Not sure what your disagreement is. I agree, and have always maintained, that we need to upgrade the QB position and that we have failed miserably in recruiting our QBs over most of the past 25 years. All I'm saying is even a great QB cannot overcome a lousy O line, a weak D, a predictable, one dimensional offense, or poor coaching. Fortunately, we just might be getting to the point where we don't have most of those obstacles to overcome. For example, if Tom Savage, who is/was a good, not great, QB with a big arm, got to play behind this O line, with this running game, instead of the ones he played with when he was here, he might have been able to do some really good things for us.
manny stocker ?
- Thread starter benchwarmer04
- Start date
-Pitts blueprint, which our own coach said, is Michigan state. Michigan state not only beats Ohio state on the field, they have 3 big ten titles in 6 years. Michigan State pumps 2 types of players into the NFL. Defensive linemen, and secondary players. They have not had squat in terms of some big time hero qb. They do it with defense, and running with players like Bell at rb. You guys need to stop thinking spread offense and naming teams that can't stop anyone on defense. Give me Bama and Michigan states blueprint. That is how we are playing, that is what we are heavily, heavily recruiting. Defensive line, secondary, running game.
That was Mauck--not Mauk. Big difference. I still should have caught it and realized you meant the LSU guy and not the Cinci guy--my bad.
That said, you're just wrong. Every one of those players you list was an outstanding and highly accomplished college player. On top of that, most of them have done more time in the NFL than any Pitt QB since VanPelt. I mean, how can you even say guys like Dorsey, McCarron, Leak or Heupel were "terrible"?
If your point is that you don't need a future NFL star QB to win in college, that's absolutely true. Two very different games, college and the NFL. But to say that those guys you list were terrible players is just flat out wrong, and it reflects a lack of understanding as to what makes a college QB special. They were all outstanding college players. You talk about measurables at the QB position. There are intangibles that all the best ones have that you can't measure except in one way--by wins, losses and championships. Those guys had the intangibles.
As a very prominent Power 5 HC once told me over beers, his best QB isn't always the one with the biggest arm, the best legs, the most stars, etc., it's simply the one who does the best job of moving the offense down the field when he's in. The guy the offense responds to. When replacing a graduated or injured starting QB, this coach and his staff figure out who the best guy is by trial and error in the first game or two, and go with the guy who moves the team down the field the best when he's in the game. Often that isn't the guy all the fans and outsiders expect it to be.
Why does every post about a player on this year's team quickly get permanently sidetracked and turns into an discussion/argument of players/coaches from 20 years ago?
Since the name of the post was called "Manny Stocker?", I think the OP was hoping for a discussion of...Manny Stocker, and not Van Pelt, etc.
Narduzzi said this week that Stocker and DiNucci were even, then gave a slight current edge to Stocker; but of course its early.
I agree that Stocker's experience would make him the likely go to guy in case of mid-game injury.
But if Peterman goes down for a long stretch in week 4 or later, I think we'll see McVittee be readied to start the next game. PN and the offensive coaches love him, and I don't see them willing to sit their best option for the sake of a keeping a guy's redshirt.
Since the name of the post was called "Manny Stocker?", I think the OP was hoping for a discussion of...Manny Stocker, and not Van Pelt, etc.
Narduzzi said this week that Stocker and DiNucci were even, then gave a slight current edge to Stocker; but of course its early.
I agree that Stocker's experience would make him the likely go to guy in case of mid-game injury.
But if Peterman goes down for a long stretch in week 4 or later, I think we'll see McVittee be readied to start the next game. PN and the offensive coaches love him, and I don't see them willing to sit their best option for the sake of a keeping a guy's redshirt.
They have not had squat in terms of some big time hero qb.
Ummm, Kirk Cousins? Conner Cook?
