Quarterback

Discuss anything and everything relating to Bobcat Football here.

Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat

Post Reply
jgrilley406
BobcatNation Redshirt
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:59 am

Re: Quarterback

Post by jgrilley406 » Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:41 am

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.
Whether we start Rovig or McKay, we still lack something on the defensive side. Idk what it is but having a better QB isn’t going to get us where we want to go, it’s defense. Like I’ve said in other posts, Weber had the best defense in the BSC and a better offense than UNI, and still had no real shot of winning their game against JMU as compared to UNI. Same goes for us and NDSU with Ill state, yes they played them twice, but they were without their QB. Look at when McGhee was at QB, he had arguably the best Bobcat defensive from then to now that we’ve seen, but yet both times they faced Sam Houston it was almost like a mirror image of the NDSU games. Idk what the MVFC has over us that helps them in the playoffs that they are able to hold the NDSU’s and the JMU’s to low scores, which gives them always a fighting chance, but for whatever reason when we have the chance to be the giant killers (NDSUx2 and Sam Houstonx2), we can’t even slow them down even a little bit, no matter how good our defense is or whose behind center (McGheex2, Andersen, Rovig).



User avatar
utucats
1st Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1919
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 3:58 pm

Re: Quarterback

Post by utucats » Fri Dec 27, 2019 5:52 pm

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 highly doubt that our coaches want to run such a gimmicky offense as we did this year. I think we ran what we did out of necessity. Also, there is no way that McKay was lured here being told he’d have the chance to be the other QB who comes in every now and again but not the main QB.

Just because McKay is mobile doesn’t mean he’s a Jonsen or a wildcat player. He’s coming here to play QB and we need to upgrade at that position. Like I said, I think it’s his job to lose.


Image

User avatar
technoCat
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3103
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:06 pm
Location: Bozeman

Re: Quarterback

Post by technoCat » Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm

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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.


DIE HARD CATS FAN SINCE 01/05/1984

User avatar
technoCat
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3103
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:06 pm
Location: Bozeman

Re: Quarterback

Post by technoCat » Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:44 pm

utucats wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 5:52 pm
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 highly doubt that our coaches want to run such a gimmicky offense as we did this year. I think we ran what we did out of necessity. Also, there is no way that McKay was lured here being told he’d have the chance to be the other QB who comes in every now and again but not the main QB.

Just because McKay is mobile doesn’t mean he’s a Jonsen or a wildcat player. He’s coming here to play QB and we need to upgrade at that position. Like I said, I think it’s his job to lose.
I didn't say that McKay came here with the intention to do that, I'm saying that he knows this is probably his last chance and at least here he knows that being the "backup" doesn't mean he's riding the pine all year. I can't imagine the coaches straight up told him it was his job to lose.


DIE HARD CATS FAN SINCE 01/05/1984

bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3518
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Quarterback

Post by bobcat99 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am

technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.



Cataholic
Member # Retired
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: Quarterback

Post by Cataholic » Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am

bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.



User avatar
grizzh8r
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5891
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:23 pm
Location: Billings via Livingston
Contact:

Re: Quarterback

Post by grizzh8r » Sun Dec 29, 2019 12:33 pm

Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.
Just because you feel compelled to disagree with EVERYTHING 99 posts doesn't mean his analysis is wrong. The age old adage "if you have 2 QB's, you have no QB" is still 100% applicable in today's game. Situational usage of a different guy under center is one thing (running the +1 QB or RB power/wildcat with TA or Ifanse in critical short yardage or goal to go situations), but having "the guy" under center for the vast majority of offensive snaps is still ideal. Think of it this way... Would you take Lulay, Prukop or McGhee out of the QB position as many times as this staff did with Rovig this season? Absolutely not. If McKay ends up being a similar talent to any of the aforementioned guys (which would be a major upgrade over Rovig, through no fault of his own) this staff would be eviscerated and rightfully so.


