I think we have to root for Calzada

[W.E.D 11,070]

19 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

How about we root for whichever QB comes out of the competition the clear favorite to run the offense? Whether Harsin desires a running QB or not, unless the OL play improves significantly, whoever wins the job is gonna need some mobility. That doesn't mean he's gotta be Nick Marshall light.

I think ppl blend rooting and having opinions a little too much.  If OP just stated his opinion that Calzada will be better vs "rooting" for him, I'm not sure this thread would have gotten to this point.  Maybe it would have idk.

[bigbird 60,525]

6 minutes ago, W.E.D said:

I think ppl blend rooting and having opinions a little too much.  If OP just stated his opinion that Calzada will be better vs "rooting" for him, I'm not sure this thread would have gotten to this point.  Maybe it would have idk.

Intentional or not, his typically turn into exactly this type

[McLoofus 35,182]

29 minutes ago, WarEagle1983 said:

When he was healthy they didn't bring him back versus a walk on QB.  UGA fans were begging and pleading for him and Kirby wouldn't let him get a snap.. Bennett was winning but he wasn't impressive. That 7-0 is not a full season. It's not even  half of the season over 2 years. Sure it's nice stats when you get to front load your stats in the beginning of the season. 

Look i hope the kid does well but it's not like he's going to put AU in championship contention. So i just rather us find someone we can build with long term. That's all.

I have no argument against your opinions on Daniels and your preference for who our QB is, even if your reasons for doubting Daniels seem to conflict a bit with your reasons for wanting Calzada to win the job. 

As I said before, you asked why we would bring in Daniels. Whether or not you agree with it, the reasons are ample and valid. But we only really need to mention one, which is that he might be better than who we have. 

[DAG 33,982]

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Intentional or not, his typically turn into exactly this type

That’s why I am kicking myself for doing this. Always extreme rhetoric when he creates these posts. 

[JerryAU 1,659]

On 4/5/2022 at 10:16 AM, toddc said:

“just don’t see TJ’s accuracy problems being fixable.”
 
Of course it can be fixed.

A qbs accuracy can improve with practice. Every qb from PeeWee football to the echelons of pro football can improve their accuracy through coaching and practice/playing from year to year. 

His accuracy can be improved without a doubt.  Get him in a ton of yoga classes pronto to work on flexibility and range of motion and I think we see a very improved TJ this fall. 

[AUght2win 6,837]

8 hours ago, W.E.D said:

He was also broken for a majority of the season and it lead to a few loses they should have won....on being vs us.

That's what you want?  Run a qb 150 times vs selectively?

I would absolutely be down to run a QB 150 times if they are a good athlete. Gus didn’t run Bo nearly enough, and Gus SHOULD have used Jeremy as a runner when it became painfully clear he wasn’t going to be a Heisman QB.

Having a running QB makes an offense so much more explosive and harder to defend. There’s a reason nearly every team Saban has lost to at Alabama had an elite runner at quarterback. Every single Iron Bowl win in the past 15 years for us has featured a QB running for a touchdown.

It works. So hell yeah. If our best option is to use Robbie as a runner, I’d be totally down for it.

[AUght2win 6,837]

5 hours ago, bigbird said:

Intentional or not, his typically turn into exactly this type

Threads need to be started with the intention to spark exponential discussion. It’s been dead in here lately because that hasn’t been happening. 

[AUght2win 6,837]

4 hours ago, DAG said:

That’s why I am kicking myself for doing this. Always extreme rhetoric when he creates these posts. 

I guess it’s a shame when threads don’t die after 4 posts or everyone doesn’t agree. Sometimes I think you guys forget this is a message board and these threads are what it’s for.

[Potatooooooes!! 1,375]

27 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

I would absolutely be down to run a QB 150 times if they are a good athlete. Gus didn’t run Bo nearly enough, and Gus SHOULD have used Jeremy as a runner when it became painfully clear he wasn’t going to be a Heisman QB.

Having a running QB makes an offense so much more explosive and harder to defend. There’s a reason nearly every team Saban has lost to at Alabama had an elite runner at quarterback. Every single Iron Bowl win in the past 15 years for us has featured a QB running for a touchdown.

It works. So hell yeah. If our best option is to use Robbie as a runner, I’d be totally down for it.

