Jump to content

unfair to criticize Gus for not developing HS QBs


gr82b4au

Recommended Posts

Guest WarEagleSteve
10 hours ago, WarEagle1983 said:

When I say average regarding Bama's QBs, my definition has less to do with if they're NFL caliber QBs and more to do with the fact they're not likely to go out and win you games by putting the team on their back in certain situations of the game if needed. Bama QBs are asked not to turn the ball over but they look to their defense and RBs to make key plays before they look to their QB. I think for what Bama needs their QBs have done a great job though. 

Bama's QBs have done a great job from a wins and losses standpoint but if we're holding Nick Saban to the same standard of quarterback evaluation that we are Gus then Nick Saban's staff might have a worse track record than Gus from a pure hit/miss standpoint. This is Saban's 11th season in T-Town. During that time he's signed 15 quarterbacks (14 if you want to consider Blake Sims was signed as an "athlete"): Six 3 stars, six 4 stars, and three 5 stars. Here's how they've turned out: 

-Of the 15 quarterbacks signed, only 4 have actually started a game (5 if you count Blake Barnett's "start" against USC last year)

-None of those 4 was a 5 star recruit. In fact, two of the three 5 star quarterbacks Saban has signed have transferred (Philip Sims and Blake Barnett). Jury's still out on number 3 (Tua Tagovailoa) 

-9 of the 15 quarterbacks Nick Saban has signed have transferred to other schools. None of them have been especially good for their new teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply
55 minutes ago, WarEagleSteve said:

Bama's QBs have done a great job from a wins and losses standpoint but if we're holding Nick Saban to the same standard of quarterback evaluation that we are Gus then Nick Saban's staff might have a worse track record than Gus from a pure hit/miss standpoint. This is Saban's 11th season in T-Town. During that time he's signed 15 quarterbacks (14 if you want to consider Blake Sims was signed as an "athlete"): Six 3 stars, six 4 stars, and three 5 stars. Here's how they've turned out: 

-Of the 15 quarterbacks signed, only 4 have actually started a game (5 if you count Blake Barnett's "start" against USC last year)

-None of those 4 was a 5 star recruit. In fact, two of the three 5 star quarterbacks Saban has signed have transferred (Philip Sims and Blake Barnett). Jury's still out on number 3 (Tua Tagovailoa) 

-9 of the 15 quarterbacks Nick Saban has signed have transferred to other schools. None of them have been especially good for their new teams. 

It seems like you're trying to say that saban hasn't been much better than Gus at recruiting and developing QBs but you just offered a ton of evidence that he's way better at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's why the lack of QB development is on Gus....IT'S HIS JOB!  And supposedly, it was his expertise.  Not having a 5* QB isn't an excuse.  The #2 pick in the draft two years ago played college ball at North Dakota State.  The potential top QB this year in the draft plays for Wyoming.

Evaluation and development are a major part of what we pay Gus for.  If he can't do it, then he damn sure deserves the blame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WarEagleSteve said:

Bama's QBs have done a great job from a wins and losses standpoint but if we're holding Nick Saban to the same standard of quarterback evaluation that we are Gus then Nick Saban's staff might have a worse track record than Gus from a pure hit/miss standpoint. This is Saban's 11th season in T-Town. During that time he's signed 15 quarterbacks (14 if you want to consider Blake Sims was signed as an "athlete"): Six 3 stars, six 4 stars, and three 5 stars. Here's how they've turned out: 

-Of the 15 quarterbacks signed, only 4 have actually started a game (5 if you count Blake Barnett's "start" against USC last year)

-None of those 4 was a 5 star recruit. In fact, two of the three 5 star quarterbacks Saban has signed have transferred (Philip Sims and Blake Barnett). Jury's still out on number 3 (Tua Tagovailoa) 

-9 of the 15 quarterbacks Nick Saban has signed have transferred to other schools. None of them have been especially good for their new teams. 

