ADVERTISEMENT

QB Race News

Who will start at QB for Tulsa against Michigan State?

  • Zach Smith

    Votes: 41 66.1%
  • Seth Boomer

    Votes: 2 3.2%
  • Davis Brin

    Votes: 8 12.9%
  • Li'l Eric Coley

    Votes: 11 17.7%

  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .
That makes zero sense. When you start game prep almost all coaches will give QB1 a majority of the snaps. I don't see anyway he's splitting reps equally during game prep week three ways.

See the other thread for today's update. All 3 QBs are definitely getting reps as of this morning.
 
I would expect Monty to name Smith as the starter next week. The fact that he has not ran away with the competition is a bit concerning.
Sports Animal did an interview with one of the WRs today and the WR made it sound like Smith is the guy, intentionally or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buzzy56
From what I remember, Dane was the well established starter by that point. I don't remember any QB controversy whatsoever.
New coach, new offense and he brought with him a four star QB. There were plenty of unknowns. There’s a couple of interviews out on the web where Dane talks about it.
 
New coach, new offense and he brought with him a four star QB. There were plenty of unknowns. There’s a couple of interviews out on the web where Dane talks about it.
A four star freshman QB who couldn't pass to save his life and was a 4 star as a WR recruit at Baylor.... Dane may not have been so sure of himself at that point, but I think he probably had a better idea about where he stood than the season prior.
 
A four star freshman QB who couldn't pass to save his life and was a 4 star as a WR recruit at Baylor.... Dane may not have been so sure of himself at that point, but I think he probably had a better idea about where he stood than the season prior.

I never understood why Monty didn't listen to his mentor and put the kid at receiver from the get go...or at least after year 1. Would have been best for TU and Chad. Stubborn I suppose.
 
I never understood why Monty didn't listen to his mentor and put the kid at receiver from the get go...or at least after year 1. Would have been best for TU and Chad. Stubborn I suppose.
Monty promised him he'd play QB to get him here. I think it was a battle of wills for who was the stubbornest, between Monty and Chad. If Chad had given in and said I'll play receiver, I'm betting Monty would have at least considered the move. Instead they both clung to that dream of him becoming a star QB, till the bitter end.
 
Monty promised him he'd play QB to get him here. I think it was a battle of wills for who was the stubbornest, between Monty and Chad. If Chad had given in and said I'll play receiver, I'm betting Monty would have at least considered the move. Instead they both clung to that dream of him becoming a star QB, till the bitter end.

In year 5, we can only hope Montgomery has learned some valuable lessons over the past several seasons as a head coach. He has to know his job is on the line this year... so maybe logic will prevail over stubborn habits.
 
Dane was here before the offense arrived. My point was about recruiting a dual threat QB and keeping him. We’ve only found one, he decommitted quickly to be QB3 at UNC. But to answer your question. Dane was not a dual threat guy but most of us recall that the defenses didn’t really loosen up until mid-season when Dane started keeping the ball more or even doing designed runs on third and short. You gotta have a guy that can run at an elite level, that knows this niche offense, and can pass with speed and accuracy outside the numbers before the secondary can jump the ball. There aren’t many high school offenses running this offense, and virtually none outside TX and OK, but there are several schools that are elite running it like FSU. so amongst the half dozen or so kids across America QBing this offense at the high school level with the talent and grades to play FBS, we are going to be a recruits four or fifth choice at best before other schools come out of the woodwork looking to poach the skills you have to have to make this offense work. Anybody we sign out of high school that hasn’t run this offense is a recruiting crap shoot, as we’ve seen before. So drastically smaller recruiting pool with even more pressure to locate “the guy.” The offense also requires defensive play at an elite level to keep scoring close and forcing turnovers to make up for offensive breakdowns and punts. This isn’t a come from behind offense.

In contrast, the Gus offense didn’t care how many points the other side scored by definition and design. Also by design, it didn’t matter whether your QB had an elite accurate arm. You needed a deep threat WR and a 3rd down WR. That’s it.

Which hire was better given TU’s struggles to attract elite defensive talent? The offense that didn’t care how many points are scored by the other team and can come from 28 points down in 5 minutes or the offense that needs the defense to hold the other team to 24 or less in today’s pass happy world and rules favoring the offense?

So our already handicapped recruiting situation has even more pressure put on it unnecessarily because we lacked the football knowledge and foresight on the search team to hire a coach with the knowledge and experience to locate players that we can sign and who can adapt situationally to our offensive and defensive philosophies to ensure success. That’s the difference between Kragthorpe and this hire. We beat ourselves with this hire. We need to stop acting like junkies hoping one thing or another will turn our life around.
In 2016 we were down 31 to Fresno late in the 1st half and came back to win with this offense. So I have to disagree about not being a come from behind offense.

Our problem has been not having a QB with a college level arm. That will make problems for you no matter where you are unless you're running the triple option. I don't care what offense you have.

Also, we did not have an elite defense in 2016 yet this offense routinely out scored people amd we won 10 games that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ctt8410
And we got those guys because we were running an offense that would get all of them on tape. We haven’t had guys like that before or since. You could sell the program because 8 guys were going to be thrown to and be given a chance to make some tape that will get them to the league. It’s chapter 1 of Gus’ book. Players want to play in that offense. Now we are running an offense where you won’t catch a ball for three years, then if you see the field, you are out there blocking 30 times a game and catching 2-4 passes, if you can catch. It’s great for unrecruited local running backs tho.
I think you have us confused with Navy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ctt8410
A four star freshman QB who couldn't pass to save his life and was a 4 star as a WR recruit at Baylor.... Dane may not have been so sure of himself at that point, but I think he probably had a better idea about where he stood than the season prior.
You don’t know where you stand until the coaches tell you. Especially new coaches.
I think you have us confused with Navy.
The offenses run on very similar blocking concepts. But since we don’t cheat, I can assure you I’ll never confuse them with us.
 