He probably didn’t do it because it’s dangerous and risky for the quarterback, which in turn is suicide for your game plan and potentially your season. That, and in reference to your mention of JJ, if all you can do is run because you can’t throw, then be prepared to see an exponential increase in three and outs if you run him. You don’t even need a “running” qb to accomplish what you want. If he can run for first downs when there’s space and nothing else available then that’s good enough to win (again, assuming he can throw. That’s the part we have been missing for years).

[AUght2win 6,837]

2 minutes ago, Potatooooooes!! said:

He probably didn’t do it because it’s dangerous and risky for the quarterback, which in turn is suicide for your game plan and potentially your season. That, and in reference to your mention of JJ, if all you can do is run because you can’t throw, then be prepared to see an exponential increase in three and outs if you run him. You don’t even need a “running” qb to accomplish what you want. If he can run for first downs when there’s space and nothing else available then that’s good enough to win (again, assuming he can throw. That’s the part we have been missing for years).

You absolutely cannot coach out of fear of injury. Gus did for years. Enough said. Imagine if we had that approach with Cam or Nick Marshall. I’m not saying you can’t keep it in the back of your mind, or ease up when the game is in hand. But if your offense’s best weapon is your QB’s legs, you use it. 

In the 2013 season, we won big road games in Knoxville and Fayetteville with Marshall throwing 8 and 7 total passes, respectively. I still can’t believe Auburn fans can doubt the effectiveness of a running QB.

[Gowebb11 9,321]

51 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

Gus SHOULD have used Jeremy as a runner

Except he wasn’t a runner. Not nearly as fast and athletic as Marshall or Newton. And SW was too small and frail to run. Which is part of what went wrong. If you’re going to build your offense on a running QB, the you have to recruit running QBs. 

[Potatooooooes!! 1,375]

16 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

You absolutely cannot coach out of fear of injury. Gus did for years. Enough said. Imagine if we had that approach with Cam or Nick Marshall. I’m not saying you can’t keep it in the back of your mind, or ease up when the game is in hand. But if your offense’s best weapon is your QB’s legs, you use it. 

In the 2013 season, we won big road games in Knoxville and Fayetteville with Marshall throwing 8 and 7 total passes, respectively. I still can’t believe Auburn fans can doubt the effectiveness of a running QB.

This is not directed toward you in any way, so I hope you don’t take it that way, but you can’t coach outta stupid either. If your best weapon is your qb’s legs then by all means use em, but there’s a MASSIVE difference between having 8-10 designed runs a game and just running your qb 100 times a game. Every time you run your qb, you risk him getting hit. And every time he gets hit, you risk him getting hurt, potentially severely. It’s beyond foolish to just throw caution into the wind (or, “not coach scared”) and run him the entire game just because he’s your best weapon. Don’t forget, it wasn’t Marshall’s legs that won us those games, it was how deadly effective he was with the zone read, paired with the fact that we had Tre Mason as a running back to complement his legs, and a really solid offensive line to boot. We had teams guessing all year on what was going to happen with the ball. We only threw it 7-8 times because no one could keep an eye on the ball, and even when they could Mason would plow through you or Marshall would run by you for big gains. Additionally, Marshall was just not that accurate in 2013, so as long as the ground game worked we weren’t gonna try anything else. But take away a good offensive line, a good running back, and/or the effectiveness of the zone read and what do you get? Teams stack the box, your qb gets hit, and you go three and out. Besides all of that, if your qb gets popped on a run and suddenly can’t play for the rest of the season (like Bo last season…that worked out well) then you just screwed yourself.  
 

Again, no one is questioning how effective a running qb can be. You’re getting pushback on the notion that Harsin doesn’t like them or favors less agile qbs, when in reality he values quarterbacks that don’t constantly overthrow their targets. If you give me a choice between someone that can’t run well but can throw it anywhere on the field and a guy that completes like half of his passes or worse but can run, I’m taking the first guy every time.

[bigbird 60,525]

2 hours ago, Potatooooooes!! said:

He probably didn’t do it because it’s dangerous and risky for the quarterback, which in turn is suicide for your game plan and potentially your season.

Cough...Sean...cough...White...cough... Georgia...

[bigbird 60,525]

1 hour ago, Gowebb11 said:

Except he wasn’t a runner.

Thank you

[bigbird 60,525]

1 hour ago, Potatooooooes!! said:

but you can’t coach outta stupid either.

I was about to say the same exact thing. 

[AUght2win 6,837]

1 hour ago, Gowebb11 said:

Except he wasn’t a runner. Not nearly as fast and athletic as Marshall or Newton. And SW was too small and frail to run. Which is part of what went wrong. If you’re going to build your offense on a running QB, the you have to recruit running QBs. 