The problem is we aren't just speaking of evaluation. That is a very minimal and short sighted way to compare the two. Every HC will miss on a QB. The issue is we are missing on QBs without success from their counterparts. Alabama aren't miss evaluating two or three QBs on their roster with no explicable valued options. Of course, a handful of them will start in a given decade. You have several individuals vying for one spot and most times the one who comes on top will start multiple seasons. Being a 5 star QB does not mean you will just be handed the job. You still have to compete at a high level and you still have to be TAUGHT. Evaluation is just the tipping point. Once you evaluate, you have to be coached up. For example, I would love to have Lamar Jackson at AU. However, even if he was here, the Lamar Jackson at UL would not be the same if he was here at AU. But even so, this isn't the downfall of CGM right now nor is it the point of the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WarEagleSteve said:

Bama's QBs have done a great job from a wins and losses standpoint but if we're holding Nick Saban to the same standard of quarterback evaluation that we are Gus then Nick Saban's staff might have a worse track record than Gus from a pure hit/miss standpoint. This is Saban's 11th season in T-Town. During that time he's signed 15 quarterbacks (14 if you want to consider Blake Sims was signed as an "athlete"): Six 3 stars, six 4 stars, and three 5 stars. Here's how they've turned out: 

-Of the 15 quarterbacks signed, only 4 have actually started a game (5 if you count Blake Barnett's "start" against USC last year)

-None of those 4 was a 5 star recruit. In fact, two of the three 5 star quarterbacks Saban has signed have transferred (Philip Sims and Blake Barnett). Jury's still out on number 3 (Tua Tagovailoa) 

-9 of the 15 quarterbacks Nick Saban has signed have transferred to other schools. None of them have been especially good for their new teams. 

I don't consider many of those QBs a bust though. Most of them simply didn't get the chance to show what they can actually do in a game. They've mostly been evaluated in camp or given 1 or maybe 2 in game situations. The quickest way to not to be a starting QB at Bama is if you don't take care of the ball and don't consistently show you can lead the offense. Saban doesn't even give his backup QBs much time to be evaluated in garbage games b/c they'll keep the ball on the ground and run the clock out. He gets his QB in camp and they've been fortunate to where that guy hasn't had to deal with injuries and they've had dominant defenses to lessen the pressure off of the offense.

Saban isn't held to the same standard regarding QB evaluation/production as Gus. Saban is a defensive guy. Bama doesn't care if they go 4 or 5 out of 14 or 15 with QBs. As long as they get 1 QB out of the 4 or 5 on their roster that can lead the team..that's all they're asking for b/c Saban is basically going to guarantee a top 3 or 5 defense every year. Gus is an offensive guy and there is absolutely no excuse for us not to have any viable options at QB if our first guy goes down.

Again..as i stated before i never looked at Gus as a good QB developer but being that he was proclaimed to be one of the great offensive minds in CFB at the time i did expect him to acknowledge his weaknesses and fix them in a timely manner. Saban knew he needed to tweak his offense some so he went and got Kiffen. It's understanding changes like that to make the team better. Again...i'm really confident that's all behind us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Nick Marshall had the benefit of a D the caliber of Bama's for those 2 years, he might have walked away with a couple of SECC's and at least one NC.  There are lot of factors in play, which is what makes it even more maddening to have watched the offense languish for 2 seasons with a much better D than we've had in years.  

I'm just hopeful the recent staff changes can help dig us out of that quagmire.  The pressure isn't on Stidham, it's on Gus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

I actually felt sorry for Lefty with the QB's he had to work with.

I have to disagree with this.  The problem that he had was not a lack of QB talent, it was that he was trying to install a pro style offense with a dual-threat QB and a weak O-Line. The only statistic you need to see to know that Loeffler set Kiehl up to fail is 42 rushing attempts for -35 yards and 0 rushing touchdowns. Under Gus, he ran for 327 and 3 touchdowns as a true freshman in limited play. Had he been able to start in Gus's system in 2012, I believe he would have fared much better... maybe not been a star, but certainly not the bust he was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

I have to disagree with this.  The problem that he had was not a lack of QB talent, it was that he was trying to install a pro style offense with a dual-threat QB and a weak O-Line. The only statistic you need to see to know that Loeffler set Kiehl up to fail is 42 rushing attempts for -35 yards and 0 rushing touchdowns. Under Gus, he ran for 327 and 3 touchdowns as a true freshman in limited play. Had he been able to start in Gus's system in 2012, I believe he would have fared much better... maybe not been a star, but certainly not the bust he was.