Eric Curry STILL makes me sad.
94VegasCat wrote:Are you for real? That is just a plain ol dumb paragraph! You just nailed every note in the Full Retard sing-a-long choir!!!
:rofl:

User avatar
Camo_Cat
BobcatNation Letterman
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 9:07 am
Location: In a tree stand

Re: Quarterback

Post by Camo_Cat » Sun Dec 29, 2019 1:19 pm

Holy sh$t, it's gonna be a looooong off-season.



Cataholic
Member # Retired
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: Quarterback

Post by Cataholic » Sun Dec 29, 2019 1:31 pm

grizzh8r wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 12:33 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.
Just because you feel compelled to disagree with EVERYTHING 99 posts doesn't mean his analysis is wrong. The age old adage "if you have 2 QB's, you have no QB" is still 100% applicable in today's game. Situational usage of a different guy under center is one thing (running the +1 QB or RB power/wildcat with TA or Ifanse in critical short yardage or goal to go situations), but having "the guy" under center for the vast majority of offensive snaps is still ideal. Think of it this way... Would you take Lulay, Prukop or McGhee out of the QB position as many times as this staff did with Rovig this season? Absolutely not. If McKay ends up being a similar talent to any of the aforementioned guys (which would be a major upgrade over Rovig, through no fault of his own) this staff would be eviscerated and rightfully so.
Just because you agree with EVERYTHING 99 posts does not mean he is always right. It does seem strange that you are always coming to 99’s defense. Do you guys know each other? He can be abrasive and condescending toward other posters (just like above to Techno), but you never comment. I questioned his statement above “that it is easier to scout and prepare (for multiple QBs)” and for some reason it out of line? Hasn’t the media and posters been saying all year how difficult it is for opponents to prepare for the multiple looks that MSU has? I ask that simple question and you freak out.

And I certainly did not say anything about Rovig over a Prukop, McGhee or Lulay? Pretty sure that we don’t have anybody on the roster with that ability yet. I am quite confident that if McKay is as good as them, the staff will play McKay. But for F sakes, McKay hasn’t even stepped on campus yet!



Cat Grad
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6558
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:05 am

Re: Quarterback

Post by Cat Grad » Sun Dec 29, 2019 1:46 pm

Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 1:31 pm
grizzh8r wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 12:33 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.
Just because you feel compelled to disagree with EVERYTHING 99 posts doesn't mean his analysis is wrong. The age old adage "if you have 2 QB's, you have no QB" is still 100% applicable in today's game. Situational usage of a different guy under center is one thing (running the +1 QB or RB power/wildcat with TA or Ifanse in critical short yardage or goal to go situations), but having "the guy" under center for the vast majority of offensive snaps is still ideal. Think of it this way... Would you take Lulay, Prukop or McGhee out of the QB position as many times as this staff did with Rovig this season? Absolutely not. If McKay ends up being a similar talent to any of the aforementioned guys (which would be a major upgrade over Rovig, through no fault of his own) this staff would be eviscerated and rightfully so.
Just because you agree with EVERYTHING 99 posts does not mean he is always right. It does seem strange that you are always coming to 99’s defense. Do you guys know each other? He can be abrasive and condescending toward other posters (just like above to Techno), but you never comment. I questioned his statement above “that it is easier to scout and prepare (for multiple QBs)” and for some reason it out of line? Hasn’t the media and posters been saying all year how difficult it is for opponents to prepare for the multiple looks that MSU has? I ask that simple question and you freak out.

And I certainly did not say anything about Rovig over a Prukop, McGhee or Lulay? Pretty sure that we don’t have anybody on the roster with that ability yet. I am quite confident that if McKay is as good as them, the staff will play McKay. But for F sakes, McKay hasn’t even stepped on campus yet!
...I thought McKay was at one of the playoff games... :-k



bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3518
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Quarterback

Post by bobcat99 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 3:47 pm

Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.
Was it harder to prepare for? Maybe substitution/package wise. Maybe just in terms of a lot to look for. Tendency wise? No, I don't think it was that difficult in comparison to how difficult it could be.

