White_Rabbit said:
Not to be all debbie downer, but I sure hope the staff doesn't think they're going to haul in Browne or Olson. Bateman I could maybe see, but doubt that one too. That would be an absurd recruiting coup if they managed that at this juncture of the program.
Click to expand...

I don't consider this "debbie downism" at all as I agree that it would be pretty outstanding for us to land these guys, particularly Browne. Just tossing out possibilities. As for the athletic QB thing, the success of a guy like Cam Newton in the pro game and guys like RG3 in college probably has a lot of offensive coordinators scrambling to see if they can find the next one.
 
lawdogg said:
I don't consider this "debbie downism" at all as I agree that it would be pretty outstanding for us to land these guys, particularly Browne. Just tossing out possibilities. As for the athletic QB thing, the success of a guy like Cam Newton in the pro game and guys like RG3 in college probably has a lot of offensive coordinators scrambling to see if they can find the next one.
Click to expand...

Browne is probably the longest of long shots. Looks to be a Stanford/USC battle.

Having a athletic QB though like Wilson at Wisconsin adds a nice element to the offense though which is nice.
 
Darth Snow said:
I've noticed the athletic QB thing too. I wonder if the staff has a dream of being a little more creative offensively than your typical pro-style system? And if there is a raw/athletic QB that will take time to develop into a successful passer, this is the year to do it because (hopefully) this year's QB won't have to see the field right away.
Click to expand...

Considering that EB and Embo saw Wisconsin as kind of a blueprint for the pro style at the college level, there's a chance that Russell Wilson's season made them more interested in dual-threat QBs. Primary job qualification will always be throwing from the pocket, though.
 
BB is of course correct in that we really need a QB every year, but we have a tight lid on numbers this year and I think we may end up as a stretch for any of the upper tiers. Next year's starter will only be a SO and should start thru 2014. You then have Dillon behind them, who will redshirt.

You can skip 2013 and bring in an early enrollee in 2014 for spring ball (many QB's doing this these days) and he will have a full year to run scout team in 2014 and be ready in his 2nd spring (2015) to compete with Dillon. This works almost as well if he isn't an early enrollee.

Selling the 1st tier of Pro-Style QBs right now is like selling PowerPoint. If Wood has a good year, it will get easier during the season. But top kids are still wary of coming in when the starter is just a SOPH.

Unless we can pull someone they REALLY believe in, I think they will wait a year
 
buffaholic said:
BB is of course correct in that we really need a QB every year, but we have a tight lid on numbers this year and I think we may end up as a stretch for any of the upper tiers. Next year's starter will only be a SO and should start thru 2014. You then have Dillon behind them, who will redshirt.

You can skip 2013 and bring in an early enrollee in 2014 for spring ball (many QB's doing this these days) and he will have a full year to run scout team in 2014 and be ready in his 2nd spring (2015) to compete with Dillon. This works almost as well if he isn't an early enrollee.

Selling the 1st tier of Pro-Style QBs right now is like selling PowerPoint. If Wood has a good year, it will get easier during the season. But top kids are still wary of coming in when the starter is just a SOPH.

Unless we can pull someone they REALLY believe in, I think they will wait a year
Click to expand...

I definitely understand what you're saying, but what if Dillon doesn't become what we think he's going to be? What if he gets homesick and transfers after a year? I just worry that not taking a QB this year causes us to put all of our cards in Wood/Dillon working out as we all hope they do.

I mean, we might be between a rock and a hard place because of the low #s of schollies available this year, but it just sucks to take risks when it comes to the QB position. It's also a nice year to go after a QB on the west coast because UCLA already locked theirs up for the cycle and he's from Georgia. UW probably isn't going to take one and there's quite a few good looking prospects out west this cycle.
 
I think the assumption that every QB is here past spring is going to be proven wrong. Plus I hope the coaches take the attitude that you do not take any chances when it comes to QB. I want quality depth at the QB position (i.e, three BCS-level QBs on the roster) for a change.
 
Boulder Buff said:
I think the assumption that every QB is here past spring is going to be proven wrong. Plus I hope the coaches take the attitude that you do not take any chances when it comes to QB. I want quality depth at the QB position (i.e, three BCS-level QBs on the roster) for a change.
Click to expand...

I agree with you not to take chances. On the other hand the coaches should aim high, if we can't get a top notch prospect I would prefer we not just take a "guy" to have one. Guys like Burnette who take up a scholly and never contribute on the field, any QB we take should be a high enough quality prospect to reasonably expect to compete for playing time in the future, not just be a depth guy.

With our roster situation and coming off the Hawk era and a less than stellar season closing the deal on a legit QB prospect may not be that easy. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try, it should be a priority but we need to be realistic.
 
Well, obviously we shouldn't take a Dorman or Burnette, but it's not like it's late in the cycle and that's all we can get. I think what you're talking about is false dilemma. It's not like all of the top prospects are committed and not interested. There's plenty of quality prospects to choose from at this point.
 
