Ohio St trotted out their 3rd string QB and beat Bama

[SoonerBBall]

And that makes me even more furious about our QB situation. Before watching OSU go through three ridiculously good QBs this season, I was somewhat okay with giving the guys we put out there a chance to work through their problems. After this, though, I'm just mad. How does Ohio St have three QBs that run and throw well and we don't even have one? That is on the OC/QB coach/QB recruiters/talent evaluators, and those guys need to get working or be fired.

[Breadburner]

k

[soonergirlNeugene]

Yes I was jealous too. And TCU built a wide receiver into a total boss at QB. I think both are more an indicator of coaching than recruiting.

[SoonerMarkVA]

Yes I was jealous too. And TCU built a wide receiver into a total boss at QB. I think both are more an indicator of coaching than recruiting.

Yup. Heupel was promoted beyond his abilities. As a QB coach, dedicated to that position and on the field during the game, he is outstanding. Juggling that and OC, at least when up in the booth, he is a bust in both.

[Aries]

Yup. Heupel was promoted beyond his abilities. As a QB coach, dedicated to that position and on the field during the game, he is outstanding. Juggling that and OC, at least when up in the booth, he is a bust in both.

There is a saying around my company that "People tend to rise to their highest level of incompetence." My boss told me that once, and I told him if I was any MORE incompetent, I'd be management material! :)

[cherokeebrewer]

There is a saying around my company that "People tend to rise to their highest level of incompetence."

It's called the 'Peter Principle'. We had it in Air Traffic Control also, those who couldn't cut in on the radar any longer were moved up to management...

[steveousiu]

I agree with Soonermark - Heupel was good at developing QB's Sam, Landry, but once he went up to the booth and started scheming, both aspects were krap!!! Instead of developing our QB's, he game planned and poorly I might add, and was trying to force a round peg into a square hole - i.e. making our QB's fit into a scheme instead of making the scheme fit our QB's skill set. I'm sorry but it is time for Josh to go, if he doesn't, do you really expect anything different next year? I think Baker Mayfield will be the starter next year when all is said and done, unfortunately for Trevor, Heupel did a tremendous disservice to him by not developing him, and to an extent Trevor bought into his one big victory in the Sugar Bowl last year and thought it would carry him through this year. I won't even begin to disucss the **** poor play our our defense, or lack there of! I will say that the talent was there, but the coaching was not. I like Coach Montgomery ( he should stay) but the rest should be sent packing to include Mike. His head isn't in the game, and his coaching of both players and coaches stinks right now. Please Bob for the Love of God, make changes, if you don't you better put your castle on the market now so you can sell it in 2016! I don't want to see Bob go - I simply want to see a positive change - that will require him growing a pair and sending several coaches packing! and Don't wait until NSD, because then the pickings for good assistants will be less!

[rock on sooner]

I agree that changes must come. I think Josh should go back down on the field and
get in the ear of the QB as he comes off the field. I watched him do that with Sam &
LJ, even their back ups, if Bob ever used them. Their growth was obvious and the
results followed. TK and CT both have some talent that Josh can develop...zone reads,
read progression, ball release, defensive reads, the fine, nitpicky things that make good
great. As for an OC on staff now, I don't think Norvell is it. Surely, Bob can find an out-
standing OC to bring to an elite program.

I feel that our D is in good enough shape, if our O can give them a chance to rest, instead
of 3 and outs. With a more competent O, recruiting will pick up, fill our needs and we can
get back to where we belong. To sum up, and repeat the obvious, fixing the QB situation/O
is paramount. imo...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Instead of developing our QB's, he game planned and poorly I might add, and was trying to force a round peg into a square hole - i.e. making our QB's fit into a scheme instead of making the scheme fit our QB's skill set.

Does anyone else have stock phrases that people say that just bother the crap out of you? This is one of them for me. Has anyone ever thought about the permutations associated with this phrase?

We typically have around 85 plays with 4 options off of each (think Bubble Screen, Fake Bubble Screen long bomb, Fake Bubble Screen Draw, et). So given that, we might have 400 plays in the playbook for a system. Now lets say that we have 3 QBs on campus with each QB having 50% of the playbook that is unique to them. That would mean we'd end up with 800 plays that the WRs and RBs have to know in case any of the 3 QBs is on the field. Given that we have 46,500 minutes of official practice time from last game to first game, we could practice each play a maximum of 20 reps (3 minutes per play).