When Jonsen lined up, I would bet 90% of the time he kept it. So that's an easy tendency. You have to read the dive back, but again, 9/10 times Jonsen kept it. That's why it wasn't as effective later in the season. Same with the others, except that Kassis was occasionally a threat to pass. Rovig, would either hand off or pass. He wasn't a threat to run. And even when he did run, it didn't scare anybody. Now imagine that you have a QB who can do a little of it all. Threat to pass, threat to run. Not as good at running as say, Jonsen, or Andersen, obviously. Probably as good at passing as Rovig, but I'll hedge it and say he's a little worse. What do you think is more difficult to prepare for? The guy who stays in all the time, and can perform all of those duties? Or the multiple substitutions, where they might be better, but the defense knows what they're doing. The beauty of the first option is the illusion of difficulty. It's all different options, out of the same package.

And fwiw, yes, I argued we needed to be better at passing than when we had Andersen at QB. It was too one sided of an attack. And Rovig was a better passer! And we got further! But there is still a lot of room for improvement. I want a true dual threat QB because it is damn hard to defend. Having a QB who is only a threat in one facet of the offense is a liability, unless they're Peyton Manning.

Fwiw, I don't have a dislike of Rovig. I just don't think he's the starting QB that gets us to a championship. Sorry for wanting the best. It doesn't mean I'm not thrilled with this season, I am. But I can still be happy with the season, and want more. I can still be happy with this season, and discuss the next. If you'd like to write a guideline on how to be a proper fan, be my guest. I'd love to read it.

Ta, ta, for now, love.



Cataholic
Member # Retired
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: Quarterback

Post by Cataholic » Sun Dec 29, 2019 4:57 pm

bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 3:47 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.
Was it harder to prepare for? Maybe substitution/package wise. Maybe just in terms of a lot to look for. Tendency wise? No, I don't think it was that difficult in comparison to how difficult it could be.

When Jonsen lined up, I would bet 90% of the time he kept it. So that's an easy tendency. You have to read the dive back, but again, 9/10 times Jonsen kept it. That's why it wasn't as effective later in the season. Same with the others, except that Kassis was occasionally a threat to pass. Rovig, would either hand off or pass. He wasn't a threat to run. And even when he did run, it didn't scare anybody. Now imagine that you have a QB who can do a little of it all. Threat to pass, threat to run. Not as good at running as say, Jonsen, or Andersen, obviously. Probably as good at passing as Rovig, but I'll hedge it and say he's a little worse. What do you think is more difficult to prepare for? The guy who stays in all the time, and can perform all of those duties? Or the multiple substitutions, where they might be better, but the defense knows what they're doing. The beauty of the first option is the illusion of difficulty. It's all different options, out of the same package.

And fwiw, yes, I argued we needed to be better at passing than when we had Andersen at QB. It was too one sided of an attack. And Rovig was a better passer! And we got further! But there is still a lot of room for improvement. I want a true dual threat QB because it is damn hard to defend. Having a QB who is only a threat in one facet of the offense is a liability, unless they're Peyton Manning.

Fwiw, I don't have a dislike of Rovig. I just don't think he's the starting QB that gets us to a championship. Sorry for wanting the best. It doesn't mean I'm not thrilled with this season, I am. But I can still be happy with the season, and want more. I can still be happy with this season, and discuss the next. If you'd like to write a guideline on how to be a proper fan, be my guest. I'd love to read it.

Ta, ta, for now, love.
So you want a quarterback that can run better than Rovig, but maybe not quite throw it as well... not a true drop back passer unless he is all pro caliber. That sounds like Chris Murray.. Did you complain about Murray? I don’t have the will to look back, but I am guessing that you even complained about Prukop... Of course we all want Lamar Jackson, but my guess is that you would still find something to complain about.

I am not sure about being a proper fan, but given that this was the most successful season in about 35 years, how many of your posts in the past two weeks have been positive? Maybe a better question (and probably why I don’t care for you), how many of your posts have been abrasive or condescending?



TomCat88
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 13552
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:16 am
Location: An endless run of moguls

Re: Quarterback

Post by TomCat88 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:10 pm

I think Mellott is gonna start next year. Probably not first game, but before halfway point.


