Hinton

[CreamyGoodness]

You don't get it. People are talking about Clawson's perception of Wolford, not simply Wolford himself. We know he's limited. Clawson clearly doesn't and that's the problem.

I think Wolford is a well below average QB at this level but I still have confidence that Claw knows what's in our offense's best interest. I'm fairly certain that Clawson wouldn't be coaching at this level if he needed a bunch of armchair QB's managing him roster.

Not to say that a "Skinner" type of situation couldn't happen if he gave Kearns a shot but it's far less likely given our O-line and rest of our personnel.

 

[Lohengrin]

I think he is saying Kearns should have a chance on the field

He was replying to me which concerned Hinton's status. If he was referring to Kearns he needed to spell that out.

 

[Deacsfan27]

You don't get it. People are talking about Clawson's perception of Wolford, not simply Wolford himself. We know he's limited. Clawson clearly doesn't and that's the problem.

I think Clawson knows quite well what Wolford's limitations are, and doesn't necessarily need people on here to alert him of that.

Better yet, he probably knows Kearns limitations as well, which are clearly greater in Clawson's eyes, and why he isn't starting, and Wolford is.

 

[simosfrostyone]

It's like every golfer knows how to grow grass better than the superintendent.

 

[Demonwolverine]

Put me in the group that thinks Kearns isn't getting time because our O-Line is ready for a pocket passer. Between our read offense and our QB's scrambling ability, D-Lines and LB's aren't allowed to just bull-rush to our QB. It's entirely different when you're blocking for a guy that has little to no mobility.

 

[Tin Cup]

Everyone loves the backup. He chose between SMU and Wake - he's probably just not very good and that's why he doesnt play. Wolford isnt good either, but he's obviously better than Kearns.

 

[PhDeac]

I think Clawson knows quite well what Wolford's limitations are, and doesn't necessarily need people on here to alert him of that.

Better yet, he probably knows Kearns limitations as well, which are clearly greater in Clawson's eyes, and why he isn't starting, and Wolford is.

Which one is it? It's conflicting to say Clawson knows Wolford's limitations but then say Clawson came up with a game plan that didn't account for Wolford's limitations.

 

[mebanedeac]

I don't care who our QB is. Just win!

Frankly I am more concerned about the offensive scheme than I am about who plays QB. It is apparent to all that we have more talent and, to this point, we have played weaker competition; yet, the offensive production has not improved. That is alarming. I think it has more to do with the plays we are running than who is playing QB.

Hopefully the staff will find a way to fix our anemic offense.

 

[Deacsfan27]

I'm not trashing Kearns because I have admittedly never seen him play, but comparing the offer sheets between he and Wolford, or even Wolford/Hinton, indicates to me that we took a flier on him.

Wolford- Air Force, Akron, Charlotte, ECU, FIU, Florida Atlantic, Harvard, Idaho, MTSU, Mississippi State, Penn State, Samford, Toledo, Western Michigan, Wake

Hinton- N.C. State, ECU, Duke, Boston College, App, Towson, Wake

Kearns- SMU and Wake. Decommitted from SMU after a coaching change. We offered right before signing day, was likely headed to UC-Davis or an FCS School if we hadn't offered.

 

[Deacsfan27]

Which one is it? It's conflicting to say Clawson knows Wolford's limitations but then say Clawson came up with a game plan that didn't account for Wolford's limitations.

I agree that it is conflicting, and I don't know the answer. Maybe he thought that Wolford could attack an Army secondary, and that's why he drew up the game plan that he did. I have said over and over again I would have run the ball against Army. I was frustrated by the game plan and thought that it cost us the game.

Wolford was 17/27 before the 4th quarter when we exclusively started throwing the ball every single play. It wasn't a good game plan from the start. It's one of the first times I've seen us try to really attack an opponent in their weak spot instead of just sticking to our strengths. It was an odd game.

Hopefully the offense gets back on track tomorrow with consistent running plays.

 

[DEACS76]

I think a good running game will help whomever we put in at QB. Some grumpy linemen and quick footed backs will win the game for us. Bring back Hinton for the 'ville.

 

[GoDeacsGo]

I'm not trashing Kearns because I have admittedly never seen him play, but comparing the offer sheets between he and Wolford, or even Wolford/Hinton, indicates to me that we took a flier on him.