But why stop there? Each of those WRs and RBs have plays that they are better at, so why not add an extra 10 play for each RB and WR that could play? Eventually we'd be at 1200 plays in the book.

[beached_sooner]

And that makes me even more furious about our QB situation. Before watching OSU go through three ridiculously good QBs this season, I was somewhat okay with giving the guys we put out there a chance to work through their problems. After this, though, I'm just mad. How does Ohio St have three QBs that run and throw well and we don't even have one? That is on the OC/QB coach/QB recruiters/talent evaluators, and those guys need to get working or be fired.

+1, Don't forget Okie State's backup freshman looked light years ahead of both Knight and Thomas, too. And Clemson's backup QB played lights out as well.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

That part doesn't frustrate me..Jones went 18-35 for 243 yards, 1TD and 1INT..and beat Alabama.

If a QB here has that stat line, we aren't beating anyone.

[graphster]

That part doesn't frustrate me..Jones went 18-35 for 243 yards, 1TD and 1INT..and beat Alabama.

If a QB here has that stat line, we aren't beating anyone.

Yep, it's the whole package. We got by under Sam and a good part of Landry's career beating people because our QB would put up monster numbers that masked problems in other areas (defense, running game).

With that said, it's also clear that we are no longer getting anywhere near that level of production from the QB position (or the WRs for that matter) on a regular basis. It's also clear that we keep recruiting/playing dual threat QBs, and do not consistently utilize that part of their skillset very effectively. Has been the case going back all the way to when Thompson was QB.

[EatLeadCommie]

Whether Heupel is good at QB coaching or not, we have been highly fortunate to ever be 2 deep at the QB position under Stoops. Forget about 3 deep. The only time we were 2 deep was with White/Hybl. I suppose you could make an argument for Bomar/Thompson, but both of those guys were green that year. Same with TK/BB. The common denominator? QB controversy. We did bring in a JUCO in Halze to back up Bradford that one year.

So QB coaching goes beyond simply having one QB who is good to great. It goes all the way to Bob Stoops and his reluctance to give backup QBs any meaningful snaps and, I'm guessing, practice time. When our starter goes down, we wilt, plain and simple. That's not Heupel. That's Stoops.

[EatLeadCommie]

+1, Don't forget Okie State's backup freshman looked light years ahead of both Knight and Thomas, too. And Clemson's backup QB played lights out as well.

In fairness, Clemson's backup had been the starter before and was a senior. Of course, they could've trotted out a dead man at QB and still beat us. It just would've been 33-6 instead because he did have that one kickass throw when he got popped pretty good.

[badger]

For these programs feeling buyer's remorse after the big wins escape the coaches... it might be time to rethink how college coaches are paid.

Make the base salary low; offer really high incentives for big wins.

Are we really paying Bob Stoops $5 million annually for 8-5? Too bad we couldn't write a little bit of that off after losing a few games at home, the bowl and finishing unranked.

[graphster]

I am honestly not that convinced in Heupel as a QB coach. I know people say that the dropoff in QB production/development is due to him moving to the booth, but I'm starting to question that.

Bomar was inconsistent for most of 2005. Thompson was serviceable but not great in 2006. Our offense in both of those years was largely driven by the running game, not the QB play.

Bradford put up monster numbers in 2007 and 2008. This was the golden era of offense under Wilson. Of course, it didn't hurt that we were also loaded on the offensive line and at the skill positions during that time.

Landry was awful in 2009. Single handedly lost us the game in Lincoln, along with several other games. He improved a lot in 2010, and then plateaued and didn't really improve much after that. Decision-making was a problem for his entire career. Landry threw some of the most head scratching INTs I've ever seen from a QB.

Bell and Knight have been average to awful in 2013 and 2014. Neither improved noticeably during their time at QB. TK continues to make horrible decisions/reads, which (as opposed to arm strength of footspeed) is something that you should ideally be able to coach. Bell was about the same, without the big play running ability.

Having a hard time believing that we can't find another QB coach out there to get similar production levels from 4 and 5 star recruits.

