The unofficial online home for fans of the Kent State University Golden Flashes. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

He obviously needs to show that in practice and hasn't. Coaches aren't in the habit of keeping players on the bench they believe are better than the guys who are ahead of them. It's a bad career strategy. Being able to throw the ball harder and farther is a way overrated skill in a QB. There are a lot of other qualities that need to be foremost.

(10-01-2014 09:33 AM)axeme Wrote:  He obviously needs to show that in practice and hasn't. Coaches aren't in the habit of keeping players on the bench they believe are better than the guys who are ahead of them. It's a bad career strategy. Being able to throw the ball harder and farther is a way overrated skill in a QB. There are a lot of other qualities that need to be foremost.

Well I do agree ,but the one sad thing is he did. He had higher completion rates way less turnovers and and won both scrimages, you say there is other qualities lets talk about that, are turnovers one of them? 9 interseption so far Would you say good decision making is one? back to turn overs How about off the field or grades or who the team wants all those you may want to think about. I am more than happy to talk to you and listen because it does come down to whats best for the team. 9 points again average will win 0 games for us

I'd like to hear your theory about why the coaches don't want to win and prefer to keep a better player on the sidelines?

So you are one person who thinks Strock is better. You imply there are others who agree. Who specifically thinks that? It's easy to be vague and imply that "the team" thinks that when no one can say otherwise. Someone else might say no one wants Strock but without any evidence, neither assertion means squat. It's a chickenshit argument.

And using negative stats is silly when one guy has played more. What if I argue that we should go with the guy who has more TD passes? See what I mean? Who's to say Strock wouldn't have had more INT's or fewer TD's. It's a specious argument. Bottom line is the professionals we have think Reardon gives us the best chance. Until Strock proves to them otherwise, he will ride the pines.

You obviously are interested only in Strock as you don't post about anything else. What are your credentials to identify talent? Are they better than our coaches' experience? I'm just a fan who doesn't claim to know more than those who make their livelihood coaching. I'm entitled to my opinion, as you are yours, but our opinions don't really have much weight. So far, no one has seen anything in live action games that indicates that Reardon is not our best QB. How many TD's has Strock led us to when he got the chance? Everything else is excuses. There have been a million second string players who have said, "if I just got the chance to play full-time everyone would see I should be a starter." You sort of sound like every parent and friend of an athlete who isn't a starter. They all think their guy isn't getting a fair shake.

We're in trouble this year.

Also, did anyone watch the WatchESPN feed? They kept showing Coach Gamble when talking about Coach Haynes.

Hahaha I was wondering who that was!

(10-01-2014 12:05 PM)axeme Wrote:  I'd like to hear your theory about why the coaches don't want to win and prefer to keep a better player on the sidelines?

So you are one person who thinks Strock is better. You imply there are others who agree. Who specifically thinks that? It's easy to be vague and imply that "the team" thinks that when no one can say otherwise. Someone else might say no one wants Strock but without any evidence, neither assertion means squat. It's a chickenshit argument.

And using negative stats is silly when one guy has played more. What if I argue that we should go with the guy who has more TD passes? See what I mean? Who's to say Strock wouldn't have had more INT's or fewer TD's. It's a specious argument. Bottom line is the professionals we have think Reardon gives us the best chance. Until Strock proves to them otherwise, he will ride the pines.

You obviously are interested only in Strock as you don't post about anything else. What are your credentials to identify talent? Are they better than our coaches' experience? I'm just a fan who doesn't claim to know more than those who make their livelihood coaching. I'm entitled to my opinion, as you are yours, but our opinions don't really have much weight. So far, no one has seen anything in live action games that indicates that Reardon is not our best QB. How many TD's has Strock led us to when he got the chance? Everything else is excuses. There have been a million second string players who have said, "if I just got the chance to play full-time everyone would see I should be a starter." You sort of sound like every parent and friend of an athlete who isn't a starter. They all think their guy isn't getting a fair shake.

I do agree with most of what you said but Strok was a 4/3 star QB who in HS was all state 3 years in arow threw for more than 7000 yards with more than60 TDS with 4 interseotions yes I no your going to say that was HS but giving him 3 and out two times does not give anyone time to prove anything Once again how do you expect any of the players to be able to show anything if they are not given a chance. We have been blown out so why not see what he can do???Your so wrong when you say I only care about Strock But I do know what he can do if given a chance. I know alot more now than I am willing to say at this time

Yes there is a protest on Risman Plaza involving hundreds demanding that Strock be put in. Take a look:

Bench players can break in in one sure way: they succeed when given the chance. What a backup QB needs to do is to go out and not have a bunch of 3 and outs. He needs to actually lead the team down the field and score when the other guy doesn't. You can't whine about not getting enough chances when you don't take advantage of the ones you get. Game time performance counts a whole lot.

Simply, be better.


PASSING GP Efficiency Comp-Att-Int Pct Yards TD Long Avg/G
Reardon, Colin 4 104.34 76-139-7 54.68 % 792 5 45 198.00
Strock, Nathan 2 38.40 3-10-0 30.00 % 10 0 4 5.00

(09-27-2014 06:59 PM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  

(09-27-2014 06:17 PM)flash fan Wrote:  

(09-27-2014 04:10 PM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  Horrible freakin call. The WR caught that ball in the end zone and was on the ground, play us dead. You can't wrestle it away 10 seconds la ter and say it's an INT. HORRIBLE! At worst it was a tie which goes to the offense. But again, it was in the end zone and he was down and had possession of the ball at that point, play over TD. No different than a RB breaking the plane and then fumbling, as soon as he has possession in the end zone it's play over and TD. Freakin terrible to get screwed like this.