Wolford- Air Force, Akron, Charlotte, ECU, FIU, Florida Atlantic, Harvard, Idaho, MTSU, Mississippi State, Penn State, Samford, Toledo, Western Michigan, Wake

Hinton- N.C. State, ECU, Duke, Boston College, App, Towson, Wake

Kearns- SMU and Wake. Decommitted from SMU after a coaching change. We offered right before signing day, was likely headed to UC-Davis or an FCS School if we hadn't offered.

Kearns was a VERY early commit to SMU. That's why he did not have many offers.

 

[tigerswood]

Kearns was a VERY early commit to SMU. That's why he did not have many offers.

Yep, although if he was truly a borderline 4 start talent, I don't think an SMU commitment would have scared off the big boys. But he was certainly a much higher ranked recruit than Riley Skinner... sometimes you just don't know what guys can do until you see them under fire.

Controlled practices/scrimmages where you don't get hit and the defense often knows what plays you are running does not count as under fire.

 

[Tin Cup]

Nothing against him, but no one appears to have jumped on him when he decommitted from SMU. He's from the Bay Area and came to WFU because we offered him a scholarship and he didnt have any other options.

 

[PhDeac]

Nothing against him, but no one appears to have jumped on him when he decommitted from SMU. He's from the Bay Area and came to WFU because we offered him a scholarship and he didnt have any other options.

Sure. But all that does is encourage Skinner and Taylor comparisons.

 

[Tin Cup]

Sure. But all that does is encourage Skinner and Taylor comparisons.

Skinner is such the exception to the rule that its not really worth arguing about. Not to mention that both of them were under a completely different coaching staff over a decade ago.

If Kearns is truly a gamer and the best option, then he should stop sucking in practice so he can play in the game.

 

[Deacsfan27]

Sure. But all that does is encourage Skinner and Taylor comparisons.

Man, are we going to compare literally every single third string quarterback we have to Skinner for the end of time?

Skinner and Taylor were exceptions to the rule, not THE rule.

Of course there are misses here and there by the recruiting services, but all-in-all, an offer list is a really good way to tell how good a player is. It's not the end all by any means, but it's one of the most accurate ways to predict if somebody will succeed or not in college.

 

[GoDeacsGo]

Yep, although if he was truly a borderline 4 start talent, I don't think an SMU commitment would have scared off the big boys. But he was certainly a much higher ranked recruit than Riley Skinner... sometimes you just don't know what guys can do until you see them under fire.

Controlled practices/scrimmages where you don't get hit and the defense often knows what plays you are running does not count as under fire.

Seems like we get a lot of QB's with stats like "beat all of Tim Tebow's or Drew Brees's records" but nobody really pans out to be super good. I suspect having a mediocre offensive line for the last 10 years doesn't help.

 

[PhDeac]

Man, are we going to compare literally every single third string quarterback we have to Skinner for the end of time?

Skinner and Taylor were exceptions to the rule, not THE rule.

Of course there are misses here and there by the recruiting services, but all-in-all, an offer list is a really good way to tell how good a player is. It's not the end all by any means, but it's one of the most accurate ways to predict if somebody will succeed or not in college.

Eh not really. There's a pretty solid list of backup QBs who over the last 20 years who either beat out the starter or performed at a significantly higher level after transferring or getting their shot. Rusty, Sankey, MacPherson, Randolph (arguably), Taylor, Hodges, Skinner, and Hinton. The Tanner Price era is the only stretch that was completely noncompetitive at QB.

When people complain about giving the backup QB a chance, they're probably thinking. "Sankey sat behind Kuklick and Rusty for 3 years and led us to the Aloha Bowl when he got his shot." Or they're thinking, "MacPherson may never have led us to the Seattle Bowl if CJ Leak didn't get injured."

 

[CharlotteDeac1]

Put me in the group that thinks Kearns isn't getting time because our O-Line is ready for a pocket passer. Between our read offense and our QB's scrambling ability, D-Lines and LB's aren't allowed to just bull-rush to our QB. It's entirely different when you're blocking for a guy that has little to no mobility.

Yes that's what I was originally trying to say as my main point. We may not have a good enough offensive line to allow a sole pocket passer time, and maybe they aren't good enough to open holes for a running back without the defensive end having to judge whether he's going after the qb or the rb. I don't think it's Kearns talent level at QB, I think it's the supporting cast not being ready for that kind of offensive scheme.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk