Page 4 of 9
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:44 am
by CARDIAC_CATS
Cataholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:06 pm
Pecos24 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:33 pm
91catAlum wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:57 am
KittieKop wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:33 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:04 am
It's not a foregone conclusion that Rovig will be unseated, but if McKay is as good as he looked to me at times last season, then I'd have to say it's a strong likelihood. Given that he isn't a rushing threat, Rovig's passing would have to be dramatically better and far more dangerous if this MSU team is going to get to the FCS championship.
And just to head off the inevitable responses, I am not saying that he was the only player that wasn't up to the task on Saturday-- not by a long shot. And I have a lot of respect for how he kept at it this last season. I hope he sticks around regardless.
But a dual threat QB, with the best backfield in the BSC led by Ifanse and Hosey, and a veteran offensive line could mean a big step forward for the offense in 2020.
Yet lack of offensive production wasn't the reason for the semi loss to NDSU. Maybe it was the three 75 plus yd short drives given up by the defense. Take those out and we have a 1 score game. Many people were forecasting a defensive battle, like a 17-10 game and would have been happy with that. While a QB upgrade could be a welcome addition, some of you are wringing hands over the wrong problem. Aside from those bombs, defense wasn't horrible against #1 in the country.
By your logic Saturday's loss could have been avoided if we'd just been able to out run them on offense, if we had a 48-42 game, like we tried to do through 2015. Or I guess the only thing some parts of fandom would be happy with would be a 50-0 win every time out. Shut down defense and Super Bowl offense.
It's a great point. The loss to Ndsu was much more about the defense than our QB.
Against my better judgment I’m hopping on this thread...in all honesty it came down to line play on Saturday. When Tucker dropped back to pass he had little time to get rid of the ball.(and on the defensive side we couldn’t get to the QB)
That, and we didn't have the horses to hang with Watson's speed.
I'm a little surprised at how many people place the game so roundly on the defense. That unit definitely wasn't good enough, but neither was the offense. You're not going to beat many good teams giving up 42 points, but the same is also true of only scoring 14. Seems like narrative driven analysis to me.
The offense had 10 real chances with the ball. That excludes the possession at the end of the first half with 24 seconds left. Two possessions resulted in touchdowns, five in punts, and three in turnovers (twice on downs and once with an INT).
Similarly, the NDSU offense had 10 chances. They scored six touchdowns, lost two fumbles, missed a field goal, and punted once.
Futility on both sides of the ball. They contained the rushing attack, they got to Rovig, he was mostly poor (more than one INT dropped), they ran the ball with authority, and created big plays in both phases.
NDSU scored 21 points on 3 plays greater than 70 yards. Each of those plays involved Watson or Lance or both. If those 3 plays were stopped by the Cats, this game is much closer. NDSU was only 5 of 10 on third down conversions. Watson was a mismatch for our corners and there should never have been a one on one matchup with one of our slower corners covering him. While “stats are for losers”, if you remove those two long TD passes of 70 yards each, Lance would have only passed for 83 yards TOTAL!
What if NDSU did not have Watson and Lance? I think this game would have been much closer if NDSU did not have those two. My point is that we are not as far from being competitive as many think. This years strong incoming class will add more key pieces for the future. Our roster is deeper than it has ever been. I would like to see more speed recruited by the Cats though. Watching Watson take over a game shows just how big an impact speed can have.
Totally agree. We need a few more pieces and some more experience out in the playoffs and we can be right there with them! The 2 long plays hurt bad.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 9:11 am
by allcat
CARDIAC_CATS wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:44 am
Cataholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:06 pm
Pecos24 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:33 pm
91catAlum wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:57 am
KittieKop wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:33 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:04 am
It's not a foregone conclusion that Rovig will be unseated, but if McKay is as good as he looked to me at times last season, then I'd have to say it's a strong likelihood. Given that he isn't a rushing threat, Rovig's passing would have to be dramatically better and far more dangerous if this MSU team is going to get to the FCS championship.
And just to head off the inevitable responses, I am not saying that he was the only player that wasn't up to the task on Saturday-- not by a long shot. And I have a lot of respect for how he kept at it this last season. I hope he sticks around regardless.
But a dual threat QB, with the best backfield in the BSC led by Ifanse and Hosey, and a veteran offensive line could mean a big step forward for the offense in 2020.