We just never used him. Had a great frame and was a good runner.

[NWALA Tiger 3,535]

A QB has to want to run as well. You can cherry pick a Jeremy Johnson TD run. I can also show examples where he was tackled by a blade of grass. He was more mobile than TJ, but running wasn't  JJ strong suit

[AUght2win 6,837]

1 hour ago, Potatooooooes!! said:

This is not directed toward you in any way, so I hope you don’t take it that way, but you can’t coach outta stupid either. If your best weapon is your qb’s legs then by all means use em, but there’s a MASSIVE difference between having 8-10 designed runs a game and just running your qb 100 times a game. Every time you run your qb, you risk him getting hit. And every time he gets hit, you risk him getting hurt, potentially severely. It’s beyond foolish to just throw caution into the wind (or, “not coach scared”) and run him the entire game just because he’s your best weapon. Don’t forget, it wasn’t Marshall’s legs that won us those games, it was how deadly effective he was with the zone read, paired with the fact that we had Tre Mason as a running back to complement his legs, and a really solid offensive line to boot. We had teams guessing all year on what was going to happen with the ball. We only threw it 7-8 times because no one could keep an eye on the ball, and even when they could Mason would plow through you or Marshall would run by you for big gains. Additionally, Marshall was just not that accurate in 2013, so as long as the ground game worked we weren’t gonna try anything else. But take away a good offensive line, a good running back, and/or the effectiveness of the zone read and what do you get? Teams stack the box, your qb gets hit, and you go three and out. Besides all of that, if your qb gets popped on a run and suddenly can’t play for the rest of the season (like Bo last season…that worked out well) then you just screwed yourself.  
 

Again, no one is questioning how effective a running qb can be. You’re getting pushback on the notion that Harsin doesn’t like them or favors less agile qbs, when in reality he values quarterbacks that don’t constantly overthrow their targets. If you give me a choice between someone that can’t run well but can throw it anywhere on the field and a guy that completes like half of his passes or worse but can run, I’m taking the first guy every time.

But see there were guys questioning the effectiveness of running QBs as a concept. Bird (saying only service academies prefer running QBs) DAG (referencing NFL failures, calling college successes exceptions) and WED (citing Kiffin’s use of Matt Corrall as a negative) to name a few. That’s what I’m arguing against.

And you make solid points. It’s just subjective preference. I would take the better runner in the two scenarios you presented because I believe the dynamism of a mobile QB makes everybody else better.

Having a mobile quarterback helps wideouts by extending plays and drawing up DBs with the threat of a scramble, it takes away a LB on most run plays to account for the read pull, safeties and LBs are often hampered by being forced to spy, and it just adds another overall dangerous athlete as a ball carrier. 

A pocket passer can’t do much to help an offense without a great line or receivers that can get open.

I’m not advocating for Harsin to necessarily use a mobile QB THIS season but I do think it’s a valid blueprint for success that he shouldn’t be opposed to.

[AUght2win 6,837]

8 minutes ago, NWALA Tiger said:

A QB has to want to run as well. You can cherry pick a Jeremy Johnson TD run. I can also show examples where he was tackled by a blade of grass. He was more mobile than TJ, but running wasn't  JJ strong suit

In terms of running vs. passing it definitely was his strong suit of the two. Because his passing couldn’t get any worse.

That 70 yard TD was easily the most impressive play of Jeremy’s career. You’re right that he didn’t have the toughness to seek or embrace contact. But he also ran well in the Birmingham Bowl. We would definitely have done better as an offense to use him, particularly, as a run-first, pass-second guy.

[AUght2win 6,837]

2 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

Except he wasn’t a runner. Not nearly as fast and athletic as Marshall or Newton. And SW was too small and frail to run. Which is part of what went wrong. If you’re going to build your offense on a running QB, the you have to recruit running QBs. 

I do agree though that you have to recruit elite runners. Jeremy wasn’t an elite runner. But being 6’6 250 and running as fast as he did was the only aspect of his game that was SEC caliber.

For reference, he ran a 4.60 in high school. Cam ran a 4.58 at the exact same size. 

[AUght2win 6,837]

9 hours ago, Potatooooooes!! said:

If Robbie was accurate and had good touch, Harsin would absolutely start him (assuming he also had a good grasp of the offense, showed poise, that he can handle the game and big moments, and was at least as good if not better in all of these areas compared to the others on the roster), but from what I’ve seen, that’s not the case yet. And it definitely was not the case with DD per every report I saw. There’s a reason he was always last on the depth chart, and there’s a reason no one ever saw him even in mop up duty.