MSU - 14 team National Champions (most recent 2011); 52 individual National Champions (most recent 2017).
toM StUber

User avatar
VimSince03
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7310
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 5:43 pm

Re: Quarterback

Post by VimSince03 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:11 pm

TomCat88 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:10 pm
I think Mellott is gonna start next year. Probably not first game, but before halfway point.
Tom...this is either a brilliant troll job of a certain poster or the hottest of hot takes.


"There's two times of year for me: Football season, and waiting for football season."

User avatar
VimSince03
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7310
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 5:43 pm

Re: Quarterback

Post by VimSince03 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:19 pm

Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 4:57 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 3:47 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.
Was it harder to prepare for? Maybe substitution/package wise. Maybe just in terms of a lot to look for. Tendency wise? No, I don't think it was that difficult in comparison to how difficult it could be.

When Jonsen lined up, I would bet 90% of the time he kept it. So that's an easy tendency. You have to read the dive back, but again, 9/10 times Jonsen kept it. That's why it wasn't as effective later in the season. Same with the others, except that Kassis was occasionally a threat to pass. Rovig, would either hand off or pass. He wasn't a threat to run. And even when he did run, it didn't scare anybody. Now imagine that you have a QB who can do a little of it all. Threat to pass, threat to run. Not as good at running as say, Jonsen, or Andersen, obviously. Probably as good at passing as Rovig, but I'll hedge it and say he's a little worse. What do you think is more difficult to prepare for? The guy who stays in all the time, and can perform all of those duties? Or the multiple substitutions, where they might be better, but the defense knows what they're doing. The beauty of the first option is the illusion of difficulty. It's all different options, out of the same package.

And fwiw, yes, I argued we needed to be better at passing than when we had Andersen at QB. It was too one sided of an attack. And Rovig was a better passer! And we got further! But there is still a lot of room for improvement. I want a true dual threat QB because it is damn hard to defend. Having a QB who is only a threat in one facet of the offense is a liability, unless they're Peyton Manning.

Fwiw, I don't have a dislike of Rovig. I just don't think he's the starting QB that gets us to a championship. Sorry for wanting the best. It doesn't mean I'm not thrilled with this season, I am. But I can still be happy with the season, and want more. I can still be happy with this season, and discuss the next. If you'd like to write a guideline on how to be a proper fan, be my guest. I'd love to read it.

Ta, ta, for now, love.
So you want a quarterback that can run better than Rovig, but maybe not quite throw it as well... not a true drop back passer unless he is all pro caliber. That sounds like Chris Murray.. Did you complain about Murray? I don’t have the will to look back, but I am guessing that you even complained about Prukop... Of course we all want Lamar Jackson, but my guess is that you would still find something to complain about.

I am not sure about being a proper fan, but given that this was the most successful season in about 35 years, how many of your posts in the past two weeks have been positive? Maybe a better question (and probably why I don’t care for you), how many of your posts have been abrasive or condescending?
99's posts are relatively honest and bring up good discussion points which most want to participate in. I disagree with him as much as I agree on other points. Instead of being this way back to him, ask him some questions like "what type of offense best suits our personnel if we stick with Tucker" or "if we get a dual threat QB, what do we need to add/change" and give your opinions. Its a discussion board. 99 wants more out of the QB position and listed his reasons why. You disagree with those reasons. That's all it has to be Cataholic. YOU are the one who makes it more. The guy has no ill will towards anyone. Call him out if you must if you believe he is throwing too much criticism at college football players but at least he gives reasons why instead of nonsense narrative BS we hear from other posters on this board.


"There's two times of year for me: Football season, and waiting for football season."

bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3518
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Quarterback

Post by bobcat99 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:58 pm

Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 4:57 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 3:47 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:36 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:48 am
technoCat wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 11:42 pm
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 am looking at it logically. Outside of the unicorns like Lance and Murray, almost every mobile qb I've seen gets hurt over the course of a year. IF Rovig is the better passer with the better grasp of the offense, it makes sense to limit the number of touches/hits McKay would take and given the fact that our offense has worked quite well with multiple qbs this last year and Miller has experience calling plays for both it might work.
Oh?

