Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Not even consideration for Maxwell
Page: 1 of 2
Cats2014
General User
C2014
Member Since: 3/29/2014
Post Count: 101
person
mail
Cats2014
mail
Posted: 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?
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,558
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 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
Cats2014
General User
C2014
Member Since: 3/29/2014
Post Count: 101
person
mail
Cats2014
mail
Posted: 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
Old BEARcat
General User
OB
Member Since: 1/3/2017
Post Count: 7
person
mail
Old BEARcat
mail
Posted: 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
Cats2014
General User
C2014
Member Since: 3/29/2014
Post Count: 101
person
mail
Cats2014
mail
Posted: 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,
Athens
General User
A
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,454
person
mail
Athens
mail
Posted: 11/24/2017 4:22 PM
With Maxwell starting the season he should have been allowed to finish it.
BryanHall
General User
BH
Member Since: 9/12/2010
Post Count: 620
person
mail
BryanHall
mail
Posted: 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?
Sean Gallagher
General User
Member Since: 12/7/2012
Post Count: 138
mail
Sean Gallagher
mail
Posted: 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
Sean Gallagher
General User
Member Since: 12/7/2012
Post Count: 138
mail
Sean Gallagher
mail
Posted: 11/24/2017 9:36 PM
How OU hasn't offered Tadas Tatarunas is beyond me.
Bobcat-7.0
General User
B70
Member Since: 12/19/2013
Post Count: 160
person
mail
Bobcat-7.0
mail
Posted: 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
Casper71
General User
C71
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,237
person
mail
Casper71
mail
Posted: 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.
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 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.
BobcatSports
General User
BS
Member Since: 2/2/2006
Post Count: 1,116
person
mail
BobcatSports
mail
Posted: 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.
MonroeClassmate
General User
MC
Member Since: 8/31/2010
Post Count: 2,325
person
mail
MonroeClassmate
mail
Posted: 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.
Doc Bobcat
General User
DB
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,421
person
mail
Doc Bobcat
mail
Posted: 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
Sean Gallagher
General User
Member Since: 12/7/2012
Post Count: 138
mail
Sean Gallagher
mail
Posted: 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...
Casper71
General User
C71
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,237
person
mail
Casper71
mail
Posted: 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
Mark Lembright '85
General User
ML85
Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Highland Heights, OH
Post Count: 2,460
person
mail
Mark Lembright '85
mail
Posted: 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.
Casper71
General User
C71
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,237
person
mail
Casper71
mail
Posted: 11/25/2017 5:30 PM
In closing, something we can all think about: would you rather have auburns quarterback or Alabama’s quarterback?
Bobcat1996
General User
B1996
Member Since: 1/3/2017
Post Count: 1,217
person
mail
Bobcat1996
mail
Posted: 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!
Robert Fox
General User
RF
Member Since: 11/17/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039
person
mail
Robert Fox
mail
Posted: 11/26/2017 8:54 AM
Well said, '96.
bshot44
General User
Member Since: 2/12/2012
Post Count: 2,211
mail
bshot44
mail
Posted: 11/26/2017 8:58 AM
Rourke is definitely NOT the problem
Casper71
General User
C71
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,237
person
mail
Casper71
mail
Posted: 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.
Sam bobcat
General User
SB
Member Since: 7/14/2015
Post Count: 633
person
mail
Sam bobcat
mail
Posted: 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
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,558
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 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)