***New*** Week 3 Starting QB Poll

[MeowingCows]

I'm not sure it even matters. Better QB alone isn't going to win games, stop our defensive woes, stop dumb penalties, etc. Put Chris Francis behind center, he's completed one or two passes in his career, we will likely win the same amount of games. /s

 

[Clonehomer]

The thing I did wonder is why we were getting the lineman down field more with Park than Lanning. Did Park hold the ball longer than he should or did he do something different pre-snap that might have caused some of the issues? Just seems like those popped up when Park came in and I didn't remember those with Lanning.

 

[Gunnerclone]

He does, but do we have one of that description?

Probably not but I know the best way never to find out is to just stick with Lanning for the sake of only playing one QB because that = good to a lot of people.

 

[Gunnerclone]

The thing I did wonder is why we were getting the lineman down field more with Park than Lanning. Did Park hold the ball longer than he should or did he do something different pre-snap that might have caused some of the issues? Just seems like those popped up when Park came in and I didn't remember those with Lanning.

Well that's simple the OL is used to the timing of Joel which is fast. Park was getting to reads that Lanning never gets to.

 

[WrestlerJJE]

I'm not sure it even matters. Better QB alone isn't going to win games, stop our defensive woes, stop dumb penalties, etc. Put Chris Francis behind center, he's completed one or two passes in his career, we will likely win the same amount of games. /s

Yes and no. Here's the thing I noticed. I rewatched the game this morning. The quarterbacks had 2-4 seconds to throw the ball. Now yesterday I watch packers vs Jags and I counted how many seconds it took to throw the ball. They had the same amount of time. The thing is that when you put a quarterback back there, they have to make a quick judgement or two before getting out of the pocket. Even if we have terrible linemen, there is enough time to either throw the ball to a receiver, get out of the pocket or throw it away. And you have to make those good passes. But the receivers work for the catch if they are not open. To me, Joel was timid and very slow to decide to throw it or run and that got him sacked 3 times. I thought Park did a better job of making a decision or getting out of the pocket. Quarterbacks do make a difference even if it's driving it down the field 20 yards compared to going 3 and out. That's why they have so much pressure on them.

 

[Clones8686]

I'm still advocating for Waye Terry

 

[RustShack]

It will be Lanning, but it should have been Park week 1.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Probably not but I know the best way never to find out is to just stick with Lanning for the sake of only playing one QB because that = good to a lot of people.

I never said we should. I think he should start, but Park should get some serious reps, and then choose. Park looked better against Iowa in several ways (pocket awareness, poise, accuracy, arm), but we need to see more.

 

[CTTB78]

Poise, accuracy,quickness, decision making. Lanning must be showing more of these traits in practice than we know. We'll see what the coaching thinks of Park now by how soon we see him against the Frogs.

 

[Cyinthenorth]

Whar Tiller?

 

[cyclonespiker33]

Poise, accuracy,quickness, decision making. Lanning must be showing more of these traits in practice than we know. We'll see what the coaching thinks of Park now by how soon we see him against the Frogs.

How impressive is that against the Iowa State defense though?

 

[Dandy]

Looks like pretty much everyone wants Park.

 

[GTO]

If we're talking pocket passer, give me Monte Morris.

 

[ManBearClone]

It will be Lanning, but it should have been Park week 1.

I didn't think Lanning looked like the best QB in the spring game. And that was before Park arrived.

 

[awd4cy]

Park actually showed the ability to move the offense down field, Lanning doesn't. Also, that deep pass down the sideline to Lazard was a thing of beauty. I'm not sure Lanning could even throw that far. Park also looked like he knows the offense better too. Park should start, but I wouldn't mind seeing Lanning in short yardage situations. Park definitely is more talented.

 

[Stormin]

This. The problems on offense go way beyond the QB. It's change for the sake of change, which is what we had at the spot the last six years with Rhoads. Rotate through quarterbacks all you like; it won't matter until the staff can piece together a decent o line and jump start the run game. FWIW, I vote Lanning to start this week. Park throws a much better ball but other than that he didn't do anything to win the job on Saturday night.

But a lot of that comes back on Lanning. Lanning is not doing a good job with the Zone Read. Lanning has carried the ball 27 times........our top 3 RB's COMBINED have 34 carries.

And it isn't like the runs are there for Lanning. He is gaining a little over 1 yard per carry. Add in that he has not been able to hit easy short passes. A lot of our problems begin with Lanning. He has not played well at all.

That said. Lanning is a Captain and I would give him the start against TCU. But Park would definitely play first half. The person who performed the best would start second half.

 

[awd4cy]

I get tired of hearing that the qb isn't the only problem with the offense. No it's not I agree, but it's still a problem. Why not try and fix a major problem? Even when Lanning has had time (fewer times than when he has I know) he has shown to be indecisive and ineffective.

 

[Gunnerclone]

I get tired of hearing that the qb isn't the only problem with the offense. No it's not I agree, but it's still a problem. Why not try and fix a major problem? Even when Lanning has had time (fewer times than when he has I know) he has shown to be indecisive and ineffective.

And QB is the one position that can cover up for a lot of other deficiencies.