[Breadburner]

Ohio State won the game running the ball.......

[EatLeadCommie]

I am honestly not that convinced in Heupel as a QB coach. I know people say that the dropoff in QB production/development is due to him moving to the booth, but I'm starting to question that.

Bomar was inconsistent for most of 2005. Thompson was serviceable but not great in 2006. Our offense in both of those years was largely driven by the running game, not the QB play.

Bradford put up monster numbers in 2007 and 2008. This was the golden era of offense under Wilson. Of course, it didn't hurt that we were also loaded on the offensive line and at the skill positions during that time.

Landry was awful in 2009. Single handedly lost us the game in Lincoln, along with several other games. He improved a lot in 2010, and then plateaued and didn't really improve much after that. Decision-making was a problem for his entire career.

Bell and Knight have been average to awful in 2013 and 2014.

Having a hard time believing that we can't find another QB coach out there to get similar production levels from 4 and 5 star recruits.

Bomar was a true freshman QB who improved over the course of 2005. PT was a converted wide receiver and played a lot better than TK has this year. Landry was awful in 2009, again going back to Stoops' habit of not having serviceable backups. In fairness, LJ was a freshman that year so I don't know how prepared he could've been. 2011 was the first season Heupel had OC duties. It is from then on that our QB play has stagnated. Landry showed no improvement over his last two years. BB and TK have been busts.

[graphster]

Understood. I'm just saying that there's actually not a lot of evidence over the past 7-8 years that Heupel is a great QB coach.

Don't forget that Bomar and Landry were also both top QB recruits in HS. And both redshirted. Look at how well Jameis Winston and Johnny Manzeil played in their freshman year. Look at Bradford in his. You get guys that talented, you expect them to be ready to play early on. Zero 5 star QBs, in this day and age, come in expecting to sit on the bench for 3 years before taking a snap.

Regardless, I have a hard time believing that you couldn't find another QB coach out there who could get the same, if not better, levels of production from the players we've had. And maybe could have even gotten more out of those guys, and/or recruited and evaluated better.

[EatLeadCommie]

Understood. I'm just saying that there's actually not a lot of evidence over the past 7-8 years that Heupel is a great QB coach.

Don't forget that Bomar and Landry were also both top QB recruits in HS. And both redshirted. Look at how well Jameis Winston and Johnny Manzeil played in their freshman year. Look at Bradford in his. You get guys that talented, you expect them to be ready to play early on. Zero 5 star QBs, in this day and age, come in expecting to sit on the bench for 3 years before taking a snap.

Regardless, I have a hard time believing that you couldn't find another QB coach out there who could get the same, if not better, levels of production from the players we've had. And maybe could have even gotten more out of those guys, and/or recruited and evaluated better.

The last part I definitely agree with.

[SoonerMarkVA]

Also, JH wasn't here for 2005. He came in only for the Holiday Bowl, where in fact Bomar probably had his best game of the year.

[badger]

Do we still have NFL-level talent at the QB position?

The starters since 2000, aside from knee-less Jason were all NFL quarterbacks... some were practice squadders, NFL Europers or perennial backups, but they were still in the NFL at least a season or two.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Understood. I'm just saying that there's actually not a lot of evidence over the past 7-8 years that Heupel is a great QB coach.

Don't forget that Bomar and Landry were also both top QB recruits in HS. And both redshirted. Look at how well Jameis Winston and Johnny Manzeil played in their freshman year. Look at Bradford in his. You get guys that talented, you expect them to be ready to play early on. Zero 5 star QBs, in this day and age, come in expecting to sit on the bench for 3 years before taking a snap.

Regardless, I have a hard time believing that you couldn't find another QB coach out there who could get the same, if not better, levels of production from the players we've had. And maybe could have even gotten more out of those guys, and/or recruited and evaluated better.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say about Bradford, he was brought in as a 3* throwaway since we had 4 QBs on campus (ironically, Texas did the same thing the year before with a guy named Colt McCoy). They weren't sold on Bradford until after the 1st game of the year (since they brought in Nichol and Halzle for the spring).