I agree. The only person I felt sorry for was Kiehl. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

I have to disagree with this.  The problem that he had was not a lack of QB talent, it was that he was trying to install a pro style offense with a dual-threat QB and a weak O-Line. The only statistic you need to see to know that Loeffler set Kiehl up to fail is 42 rushing attempts for -35 yards and 0 rushing touchdowns. Under Gus, he ran for 327 and 3 touchdowns as a true freshman in limited play. Had he been able to start in Gus's system in 2012, I believe he would have fared much better... maybe not been a star, but certainly not the bust he was.

Obviously I didn't make my self clear.  Even though I was talking about Frazier in the paragraph above the quote, the quote was meaning to include all of the QBs left on the roster.  I understand that a Dual Threat QB brought up in Gus' system doesn't have a real good shot at a pro style offense, but the others were pro style QBs.

What was he to do with Clint Moseley and Barrett Trotter?  Do you consider those as talented QBs that can face a SEC defense and succeed?  We ended up playing a true freshmen with a lot of heart down the stretch.  The cupboard was bear for his type of offense, or anybody else's for that matter, the weak OL had a lot to do with the lack of producivity of the offense that year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think too much is made of "pro style" vs "spread"/"Wing T" or whatever. 

Also, too much is made of Lefty's failure in 2012. You know what Gus did down the stretch in 2011? 19.25 points a game for the last 8 games of the season, and that includes 41 against Ole Miss and 35 against Samford. 10 pts/game against LSU, UGA and bama.

Point being, 2012 wasn't Lefty's fault. It wasn't Kiehl's, Clint's, Barrett's or JWall's, either. The *entire program was in the toilet long before 2011 had even ended. *Everything was wrong.

*Except special teams. #jayboulware4eva

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

I think too much is made of "pro style" vs "spread"/"Wing T" or whatever. 

Also, too much is made of Lefty's failure in 2012. You know what Gus did down the stretch in 2011? 19.25 points a game for the last 8 games of the season, and that includes 41 against Ole Miss and 35 against Samford. 10 pts/game against LSU, UGA and bama.

Point being, 2012 wasn't Lefty's fault. It wasn't Kiehl's, Clint's, Barrett's or JWall's, either. The *entire program was in the toilet long before 2011 had even ended. *Everything was wrong.

*Except special teams. #jayboulware4eva

 

That's fair. Chizik had already begun losing control of the locker room, and it was his decision to bring in Loeffler to run the pro-style. But that whole season in Auburn football history - Frazier...Trotter...Moseley. Rough. Sean would have done well in that offense by the way.   Sean would have done better in Loeffler's offense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

That's fair. Chizik had already begun losing control of the locker room, and it was his decision to bring in Loeffler to run the pro-style. But that whole season in Auburn football history - Frazier...Trotter...Moseley. Rough. Sean would have done well in that offense by the way.   Sean would have done better in Loeffler's offense. 

Check those numbers on Gus's 2011 offense again. It was really, really bad. Loeffler is a scapegoat. So is Ted Roof for that matter. 

None of those QBs were nearly as bad as Chizik's regime made them look, especially not Trotter. Goes for players all over that roster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Gus knew what he had at the QB spot and how we finished the year and decided to get outta town just at the right time. Then when he came back, what was his first move? Recruit Nick Marshall to be QB. 

 

I think he knew where the Chizik led team was going and he definitely knew what he had in the QB room was gonna make it tough for him to keep his big time HC ambitions alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Obviously I didn't make my self clear.  Even though I was talking about Frazier in the paragraph above the quote, the quote was meaning to include all of the QBs left on the roster.  I understand that a Dual Threat QB brought up in Gus' system doesn't have a real good shot at a pro style offense, but the others were pro style QBs.

What was he to do with Clint Moseley and Barrett Trotter?  Do you consider those as talented QBs that can face a SEC defense and succeed?  We ended up playing a true freshmen with a lot of heart down the stretch.  The cupboard was bear for his type of offense, or anybody else's for that matter, the weak OL had a lot to do with the lack of producivity of the offense that year.

Trotter and Mosley were 2011, under Gus. Loeffler was left with Wallace and Mosley (Trotter quit... he likely would have actually done well under Loeffler, since he was a more pro-style QB, and actually looked better than Cam in the 2010 A-Day game) and no, neither of them were great QBs or honestly were recruited to be great QBs. Mosley was signed as the "other QB" to Tyrik Rollison, who would have been something special, were he able to get himself together off the field. Same situation with Wallace who was signed along with Zeke Pike, who also never got it together to the point where no one knew how good he could have been.