Yet lack of offensive production wasn't the reason for the semi loss to NDSU. Maybe it was the three 75 plus yd short drives given up by the defense. Take those out and we have a 1 score game. Many people were forecasting a defensive battle, like a 17-10 game and would have been happy with that. While a QB upgrade could be a welcome addition, some of you are wringing hands over the wrong problem. Aside from those bombs, defense wasn't horrible against #1 in the country.
By your logic Saturday's loss could have been avoided if we'd just been able to out run them on offense, if we had a 48-42 game, like we tried to do through 2015. Or I guess the only thing some parts of fandom would be happy with would be a 50-0 win every time out. Shut down defense and Super Bowl offense.
It's a great point. The loss to Ndsu was much more about the defense than our QB.
Against my better judgment I’m hopping on this thread...in all honesty it came down to line play on Saturday. When Tucker dropped back to pass he had little time to get rid of the ball.(and on the defensive side we couldn’t get to the QB)
That, and we didn't have the horses to hang with Watson's speed.
I'm a little surprised at how many people place the game so roundly on the defense. That unit definitely wasn't good enough, but neither was the offense. You're not going to beat many good teams giving up 42 points, but the same is also true of only scoring 14. Seems like narrative driven analysis to me.
The offense had 10 real chances with the ball. That excludes the possession at the end of the first half with 24 seconds left. Two possessions resulted in touchdowns, five in punts, and three in turnovers (twice on downs and once with an INT).
Similarly, the NDSU offense had 10 chances. They scored six touchdowns, lost two fumbles, missed a field goal, and punted once.
Futility on both sides of the ball. They contained the rushing attack, they got to Rovig, he was mostly poor (more than one INT dropped), they ran the ball with authority, and created big plays in both phases.
NDSU scored 21 points on 3 plays greater than 70 yards. Each of those plays involved Watson or Lance or both. If those 3 plays were stopped by the Cats, this game is much closer. NDSU was only 5 of 10 on third down conversions. Watson was a mismatch for our corners and there should never have been a one on one matchup with one of our slower corners covering him. While “stats are for losers”, if you remove those two long TD passes of 70 yards each, Lance would have only passed for 83 yards TOTAL!
What if NDSU did not have Watson and Lance? I think this game would have been much closer if NDSU did not have those two. My point is that we are not as far from being competitive as many think. This years strong incoming class will add more key pieces for the future. Our roster is deeper than it has ever been. I would like to see more speed recruited by the Cats though. Watching Watson take over a game shows just how big an impact speed can have.
Totally agree. We need a few more pieces and some more experience out in the playoffs and we can be right there with them! The 2 long plays hurt bad.
The 2 long plays put in the dagger . The 12 play methodical drive to start was the true killer to me. The qb had all day to throw and did not need it.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 9:24 am
by iaafan
The long plays could’ve just turned out to be long scoring drives, but it’s less demoralizing that way. Giving up long scores right after your own TD hurts. No other way to put it.
You at least come away feeling you had a chance.
Ndsu had 3 plays for 218 yards. Their other 55 plays went for 323. Had MSU been able to turn those three plays into what it did over the others 55 it wouldn’t have seemed so bad.
How many games in college football over the past 50 years have had three TDs from scrimmage of 70 yards?
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 10:45 am
by Cataholic
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:26 am
Cataholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:06 pm
Pecos24 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:33 pm
91catAlum wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:57 am
KittieKop wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:33 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:04 am
It's not a foregone conclusion that Rovig will be unseated, but if McKay is as good as he looked to me at times last season, then I'd have to say it's a strong likelihood. Given that he isn't a rushing threat, Rovig's passing would have to be dramatically better and far more dangerous if this MSU team is going to get to the FCS championship.
And just to head off the inevitable responses, I am not saying that he was the only player that wasn't up to the task on Saturday-- not by a long shot. And I have a lot of respect for how he kept at it this last season. I hope he sticks around regardless.
But a dual threat QB, with the best backfield in the BSC led by Ifanse and Hosey, and a veteran offensive line could mean a big step forward for the offense in 2020.
Yet lack of offensive production wasn't the reason for the semi loss to NDSU. Maybe it was the three 75 plus yd short drives given up by the defense. Take those out and we have a 1 score game. Many people were forecasting a defensive battle, like a 17-10 game and would have been happy with that. While a QB upgrade could be a welcome addition, some of you are wringing hands over the wrong problem. Aside from those bombs, defense wasn't horrible against #1 in the country.
By your logic Saturday's loss could have been avoided if we'd just been able to out run them on offense, if we had a 48-42 game, like we tried to do through 2015. Or I guess the only thing some parts of fandom would be happy with would be a 50-0 win every time out. Shut down defense and Super Bowl offense.