The major problem with our QBs the last 2 years is the inability to throw the slant. The slant is by far our favorite throw for 1st downs. Without it, we devolve into a big play team with a feast or famine offense. It has happened before (2005 with Bomar) and it will probably happen again. Remember, that as much crap as Thompson gets for 2006, that guy could throw the slant like no one's business.

Last, QBs have weird quirks. Stafford still just throws stuff up for grabs and he has been in the NFL for 5 years (5* out of Dallas). Drew Brees used to drive Joe Stiller crazy at times with his decision making at Purdue.

[SoonerorLater]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say about Bradford, he was brought in as a 3* throwaway since we had 4 QBs on campus (ironically, Texas did the same thing the year before with a guy named Colt McCoy). They weren't sold on Bradford until after the 1st game of the year (since they brought in Nichol and Halzle for the spring).

The major problem with our QBs the last 2 years is the inability to throw the slant. The slant is by far our favorite throw for 1st downs. Without it, we devolve into a big play team with a feast or famine offense. It has happened before (2005 with Bomar) and it will probably happen again. Remember, that as much crap as Thompson gets for 2006, that guy could throw the slant like no one's business.

Last, QBs have weird quirks. Stafford still just throws stuff up for grabs and he has been in the NFL for 5 years (5* out of Dallas). Drew Brees used to drive Joe Stiller crazy at times with his decision making at Purdue.

Bradford was the number 12 rated pro style QB in the nation that year. That doesn't seem like a throwaway QB.

[graphster]

Bradford was not a superstar recruit coming in, true. But from what I understand, Heupel wasn't the one who was primarily responsible for evaluating or recruiting him either.

[BoulderSooner79]

Ohio State won the game running the ball.......

... and passing the ball and intercepting the ball and getting stops on 3rd down. It took every element of the game to pull it off.

[Blue]

Does anyone else have stock phrases that people say that just bother the crap out of you? This is one of them for me. Has anyone ever thought about the permutations associated with this phrase?

We typically have around 85 plays with 4 options off of each (think Bubble Screen, Fake Bubble Screen long bomb, Fake Bubble Screen Draw, et). So given that, we might have 400 plays in the playbook for a system. Now lets say that we have 3 QBs on campus with each QB having 50% of the playbook that is unique to them. That would mean we'd end up with 800 plays that the WRs and RBs have to know in case any of the 3 QBs is on the field. Given that we have 46,500 minutes of official practice time from last game to first game, we could practice each play a maximum of 20 reps (3 minutes per play).

But why stop there? Each of those WRs and RBs have plays that they are better at, so why not add an extra 10 play for each RB and WR that could play? Eventually we'd be at 1200 plays in the book.

Way to miss his point.

How about we just scrap the crap playbook we have and start over?

[steveousiu]

JKM - WOW! permutations associated with this phrase? I didn't know a simple statement would generate such a guttural response!! Obviously responding to a comment on a forum as a fan and an Alum is disruptive if we use stock phrases! and here I thought we could all share in the love we have for our sooners and not have to talk about permutations. I guess I'm just too slow to be able to communicate on a Sooner forum, perhaps you can give us the NASA forum you belong to, and some of that rocket science vernacular you are using can rub off on us! Give it a rest, let sooner fans voice their concerns without being tags for stock phrases, if you don't like them, then don't read the posts.

[PalmBeachSooner]

When you look at tOSU QBs that played this year they are the splitting image of each other. It's no wonder they were able to come in and execute the offense with little or no drop off. OU on the other hand went from Sam and Landry to TK. I love TK and I think in the right offense he'd be outstanding, but he's been asked to be something he's not. I'm not sure about Thomas but Thomas certainly struggled to execute the offense.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

JKM - WOW! permutations associated with this phrase? I didn't know a simple statement would generate such a guttural response!! Obviously responding to a comment on a forum as a fan and an Alum is disruptive if we use stock phrases! and here I thought we could all share in the love we have for our sooners and not have to talk about permutations. I guess I'm just too slow to be able to communicate on a Sooner forum, perhaps you can give us the NASA forum you belong to, and some of that rocket science vernacular you are using can rub off on us! Give it a rest, let sooner fans voice their concerns without being tags for stock phrases, if you don't like them, then don't read the posts.

