Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Not even consideration for Maxwell
Page: 1 of 2
mail
person
Cats2014
11/24/2017 2:42 PM
It’s very strange to me that #7 does not even get a look. I mean this team has prettty much two
platooned successfully at QB for as long as I can remember. If 12 was absolutely tearing it up... ok. But considering the past several quarters of play... how about a look?
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
11/24/2017 2:44 PM
I think Maxwell deserves a look. I don't know if he's better, but he did far less to lose this job than the exhausting number of turnovers by Rourke lately.

Edit: that's not to say the pass protection, receivers not getting open and dropping balls when they do don't share a lot of the blame. those are bad things for any qb
Last Edited: 11/24/2017 2:45:10 PM by Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
person
Cats2014
11/24/2017 3:09 PM
Cats2014 wrote:expand_more
It’s very strange to me that #7 does not even get a look. I mean this team has prettty much two
platooned successfully at QB for as long as I can remember. If 12 was absolutely tearing it up... ok. But considering the past several quarters of play... how about a look?
Oh never mind... nice pass LOL
mail
person
Old BEARcat
11/24/2017 4:06 PM
It's about time someone on this blog saw the double standard!
Last Edited: 11/24/2017 4:34:54 PM by Old BEARcat
mail
person
Cats2014
11/24/2017 4:10 PM
I do question allowing a groggy, shaken QB to re-enter and try to finish. 7 was doing fine, he gets his feet set and doesn’t rush,
mail
TWT
11/24/2017 4:22 PM
With Maxwell starting the season he should have been allowed to finish it.
mail
person
BryanHall
11/24/2017 4:40 PM
Maxwell had weapons last year (Think Smith, Reid, Belack and Ball) and constantly overthrew everyone. He was given the job twice and couldn't hold it either time. If he ever starts again he would really need to earn it.

How different would that last two weeks look with Smith, Reid, Belack and Ball?
mail
Sean Gallagher
11/24/2017 7:15 PM
While Rourke has been a pleasant surprise, I don't think either of these QB's has shown they can take this team to the next level. Can one or both develop into a passer in the offseason? Perhaps. But the program can't assume they'll be ok at that position with either of these two. They should be looking for QB's 24/7. You simply have to have a QB to win at any level.
Last Edited: 11/24/2017 7:16:25 PM by Sean Gallagher
mail
Sean Gallagher
11/24/2017 9:36 PM
How OU hasn't offered Tadas Tatarunas is beyond me.
mail
person
Bobcat-7.0
11/25/2017 1:51 AM
Sorry but Rourke is the starter for the next 2 years. ( as long as frank is coaching!)
Last Edited: 11/25/2017 6:50:26 PM by Bobcat-7.0
mail
person
Casper71
11/25/2017 2:46 PM
If I never see a dual threat quarterback again I will be happy. The staff has shown that you cannot win a MACC with a dual threat guy. Look at the teams the last 10 or 15 years That have won MACC’s. I believe they’ve pretty much all had prototype quarterbacks and more prototype offenses. It’s time for FS&Co to get out of the 60s and pistol. Give me a thrower, some wide receivers, and a running back.
mail
person
colobobcat66
11/25/2017 3:19 PM
Bobcat-7.0 wrote:expand_more
Sorry but Rourke is the starter for the next 2 years. ( as long as Franknis coaching!)
No chance that he doesn't get hurt during the next two years. Maxwell will get his chance.
mail
person
BobcatSports
11/25/2017 3:45 PM
In the grand scheme things OUr QB play as a middling MAC program is nothing compared to the Mega bucks Michigan QB issues. I think Frank recruits better QBs than Harbaugh. Goodness their QB play is beyond awful.
mail
person
MonroeClassmate
11/25/2017 4:18 PM
Casper71 wrote:expand_more
If I never see a dual threat quarterback again I will be happy. The staff has shown that you cannot win a MACC with a dual threat guy. Look at the teams the last 10 or 15 years That have won MACC’s. I believe they’ve pretty much all had prototype quarterbacks and more prototype offenses. It’s time for FS&Co to get out of the 60s and pistol. Give me a thrower, some wide receivers, and a running back.
Ghost, you are not serious with the 10-15 year MAC dual threat comment are you? Should my sarcasm detector be going off?

The dynasty Central and NIU teams both had dual threat guys at the helm. (Lefevor and Harnish/Lynch)

Or do you consider these guys runners only and you'd like to go back to an option QB?