It's a great point. The loss to Ndsu was much more about the defense than our QB.
Against my better judgment I’m hopping on this thread...in all honesty it came down to line play on Saturday. When Tucker dropped back to pass he had little time to get rid of the ball.(and on the defensive side we couldn’t get to the QB)
That, and we didn't have the horses to hang with Watson's speed.
I'm a little surprised at how many people place the game so roundly on the defense. That unit definitely wasn't good enough, but neither was the offense. You're not going to beat many good teams giving up 42 points, but the same is also true of only scoring 14. Seems like narrative driven analysis to me.
The offense had 10 real chances with the ball. That excludes the possession at the end of the first half with 24 seconds left. Two possessions resulted in touchdowns, five in punts, and three in turnovers (twice on downs and once with an INT).
Similarly, the NDSU offense had 10 chances. They scored six touchdowns, lost two fumbles, missed a field goal, and punted once.
Futility on both sides of the ball. They contained the rushing attack, they got to Rovig, he was mostly poor (more than one INT dropped), they ran the ball with authority, and created big plays in both phases.
NDSU scored 21 points on 3 plays greater than 70 yards. Each of those plays involved Watson or Lance or both. If those 3 plays were stopped by the Cats, this game is much closer. NDSU was only 5 of 10 on third down conversions. Watson was a mismatch for our corners and there should never have been a one on one matchup with one of our slower corners covering him. While “stats are for losers”, if you remove those two long TD passes of 70 yards each, Lance would have only passed for 83 yards TOTAL!
What if NDSU did not have Watson and Lance? I think this game would have been much closer if NDSU did not have those two. My point is that we are not as far from being competitive as many think. This years strong incoming class will add more key pieces for the future. Our roster is deeper than it has ever been. I would like to see more speed recruited by the Cats though. Watching Watson take over a game shows just how big an impact speed can have.
Just to play devil's advocate with you, one could remove those huge plays and it's still possible that NDSU goes on a longer, more methodical drive and scores just the same.
Both the Watson touchdowns came on first down. So it's not like a failure to execute on the Bison's part would have meant a punt.
Two drives before the two huge plays, they went for 12 plays, 73 yards and a TD. One drive after, they went on for 15 plays, 75 yards and a TD.
I'm not despairing. I think we closed the gap a little bit and can make up more ground in time. But they are still a lot better than us.
Lastly-- to your question of what if NDSU didn't have Watson or Lance-- that's kind of the whole issue. Their roster is generally peppered with a level of recruit that almost no other FCS programs can land.
All valid points. But those two 70 yard scores in the second quarter took a total of 20 seconds. If they had longer drives, that eats up clock and affects number of opportunities. Additionally, maybe we could hold them to a punt on at least one of those possessions. Up to that point of the game, the score was 7-7. NDSU has two possessions so far: one was a TD, the other was a punt. Then Watson gets two consecutive touches both going for touchdowns. He is a game changer like Troy Anderson could change the game with one carry. Let’s say if we were only able to stop one of those drives, the score would have been 22-14 in the 3rd quarter.
My only point is that we are not as far away as some people suggest. NDSU would look a lot different if they did not have a Troy Anderson type playmaker at wide receiver and a QB comparable to Prukop. Can you imagine how good the Cats would have been if we had Prukop at QB and Watson at WR?
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 pm
by utucats
McKay didn’t choose Montana State on a promise that he can back up Rovig. It’s his job to lose.
We need a more dynamic QB. That’s just the truth.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:20 pm
by superbobcat
I believe that the coaching staff has decided to recruit less drop back style and go more dual threat. Coach is learning on the fly and I believe he has found which style works best for MSU. We are a better team with the mobile QB and will now continue to go that way. I was happy with how Rovig came a long, but for us to truly capitalize in this offense our QB needs to run and we can't keep switching at that position and bludgeon guys into the ground. It lost it's effectiveness by season's end.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:41 pm
by RobertoGato
Cataholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 10:45 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:26 am
Cataholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:06 pm
Pecos24 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:33 pm
91catAlum wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:57 am
KittieKop wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:33 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:04 am
It's not a foregone conclusion that Rovig will be unseated, but if McKay is as good as he looked to me at times last season, then I'd have to say it's a strong likelihood. Given that he isn't a rushing threat, Rovig's passing would have to be dramatically better and far more dangerous if this MSU team is going to get to the FCS championship.