White_Rabbit said:
Well, obviously we shouldn't take a Dorman or Burnette, but it's not like it's late in the cycle and that's all we can get. I think what you're talking about is false dilemma. It's not like all of the top prospects are committed and not interested. There's plenty of quality prospects to choose from at this point.
Click to expand...

I want the coaches to go after top guys and see if we can get one, if so all the better. I just don't want to see us taking a "second choice" guy in a year that we are short on schollies and have major needs at other positions.
 
I am not saying we take anybody, but it should be a reasonable expectation for this coaching staff to close on better QB prospects than the last staff. Hirschman and Sherry were both outside the top 40 pro-style QBs in the country (both Rivals and Scout). Clark Evans is playing TE at Hawaii after a JUCO stopover. There are plenty of guys in between 5*/4* blue chips and the level of the aforementioned recruits that can make an impact at the BCS level.

If there is no QB in this class, there is a lot more pressure to land a good one in the 2014 class. It is a risk either way. It seems most people think getting Wood and Dillon has basically solved the QB position. I just do not agree, still view QB as a pretty big need in this class.
 
Anyway, maybe the coaches are waiting to see how Spring plays out and figure out what Hirschman wants to do. If he loses the QB battle badly and decides to transfer, maybe that's when we see the coaches go all out for a QB this cycle. If he decides to stick around, we might not be able to take a QB.

It should also be interesting to see what happens with Dorman/Schrock. I can't imagine either one really has many options as far as transferring goes, but they might decide to drop down a division or something.
 
I wouldn't be shocked if we lose some depth after this spring. I think everyone is saying the same thing on here. You can't rely on Dillon to be the guy when he's yet to get here, and you got to have depth. I think the staff will aim high and take a QB if they can get a guy they want. They're not taking a QB to take a QB.

And I think Schrock is going to surprise some guys who haven't seen him play. He was so far ahead of Dorman in early fall it was not close. Not sure if Dorman made progress, but we'll start to find out soon.
 
buffaholic said:
I wouldn't be shocked if we lose some depth after this spring. I think everyone is saying the same thing on here. You can't rely on Dillon to be the guy when he's yet to get here, and you got to have depth. I think the staff will aim high and take a QB if they can get a guy they want. They're not taking a QB to take a QB.

And I think Schrock is going to surprise some guys who haven't seen him play. He was so far ahead of Dorman in early fall it was not close. Not sure if Dorman made progress, but we'll start to find out soon.
Click to expand...

I am very intrigued by Shrock. I am not writing him off just because of the walk-on designation. I had heard the same about him being well ahead of Dorman, which was both a pleasant surprise and a little concerning as far as Dorman goes. Like you have said before, Dorman has something to prove this spring because if he makes little progress this spring, he is going to be buried his entire time here IMO.
 
White_Rabbit said:
Anyway, maybe the coaches are waiting to see how Spring plays out and figure out what Hirschman wants to do. If he loses the QB battle badly and decides to transfer, maybe that's when we see the coaches go all out for a QB this cycle. If he decides to stick around, we might not be able to take a QB.

It should also be interesting to see what happens with Dorman/Schrock. I can't imagine either one really has many options as far as transferring goes, but they might decide to drop down a division or something.
Click to expand...


There's a lot of options for the returning RS-Frosh. They both have two years to play at a Juco for starters. Walking on somewhere that the depth chart looks more inviting is an option. Also, an endorsement from Rip and/or JE/EB would probably get some attention at a D2 or non BCS D1 situation.

Both Hirschman and Wood have 3 to play and could also sit a year and play 2 in the right situation.

Our depth chart isn't exactly bursting at the seams though. The loser of the #1 battle will be #2 and that still presents itself with lots of possibilities to play and perhaps take that job away.
 
With regard to offering more dual-threat QB types this year than last, I think you have a couple different things at play.

The first is that we may feel comfortable with Wood and Dillon so that allows us to take more time to develop a '13 QB as a passer.

The second is related to the first in that if you take a chance on a dual threat QB and he turns out to be a bust at QB, he could still be a contributor elsewhere whereas a pro style QB typically will not be. Because of having Wood and Dillon compared to last year where we had very little, having a bust at QB is more affordable.

The third thing is that even though we are committed to a pro style offense, adding something different to the roster allows you to be more flexible should we later decide to go a different direction or even if we just want to give defenses different looks or different things to have to prepare for.

And lastly, even though some of these guys are dual threat QBs, we may still like their passing ability and potential quite a bit.
 
WTH? No sooner does Rabbit post this thread and it looks like we've offered 4 more QBs. NTTAWWT.
 
I agree, I think we have to take a qb this year. There is a difference between depth and quality depth. As far as the dqb or pqb thing, I prefer a more athletic type at qb. As long as he is the type of dqb that will operate from the pocket and execute the offense. Guys that can do that and make plays with their legs when they have to, are the hardest to defend.
 
It thought JE had said he wanted to add a QB each cycle. Obviously there is need to balance the classes going forward. I think the offers to several dqb so far is consistent with the staffs overall approach to improve team speed and athleticism. I agree that the first priority in any QB recruit will be the arm and ability to work out of the pocket, but the mobility is a nice bonus. If you only plan to sign one QB, why not go after the dqb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top