Your phrase wasn't any different than "We only use 10% of our brains". If you sat back and really thought about it, you would see how unmanageable that stock phrase actually is. This isn't the NFL where you might have a QB for a decade that you can build a system around, you have them for a max 4 years. Therefore, you are forced to have a system and you have to be able to recruit to that system. There just isn't enough practice time to do otherwise (since you are new, college football teams are allowed a little over 5% of the practice time of an NFL team).

Here is my conundrum. Who is responsible for our current talent mismatch - Heupel or Norvell? This isn't the first QB we've had that can't throw the slant as it started with the kid who transferred to Syracuse. Every time I get a chance to see a new QB these days they throw a couple of swing passes and then they are straight to the deep out/corner (think about last year's pokey state game - Kendall Thompson threw a pick on it, Bell threw the game winning TD on it). Then Knight went absolutely nuts in the Sugar Bowl throwing those same routes to a couple of graduating WRs who were great at running them. In other words, Heupel has been fairly consistent in getting QBs that favor that route (even Landry favored that route whereas Sam was all Seam/Slant).

Then you look at WR. This year, we have no one on campus outside of DGB that is good with those routes. We just can't keep the prototypical guys for the outside on campus (Metoyer says "Hold this"). In other words, I personally think Norvell is the bigger problem here on the talent side.

[graphster]

When you look at tOSU QBs that played this year they are the splitting image of each other. It's no wonder they were able to come in and execute the offense with little or no drop off. OU on the other hand went from Sam and Landry to TK. I love TK and I think in the right offense he'd be outstanding, but he's been asked to be something he's not. I'm not sure about Thomas but Thomas certainly struggled to execute the offense.

I think that's kind of the point. Ohio State has a system and they recruit/develop players to fit that system. This is what allows their players to be successful. Just the same way that Josh Heupel could be effective in Leach's system, even though he wouldn't have been nearly as good at most other schools during that era.

We do not have a clearly defined system, and we do not have a clearly defined strategy for developing QBs or designing gameplans that utilize their strengths and minimize their weaknesses.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

When you look at tOSU QBs that played this year they are the splitting image of each other. It's no wonder they were able to come in and execute the offense with little or no drop off. OU on the other hand went from Sam and Landry to TK. I love TK and I think in the right offense he'd be outstanding, but he's been asked to be something he's not. I'm not sure about Thomas but Thomas certainly struggled to execute the offense.

Heh, we are thinking the same thing here. I think our problems at WR are covering up the fact that our WRs are clones on that deep out.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I think that's kind of the point. Ohio State has a system and they recruit/develop players to fit that system. This is what allows their players to be successful. Just the same way that Josh Heupel could be effective in Leach's system, even though he wouldn't have been nearly as good at most other schools during that era.

We do not have a clearly defined system, and we do not have a clearly defined strategy for developing QBs or designing gameplans that utilize their strengths and minimize their weaknesses.

You can't say this with any kind of certainty. The lack of talent at WR this year throws it off the table. That leaves you last year, where there were multiple examples of us highlighting a QBs strengths (like the Sugar Bowl) and the 4 years of Landry Jones.

[graphster]

Despite the lack of talent at WR, the fact remains that for most of the Bell/Knight era, we have tried to make our QBs be pocket passing QBs who throw it 35+ times a game, when that is not their strong suit.

If anything, the lack of talent at WR should have pushed us further in the direction of more option/designed QB run game.

I'm not saying that we should run an option style offense, or that we should run a pro-style offense. What I am saying is that when you don't have a clear idea of what you want to do (and instead just try to do a little bit of everything), then it's very difficult to recruit or develop talent with any consistency. You either need to have a very clear idea about what you want your identity to be on offense and recruit QBs that can execute that style of offense, or you need to be willing to change your offense from season to season to fit the current starter's strengths and weaknesses. We do neither. We recruit a bunch of dual threat QBs and then largely have them try to execute the same offense that Sam and Landry ran. By the way, we did the same thing when Thompson was QB. We had a converted WR playing QB and utilized virtually no designed QB runs in the offense.

If you're not going to go all in and run an Oregon/Ohio State style offense, then there is no point in signing and developing guys like Bell and Knight. Neither one of them are ever going to be successful as a drop back, pocket passer.