And just to head off the inevitable responses, I am not saying that he was the only player that wasn't up to the task on Saturday-- not by a long shot. And I have a lot of respect for how he kept at it this last season. I hope he sticks around regardless.
But a dual threat QB, with the best backfield in the BSC led by Ifanse and Hosey, and a veteran offensive line could mean a big step forward for the offense in 2020.
Yet lack of offensive production wasn't the reason for the semi loss to NDSU. Maybe it was the three 75 plus yd short drives given up by the defense. Take those out and we have a 1 score game. Many people were forecasting a defensive battle, like a 17-10 game and would have been happy with that. While a QB upgrade could be a welcome addition, some of you are wringing hands over the wrong problem. Aside from those bombs, defense wasn't horrible against #1 in the country.
By your logic Saturday's loss could have been avoided if we'd just been able to out run them on offense, if we had a 48-42 game, like we tried to do through 2015. Or I guess the only thing some parts of fandom would be happy with would be a 50-0 win every time out. Shut down defense and Super Bowl offense.
It's a great point. The loss to Ndsu was much more about the defense than our QB.
Against my better judgment I’m hopping on this thread...in all honesty it came down to line play on Saturday. When Tucker dropped back to pass he had little time to get rid of the ball.(and on the defensive side we couldn’t get to the QB)
That, and we didn't have the horses to hang with Watson's speed.
I'm a little surprised at how many people place the game so roundly on the defense. That unit definitely wasn't good enough, but neither was the offense. You're not going to beat many good teams giving up 42 points, but the same is also true of only scoring 14. Seems like narrative driven analysis to me.
The offense had 10 real chances with the ball. That excludes the possession at the end of the first half with 24 seconds left. Two possessions resulted in touchdowns, five in punts, and three in turnovers (twice on downs and once with an INT).
Similarly, the NDSU offense had 10 chances. They scored six touchdowns, lost two fumbles, missed a field goal, and punted once.
Futility on both sides of the ball. They contained the rushing attack, they got to Rovig, he was mostly poor (more than one INT dropped), they ran the ball with authority, and created big plays in both phases.
NDSU scored 21 points on 3 plays greater than 70 yards. Each of those plays involved Watson or Lance or both. If those 3 plays were stopped by the Cats, this game is much closer. NDSU was only 5 of 10 on third down conversions. Watson was a mismatch for our corners and there should never have been a one on one matchup with one of our slower corners covering him. While “stats are for losers”, if you remove those two long TD passes of 70 yards each, Lance would have only passed for 83 yards TOTAL!
What if NDSU did not have Watson and Lance? I think this game would have been much closer if NDSU did not have those two. My point is that we are not as far from being competitive as many think. This years strong incoming class will add more key pieces for the future. Our roster is deeper than it has ever been. I would like to see more speed recruited by the Cats though. Watching Watson take over a game shows just how big an impact speed can have.
Just to play devil's advocate with you, one could remove those huge plays and it's still possible that NDSU goes on a longer, more methodical drive and scores just the same.
Both the Watson touchdowns came on first down. So it's not like a failure to execute on the Bison's part would have meant a punt.
Two drives before the two huge plays, they went for 12 plays, 73 yards and a TD. One drive after, they went on for 15 plays, 75 yards and a TD.
I'm not despairing. I think we closed the gap a little bit and can make up more ground in time. But they are still a lot better than us.
Lastly-- to your question of what if NDSU didn't have Watson or Lance-- that's kind of the whole issue. Their roster is generally peppered with a level of recruit that almost no other FCS programs can land.
All valid points. But those two 70 yard scores in the second quarter took a total of 20 seconds. If they had longer drives, that eats up clock and affects number of opportunities. Additionally, maybe we could hold them to a punt on at least one of those possessions. Up to that point of the game, the score was 7-7. NDSU has two possessions so far: one was a TD, the other was a punt. Then Watson gets two consecutive touches both going for touchdowns. He is a game changer like Troy Anderson could change the game with one carry. Let’s say if we were only able to stop one of those drives, the score would have been 22-14 in the 3rd quarter.
My only point is that we are not as far away as some people suggest. NDSU would look a lot different if they did not have a Troy Anderson type playmaker at wide receiver and a QB comparable to Prukop. Can you imagine how good the Cats would have been if we had Prukop at QB and Watson at WR?
Yeah I get that-- make them work for it and it's a more competitive contest for longer instead of getting blitzed.
