The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(09-04-2014 05:58 AM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  GBL - you're asking for answers that you probably aren't ever going to get.

I've given about as much supporting evidence as I can possibly provide. It's a message board full of fans. We all have opinions. I'm just sharing mine on our QB play.

Ok, so there are no experts, just fellow fans with opinions. No problem. But why exagerate who your sources so to diminish the kid's performance and potential? Particularly when those sources really dont exist (Since you offered them up, I asked for delivery and you can't deliver it must be because they really don't measure up).

I'm simply questioning the questioning of ZT's performance and potential.

I don't know if his "ceiling" is higher or lower. I dont know if he is "just serviceable" and what that actually means. I do know that the context you have shaped over the last two years can't just include the HC and exclude Zach. It's nonsensical but worse, unfair. Something I don't think you'd want to experience yourself. But seem pretty comfortable in dishing it out.

Key here is context. You have shaped it to fit your opinion. You're entitled. But as you have read it isnt selling. So there is less value to it than you think.

Is this the only forum where you only question coaches but never players?

Questioning players performances is rampant on the P5 forums. The "they're just kids" mantra is bs. Lebron and Matt Staffor were just kids when they got into professional sports, and neither was excluded from criticism.

College players aren't paid in the classic sense, but they're paid any way you slice it, and they're high profile in the media, and not above scrutiny.

GLB - I really don't know what your beef here is. You're all over the map and honestly, I'm having trouble following it so I'll keep my response simple, leave it at this for now, and revisit the topic again after Idaho in a couple weeks. My opinion on the topic is pretty well-documented by now I suppose.

I thought I was allowed to have an opinion here. Guess saying I'm not satisfied with our QB play is now considered "unfair" to ZT . Clearly your opinion of "unfair" is very different than mine.

I've never offered up any inside sources. I'm not sure where you keep getting that from.

I used a lot of facts and statistics to back up my position and where I was coming from. So far, I have seen very little of that from the other side. All I see from you and a couple others are broad, arbitrary, and accusatory statements. Give me something besides "you have an agenda" (which is just a cop-out defense mechanism) or "leave the poor kid alone" when I have never once made any personal attacks towards the young man.

I get it... the accepted narrative here is always, "It's Fleck's fault he <fill in the blank>" no matter what!

Like I've said before...
Coaches need to coach, but players need to play.

(09-04-2014 10:51 AM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  Is this the only forum where you only question coaches but never players?

Questioning players performances is rampant on the P5 forums. The "they're just kids" mantra is bs. Lebron and Matt Staffor were just kids when they got into professional sports, and neither was excluded from criticism.

College players aren't paid in the classic sense, but they're paid any way you slice it, and they're high profile in the media, and not above scrutiny.

You mean Johnny Football and Tim Tebow were NEVER criticized until they made it to the pro's and got paid the big bucks!?

How on earth did they handle the pressure of those "unfair" web board posters!? Say it ain't so!

(09-04-2014 10:53 AM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  GLB - I really don't know what your beef here is. You're all over the map and honestly, I'm having trouble following it so I'll keep my response simple, leave it at this for now, and revisit the topic again after Idaho in a couple weeks. My opinion on the topic is pretty well-documented by now I suppose.

I thought I was allowed to have an opinion here. Guess saying I'm not satisfied with our QB play is now considered "unfair" to ZT . Clearly your opinion of "unfair" is very different than mine.

I've never offered up any inside sources. I'm not sure where you keep getting that from.

I used a lot of facts and statistics to back up my position and where I was coming from. So far, I have seen very little of that from the other side. All I see from you and a couple others are broad, arbitrary, and accusatory statements. Give me something besides "you have an agenda" (which is just a cop-out defense mechanism) or "leave the poor kid alone" when I have never once made any personal attacks towards the young man.

I get it... the accepted narrative here is always, "It's Fleck's fault he <fill in the blank>" no matter what!

I have no problem of posters talking about a player's bad performance. What I have a problem with is doing it to the kids, but not the coach. Especially when your "stats" are based on those from a 1-11 season. You'll judge ZT on less than a year of stats but you'll "wait and see" on PJF. :eggroll:

This team is different than last year. Calling for a player's head after one half of football doesn't make sense in my opinion. Yes, the INT was a bad one. I'd love to see his QB Rating from the second half only. I bet it would stack up pretty well against the "2013 stats of returning MAC quarterbacks, regardless of player experience, team strengths".

I can't wait until Chance Stewart plays (this year or next) and doesn't throw any INTs. I'm glad Coach stuck with ZT the rest of the game, because I don't think, in my opinion, any of the other QB options would have resulted in a win or even a game as close as this one.

The offense scored 34 points. The QB was not the problem.

(09-04-2014 11:24 AM)thegeneral Wrote:  I have no problem of posters talking about a player's bad performance. What I have a problem with is doing it to the kids, but not the coach.

So basically I'm right, it's literally always Fleck's fault. No matter what. Ok, got it.