[bluedogok]

Last, QBs have weird quirks. Stafford still just throws stuff up for grabs and he has been in the NFL for 5 years (5* out of Dallas). Drew Brees used to drive Joe Stiller crazy at times with his decision making at Purdue.
It helps when you have a Calvin Johnson to throw it up to.

[soonercastor]

That part doesn't frustrate me..Jones went 18-35 for 243 yards, 1TD and 1INT..and beat Alabama.

If a QB here has that stat line, we aren't beating anyone.

It's not just about stats. He was very poised and made plays on key situations.

[SouthFortySooner]

It's not just about stats. He was very poised and made plays on key situations.

He also RAN THE BALL! OMG! How could they let their 3rd string QB run the ball?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Despite the lack of talent at WR, the fact remains that for most of the Bell/Knight era, we have tried to make our QBs be pocket passing QBs who throw it 35+ times a game, when that is not their strong suit.

If anything, the lack of talent at WR should have pushed us further in the direction of more option/designed QB run game.

Except that Knight can't stay healthy and Bell floundered in the running game when he took over as QB last year.



I'm not saying that we should run an option style offense, or that we should run a pro-style offense. What I am saying is that when you don't have a clear idea of what you want to do (and instead just try to do a little bit of everything), then it's very difficult to recruit or develop talent with any consistency. You either need to have a very clear idea about what you want your identity to be on offense and recruit QBs that can execute that style of offense, or you need to be willing to change your offense from season to season to fit the current starter's strengths and weaknesses. We do neither. We recruit a bunch of dual threat QBs and then largely have them try to execute the same offense that Sam and Landry ran. By the way, we did the same thing when Thompson was QB. We had a converted WR playing QB and utilized virtually no designed QB runs in the offense.

What you are forgetting is the 1st game of 2005 against TCU. Unlike the 2003 aTm game, Thompson didn't keep the ball once even when it was wide open. The closest he came to keeping it was a botched exchange that he recovered. For whatever reason, he went from a guy who kept the ball every read option to a guy who would not keep it. The same thing happened to Bell last year. Its like once they learn that they can throw it, they become gunshy on every other part of the game.


If you're not going to go all in and run an Oregon/Ohio State style offense, then there is no point in signing and developing guys like Bell and Knight. Neither one of them are ever going to be successful as a drop back, pocket passer.

Oregon's philosophy is to get a throwing QB who can run which is kind of what our coaches wanted.

[graphster]

When players continually make bad reads in the option game, that is coaching. Just the same as if a guy can't go through a route progression.

Bell floundered all year outside of Notre Dame, Texas Tech, and Tulsa, but particularly in games where they didn't run the QB much. Remember the Texas game?

Doesn't really matter if Knight is healthy or not when you're asking him to run an offense that he has repeatedly proven unsuccessful at. Given that your backup also struggles throwing the ball from the pocket, it's unclear why you'd base your offensive style around a pocket passing attack. Last year we had Bell, Knight, and Kendall Thompson. None of those guys are top tier pocket passers, and yet we did not adapt our offense to fit their strengths. That is either poor playcalling/gameplanning, or poor recruiting and evaluation (or both!).

The difference between Oregon's approach with QBs and our approach is that Oregon gets throwing QBs who can run, and then explicitly makes the QB running game (along with designed rollouts and run/pass options) a central of their offense. We recruit throwing QBs who can run, and then ask them to throw the ball with very little incorporation of their running abilities, except as a rare change of pace or gadget play.

[bluedogok]

He also RAN THE BALL! OMG! How could they let their 3rd string QB run the ball?
When he is the size of the defensive linemen I think that gives you a little more latitude. It does seem a bit ridiculous to put a guy out there who one of their strengths is running the ball and take that away from him. You could understand it with Jason White since he blew his knees out and couldn't run after that but most of the QB's since with a running game that was not the issue.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Doesn't really matter if Knight is healthy or not when you're asking him to run an offense that he has repeatedly proven unsuccessful at. Given that your backup also struggles throwing the ball from the pocket, it's unclear why you'd base your offensive style around a pocket passing attack. Last year we had Bell, Knight, and Kendall Thompson. None of those guys are top tier pocket passers, and yet we did not adapt our offense to fit their strengths. That is either poor playcalling/gameplanning, or poor recruiting and evaluation (or both!).

