Barnett won't be seeing the field hardly unless we keep playing like this after 3 or 4 more games possibly. And even then, I'd bet we'd see Richardson before Barnett since Richardson has been taking reps with the 2's as well.
I seem to recall that Rhoads spent a little time as a defensive coach. Now, and I am assuming here, that kind of experience might give him some insight as to what kinds of offenses are difficult to prepare for. So I might trust his judgement when it comes to the O that his team runs.
No scheme is effective if you don't have good play-calls and poorly execute the ones that are called.
We need a QB that can make the defense pay for such risks. A tough spot for any QB. It takes good pocket movement, quick reads, accuracy, and touch. This does not happen by turning your back and bailing anytime a defender gets up field. QB play and scheme the past three years have marginalized better lines than this- no surprise it would continue.
Its bueker time
the same guys that are defending the coaches for our recruiting (stars dont matter! trust Rhoads!) are the same ones that are complaining about the coaches not putting in Barnett. Just an observation.
I've seen the offense move up and down the field better with Barnett at qb, than Jantz. With fewer 3 and outs. Period.
Not saying Barnett is the answer, but it's either him or Richardson. Not Jantz.
But for real if we make a QB change its need to Richardson not barnett. Teams know what we will do if barnett plays and they obviously know what steele does. There is no tape on richardson, teams wouldnt know how to prepare for him, at least the first couple of games. And im sick and F'n tired of ppl acting like barnett is so dam good and doesnt turn the ball over... He fumbled 11 f'n times last year in half a season... 11 times!!!!! Thats god awful. Thats a career worth of fumbles in half a season! He doesnt hold onto the ball. Steele is not the answer but neither is barnett...
If Herman ran the same scheme at Rice and had good offensive production, one would assume he either had good play calls or good enough execution to cover for bad ones. So the scheme was successful then, by your definition. Correct?
When this season started, Mess and CPR said they wanted to be a running team first --- if that's true then I don't understand why Jantz is out there. He's good (or can be good) at the broken play and getting out of trouble, but he's not good at the zone read and turns it over way too much. It's true you can't pin all of last night's TO's on him, but over his career I think he's responsible for most of them.
And even when he had time to throw last night, he displayed no touch or accuracy. Oye.