• 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!

Hinton

A bunch of peeps to keep referring to play calls, arm strength and all sorts of variables that are complete speculation and most likely irrelevant. Pay attention to our offense prior to the snap...It seems apparent that we approach the line with two plays in queue - both a run and a pass option (based on Wolford's play it's probably a pass first option). It's the QBs call at the line based on what he sees in the defense.

I could easily be dead wrong but you see my point - In said situation, Kearns very likely solidified his position as a backup before arm strength was even considered. It's also hard to cast blame for not running the football enough when the plays are dictated by the defensive scheme.
 
Our best qb might be playing on friday nights right now. And that is not a knock on Newman or hinton
 
jaybone said:
Our best qb might be playing on friday nights right now. And that is not a knock on Newman or hinton
Click to expand...

If you're talking of Sam Hartman, yes that guy is the truth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
PhDeac said:
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."
Click to expand...

don't even need to look that far into the past -- the staff started wolford over hinton to start this season
 
I want to weigh in on Kyle Kearns, who I am a big fan of (I’ll accept the criticism for jumping on the bandwagon of the backup QB). I think there is some good perspective on this thread, including ID’ing some of the reasons that he’s not seeing the field yet. But I agree that it is time for him to see some PT.

Let me clarify a few things with his recruitment. It is true that despite being a 4-star he had few offers. He committed to SMU, but then decommitted when Chad Morris went there. It was probably an easy decision as he was recruited to run the June Jones offense and Morris likely didn’t want him. Wake appeared to be strongly considering an offer to Kearns BEFORE Hinton committed, but didn’t pull the trigger until much later in the cycle. When Wake decided to take a second scholarship QB in the class, Kearns still wasn’t Wake’s first choice.

At the time, I wrote that what held Kearns back in his recruitment was a perception that he lacked athleticism and rushing ability. I think this had to been the case given what I read about the rest of his skill-set where reviewers fawned over him at the T-shirt and shorts “campetitions” (++ accuracy, + arm strength, ++ character and aptitude). He was strongly considered for the Elite 11 Finals. If there had been an Elite 11 semifinals (like there was the following year for Newman) I can absolutely guarantee you that he would have made it. After he was signed, I was told by a staff member that I trust that they were much higher on Kearns athleticism than other schools were.

I have seen every scrimmage rep that Kearns has taken with the exception of the second scrimmage this summer. Like many of you I also watched each snap against NCSU when he got on the field in garbage time. He has exceeded my expectations every time I have seen him. His passes look completely different from both Hinton and Wolford. On the flip side, each appearance has seemed to include one bad misfire. The kind that can probably only be explained by Kearns and the WR not being on the same page about what route was supposed to be run. (As an aside, from seeing Kearns in person, I buy that he could be 6’2. I’d estimate that he is about 4 inches taller than Wolford).

Since I am high on Kearns, I was disappointed by the reports this summer that he was not getting quality reps. Until the last few practices, he was limited to whatever third team was getting. Plus he was sharing those reps with other backups. The priority was getting two QBs, Wolford and Hinton, both ready to start and my perception was that they soaked up the quality reps at the expense of developing the other QBs. That’s solely my perception though, not based on any conversations with anyone at practice.

That’s brings me around to the points on this thread that I agree with. The staff isn’t playing him because 1) they fear he’s not ready to handle the pre-snap responsibilities of reading blitzes and defensive formations, as well as ensuring that his teammates are in the right place, 2) they would have to limit the read option plays that have become the bread and butter plays in the offense and 3) they fear that his inexperience will lead to 4-5 really bad plays that could cost them the game.

Like many of you, I think that the risk is worth taking. Probably starting with 2 or so series per game. Yes, the risk of a bad play is real. SO WHAT? It’s a certainty that Wolford will give you some bad plays. If the opposing defense is stacking the box and playing that Cover-1 BS – challenging Wake to throw the ball deep – give me Kearns EVERY TIME. I feel strongly that he will break them out of those defenses and give our RBs more room to run (albeit probably not via the read option).

I would also like to see them get him ready to run the two-minute drill if we are down late. That may sound silly given the inexperience, but I don’t think it’s crazy if they dedicate the practice time to getting him ready for that specific situation.

Above all, I appreciate the fact that this thread has mostly lacked the “Kearns must suck” BS that appeared on some earlier threads. We are talking about a redshirt freshman QB here. He’s a young guy that has been doing everything right (well, as far as I can tell). He’s been getting quality practice reps for the first time in his career over just the last handful of weeks. I think people need to give him time to develop. The upside continues to appear to be really high and I hope that he gets a chance to show it soon.
 
Last edited:
Good to have your input, 94. What I don't get is Clawson is cautious about playing Kearns but wants to gamble with Wolford going deep with throws he cannot make. Seems schizo to me.
 
simosfrostyone said:
Good to have your input, 94. What I don't get is Clawson is cautious about playing Kearns but wants to gamble with Wolford going deep with throws he cannot make. Seems schizo to me.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But we've heard time and again that experience - both in games and in practice - is of paramount importance to the staff. They want to play as mistake free as possible. That's understandable. But at what point do you need a guy who is capable of winning the game (versus not losing it)???

There may also be an element where Wolford is making the throws in practice. It's just not happening in games for whatever reason. But the staff is holding out hope that it begins to.
 
I think it is funny that the staff is worried about Kearns in ability to make pre snap reads. How has that worked with Wolford? I have not seen a QB that is Manning like in reading defenses. More often than not Wolford makes the wrong read and the play goes for 0 yds max! The staff is seeing stuff in practice that is not being translated into the games. I think Wolford looks like a deer in headlights most of the time. Hope you get your wish '94. I agree we need to play to win the game. not lose. Playing to not lose most often results in losing the game. You can not continue to put your defense on the field in bad field position and squander scoring opportunities. They must get really discouraged
 
Deac94: *drops mic*

But really, thanks for the input. The only times I've seen him were in the NCSU and the spring game and his arm and accuracy are both by far and away better than the other two QB's. He threw probably the most gorgeous deep ball I've ever seen in the spring game. I think it's time to give him an opportunity to show what he can do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Someone give an update on if Hinton is dressed out whenever they get in the game?
 
The coach who doesn't give Kearns experience in games or practice criticizes him for not having experience.
 
I sometimes wonder if coaches hesitate to play guys for fear of being exposed for not playing them sooner.

Of course, that wouldn't happen at Wake, however.
 
I have no angle in all of this but my own opinion is that Wolford has easily had better games than the Army debacle and I would go ahead and start him today in the hopes that he can replicate his play against Indiana and Syracuse. If he can't move the offense and get a score in the first couple of possessions, and especially if UVa scores and we're behind and/or he throws a pick, I'd play Kearns to see what he can do. We just have to get something out of the QB position. If Kearns blows it in turn, I'd go back to Wolford and hope for a miracle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top