Grant Rohach

**Rhoadhoused** · 01-04-2013, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by ketelmeister

Why didn't we just have a backup punter kick the ball, lord knows we could use the practice?

Because it is more accurate. Never have to worry about a shank.

**Cycsk** · 01-04-2013, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by DhaCheann

Rohach would make plays for the scout team vs our #1 defense that made him look like a big12 ready QB, and he's got such a cannon, that he was the "backup punter" in punt return drills. Aka he would launch the ball 60+ yards simulating a punt

Very interesting. Can hardly wait for the spring game.

**Rural** · 01-04-2013, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by klamath632

You screwed up by not including the non-conference games. When including Tulsa, Iowa, and WIU, the obvious conclusion is that we needed to start a different quarterback for each game. Every QB followed up his outstanding first start with a mediocre second start. If we had just rotated our QBs throughout the season, we would have been throwing for about 280 yards and 70% every game, and would have gone 12-0. We'd be waiting right now for our matchup with Notre Dame on Monday.

The answer is 13 QBs.

**MaccloNe** · 01-04-2013, 06:29 PM

Joel "Klein" Lanning will start. Run for 100 yards a game and pass for a 150 more.

**zwclones51** · 01-04-2013, 07:04 PM

He's obviously the second coming of Johnny Manziel. Wore #2 and all. Wonder if he will switch to Steeles old number now that he's finally gone.

**CycloneVet** · 01-04-2013, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by State43

I like Sam, but of the 3 qbs we had play this season, Steele was the only on that could throw those bullets directly to the opposition in mid field and quick outs. Yes, Steele had his issues mentally, but Sam seemed to only be effective on floaters and touch passes when given time for td's and Barnett was all over the place. Some of his skip passes just left me dumb founded. No D1 qb should be throwing multiple dirt passes when a WR is open and he isn't in the process of getting tackled. Not saying he doesn't work in the offseason and change that but he has had 3 years in the system already...

fify

**CycloneErik** · 01-04-2013, 08:05 PM

I'm with Grant until he sees the field, then the gloves come off.

**CarlHungus** · 01-04-2013, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by MaccloNe

Joel "Klein" Lanning will start. Run for 100 yards a game and pass for a 150 more.

I wouldn't mind getting that kind of production from our QB. I think Lanning switches positions though

**CarlHungus** · 01-04-2013, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by Snyder21

Looks like our #1 guy next year.

Barnett looked good in his HS tape too. Lets slow down a bit; Rohach could be a stud, but I still liked what I saw from Richardson overall. He has some work to do, but if he ever gets good protection from the O-line then he could be a stud QB too

**CycloneErik** · 01-04-2013, 08:16 PM

Originally Posted by CarlHungus

Barnett looked good in his HS tape too. Lets slow down a bit; Rohach could be a stud, but I still liked what I saw from Richardson overall. He has some work to do, but if he ever gets good protection from the O-line then he could be a stud QB too

That's what it all comes down to. If the OL can perform, then we have (potentially) very good QBs, whoever wins the job.

**swarthmoreCY** · 01-04-2013, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by MaccloNe

Joel "Klein" Lanning will start. Run for 100 yards a game and pass for a 150 more.

Originally Posted by CarlHungus

I wouldn't mind getting that kind of production from our QB. I think Lanning switches positions though

You mean like the 119 and 162 Sam put up on WVU (with 3 TDs and no INTs)?

**ISUFan22** · 01-04-2013, 08:23 PM

Better start winning in the trenches or this QB debate won't matter.

**CycloneVet** · 01-04-2013, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by ISUFan22

Better start winning in the trenches or this QB debate won't matter.

So So true.

**swarthmoreCY** · 01-04-2013, 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by ISUFan22

Better start winning in the trenches or this QB debate won't matter.

Unfortunately in this offense that is way too simple of an assessment of our troubles. It also needs to be said "better start winning at the QB spot, or winning in the trenches will not matter".
In any offense poor QB play can waste the efforts of the OL in the passing game, but with relying on the zone-read as the foundation of our ground game, the success of our entire offense is on the QB.

It is quite troubling to know if our Oline next year was unexpectedly capable of moving the LOS (like they were the first 3 years of this offense), we would still struggle running. Or if the QB developed Aaron Rogers accuracy, he would still not have anyone open to throw to. And if we had great WR's, our horrible (and compressed) scheme would still allow the defense to defend the run and pass by blitzing the **** out of us.

**Wesley** · 01-04-2013, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by Frak

I think that we need to stop running the QB so much. None of the QBs on the roster are big guys. If you're running them more than a few times a game on designed runs, they're going to get hurt. It makes zero sense to have a QB with more carries than any of the RBs. If you want to do that, find a bigger kid like Arnaud who can take a little more punishment. I've seen enough of SR and JB taking huge hits and then stumble back to the huddle only to make poor throws later in the game. If we're going to be a spread offense, use the QB run just enough to keep the D honest and otherwise keep them upright and throwing. I really believe that the zone read has hurt us a lot more than helped.

That is a problem then. Unless we have a very accurate throwing qb or a good blocking line or a fast power back, I think we are stuck with running our qbs a lot. This is the B12, not SEC.