Jalen Hurts got hurt? Lulay got hurt? Trevor Lawrence got hurt? Lamar Jackson? Don't make me list all of the friggin mobile QB's in college football, man. Justin Fields. Even Joe Burrows is pretty mobile.

Look, football is a contact sport. Guys are going to get hurt, whether they're a mobile QB or a pocket QB. One of the worst injuries I've seen from a QB was in the pocket (Joe Theisman).

There is a reason basically nobody runs multiple QB's. It's inefficient. It's easier to scout and prepare for. The team doesn't know who "the guy" is. We ran multiple QB's out of necessity, not because they wanted to.

The thing with Rovig, is that to be a good pocket passer, you have to hit certain throws. Rovig threw about 4 passes the entire year. WR screen/bubble, hitch by the sideline, mesh (slant/crosser), and a go route. Basically nothing in the middle of the field. Nothing up the seam. And it's not just the offense, the guys are there, but the ball never goes there. You can mitigate these issues if you're a running threat, but he isn't. The offense is just much more dangerous with one guy, who can be a passing and running threat. Even if McKay is a little bit less of a passing threat, overall, he's still more dangerous if he can run. Running a 2-3 QB system is dumb.
It would seem that multiple QB’s would be harder for an opponent to prepare for. I recall media and others saying how hard it was to prepare for MSU this year because of the different looks with each option at QB: Rovig, Jonsen, Kassis, Ifanse and Andersen.

For the past four years, many have screamed for a true passing QB. Now you want to insert a different QB because he is a better runner than Rovig? Your dislike of Rovig has you making any argument to justify unseating him at QB. Here is a novel idea: Why don’t we celebrate the great season for now and wait until at least spring practice before anointing a new starter.
Was it harder to prepare for? Maybe substitution/package wise. Maybe just in terms of a lot to look for. Tendency wise? No, I don't think it was that difficult in comparison to how difficult it could be.

When Jonsen lined up, I would bet 90% of the time he kept it. So that's an easy tendency. You have to read the dive back, but again, 9/10 times Jonsen kept it. That's why it wasn't as effective later in the season. Same with the others, except that Kassis was occasionally a threat to pass. Rovig, would either hand off or pass. He wasn't a threat to run. And even when he did run, it didn't scare anybody. Now imagine that you have a QB who can do a little of it all. Threat to pass, threat to run. Not as good at running as say, Jonsen, or Andersen, obviously. Probably as good at passing as Rovig, but I'll hedge it and say he's a little worse. What do you think is more difficult to prepare for? The guy who stays in all the time, and can perform all of those duties? Or the multiple substitutions, where they might be better, but the defense knows what they're doing. The beauty of the first option is the illusion of difficulty. It's all different options, out of the same package.

And fwiw, yes, I argued we needed to be better at passing than when we had Andersen at QB. It was too one sided of an attack. And Rovig was a better passer! And we got further! But there is still a lot of room for improvement. I want a true dual threat QB because it is damn hard to defend. Having a QB who is only a threat in one facet of the offense is a liability, unless they're Peyton Manning.

Fwiw, I don't have a dislike of Rovig. I just don't think he's the starting QB that gets us to a championship. Sorry for wanting the best. It doesn't mean I'm not thrilled with this season, I am. But I can still be happy with the season, and want more. I can still be happy with this season, and discuss the next. If you'd like to write a guideline on how to be a proper fan, be my guest. I'd love to read it.

Ta, ta, for now, love.
So you want a quarterback that can run better than Rovig, but maybe not quite throw it as well... not a true drop back passer unless he is all pro caliber. That sounds like Chris Murray.. Did you complain about Murray? I don’t have the will to look back, but I am guessing that you even complained about Prukop... Of course we all want Lamar Jackson, but my guess is that you would still find something to complain about.