Cook's legacy:
- Big Ten Quarterback of The Year (2015)
- Johnny Unitas Golden Arm Award (2015)
- First-team All-Big Ten (2015)
- 2x Second-team All-Big Ten (2013, 2014)
- 9th place in Heisman Trophy voting (2015)
- Big Ten Champion (2013, 2015)
- Big Ten Championship Game MVP (2013, 2015)
- 2014 Rose Bowl Champion
- 2014 Rose Bowl Offensive MVP
- 2015 Cotton Bowl Classic Champion
You gotta have a QB.
Cook
2013 Michigan State Big Ten SO QB 14 223 380 58.7 2755 7.3 7.7 22 6 135.5 rating
*2014 Michigan State Big Ten JR QB 13 212 365 58.1 3214 8.8 9.1 24 8 149.4
2015 Michigan State Big Ten SR QB 13 229 408 56.1 3131 7.7 8.1 24 7 136.6
Tyler Palko
2004 Pittsburgh Big East QB 12 230 409 56.2 3067 7.5 7.9 24 7 135.2 rating
2005 Pittsburgh Big East QB 11 193 341 56.6 2392 7.0 6.8 17 9 126.7
2006 Pittsburgh Big East QB 12 220 322 68.3 2871 8.9 9.2 25 9 163
-Cook wasn't a hero, he was a good player. He played on a great team and didnt make dumb mistakes. He was selected in the 4th round of the draft. When your team wins 13 games a season, someone is going to get accolades. His numbers arent that great, they are respectable.
Oh--the original topic. Yes of course. Well it's like this: If Peterman goes down, we're screwed and the coaches know it. We do not appear to have a capable backup that we can expect to win with at this point. Sometimes a guy can surprise, if that were to happen, I would expect it to be DiNucci.
Also, you can forget about MacVittie starting this season unless Peterman, Stocker and DiNucci all get hurt. It just isn't going to happen, there's no way he'll be ready to run the offense. He's still learning his footwork and the fundamentals at this point. He'll be wearing red this year.
How's that?
You don't know what you're talking about, because you see nothing outside of raw numbers. And his numbers were outstanding for a balanced pro-style offense. I sincerely doubt you ever saw MSU play outside of their bowl games. Cook was the kind of QB that won games for them by making individual plays.
MSU had its weakest defense in the entire Dantonio era last year, graduated it's best RB, yet went 12-2 and made it to the playoff.
i think your dreaming if you think mcvittie would be ready in week 4 if nate was down with an injury. he will not be ready and unless we have several injuries at qb, mcvittie is headed for a rs year.
and that is saying something considering how bare our qb depth is for this year.
and that is saying something considering how bare our qb depth is for this year.
Excellent Badby! An opinion related to the OP's topic. Imagine that, a discussion about this year's players, a few weeks before the start of a new season, rather than a rehashing, for the million time of the past.
You might be right in saying the McV won't be ready. Of course, if you are right about the coaches thinking we're screwed if Peterman goes down, they could skip past the more ready, yet less effective options and go straight to the young guy with real talent.
You might be right in saying the McV won't be ready. Of course, if you are right about the coaches thinking we're screwed if Peterman goes down, they could skip past the more ready, yet less effective options and go straight to the young guy with real talent.
-That defense was ranked 19th nationally in points against. This is exactly what Ive been saying, you can beat anyone with a dominant defense. Ohio State had 5 first downs against Michigan State last year. 5
-Considering we should be running the ball close to 65-70% of the time, there won't be that much to learn. Jim Chaney is done here. Its all power run. Just dont fumble the handoff, Tmac.
In college football you can win big with a system QB. I will use WV as an example of a team that had a great college QB who fit their system, but never did anything in the pros. Major Harris and Pat White were 2 guys that fit this profile. Cincy had a revolving door at QB under Brian Kelly and did very well because the QB's fit his system. The college game is different from the pros.
Umm.....Michigan st has put at least 2 or 3 QB's in the NFL during their run. So your point is not accurate......just,sayin
I think you have to add Priestley to this list. He did very well under Walt's system.
List for what ? He was a stiff. Now Wlat screwed up when he changed the O, then changed it back, he saved his job that year
Turman was better. I can only remember Priestley having 1 really good game against VT at home.
