Sunday, August 23, 2009

Back to square one

It looks like the QB depth chart is written in pencil. After narrowing in on Shinskie and Marscovetra last week, Spaz et al must of had a change of heart. How else to explain giving more snaps to Tuggle and Boek in Sunday's scrimmage? One theory is that we'll be running more (including some direct snaps) so having a QB who is a threat to run compliments those strategies. Who knows?

What I don't understand is the urge to lock in on one guy before the season. If no one stood out, why not split time amongst the equals? Although I never want to overlook anyone, Northeastern is not very good. We could split time among three QBs and see who steps up in live action. We could potentially do the same against Kent State. Michigan plans to play three QBs in their opener. Ideally you work out the kinks and are ready to go with one guy by the time we head down to Clemson.

We have one more scrimmage to decipher. But I have a feeling we won't know or understand what's best until after Northeastern.

1 comment:

CT said...

You always want your #1 QB to start getting the most snaps during these final two weeks of practice before the start of the season. That's why it's smart to lock in on someone. Citing Michigan as an example isn't, imho, the smart thing to do: they're a mess at QB and are making the best of a bad situation. It's also a different offense.

If the coaches can't pick a QB by now, it speaks rather poorly for the idea that competition has made any of these guys better. I'm still thinking, "uh-oh."