I am not sure about being a proper fan, but given that this was the most successful season in about 35 years, how many of your posts in the past two weeks have been positive? Maybe a better question (and probably why I don’t care for you), how many of your posts have been abrasive or condescending?
I did list faults with Murray. I also think our team this year does better with him at the helm. But yeah, Murray certainly had faults. As did Prukop. As does Lamar Jackson. I think it's fair to point those out, as well as highlight strong points. I'm just not the type ignore and sugarcoat things.



TomCat88
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 13552
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:16 am
Location: An endless run of moguls

Re: Quarterback

Post by TomCat88 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:02 pm

VimSince03 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:11 pm
TomCat88 wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:10 pm
I think Mellott is gonna start next year. Probably not first game, but before halfway point.
Tom...this is either a brilliant troll job of a certain poster or the hottest of hot takes.
Maybe, but of all the QBs Choate has brought in I think Mellott looks better than all of them coming out of high school. Couple that with his smarts, desire, work ethic and the amount he’s improving, I think he’ll takeover and not look back.

The AA 100m is gonna be fun to follow this spring. I think something like 8 of the top 10 finishers at state are back. Mellott will be in the mix unless he decides to not go out.


MSU - 14 team National Champions (most recent 2011); 52 individual National Champions (most recent 2017).
toM StUber

bobcatbob
1st Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1869
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:04 pm

Re: Quarterback

Post by bobcatbob » Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:05 pm

I was very happy with this season. I thought Rovig improved tremendously. He did a solid job. Now it is on to next year. I hope his improvement continues into Spring ball. However, his lack of quickness and speed is a negative. Also, he throws a lot off his back foot which is not good. He can work on that but the quickness and speed is not going to change. I think having a dual threat that can pass and run is much more effective. Hopefully McKay is the guy. Anxious to see how Tommy Mellot does. He appears to be a Lulay type. The kid is a leader. Will be good to see more competition at that position next year.



TomCat88
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 13552
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:16 am
Location: An endless run of moguls

Re: Quarterback

Post by TomCat88 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:23 pm

jgrilley406 wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:41 am
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.
Whether we start Rovig or McKay, we still lack something on the defensive side. Idk what it is but having a better QB isn’t going to get us where we want to go, it’s defense. Like I’ve said in other posts, Weber had the best defense in the BSC and a better offense than UNI, and still had no real shot of winning their game against JMU as compared to UNI. Same goes for us and NDSU with Ill state, yes they played them twice, but they were without their QB. Look at when McGhee was at QB, he had arguably the best Bobcat defensive from then to now that we’ve seen, but yet both times they faced Sam Houston it was almost like a mirror image of the NDSU games. Idk what the MVFC has over us that helps them in the playoffs that they are able to hold the NDSU’s and the JMU’s to low scores, which gives them always a fighting chance, but for whatever reason when we have the chance to be the giant killers (NDSUx2 and Sam Houstonx2), we can’t even slow them down even a little bit, no matter how good our defense is or whose behind center (McGheex2, Andersen, Rovig).
A better QB will help the defense. As will better receivers and an improved run game.


MSU - 14 team National Champions (most recent 2011); 52 individual National Champions (most recent 2017).
toM StUber

TomCat88
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 13552
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:16 am
Location: An endless run of moguls

Re: Quarterback

Post by TomCat88 » Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:30 pm

bobcatbob wrote:
Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:05 pm
I was very happy with this season. I thought Rovig improved tremendously. He did a solid job. Now it is on to next year. I hope his improvement continues into Spring ball. However, his lack of quickness and speed is a negative. Also, he throws a lot off his back foot which is not good. He can work on that but the quickness and speed is not going to change. I think having a dual threat that can pass and run is much more effective. Hopefully McKay is the guy. Anxious to see how Tommy Mellot does. He appears to be a Lulay type. The kid is a leader. Will be good to see more competition at that position next year.
Mellott’s best comparison is Johnny Manziel style and skills-wise. I believe that’s why he wears #2.


MSU - 14 team National Champions (most recent 2011); 52 individual National Champions (most recent 2017).
toM StUber

Post Reply