Thars pretty much the perfect answer.
For that matter Rod Rutherford and Tyler Palko certainly wasn't bad, both decent. It waa pretty bad after that though until savage
They have to be very careful with that
Steel-pick up a D1 playbook sometime and let's see how little there is for a QB to learn. The QB has to know it all-what every player on the offense does on every play. Not to mention the fundamental stuff with footwork, drops, ball handling, pre-snap reads, blitz reads, in-route adjustments, and everything else a QB needs to learn or re-learn when he gets to college.
The game may look simple to you, especially power run plays, but it isn't. Far from it.
-You missed my point. The point is our running game will be doing most of the damage. Even if Peterman went down, we wont be counting on the 2nd string QB to win Pitt games. Im not counting on Peterman to win Pitt any games this year. Im counting on Conner, Ollison, Our Oline, and our Defense to win us games this year.
No, we didn't miss your point. If Nate goes down, we're not going to run the ball down the throat of every team on the schedule.
Wait! What?!
That's honestly one of the craziest assertions ever made on this message board. Joe Flacco's own mother doesn't agree with you.
Nobody thinks Flacco is better than Marino. I meant in the last 30 years. Should have better clarified what I typed.
As for the list of game managers who won BCS titles, I'm not sure what that is proving. Those are essentially NFL teams they are quarterbacking. Pitt doesn't have that. Pitt and teams like Pitt cannot expect to have a magical season with a game manager. The team will always have holes.
Thank you for listing John Congemi. Seemed like he played at Pitt forever but was pretty darn good.
van pelt was great but rutherford was average..ok
the difference between AVP and Tino Sunseri was AVP started 1 more season...(and won less games and threw more ints)
the difference between AVP and Tino Sunseri was AVP started 1 more season...(and won less games and threw more ints)
I think we are going to try to get some rhythm in the passing game against Villanova. This may make this game rather close if it doesnt work out. But I think we need to find out who will be our other WR opposite Ford before the UPS game
Agree with this, and hopefully we have a tip notch QB at Pitt soon, maybe that person is on our roster right now
Van Pelt was a notch better than RR, and he didn't have the great wide outs either.
Steel--the MSU vs. OSU game was played in a monsoon with the worst field conditions imaginable. Sparty was strong against the run but weak against the pass all year, but the crazy conditions made both teams entirely one dimensional. MSU had its backup QB in and had him run option keepers all game. It was a weird game.
Against Bama, MSU was able to load the box and stop the run for the most part. But they overplayed the LOS and Bama threw the ball over the field on them.
Point is, any decent defense can stop the run against any decent offense, if the D doesn't have to worry about getting burned through the air. That;s why BALANCE on offense is so important. You can be run heavy, but you will have to be able to throw the ball effectively when necessary too, or you will be in for some losses.
A Lair poster (can't remember who) a couple of weeks ago posted that he ran into Canada at the airport and chatted with him a bit. Canada apparently said "if we can keep Nate Peterman healthy, we're going to score a lot of points this season."
Assuming the poster's report to be true, what do you suppose Canada meant by that statement?
I'm not a psychoanalyst nor a qualified linguist. But I suspect he meant that, it's his opinion that if they can keep Nate Peterman healthy, Pitt will score a lot of points this season.
I guess it is all relative, but allowing 160 yards on 30 carries seems pretty far from "stopping the run" to me.
I do agree with you about offensive balance being very important, though.
Kenyan Drake popped one for like 60 yards late in the 4th that led to Bama's last TD. By then Coker had already put up nearly 300 passing yards and MSU's run D was softened way up. Other than Drake's one big run when the game was in the bag, MSU held Henry and the Bama rushing attack in check. Henry had 75 yards and 3.8 YPC, about half his season average. Bama took full advantage of that stacked box and just murdered MSU's subpar secondary through the air.
What Canada meant was, if we lose Peterman to injury this season, we might as well have you in there at QB, because the season is shot.