The point still stands that Loeffler had a QB with the tools available to him and he TOTALLY misused him by forcing the pro-style offense. A good OC works builds a system around the players he has.  Of course, Chizik gets some of the blame for hiring an OC that prefers pro-style, when he obviously hasn't recruited for it.

You are completely correct that the weak O-Line had a huge effect on everyone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was Chizik's end game? He was going to out-Saban Saban? History has shown us teams that play the same style as Bama do not fare well against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tiger said:

What was Chizik's end game? He was going to out-Saban Saban? History has shown us teams that play the same style as Bama do not fair well against them.

I think he looked at the QB issues in 2011 and decided he needed a QB guru, and Loeffler snowed him with some name dropping in his resume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lionheartkc said:

I think he looked at the QB issues in 2011 and decided he needed a QB guru, and Loeffler snowed him with some name dropping in his resume.

Was Loeffler the first choice? Or did Chizik hire someone he knew didn't have the clout to push back against him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tiger said:

Was Loeffler the first choice? Or did Chizik hire someone he knew didn't have the clout to push back against him?

I honestly don't remember, if I knew in the first place, but I do remember a lot of people being excited that he coached Tom Brady.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

I honestly don't remember, if I knew in the first place, but I do remember a lot of people being excited that he coached Tom Brady.

That was essentially the only thing we had to cling on to to get excited about. He was an OC with what? Just 1-2 years of OC experience and it was at Temple? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

Trotter and Mosley were 2011, under Gus. Loeffler was left with Wallace and Mosley (Trotter quit... he likely would have actually done well under Loeffler, since he was a more pro-style QB, and actually looked better than Cam in the 2010 A-Day game) and no, neither of them were great QBs or honestly were recruited to be great QBs. Mosley was signed as the "other QB" to Tyrik Rollison, who would have been something special, were he able to get himself together off the field. Same situation with Wallace who was signed along with Zeke Pike, who also never got it together to the point where no one knew how good he could have been.

The point still stands that Loeffler had a QB with the tools available to him and he TOTALLY misused him by forcing the pro-style offense. A good OC works builds a system around the players he has.  Of course, Chizik gets some of the blame for hiring an OC that prefers pro-style, when he obviously hasn't recruited for it.

You are completely correct that the weak O-Line had a huge effect on everyone. 

I missed a year with Trotter, I knew he quit with a year's eligibility left, but I thought it was in '13.  As to the Rollison and Pike years, the plan B for QBs could have been better.  It seems Leoffler was too inexperienced to be able to build a system around his players.

I'm not sure Loeffler was CGC first choice, but as Mcloofus stated

3 hours ago, McLoofus said:

The *entire program was in the toilet long before 2011 had even ended. *Everything was wrong.

A good year to forget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, we lost 33 players after the 2010 season, before the 2011 season even started Fall camp. That included the Heisman winner and the Lombardi Award winner as well as 4 multi-year starters on the OL and a Senior laden D from the DL to LB's to secondary

2012 was a bit more of a mystery. It didn't seem like the Stache could stop a cold, nor could Loeffler mount any sort of offensive attack...then came the dissension and quit on the field which resulted in the multiple embarrassing shutouts and the 63-21 drubbing by the Aggies, which realistically could have been 84-0 had they not called off the dogs early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

As to the Rollison and Pike years, the plan B for QBs could have been better.

Could have, but it's not likely.  We got lucky last year with Willis and will be beyond lucky this year if we land Fields and Gatewood in the same class. It's pretty rare to land two quality QBs in the same year, since they all want to be "the man". You hope you land one great QB and then a decent QB with potential, in hopes that they become the next Willis.

He wasn't a world beater by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't think anyone would deny that Wallace played far above expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

2012 was a bit more of a mystery. It didn't seem like the Stache could stop a cold, nor could Loeffler mount any sort of offensive attack...then came the dissension and quit on the field which resulted in the multiple embarrassing shutouts and the 63-21 drubbing by the Aggies, which realistically could have been 84-0 had they not called off the dogs early.

On top of having an OC who tried to force a square peg into a round hole, you had a DC who was constantly being interfered with by people who had no business even giving their 2 cents, and a head coach who had lost the respect and control of his team. The day he felt he had to institute a curfew to reign in the issues was the day we all should have know the season, and Chizik's tenure as coach, were over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...