But what I would say is that Trey Lance and Christian Watson are what made NDSU what they are. Those dudes are just plain better than almost any FCS recruit. They could both play in the Power 5. And the Bison have similar talent on their lines.
MSU needs dudes like that if they are going to regularly challenge the Bison. But that's a big hurdle. It's hard to lure these guys away from the higher level programs. For it to happen will need to involve more investment in the infrastructure of Bobcat football.
They are making progress. It can happen. But it's going to require a lot of patience.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 1:47 pm
by Cataholic
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:41 pm
Cataholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 10:45 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:26 am
Cataholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:06 pm
Pecos24 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 3:33 pm
91catAlum wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:57 am
KittieKop wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:33 am
RobertoGato wrote: ↑Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:04 am
It's not a foregone conclusion that Rovig will be unseated, but if McKay is as good as he looked to me at times last season, then I'd have to say it's a strong likelihood. Given that he isn't a rushing threat, Rovig's passing would have to be dramatically better and far more dangerous if this MSU team is going to get to the FCS championship.
And just to head off the inevitable responses, I am not saying that he was the only player that wasn't up to the task on Saturday-- not by a long shot. And I have a lot of respect for how he kept at it this last season. I hope he sticks around regardless.
But a dual threat QB, with the best backfield in the BSC led by Ifanse and Hosey, and a veteran offensive line could mean a big step forward for the offense in 2020.
Yet lack of offensive production wasn't the reason for the semi loss to NDSU. Maybe it was the three 75 plus yd short drives given up by the defense. Take those out and we have a 1 score game. Many people were forecasting a defensive battle, like a 17-10 game and would have been happy with that. While a QB upgrade could be a welcome addition, some of you are wringing hands over the wrong problem. Aside from those bombs, defense wasn't horrible against #1 in the country.
By your logic Saturday's loss could have been avoided if we'd just been able to out run them on offense, if we had a 48-42 game, like we tried to do through 2015. Or I guess the only thing some parts of fandom would be happy with would be a 50-0 win every time out. Shut down defense and Super Bowl offense.
It's a great point. The loss to Ndsu was much more about the defense than our QB.
Against my better judgment I’m hopping on this thread...in all honesty it came down to line play on Saturday. When Tucker dropped back to pass he had little time to get rid of the ball.(and on the defensive side we couldn’t get to the QB)
That, and we didn't have the horses to hang with Watson's speed.
I'm a little surprised at how many people place the game so roundly on the defense. That unit definitely wasn't good enough, but neither was the offense. You're not going to beat many good teams giving up 42 points, but the same is also true of only scoring 14. Seems like narrative driven analysis to me.
The offense had 10 real chances with the ball. That excludes the possession at the end of the first half with 24 seconds left. Two possessions resulted in touchdowns, five in punts, and three in turnovers (twice on downs and once with an INT).
Similarly, the NDSU offense had 10 chances. They scored six touchdowns, lost two fumbles, missed a field goal, and punted once.
Futility on both sides of the ball. They contained the rushing attack, they got to Rovig, he was mostly poor (more than one INT dropped), they ran the ball with authority, and created big plays in both phases.
NDSU scored 21 points on 3 plays greater than 70 yards. Each of those plays involved Watson or Lance or both. If those 3 plays were stopped by the Cats, this game is much closer. NDSU was only 5 of 10 on third down conversions. Watson was a mismatch for our corners and there should never have been a one on one matchup with one of our slower corners covering him. While “stats are for losers”, if you remove those two long TD passes of 70 yards each, Lance would have only passed for 83 yards TOTAL!
What if NDSU did not have Watson and Lance? I think this game would have been much closer if NDSU did not have those two. My point is that we are not as far from being competitive as many think. This years strong incoming class will add more key pieces for the future. Our roster is deeper than it has ever been. I would like to see more speed recruited by the Cats though. Watching Watson take over a game shows just how big an impact speed can have.
Just to play devil's advocate with you, one could remove those huge plays and it's still possible that NDSU goes on a longer, more methodical drive and scores just the same.
Both the Watson touchdowns came on first down. So it's not like a failure to execute on the Bison's part would have meant a punt.
Two drives before the two huge plays, they went for 12 plays, 73 yards and a TD. One drive after, they went on for 15 plays, 75 yards and a TD.
I'm not despairing. I think we closed the gap a little bit and can make up more ground in time. But they are still a lot better than us.
Lastly-- to your question of what if NDSU didn't have Watson or Lance-- that's kind of the whole issue. Their roster is generally peppered with a level of recruit that almost no other FCS programs can land.
