• The KillerFrogs

FWST: Here’s why you shouldn’t expect TCU’s Gary Patterson to make significant staff changes

5-5 is a high level?
5-5 is not a high level but football is a team sport. And he's missed I think 2 1/2 games due to injury. When he's played, he's played well.

Texas Tech Red Raiders Stats - 2018
Year:

PASSING STATISTICS
NAME CMP ATT YDS CMP% YDS/A TD INT RAT
Alan Bowman 227 327 2638 69.4 8.07 17 7 150.1

Like I said, it's a team sport so it's not all the QB but that is pretty decent.
 
S&C...no more bulk at the expense of flexibility. Bulk is good, but not if you tear up stuff.

Can't see why you can't have both. SEC seems fine and their recruits have bulk, speed, and flexibility.

S&C coaches need to go to other programs and see how they do things and keep injury free.

You'll need bulk to compete in the Power 5.
 

froginmn

Full Member
Just answering the question, not trying to hit your moving goalposts.
Just trying to understand the comment that "so many other schools" have true freshmen playing QB at a high level.

If I gave you all of those, including the number one recruit in the nation, there are three schools out of over a hundred achieving that distinction.

Three isn't a lot.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
Just trying to understand the comment that "so many other schools" have true freshmen playing QB at a high level.

If I gave you all of those, including the number one recruit in the nation, there are three schools out of over a hundred achieving that distinction.

Three isn't a lot.

Regardless of whether they are true freshman or not, I'm confident in saying that whenever other teams put in their backup QBs, way more often than not they look so much better prepared than ours do. I know you can find some anecdotal evidence that might suggest otherwise but I'm speaking generally. Our overall development of QBs over the past 6-7 years has generally sucked. We've been very fortunate a starter (not counting SR who maybe shouldn't have been starting anyway) hasn't gone down for any extended period of time in recent years.
 

Chico Dusty

Active Member
Just trying to understand the comment that "so many other schools" have true freshmen playing QB at a high level.

If I gave you all of those, including the number one recruit in the nation, there are three schools out of over a hundred achieving that distinction.

Three isn't a lot.

UGA. Had a freshman start 2 years ago, he got hurt, another freshman came in and almost won the National Championship, now he is a soph this year, and they sometimes rotate a freshmen in this year as well.
 

froginmn

Full Member
Regardless of whether they are true freshman or not, I'm confident in saying that whenever other teams put in their backup QBs, way more often than not they look so much better prepared than ours do. I know you can find some anecdotal evidence that might suggest otherwise but I'm speaking generally. Our overall development of QBs over the past 6-7 years has generally sucked. We've been very fortunate a starter (not counting SR who maybe shouldn't have been starting anyway) hasn't gone down for any extended period of time in recent years.
I just think there is a lot of cherry picking in these statements that "so many schools play true freshmen at a high level" and "other teams backup QBs look better prepared than ours" (watch your back, by the way, because you just dissed the baby Jesus). These arguments are circular to one another.

We've had a bad year. And admittedly we're not Clemson, Georgia, or Alabama.

But let's tap the brakes on saying our QB's have sucked and we can't develop players.

In the last five years we've barely missed the playoffs, won a NY6 bowl, won 11+games three times, and appeared in the CCG. Tied for the conference championship once and finished second twice. Just because we haven't done those things every year doesn't mean we suck.
 

Latest posts

Top