If Dorian Brown had been at full speed for the Akron and Buffalo games, OHIO likely wins and OUr QB is more successful as a runner when the defense has other excellent runners to key on. Take the speedy Brown out and the running game including the QB's ability to gain yards tumbles.

But concur that OHIO needs about 8 new guys at wideout and add to that another new 8 or so to man the DB spots.
mail
person
Doc Bobcat
11/25/2017 4:34 PM
Bobcat-7.0 wrote:expand_more
Sorry but Rourke is the starter for the next 2 years. ( as long as Franknis coaching!)
Is Joey Burrow gonna be happy as a second stringer at OSU next year.
Last Edited: 11/25/2017 4:35:07 PM by Doc Bobcat
mail
Sean Gallagher
11/25/2017 4:40 PM
I'm not a Mentor supporter. I went to St. Eds. But even I can see talent. Why Ohio U. coaches didn't have this kid wrapped up after his junior year is beyond me. http://www.news-herald.com/sports/20171124/tadas-tataruna...
mail
person
Casper71
11/25/2017 5:12 PM
Classmate, those guys along with Rothlisberger Leftwich et all could throw the ball. Our dual threat guys tend to be runners first and not to be able to throw the ball very well. I think the current guy falls into that category. In his defense, as the season wore on it looked a lot like the videos of him in junior college. He was always running for his life. I’m just not sure about his arm strength and his accuracy seem to be off at times.

And, you ask if I want to go back to an option quarterback? No, I’d like a prostyle quarterback. Or, at least a dual threat who throws first and runs second.
Last Edited: 11/25/2017 5:29:19 PM by Casper71
mail
person
Mark Lembright '85
11/25/2017 5:26 PM
BobcatSports wrote:expand_more
In the grand scheme things OUr QB play as a middling MAC program is nothing compared to the Mega bucks Michigan QB issues. I think Frank recruits better QBs than Harbaugh. Goodness their QB play is beyond awful.
Michigan’s redshirt freshman QB Brandon Peters is a good one. He was out against OSU due to a concussion.
mail
person
Casper71
11/25/2017 5:30 PM
In closing, something we can all think about: would you rather have auburns quarterback or Alabama’s quarterback?
mail
person
Bobcat1996
11/25/2017 8:16 PM
Some of the people on this message board actually make me laugh. Are you kidding me questioning the QB decision of this program? Have any of you who are commenting on this subject watched and attended each game? The current QB is by far head and shoulders ahead of the backup. It is because of this QB that the Bobcats won 8 games. Of course we have growing pains with the turnovers, but no doubt this kid can play. He is starting for a reason. Nothing against the backup, but this kid makes plays. Maybe the bandwagon fans can jump off at anytime. This staff is not happy with 8 wins, but I for one would prefer 8 wins with a chance to grab nine rather than the days of nine wins in five years. As I mentioned in an earlier thread nine turnovers in the MAC games are the reason the Cats have three league defeats. If the Cats don't turn it over (and that is a huge request)and create turnovers in the bowl game, they will win. Simple formula, but it is not easy to duplicate!
mail
person
Robert Fox
11/26/2017 8:54 AM
Well said, '96.
mail
bshot44
11/26/2017 8:58 AM
Rourke is definitely NOT the problem
mail
person
Casper71
11/26/2017 10:38 PM
I see our passing offense is number 95 in the nation. As I said earlier, I think our QB is runner first and passer second. I would rather see a passer first runner second if we are going with a dual threat quarterback I realize nowadays all quarterbacks have to run some.
mail
person
Sam bobcat
11/27/2017 10:53 AM
Casper71 wrote:expand_more
I see our passing offense is number 95 in the nation. As I said earlier, I think our QB is runner first and passer second. I would rather see a passer first runner second if we are going with a dual threat quarterback I realize nowadays all quarterbacks have to run some.
If we had receivers who could get open more often and not drop passes when they do, he would likely be pass first. Your ideas on quarterbacking are interesting. I will keep my eyes open for these elusive pass first run second quarterbacks.
Last Edited: 11/27/2017 10:54:01 AM by Sam bobcat
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
11/27/2017 10:56 AM
Sam bobcat wrote:expand_more
I see our passing offense is number 95 in the nation. As I said earlier, I think our QB is runner first and passer second. I would rather see a passer first runner second if we are going with a dual threat quarterback I realize nowadays all quarterbacks have to run some.
I will keep my eyes open for these elusive pass first run second quarterbacks.
You mean like 90% of all quarterbacks?
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 36
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)