Even if Harsin doesn’t like to run QB runs for whatever reason, that doesn’t mean he’s just not going to play a mobile qb. Everyone and their dog knows what an advantage a mobile qb can be, but it can’t be at the expense of good decision making and accuracy. And like every coach on earth, that is what Harsin cares about most. 

From his comments on Ashford, he won’t see the field this year barring a monumental summer and some injuries to other guys. Harsin basically talked about him like a long term project.

And just to reiterate, everyone and their dog doesn’t believe in QB mobility. Check out who I’ve been responding to.

[Potatooooooes!! 1,375]

21 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

But see there were guys questioning the effectiveness of running QBs as a concept. Bird (saying only service academies prefer running QBs) DAG (referencing NFL failures, calling college successes exceptions) and WED (citing Kiffin’s use of Matt Corrall as a negative) to name a few. That’s what I’m arguing against.

And you make solid points. It’s just subjective preference. I would take the better runner in the two scenarios you presented because I believe the dynamism of a mobile QB makes everybody else better.

Having a mobile quarterback helps wideouts by extending plays and drawing up DBs with the threat of a scramble, it takes away a LB on most run plays to account for the read pull, safeties and LBs are often hampered by being forced to spy, and it just adds another overall dangerous athlete as a ball carrier. 

A pocket passer can’t do much to help an offense without a great line or receivers that can get open.

I’m not advocating for Harsin to necessarily use a mobile QB THIS season but I do think it’s a valid blueprint for success that he shouldn’t be opposed to.

I think all of that in bold can be true, but it doesn’t mean you’re wrong either. In other words, I think you can all be right at the same time. The benefits you listed of a running qb are absolutely true: he can extend plays, give wideouts time to get open (which only matters if he’s an accurate passer of course), grab first downs, and even be a threat to gain huge chunks of yardage or tds. While I didn’t read Bird’s comment, I take your summary of it to mean that if you are given a more black and white option of a guy that can run or a guy that can throw, almost no one will take the guy that can run but can’t throw, because at that point you just have an extra running back. And qbs win you games, not running backs. Because, again, if all you can do is run then defenses are gonna stack the box, spy you, whatever, and you’re going to have a miserable game. There are very few examples I can think of of a team that had a guy with no throwing ability making his team a legit threat and just winning games. 
 

I think Dag’s point is more that there really aren’t many qbs that are truly dual threat that are accurate passers. His point about the NFL is correct. First of all, coaches just don’t want to run their qbs because they are almost literally the face of the entire franchise. It’s hard enough to win games with your starter, much less a back up. And there just aren’t many DT guys out there. Colin Kapernick was one several years ago. So was Russel Wilson and Cam Newton. But Rivera was scared to death of Newton running and spent most of his career training him to stay in the pocket. And I think RW got similar treatment as well. And to be honest, where are those guys today (not Colin. He’s a whole ‘nother issue)? Cam has just not been accurate the last half of his career, and to my knowledge RW hasn’t done much since the super bowl. The guys that are making a difference? Accurate pocket passers like Tom Brady, Aaron Rogers, Drew Brees, etc. And as far as the college guys that were successful, they all had other elements of their game that had to be respected, so they were given space to be successful. Johnny Manziel was super accurate and slippery as ice. Nick Marshall had the zone read and at least respectable throwing talent. Can Newton could throw it almost anywhere on the field. But guys that could truly be considered DT were rare. Much more plentiful were guys described as “deceptively fast”, guys that will beat you with their arm, but if you’re not careful they can pick up first downs or even score. That’s the kind of QB I want, and those are the kind that seem to kill us year after year.

 

I don’t remember having an issue with how Kiffin used Corral, but I’m pretty sure he got hurt and had a season ending injury. Which is just part of my overall point. 
 

All of this to say, we’re all right because this conversation has caveats. But I believe if we have learned anything from this past season, it’s the need for an accurate passer over a less accurate one that can run. We had that in Bo Nix, and look how frustrating it was. I believe you’ll be amazed at how much better a passer over a runner is once you see one in Harsin’s system. Now, would it be even better if he’s a running threat? Absolutely. But he’s far more valuable to us as someone that can stretch the field, so even if he can run, it should be kept to a minimum.