All valid points. But those two 70 yard scores in the second quarter took a total of 20 seconds. If they had longer drives, that eats up clock and affects number of opportunities. Additionally, maybe we could hold them to a punt on at least one of those possessions. Up to that point of the game, the score was 7-7. NDSU has two possessions so far: one was a TD, the other was a punt. Then Watson gets two consecutive touches both going for touchdowns. He is a game changer like Troy Anderson could change the game with one carry. Let’s say if we were only able to stop one of those drives, the score would have been 22-14 in the 3rd quarter.
My only point is that we are not as far away as some people suggest. NDSU would look a lot different if they did not have a Troy Anderson type playmaker at wide receiver and a QB comparable to Prukop. Can you imagine how good the Cats would have been if we had Prukop at QB and Watson at WR?
Yeah I get that-- make them work for it and it's a more competitive contest for longer instead of getting blitzed.
But what I would say is that Trey Lance and Christian Watson are what made NDSU what they are. Those dudes are just plain better than almost any FCS recruit. They could both play in the Power 5. And the Bison have similar talent on their lines.
MSU needs dudes like that if they are going to regularly challenge the Bison. But that's a big hurdle. It's hard to lure these guys away from the higher level programs. For it to happen will need to involve more investment in the infrastructure of Bobcat football.
They are making progress. It can happen. But it's going to require a lot of patience.
You hit the nail on the head with two words: Patience and Progress. The progress is clear with a semi-final appearance, top 5 national ranking, new infrastructure, great recruiting classes, better depth on the roster, top conference players with a number of “pro” potential players and a streak of wins over the Griz (the last one being the second largest margin of victory by a Cat team in the 100+ year history of the series).
Patience is a word that many of us have forgotten. Just look some of these threads. Maybe it is because everybody seeks instant gratification in today’s society and nobody is willing to be patient. As a freshman at MSU over 30 years ago, getting to the semi-finals was an accomplishment I have never experienced. The crazy thing is that I know the best is yet to come!!
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 2:04 pm
by onceacat
People seem to forget that Watson and Lance weren’t exactly under the radar type recruits. NDSU consistently takes good, not great recruits and turns them into NFL draft picks.
Lance was the top Prospect out of Minnesota and I think only had one FBS offer (and not to a pier 5 school). Watson played in Tampa and as far as I can find, didn’t have any FCS offers. Was only a 2 star recruit.
Same deal with Easton Stick and Carson Wentz.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2019 3:33 pm
by RobertoGato
onceacat wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 2:04 pm
People seem to forget that Watson and Lance weren’t exactly under the radar type recruits. NDSU consistently takes good, not great recruits and turns them into NFL draft picks.
Lance was the top Prospect out of Minnesota and I think only had one FBS offer (and not to a pier 5 school). Watson played in Tampa and as far as I can find, didn’t have any FCS offers. Was only a 2 star recruit.
Same deal with Easton Stick and Carson Wentz.
According to 247, Lance had offers from Boise State, Western Michigan, and Northern Illinois (all FBS) and chose NDSU over them. He had interest from Minnesota. Also according to that site, he only had four FCS offers (NDSU, SDSU, Cornell, and Brown)-- which illustrates the point that NDSU's recruiting territory is dramatically under-recruited at the FCS level.
I can't find anything on Watson.
But landing a guy who had three offers at the FBS level is hard to do in the FCS. Grady Robison only got one, to my knowledge, and we lost him. Lance turned down Boise State, which is obviously a much higher profile than Western Kentucky.
No doubt NDSU can develop talent. I am not disputing that. But they also bring in a better level of talent to begin with.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 4:03 pm
by catamaran
allcat wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:00 pm
In the FBS both Clemson and Oklahoma are playing cast aside QB's. Burrows from Ohio State and Hurts from Alabama. I'm not really making judgements about our QB's, just stating that even if one does not work for your team, he just might shine in another.
The three besides Clemson are playing with transfers
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 4:38 pm
by thisnamesucks
NDSU is more talented as of right now plain and simple.
So the best way to hang with them is shorten the game up with long drives. Make it a 6-7 possession game instead of 10.
