Wake Forest Football Preseason Thread

Didn't mean to tag your post Ptown^

Wolford was thrown to the wolves his freshman season. It's almost a miracle that he played as well as he did. Much of last season he played with a bad ankle sprain, which obviously limited his mobility. Hinton played with an injured shoulder which limited his ability to finish his passing motion.

So, the impression that Wolford is immobile and that Hinton is an inferior passer, both impressions are skewed. Wolford is better with his feet that many think and Hinton is a better passer than many seem to think. But, you can't bench a two year starter going into a new season unless the guy replacing him is so obviously superior that it would be ludicrous not to do so. Both have performed well in this preseason so the tie goes to the upperclassman starter.

Hinton will see lots of playing time and will have ample opportunity to win the starting position in real game situations. But no one should be surprised that Wolford is the starter if he has followed the practice reports and especially if he watched the Spring game and the public scrimmage.

As for Kearns, I think he may be the best passer of the three; but he is inexperienced and not as mobile as either of the other two. I expect that he will see plenty of action this season too.

PhDeac said:

Wolford got an entire season to show what he could and couldn't do. Hinton will get a few plays here and there barring injury.

Click to expand...

Ph, I'm curious, which season was that? His first one, where he looked like Scott Bakula in Unnecessary Roughness? Sorry, but that just doesn't qualify as a season for me. Or last year, where he played with a high ankle sprain and missed several games due to injury, as did Hinton, who played injured.

I think Hinton is a better playmaker and more dynamic player, but objectively, neither of these guys has had a real stretch to show what they can do -- while healthy -- over any period of time in something resembling a "normal" offense.

Also you throw "barring injury" out there pretty casually given our recent QB health issues.

just ready for some football.

So, we still suck ?

BiffTannen said:

So, we still suck ?

Click to expand...

:tear:

Wolford as nominal starter makes sense to me. More experience and unless things have changed a lot in spring and fall practice (which they're definitely prone to) he has the better overall arm when comparing strength and accuracy. If both guys are going to get playing time per Clawson's comment, it also makes more sense to use Hinton as the situational quarterback when we want to mix up packages. If the decision making and accuracy between the two is close now, defenses are going to have a difficult time adjusting to Hinton coming in when he could throw it deep, take off on an option run play, or even just run the normal offense that we would run with Wolford. If you're starting Hinton and he's seeing the bulk of the time, plugging Wolford in as a situational guy doesn't make as much sense.

Of course if you think Hinton is the overall better QB and don't figure both should be playing consistently, then that's completely different. I don't think that's the case though.

From Wolfords last game of his freshman year against Duke through last years game against Cuse, he was coming along really strong. He had time in all three of these games and threw for 947, 7 TDs, 3 interceptions. Thats average of 315.66 a game, 2.33 passing TDs a game, and 1 pick. I use these three games as a defense of Wolford because the 2014 Duke game he had time and the oh-line began to gel, Elon obviously everything goes right, and the Cuse game was another conference game where he seemed to have decent time. All three games Wolford was healthy. From the Army game on, Wolford is hard to defend.

It seems everything needs to go right for Wolford to be successful, which it can, given decent time in the pocket AND he has to be healthy.

Hinton on the other hand, I do not think everything has to go right for him to be successful. In his two starts he was rather successful against an Indiana defense which was OK and a superior talented FSU defense.

Seems to me that Wolford is the "safe" call, but Hinton can do so much more.

This will sort itself out. Hinton will have his chance to take the reins- he did last year and did not separate himself. Both QBs are prone to big mistakes and bad decisions- whoever is more efficient and can manage the game without the killing mistakes should play.

I still have my doubts about the mind numbing offensive scheme (gracious to call it a scheme) and as a big Clawson supporter I am reluctantly beginning to wonder like some others on the Board if he has the inclination, imagination, will and ability to develop an offense hoping that his UT experience was an anomaly. Sometimes I wonder if Lobo ever left. Ruggerio has not shown me anything so far and might prove to be the anchor around Clawson's neck.

dcon69 said:

This will sort itself out. Hinton will have his chance to take the reins- he did last year and did not separate himself. Both QBs are prone to big mistakes and bad decisions- whoever is more efficient and can manage the game without the killing mistakes should play.