I'm not trying to be abrasive here, but you are making anecdotal assumptions that aren't based on facts. In 2013, Oregon's QB (by percentage) ran the ball less time than any QB we had on campus. The rest of your argument seems to be based on those anecdotal conclusions.

Knight had 67 rushes, 134 passes (33% rushes)
Bell had 75 rushes, 233 passes (24% rushes)
Thompson had 4 rushes, 13 passes (24% rushes)
Mariotta had 125 rushes and 408 passes (23% rushes)

Now, I'm not arguing Heupel doesn't have issues that warrant him being replaced. I just think that if he goes you have to take Norvell with him. For me, Heupel's primary issue is his propensity to go 3 and out way too often in a game. The ballooning of that stat under his OCship has cost us more losses than I wish to contemplate.

[PalmBeachSooner]

When you look at tOSU QBs that played this year they are the splitting image of each other. It's no wonder they were able to come in and execute the offense with little or no drop off. OU on the other hand went from Sam and Landry to TK. I love TK and I think in the right offense he'd be outstanding, but he's been asked to be something he's not. I'm not sure about Thomas but Thomas certainly struggled to execute the offense.

That's the point exactly. We had a system and recruited QBs to fit that system. Then along came the dual threat QBs (RGIII, JFF, etc.). After the butt-raping by JFF in the Cotton Bowl we decided that's the direction our offense should go. At least that's the impression we had. Enter TK, who seems to be a great fit in that system, but guess what, we asked him to be a Sam. FAIL!

IMHO there's no reason Blake Bell could not have been a pro-style QB. He had the size and arm but never developed. I think he took it up the arse by our coaches. They totally failed him and seem to be failing TK.

[graphster]

I'm not trying to be abrasive here, but you are making anecdotal assumptions that aren't based on facts. In 2013, Oregon's QB (by percentage) ran the ball less time than any QB we had on campus. The rest of your argument seems to be based on those anecdotal conclusions.

Knight had 67 rushes, 134 passes (33% rushes)
Bell had 75 rushes, 233 passes (24% rushes)
Thompson had 4 rushes, 13 passes (24% rushes)
Mariotta had 125 rushes and 408 passes (23% rushes)

Now, I'm not arguing Heupel doesn't have issues that warrant him being replaced. I just think that if he goes you have to take Norvell with him. For me, Heupel's primary issue is his propensity to go 3 and out way too often in a game. The ballooning of that stat under his OCship has cost us more losses than I wish to contemplate.

I agree that Norvell should go too, and that the WR play is also a big problem with our offense currently (and really has been ever since Stills and Justin Brown graduated). I am not claiming that our QB problems are all about the QBs, because the WR play has also been very poor, with a few exceptions (Saunders and Shepard last year, Shepard this year).

I guess the stats do tell a different story, but it sure seems like we have not done an effective job using the running abilities of Knight (or Bell) consistently. Some games (like the Iowa State game this year), it was featured prominently and worked well. Knight had 16 carries for 146 yards in that game. In a lot of other games, it was never really a major factor. Against Clemson, for example, Knight had 2 runs. One was a sack and the other was a called play action pass that he ended up scrambling on. He threw the ball 37 times in the game, and there were zero called QB runs. Against WVU, Knight had zero runs. Against Texas he had 4 runs.

So I guess you're right that it's not correct to say that we never ran the QBs the last two years, but rather that we did so inconsistently. But you're also right that the bigger issue was probably that we did not execute consistently in the passing game, which would have required more than simply calling more designed QB runs to fix. I just felt that at times this year (and part of last, although they really dialed back the passing game the second half of the year last season), we put way too much of the gameplan on Trevor's arm and decision-making when we would have been better off to run it more (either with one of the RBs or with Knight in the option game), or call passing plays that gave Trevor a very simple read with an option to run if it wasn't there.

[dennis580]

That part doesn't frustrate me..Jones went 18-35 for 243 yards, 1TD and 1INT..and beat Alabama.

If a QB here has that stat line, we aren't beating anyone.

Cardale was also extremely effective with the power running game. He converted numerous first downs with his power running.