[Potatooooooes!! 1,375]

39 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

From his comments on Ashford, he won’t see the field this year barring a monumental summer and some injuries to other guys. Harsin basically talked about him like a long term project.

And just to reiterate, everyone and their dog doesn’t believe in QB mobility. Check out who I’ve been responding to.

I haven’t seen his comments, so I can’t really speak to that, but if he’s a long term project there’s a reason for that. Let’s not forget, Harsin is the one that went out and got Ashford, so he obviously values his skill set; he just might need more coaching to be useful on the field other than being an obvious package guy. 
 

As for the other comment, see my woefully longer post

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Right now I'm wishing Bo Nix was still at AU.

Edited April 7, 2022 by Proud Tiger

[AUght2win 6,837]

32 minutes ago, Potatooooooes!! said:

I think all of that in bold can be true, but it doesn’t mean you’re wrong either. In other words, I think you can all be right at the same time. The benefits you listed of a running qb are absolutely true: he can extend plays, give wideouts time to get open (which only matters if he’s an accurate passer of course), grab first downs, and even be a threat to gain huge chunks of yardage or tds. While I didn’t read Bird’s comment, I take your summary of it to mean that if you are given a more black and white option of a guy that can run or a guy that can throw, almost no one will take the guy that can run but can’t throw, because at that point you just have an extra running back. And qbs win you games, not running backs. Because, again, if all you can do is run then defenses are gonna stack the box, spy you, whatever, and you’re going to have a miserable game. There are very few examples I can think of of a team that had a guy with no throwing ability making his team a legit threat and just winning games. 
 

I think Dag’s point is more that there really aren’t many qbs that are truly dual threat that are accurate passers. His point about the NFL is correct. First of all, coaches just don’t want to run their qbs because they are almost literally the face of the entire franchise. It’s hard enough to win games with your starter, much less a back up. And there just aren’t many DT guys out there. Colin Kapernick was one several years ago. So was Russel Wilson and Cam Newton. But Rivera was scared to death of Newton running and spent most of his career training him to stay in the pocket. And I think RW got similar treatment as well. And to be honest, where are those guys today (not Colin. He’s a whole ‘nother issue)? Cam has just not been accurate the last half of his career, and to my knowledge RW hasn’t done much since the super bowl. The guys that are making a difference? Accurate pocket passers like Tom Brady, Aaron Rogers, Drew Brees, etc. And as far as the college guys that were successful, they all had other elements of their game that had to be respected, so they were given space to be successful. Johnny Manziel was super accurate and slippery as ice. Nick Marshall had the zone read and at least respectable throwing talent. Can Newton could throw it almost anywhere on the field. But guys that could truly be considered DT were rare. Much more plentiful were guys described as “deceptively fast”, guys that will beat you with their arm, but if you’re not careful they can pick up first downs or even score. That’s the kind of QB I want, and those are the kind that seem to kill us year after year.

 

I don’t remember having an issue with how Kiffin used Corral, but I’m pretty sure he got hurt and had a season ending injury. Which is just part of my overall point. 
 

All of this to say, we’re all right because this conversation has caveats. But I believe if we have learned anything from this past season, it’s the need for an accurate passer over a less accurate one that can run. We had that in Bo Nix, and look how frustrating it was. I believe you’ll be amazed at how much better a passer over a runner is once you see one in Harsin’s system. Now, would it be even better if he’s a running threat? Absolutely. But he’s far more valuable to us as someone that can stretch the field, so even if he can run, it should be kept to a minimum.

This is all good stuff. But their points are all strawman arguments. I agree running QBs don’t typically work in the NFL. Neither do scat-backs like McCalebb. But the college game is completely different and it’s totally off-topic to try to discount the blueprint of running QBs because the pros don’t like them. It’s irrelevant to Auburn winning games at the college level.

Another strawman is that it’s a black or white issue. You don’t have to “prefer” your quarterback to run OVER pass. That’s like asking a baseball manager if they “prefer” their pitchers throw curveballs over fastballs. You incorporate both to whatever ratio you see fit. Some guys may throw a great curveball throw them half the time. Some may be flamethrowers and only them three times a game. Same with a mobile QB.

And for the record, I’m not against pocket passers. In the long term, when we have depth and talent, I would love it. I’ve always wanted to see a real passing attack at Auburn. I’m just of the mind that you have to use what you’ve got to mold your offense to what will be most successful with your current roster. 

Is that leaning on the QB run? I have no idea. I just hope that’s at least on the table for Harsin.