I still have my doubts about the mind numbing offensive scheme (gracious to call it a scheme) and as a big Clawson supporter I am reluctantly beginning to wonder like some others on the Board if he has the inclination, imagination, will and ability to develop an offense hoping that his UT experience was an anomaly. Sometimes I wonder if Lobo ever left. Ruggerio has not shown me anything so far and might prove to be the anchor around Clawson's neck.

Click to expand...

Good post.

Agreed dcon.

Anyone counting Wolford's true freshman season against him really misses the point. He was a true frosh starting on one of the least talented offensive teams in Power V conference history. Literally any QB placed in that situation would've failed. He was forced to start at QB straight out of HS with literally no OL, no RBs, marginal at best WRs and a solid frosh TE. Just not fair to evaluate Wolford on that season.

Last year, Wolford played 5 games when he was healthy (Elon, Cuse, Notre Dame, Clemson and Duke), he completed over 60% of his passes in each of those games and threw for over 300 yards in the 3 of them (Duke, Cuse and Elon), and over 200 in the other (Notre Dame). Clawson recruited Hinton, not Wolford. Clawson has one priority: win games. If Clawson felt that benching Wolford and giving Hinton all of the snaps would give WF its best chance to win. He would do that, but he doesn't. I have 100% confidence that Clawson and staff judged the situation objectively, and feel that starting Wolford, while also playing Hinton, maximizes WF's win potential.

I don't see anybody counting it against him. I do see Clawson counting it for him as part of an experience edge on Hinton. Who's to say Hinton wouldn't be clearly ahead of Wolford if he had extended time to play?

Honestly, it doesn't matter who the quarterback is if the offensive line isn't any better than last year.

PhDeac said:

I don't see anybody counting it against him. I do see Clawson counting it for him as part of an experience edge on Hinton. Who's to say Hinton wouldn't be clearly ahead of Wolford if he had extended time to play?

Click to expand...

It very well may be true that if Hinton was the junior and Wolford the sophomore that Hinton would be the starter and Wolford the backup.

Another edge that seems to belong to Wolford, perhaps due to experience or perhaps due to study, is that he perhaps reads defenses better. I get the impression that Wolford is something of a coach on the field. That said, the biggest knock against Wolford is that he tries to force the ball into tight situations resulting in interceptions. If that continues, I expect to see Hinton starting early.

I don't think Clawson's Tennessee tenure is cause for much concern. He called the plays there, he doesn't now. And he's had very good offenses as a head coach, and with Ruggiero as OC, albeit not at Wake yet. And it was a messy situation in Knoxville with people fed up with Fulmer.

Doesn't mean our O will for sure succeed, but I just don't think what happened at UT is a reason to worry

Yeah the line for Wolford his freshman year was probably the worst in the country, certainly one of the worst in P5 history. The rushing stats from that year are just downright embarrassing.

But we can't afford to assume any QB is going to have a decent OL and viable running game.

mebanedeac said:

It very well may be true that if Hinton was the junior and Wolford the sophomore that Hinton would be the starter and Wolford the backup.

Another edge that seems to belong to Wolford, perhaps due to experience or perhaps due to study, is that he perhaps reads defenses better. I get the impression that Wolford is something of a coach on the field. That said, the biggest knock against Wolford is that he tries to force the ball into tight situations resulting in interceptions. If that continues, I expect to see Hinton starting early.

Click to expand...

lol he also shows a lot of grit. A real scrappy guy. A natural leader. Deceptively fast, too.

PhDeac said:

But we can't afford to assume any QB is going to have a decent OL and viable running game.

Click to expand...

True, I am optimistic about the line this year. Relative to the last couple years it SHOULD be improved. If the line prove to be a major issue again, I'm all for Hinton getting in more.