In 2016 we were down 31 to Fresno late in the 1st half and came back to win with this offense. So I have to disagree about not being a come from behind offense.

Our problem has been not having a QB with a college level arm. That will make problems for you no matter where you are unless you're running the triple option. I don't care what offense you have.

Also, we did not have an elite defense in 2016 yet this offense routinely out scored people amd we won 10 games that way.
we won ten games using players already on campus. Our recruiting has been very suspect since then and our wins have dwindled as we’ve supposedly added talent according to these coaches. You can blame the budget but the offensive scheme and the opportunities it provides bear a large portion of the blame.

Fair point on Fresno but that team was historically inept.
 
I was concerned during that Fresno game that if we didn’t have a come back our season was toast. If that had happened we wouldn’t be in year 5 of the Monty regime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuffyCane
During a media day interview with Pop today, Zach Smith said to watch JC Santana, that he has the goods, is fast, finds ways to get open and goes and gets the football. Let’s hope Monty thinks a RS FR should be on the field.
Montgomery was quoted as saying "Most of our receivers our very young, but it’s good to see their development starting to happen. That’s been key,” said Montgomery. “Up front those guys are jelling every day and getting better every day. They’re taking a lot of pride in what they do. We still have some way to go, but I think we’re on the right track to get there.”

The three probable starters are a Sr and two Jr.'s. Considering he said that and that they will get subbed occasionally and go with 4 receivers from time to time, I'm thinking Santana will get his chance to show it on the field. Out of the rest, I think there is only one So,(Crawford) and the rest are all Fr and redshirt Fr.
 
I thought Boomer looked the best by a little bit in the scrimmage today. I definitely wouldn't say he won the starting job. Still looks open.
 
Since Smith got very few reps and didn't do anything special, I thought Brin looked like the best option with Boomer a distant third. I just can't understand why we still have indecision in regard to that position. Monty has had all three practicing side by side for 2 springs, summers, and one regular season. What more do you need to see? Today was a great opportunity to name the starter and give him 50% of the reps with 1st team. Whoever is named the starter got shafted today.
 
Montgomery was quoted as saying "Most of our receivers our very young, but it’s good to see their development starting to happen. That’s been key,” said Montgomery. “Up front those guys are jelling every day and getting better every day. They’re taking a lot of pride in what they do. We still have some way to go, but I think we’re on the right track to get there.”

The three probable starters are a Sr and two Jr.'s. Considering he said that and that they will get subbed occasionally and go with 4 receivers from time to time, I'm thinking Santana will get his chance to show it on the field. Out of the rest, I think there is only one So,(Crawford) and the rest are all Fr and redshirt Fr.
Monty mentioned both Santana and Crawford in the post scrimmage interview as players emerging.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW
SpartanJD-We are going to run on 1st down and second down and pass on third down if we need 5 yards or more for a first down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TU_BLA
I thought Boomer looked the best by a little bit in the scrimmage today. I definitely wouldn't say he won the starting job. Still looks open.
Just a guess, but Boomer might start because he is a bit more mobile-in view of a MickSt D line & backers(not to mention our inexperienced O-line) that could stifle our run game. On the other hand, if the so-called QB race is not as tight as advertised & not just ear-wash, it's Smith anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hurricane Drummer
I like Brin. No film on him and he’s not a statue.

I’ll also be glad when we get rid of this crappy Baylor offense.
I love the offense with the right personnel. We've seen what it can do... problem is... it's yet to be seen whether or not we can get the right personnel.
 
I like Brin. No film on him and he’s not a statue.

I’ll also be glad when we get rid of this crappy Baylor offense.
I love the offense with the right personnel. We've seen what it can do... problem is... it's yet to be seen whether or not we can get the right personnel.
The Malzahn offense is infinitely better, and less predictable.
 
I like Brin. No film on him and he’s not a statue.

I’ll also be glad when we get rid of this crappy Baylor offense.
Yeah, I don't think it has been the "Baylor" offense for 4 years now. Right now it's the "Tulsa" and "Syracuse" offenses as I think we might be the only 2 in the country running it...and maybe USF (aren't the 2 OL coaches who Texas came and begged there now?)
 
The Malzahn offense is infinitely better, and less predictable.
I wouldn't necessarily say less-predictable. I do remember knowing the Milkman was running a seam route against UTEP from our own 3 yd line, and I'm pretty sure UTEP knew it was coming as well because they lined up in a 3 deep dime on 1st down...and they still couldn't stop it.

There were certain down and distance situations where you knew exactly what pass route combos were coming but when your offensive skill players are flat out better than the defensive players, you can show them the play book and they can't stop it. We just had flat out superior offensive talent when Gus was here. You had a QB, H-back/TE, and a WR all go to the NFL. And I believe the WR still holds the NCAA record for yards per catch in a season at 31+ (which is ridiculous BTW).
 
The Malzahn offense is infinitely better, and less predictable.
I guess you can make that argument.... though I think both offenses have been pretty potent when they're running at their best. I think the pace of the Baylor offense was always what gave it an advantage... it was just faster than anyone else.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT