• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Summer Football Practice

Well Wolford broke most of the FL QB records this year. They were previously held by Tim Tebow so I guess that's part of it.
 
DeaconCav06 said:
Well Wolford broke most of the FL QB records this year. They were previously held by Tim Tebow so I guess that's part of it.
Click to expand...

I can literally see Bishop Kenny's campus from my office in downtown Jacksonville. This kid is something special - really special.
 
Pilchard said:
What is the basis to assume that Wolford or Smith are the best WF QB in 2014? Again, other than the elite few, like Matt Barclay (#1 rated QB in 2009), Terrell Pryor (#1 rated QB in 2008), Robert Griffin (#12 rated QB in 2008), true freshman are almost always awful at QB. Here is an article analyzing the sad history of CFB teams that start true frosh at QB: http://mgoblog.com/diaries/brief-history-true-freshman-quarterbacks

As previously stated, Cameron and Sousa are comparably rated as HS recruits than Wolford and Smith and Cameron and Sousa are older, stronger and more experienced. The only rationale in support of starting Wolford or Smith is that the claim that they can't be as bad Cameron and Sousa because no one has seen them play against D-1 college football players. That is not a logical leap.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you're coming from on this. You're arguing with a straw man. First, you're conflating that people hope our true frosh will be better than Cameron and Sousa with a belief that they will be better.

Second, nobody has said Wolford or Smith are going to be like Barclay, Pryor, or RGIII, nor do they need to be. One just needs to be the next Tanner Price and even and only until Clawson recruits a better QB.

Third, anybody putting hope in Wolford or Smith is following the cues of Coach Clawson himself. He has little confidence in Cameron or Sousa. He didn't name a starter going into the Fall. You don't even have to read between the lines to see he hopes Wolford or Smith are capable of starting in August. And meanwhile, he's busy recruiting players he believes can start at QB in 2015.
 
TheIshThatSaved WakeForest said:
Well if we are going to be bad anyway, might as well start a frosh that will be here a while and build from there. If the differences between the frosh and Cameron/Sousa are as small as expected, I'd take that option.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense to me. If WF is going to be bad anyway why burn a redshirt with no benefit? These are the reasons to burn a redshirt:

- Player likely to stay 4 or less years before going pro (not applicable to Wolford or Smith)
- Playing the true frosh will make a material difference in the outcome of the season (being bad regardless is the opposite of this rationale)
- No other options (not applicable, barring injury as WF has 2 upperclass QBs)

In addition, PhDeac's logic is simply not plausible:

- Smith and/or Wolford are better as true frosh than two QBs that are older and more experienced QBs that were similarly rated coming out of HS.
- Even though Smith and/or Wolford are better as true frosh than the incumbent QBs, they will not improve enough over the next 4 years under this staff to be contributors as RS seniors because WF will recruit multiple QBs that will be better as young players than either Smith and Wolford as older players.

Playing Smith or Wolford turns on whether the staff believes that WF will win at least one more game with either at QB instead of Cameron and Sousa. There is such a massive leap from playing HS football as a QB to playing BCS level football as a QB. Only the very elite few are even marginally successful at the BCS level as a true frosh QB, and neither Smith or Wolford are evaluated at anything close to an elite level QB coming out of HS. So, Smith or Wolford only play if they are exceptionally talented (and massively under-rated as recruits) or if both Sousa and Cameron are exceptionally awful. Otherwise, playing either true frosh QB makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
But to me there is benefit in gaining a year of experience. None of our QBs have any real experience so you start with the one that has more long term potential to build with.
 
Pilch, you seem to have ignored the last 9 years of Wake Forest football in which the things that you seem to believe are impossible actually happened.
 
Will Claw red-shirt the one frosh QB that won't start?
 
Pilchard said:
In addition, PhDeac's logic is simply not plausible:

- Smith and/or Wolford are better as true frosh than two QBs that are older and more experienced QBs that were similarly rated coming out of HS.

Tanner Price (2* #104 QB) was better as a true frosh than Ted Stachitas (3* #24 QB) and Skylar Jones (3* #30 QB).

Riley Skinner (2* NR QB) was better as a redshirt frosh than more experienced higher and similarly rated players as well.



- Even though Smith and/or Wolford are better as true frosh than the incumbent QBs, they will not improve enough over the next 4 years under this staff to be contributors as RS seniors because WF will recruit multiple QBs that will be better as young players than either Smith and Wolford as older players.

See above. Price and Skinner were better than more experienced players who redshirted.

Playing Smith or Wolford turns on whether the staff believes that WF will win at least one more game with either at QB instead of Cameron and Sousa. There is such a massive leap from playing HS football as a QB to playing BCS level football as a QB. Only the very elite few are even marginally successful at the BCS level as a true frosh QB, and neither Smith or Wolford are evaluated at anything close to an elite level QB coming out of HS. So, Smith or Wolford only play if they are exceptionally talented (and massively under-rated as recruits) or if both Sousa and Cameron are exceptionally awful. Otherwise, playing either true frosh QB makes no sense.

Reports have been that both Sousa and Cameron are exceptional awful. Either way, the best player will play.
Click to expand...
..
 
I'll also add that Sousa/Cameron had very few reps in practice/games in the time they've been at Wake. When you factor in that they are learning a new offense, the experience advantage they have over Smith/Wolford is only but so substantial.
 
CumberlandDeac said:
I'll also add that Sousa/Cameron had very few reps in practice/games in the time they've been at Wake. When you factor in that they are learning a new offense, the experience advantage they have over Smith/Wolford is only but so substantial.
Click to expand...

Very good point. Sousa and Cameron only have a 15 practice and 3 scrimmage edge in Clawson's offense.
 
Skinner was a RS frosh when he played. The focus of this discussion is whether WF will start a true frosh at QB. There are many RS frosh that excel at QB regardless of ranking including Skinner. There is no such record supporting the claim that non-highly rated true frosh can be successful at QB (even the vast majority of highly ranked true frosh QBs stink).

As a true frosh in 2010, Tanner Price started at QB for a team that went 1-9 with him as a starter (3-9 overall; Stachitas started the first two and then got hurt). Price was awful as a true frosh. Price was last in the ACC in passing efficiency in 2010; he threw 7 TDs despite 10 starts. WF could have been similarly awful if WF had redshirted Price. Have no idea how playing Price in 2010 supports the decision to play either Smith or Wolford in 2014.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't. This is a unique situation. You're the one who said it was unlikely a true frosh would beat out more experienced similarly ranked players and I showed you that Price did exactly that.

Clawson has made it clear that the best QB will play. We should all hope that the best QB is a good QB who will help us win games.
 
Pilchard said:
What is the basis to assume that Wolford or Smith are the best WF QB in 2014? Again, other than the elite few, like Matt Barclay (#1 rated QB in 2009), Terrell Pryor (#1 rated QB in 2008), Robert Griffin (#12 rated QB in 2008), true freshman are almost always awful at QB. Here is an article analyzing the sad history of CFB teams that start true frosh at QB: http://mgoblog.com/diaries/brief-history-true-freshman-quarterbacks

As previously stated, Cameron and Sousa are comparably rated as HS recruits than Wolford and Smith and Cameron and Sousa are older, stronger and more experienced. The only rationale in support of starting Wolford or Smith is that the claim that they can't be as bad Cameron and Sousa because no one has seen them play against D-1 college football players. That is not a logical leap.
Click to expand...

What is the basis to assume they won't. Older, stronger and experienced? Older does not make you automatically better, you don't know that they are stronger and experienced? Cameron and Sousa essentially have not played football/QB in 3 years-serious injuries, playing /practicing at different positions. Sousa does not have much HS experience to boot.

While we have not seen the incoming guys they might be better- might not, but a rel good chance they might be. Our "incumbents" showed nothing in spring camp. This we have seen. It will all be decided in the fall and if a frosh is better- holding him back for the future while you suck at the position makes no sense and is not logical. You play the guy who gives you the best chance to win and be good. Statistics also say bad returning players are almost always awful. There is opportunity here and I hope it is one of the new guys as they would have a bigger upside. But I don't know- it is just an opinion as I have not seen them play. I have seen that Cameron and Sousa are not ACC quarterbacks - maybe they can change that maybe they can't. We will know in the fall. Until then we are only arguing from emotion.

Either way QB will not be position where we want it to be next year - and neither will our record.
 
Price "beat out" an injured Stachitas and Skylar Jones with poor results. In retrospect, it was a bad decision.

Agree that Clawson will start whomever he thinks is the best QB. The assumption here that Smith or Wolford will be ready to step in and be anything other than awful is flawed. As a result, if Clawson chooses to redshirt either or both them, the decision would make sense, and would not mean that he does not like their future prospects.
 
So Pilch, you would have started Skylar Jones at QB?
 
Absolutely. Jones ended up playing against GT that year (Tech was a bowl team) due to injuries to Stachitas and Price, and Jones played reasonably well as GT needed a TD pass from Jamar Nesbitt with 15 seconds left to win. WF would not have been any worse with Jones playing QB than Price.
 
I agree with Pilch. Obviously you don't know how things would have turned out, but I think we'd be in a better position today if we had redshirted Tanner his true frosh year.

Like Pilch said, even bluechip QB recruits are generally terrible as true frosh.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
I agree with Pilch. Obviously you don't know how things would have turned out, but I think we'd be in a better position today if we had redshirted Tanner his true frosh year.

Like Pilch said, even bluechip QB recruits are generally terrible as true frosh.
Click to expand...

Given how Price ended last year, people would still be hoping for one of our QBs to replace him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top