(09-04-2014 11:24 AM)thegeneral Wrote:  You'll judge ZT on less than a year of stats but you'll "wait and see" on PJF. :eggroll:

It'd be one thing if Fleck didn't just pull in the MAC's top recruiting class last year, made a ton of really impressive facility upgrades, and I hadn't heard unanimous reports of actual players buying into the new staff's philosophy. I'm looking at the product as a whole. Not just the first 1-11 season. I've never seen a complete rebuild happen in one season, but I've seen it happen over the course of several seasons quite often. Recruiting and attitude/morale change is a huge first step in creating that environment, and Fleck has done a tremendous job in both of those areas early on. Hence, my "wait and see" approach on results.

(09-04-2014 11:24 AM)thegeneral Wrote:  The offense scored 34 points. The QB was not the problem.

I agree the defense was a major part of the problem.

(09-04-2014 11:41 AM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(09-04-2014 11:24 AM)thegeneral Wrote:  I have no problem of posters talking about a player's bad performance. What I have a problem with is doing it to the kids, but not the coach.

So basically I'm right, it's literally always Fleck's fault. No matter what. Ok, got it.

(09-04-2014 11:24 AM)thegeneral Wrote:  You'll judge ZT on less than a year of stats but you'll "wait and see" on PJF. :eggroll:

It'd be one thing if Fleck didn't just pull in the MAC's top recruiting class last year, made a ton of really impressive facility upgrades, and I hadn't heard unanimous reports of actual players buying into the new staff's philosophy. I'm looking at the product as a whole. Not just the first 1-11 season. I've never seen a complete rebuild happen in one season, but I've seen it happen over the course of several seasons quite often. Recruiting and attitude/morale change is a huge first step in creating that environment, and Fleck has done a tremendous job in both of those areas early on. Hence, my "wait and see" approach on results.

(09-04-2014 11:24 AM)thegeneral Wrote:  The offense scored 34 points. The QB was not the problem.

I agree the defense was a major part of the problem.

From what I gathered above, PJ has laid the groundwork that you believe will lead to tangible results and that is why you take a "wait and see" approach with him. Honest question since I have never played organized football so I know I am not the best one to identify these, but is it possible that Terrell has laid the groundwork that will lead to better tangible results as a quarterback? It seemed to me he had better pocket awareness this week than I recalled last year. He didn't seem to stare down a receiver as much as he did last year. He wasn't perfect obviously, but headed in the right direction.

I think it all goes back to the original question that there is no answer for. At what point do you potentially decide that the positive of the experince gained from playing outweighs the negative of taking away the experience of someone who has grown and is ahead in the competition because of past experience.

I think we will continue to get a better idea as we can see if he continues to improve. As you said, we will have a better idea after a couple more games.

(09-04-2014 12:16 PM)BusinessBronco Wrote:  Honest question since I have never played organized football so I know I am not the best one to identify these, but is it possible that Terrell has laid the groundwork that will lead to better tangible results as a quarterback? It seemed to me he had better pocket awareness this week than I recalled last year. He didn't seem to stare down a receiver as much as he did last year. He wasn't perfect obviously, but headed in the right direction.

I think it all goes back to the original question that there is no answer for. At what point do you potentially decide that the positive of the experience gained from playing outweighs the negative of taking away the experience of someone who has grown and is ahead in the competition because of past experience.

I think we will continue to get a better idea as we can see if he continues to improve. As you said, we will have a better idea after a couple more games.

Great points. And I think yes, it's possible. But when I look at Terrell's weaknesses, I'm afraid some of them aren't coachable -- namely arm strength and accuracy. That's not to say he doesn't do a few things very well, like manage the offense and limit turnovers. But the problem I see is that there is a natural ceiling there that potentially limits our success with him down the road. That's just my opinion.

(09-04-2014 12:50 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(09-04-2014 12:16 PM)BusinessBronco Wrote:  Honest question since I have never played organized football so I know I am not the best one to identify these, but is it possible that Terrell has laid the groundwork that will lead to better tangible results as a quarterback? It seemed to me he had better pocket awareness this week than I recalled last year. He didn't seem to stare down a receiver as much as he did last year. He wasn't perfect obviously, but headed in the right direction.

I think it all goes back to the original question that there is no answer for. At what point do you potentially decide that the positive of the experience gained from playing outweighs the negative of taking away the experience of someone who has grown and is ahead in the competition because of past experience.

I think we will continue to get a better idea as we can see if he continues to improve. As you said, we will have a better idea after a couple more games.

Great points. And I think yes, it's possible. But when I look at Terrell's weaknesses, I'm afraid some of them aren't coachable -- namely arm strength and accuracy. That's not to say he doesn't do a few things very well, like manage the offense and limit turnovers. But the problem I see is that there is a natural ceiling there that potentially limits our success with him down the road. That's just my opinion.

I agree that sometimes players have natural ceilings purely based on athletic abilities. Which in this case does limit us as a team down the road. That is why IMO we will be farther ahead, as a team, with a QB like CS or JW. Its nothing personal against Terrell, but he is only going to take us so far. If we were talking about another position we could get away with his natural limitations (like arm strength etc..), just don't see us hiding those at QB.

Agreed CMTSU, arm strength isn't important in other positions.

HA

Walk and chew gum at the same time helps.