I’m just not sure Rovig is the guy to do that. No idea if McKay is either but wouldn’t surprise me to see him starting next year
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 5:45 pm
by jgrilley406
There are obviously more than one hurdle we need to get over to hang with the likes of NDSU but idk if the QB is the most important...as good as our defense was this year, we clearly lacked overall speed and size (interior DL especially) still. You look at the two teams that gave JMU and NDSU the most trouble were teams (Ill st and UNI) that had QBs that were not as good as Rovig but still had a shot to win. Even Weber who was at the tops of the BSC in defense and had a better looking offense than UNI were never really in it against JMU. I think our offense is good enough to win these games, as is most offenses in the BSC, but there’s something our team and the BSC as a whole is lacking on the defensive side of the ball that most MVFC teams clearly have over us...not sure what it is but if we held NDSU to 9 and JMU to 17 I think we win both those games.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:52 pm
by technoCat
utucats wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 pm
McKay didn’t choose Montana State on a promise that he can back up Rovig. It’s his job to lose.
We need a more dynamic QB. That’s just the truth.
But he may have chosen MSU because he knows that Choate isn't afraid to run packages for multiple QBs so his chances of playing are probably near 100%. I mistakenly said he would run the "wildcat" package but what I really meant was he would be that qb that comes in and threatens the +1 game but have legitimate throwing ability too. Something we lacked with Andersen and Jonsen this year. We still need a qb that can distribute the ball to other playmakers and run our offense which Rovig has a leg up on since he's played in the system longer. Granted if McKay is about even with him at the end of spring ball, he will probably get the start full-time since he is not going to be playing receiver at all so they wouldn't really be able to have both in the huddle at the same time.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:47 am
by bobcat99
technoCat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:52 pm
utucats wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 pm
McKay didn’t choose Montana State on a promise that he can back up Rovig. It’s his job to lose.
We need a more dynamic QB. That’s just the truth.
But he may have chosen MSU because he knows that Choate isn't afraid to run packages for multiple QBs so his chances of playing are probably near 100%. I mistakenly said he would run the "wildcat" package but what I really meant was he would be that qb that comes in and threatens the +1 game but have legitimate throwing ability too. Something we lacked with Andersen and Jonsen this year. We still need a qb that can distribute the ball to other playmakers and run our offense which Rovig has a leg up on since he's played in the system longer. Granted if McKay is about even with him at the end of spring ball, he will probably get the start full-time since he is not going to be playing receiver at all so they wouldn't really be able to have both in the huddle at the same time.
I mean, can we look at this logically?
You're saying we should take out the starter, who can only pass, so that we can put in the backup, who can run and pass. This is a very simple explanation, but that's what you're saying here.
I just hate it. If the backup can do both adequately, then freaking roll with him! It stresses the defense more to have to constantly defend the pass/run.
I say this as somebody who has always liked/preferred the classic pocket QB. The stand tall in the pocket and deliver a rocket pass, kind of QB. I'm changing, evolving. Those kinds of QB's are still great, but rare! Unless you have an elite one, in today's football, you're much better off with a mobile option. It just puts more stress on a defense. Imagine running all of our packages without having to substitute personnel! That's a defensive coaches nightmare.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:55 am
by wbtfg
Why not just wait to see how spring and summer play out to see who has the best combination of accuracy, athleticism, leadership, grasp of the offense, and overall football IQ?
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:00 am
by grizzh8r
wbtfg wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:55 am
Why not just wait to see how spring and summer play out to see who has the best combination of accuracy, athleticism, leadership, grasp of the offense, and overall football IQ?
Oh come on, you don't like endless pages of rumor, speculation, arguments and drama?
What would we do all off season without it...?
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:02 am
by grizzh8r
bobcat99 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:47 am
technoCat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:52 pm
utucats wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 pm
McKay didn’t choose Montana State on a promise that he can back up Rovig. It’s his job to lose.
We need a more dynamic QB. That’s just the truth.
But he may have chosen MSU because he knows that Choate isn't afraid to run packages for multiple QBs so his chances of playing are probably near 100%. I mistakenly said he would run the "wildcat" package but what I really meant was he would be that qb that comes in and threatens the +1 game but have legitimate throwing ability too. Something we lacked with Andersen and Jonsen this year. We still need a qb that can distribute the ball to other playmakers and run our offense which Rovig has a leg up on since he's played in the system longer. Granted if McKay is about even with him at the end of spring ball, he will probably get the start full-time since he is not going to be playing receiver at all so they wouldn't really be able to have both in the huddle at the same time.
I mean, can we look at this logically?
You're saying we should take out the starter, who can only pass, so that we can put in the backup, who can run and pass. This is a very simple explanation, but that's what you're saying here.
I just hate it. If the backup can do both adequately, then freaking roll with him! It stresses the defense more to have to constantly defend the pass/run.
I say this as somebody who has always liked/preferred the classic pocket QB. The stand tall in the pocket and deliver a rocket pass, kind of QB. I'm changing, evolving. Those kinds of QB's are still great, but rare! Unless you have an elite one, in today's football, you're much better off with a mobile option. It just puts more stress on a defense. Imagine running all of our packages without having to substitute personnel! That's a defensive coaches nightmare.
#micdrop
I think this discussion can officially be tabled until next fall. Good post 99...
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:04 am
by Long Time Cat
bobcat99 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:47 am
technoCat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:52 pm
utucats wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 pm
McKay didn’t choose Montana State on a promise that he can back up Rovig. It’s his job to lose.
We need a more dynamic QB. That’s just the truth.
But he may have chosen MSU because he knows that Choate isn't afraid to run packages for multiple QBs so his chances of playing are probably near 100%. I mistakenly said he would run the "wildcat" package but what I really meant was he would be that qb that comes in and threatens the +1 game but have legitimate throwing ability too. Something we lacked with Andersen and Jonsen this year. We still need a qb that can distribute the ball to other playmakers and run our offense which Rovig has a leg up on since he's played in the system longer. Granted if McKay is about even with him at the end of spring ball, he will probably get the start full-time since he is not going to be playing receiver at all so they wouldn't really be able to have both in the huddle at the same time.
.
I mean, can we look at this logically?
You're saying we should take out the starter, who can only pass, so that we can put in the backup, who can run and pass. This is a very simple explanation, but that's what you're saying here.
I just hate it. If the backup can do both adequately, then freaking roll with him! It stresses the defense more to have to constantly defend the pass/run.
I say this as somebody who has always liked/preferred the classic pocket QB. The stand tall in the pocket and deliver a rocket pass, kind of QB. I'm changing, evolving. Those kinds of QB's are still great, but rare! Unless you have an elite one, in today's football, you're much better off with a mobile option. It just puts more stress on a defense. Imagine running all of our packages without having to substitute personnel! That's a defensive coaches nightmare.
I have been a Rovig defender all season but don’t see anything in 99’s post I can or even want to disagree with. Which is kind of disappointing since 99 gets so fired up when you do.
Re: Quarterback
Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:28 am
by bobcat99
Long Time Cat wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:04 am
bobcat99 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:47 am
technoCat wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:52 pm
utucats wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:04 pm
McKay didn’t choose Montana State on a promise that he can back up Rovig. It’s his job to lose.
We need a more dynamic QB. That’s just the truth.
But he may have chosen MSU because he knows that Choate isn't afraid to run packages for multiple QBs so his chances of playing are probably near 100%. I mistakenly said he would run the "wildcat" package but what I really meant was he would be that qb that comes in and threatens the +1 game but have legitimate throwing ability too. Something we lacked with Andersen and Jonsen this year. We still need a qb that can distribute the ball to other playmakers and run our offense which Rovig has a leg up on since he's played in the system longer. Granted if McKay is about even with him at the end of spring ball, he will probably get the start full-time since he is not going to be playing receiver at all so they wouldn't really be able to have both in the huddle at the same time.
.
I mean, can we look at this logically?
You're saying we should take out the starter, who can only pass, so that we can put in the backup, who can run and pass. This is a very simple explanation, but that's what you're saying here.
I just hate it. If the backup can do both adequately, then freaking roll with him! It stresses the defense more to have to constantly defend the pass/run.
I say this as somebody who has always liked/preferred the classic pocket QB. The stand tall in the pocket and deliver a rocket pass, kind of QB. I'm changing, evolving. Those kinds of QB's are still great, but rare! Unless you have an elite one, in today's football, you're much better off with a mobile option. It just puts more stress on a defense. Imagine running all of our packages without having to substitute personnel! That's a defensive coaches nightmare.
I have been a Rovig defender all season but don’t see anything in 99’s post I can or even want to disagree with. Which is kind of disappointing since 99 gets so fired up when you do.
Lol!
I don't really get that fired up, I promise, I just enjoy the debate. A board full of circle jerkers is boring. I love new/different ideas! Me disagreeing with people, or people disagreeing with me, isn't a bad thing! I actually think it's healthy. Learning how to have an idea, and how to logically present that idea to other people is an ability that seems to be falling on the wayside.
TL;DR: I like to argue, and better with you jerks than my wife. Gotta keep the home life happy!