Great showing so far, we need to get some pressure up front on D, and the damn WRs need to hold onto the ball. Wayyyy too many dropped balls. If I'm Paul Haynes I'm taking every one of their gloves awY, in weather like this there's no need for them. I understand the frustration over the INTs from Reardon (2nd was horrible and 3rd was on the refs) but Strock needs to stay on the bench, he's out there looking lost and so unsure of things.

Polish Hammer Your constant trash talking about Strock is uncalled for I know you will come back with some more BS Reardon is horriable and you know it but how does a freshman come off the bench and get three plays A QB needs to get a rythem Strock has thrown three long passes and all three we have gotten pass interference calls That in my book are completions. He has not forced a pass he has taken some big hits and not fumbled He has an excellent arm You trashed him last game too but his first pass was dropped and 3 and out, , no chance to settle in It is so blatent you are a Reardon faithfull if you think you no it all all I can say is if you only new

Constant trash talking? From a guy with all of two posts. No Reardon faithful but he is clearly the best we have at the position and Strock looks lost out there plain and simple.

Constant trash talking? I've ever only commented on Strock twice, this game and in the Ohio State debacle so give me a freaking break!

UVA: "I understand the frustration over the INTs from Reardon (2nd was horrible and 3rd was on the refs) but Strock needs to stay on the bench, he's out there looking lost and so unsure of things."

OSU: "Strock was thrown in for a spark and looked terrible (1-7); but I wouldn't doubt we see him get a series here and there."

I'm constantly trashing Strock, yet I pointed out the two times out of over 5700 posts that I actually discussed him. You've been using this user ID for a whopping 7 posts, all trashing Reardon and touting what we could imagine is a relative of yours. There is nobody else calling for Strock, the coaches that see these kids day in and day out have not wavered too much in their insistence if running Reardon out there. Therefore it is quite obvious the difference between the two is much more drastic than you will ever agree with. Reardon's not going anywhere. He has struggled at times and made some poor decisions, but also strung together some solid drives. He moved the ball well at times Saturday before shooting himself in the foot. He tried to squeeze one in there that would work in the MAC but against bigger and faster DBs like UVA had you aren't going to get away with it. Another INT was terrible, but that 3rd one was all on the refs. The WRs dropped numerous balls, especially in the 1st half, Saturday that could've built us a nice cushion before things fell apart. We don't get screwed on that INT in the end zone going into the half and it's a whole different ball game going into the locker room. We appreciate anyone that comes and talks KSU sports, but your over the top insistence that Strock is Tom Brady waiting for a chance is getting old. Yes he's only had limited opportunities, but he has looked lost out there. He has accomplished little positive, unless of course you count flinging a ball out there and hoping to get a pass interference call. You're over zealous posting is making it worse on the poor kid as people need to point out the negatives. Not long ago there was somebody on here doing the same thing about a different QB and saying how great he was; needless to say he was buried on the depth chart, had to change positions and eventually left the program and isn't seeing the field at a DIII school. So trust the coaches and people that see them on a daily basis and can think objectively.

Polish hammer. Who cares how many times a person posts? So, this guy doesn't jump into every discussion everyday. He can still state his opinions. On a different topic I spoke to somebody in athletics today. Obviously Haynes is safe but he said the program was putting a strain on the whole dept

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-01-2014 09:33 PM)KSU 93 Wrote:  Polish hammer. Who cares how many times a person posts? So, this guy doesn't jump into every discussion everyday. He can still state his opinions.

Who cares? That poster obviously cares since he claimed I'm bashing Strock so much. I merely pointed out less than .00034% of my posts had any mention of him as opposed to his 100% por-Strock/anti-Reardon campaign. Just a slight difference. He certainly can state his opinions, we'd like different opinions here.

(10-01-2014 09:33 PM)KSU 93 Wrote:  Polish hammer. Who cares how many times a person posts? So, this guy doesn't jump into every discussion everyday. He can still state his opinions. On a different topic I spoke to somebody in athletics today. Obviously Haynes is safe but he said the program was putting a strain on the whole dept
Thanks for your input , That's all I want is to be allowed to share my opinon. It is my opinon that many fans do not really know what is really going on what is said to the players or what the players say or feel I beleave that we have some good players that can make some big plays but for whatever reason our offense is not clicking Yes our running game is not great and we have dropped some passes but 0ur QB is not helping at all I do not agree at all that Reardon is our best QB and Polish hammer to think that strock has had a fair chance is dead wrong to be put in at the end of a half or quarter and be loose and ready and get 3 plays when he is on the side lines signaling the play is crazy Pros need warm up time!I think our coaching is at fault and I only hope that we get things in order this week, we can still win this conference
Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Perhaps he should've been given another series or two. But i think it comes down to the staff is sold on Reardon, they yanked him a few times to sit him down and un-rattle him as well as send a message as opposed to let's see what the back-up can do. I think they know what they have with both; had Strock gone in and lit it up would be one thing, but Reardon going right back in after sitting a series was the plan. Not much different two years ago with Fisher spelling Keith.

(10-01-2014 09:33 PM)KSU 93 Wrote:  On a different topic I spoke to somebody in athletics today. Obviously Haynes is safe but he said the program was putting a strain on the whole dept

Interesting.... Are you able to expand on/share more? Curious.

(10-02-2014 06:32 PM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  Perhaps he should've been given another series or two. But i think it comes down to the staff is sold on Reardon, they yanked him a few times to sit him down and un-rattle him as well as send a message as opposed to let's see what the back-up can do. I think they know what they have with both; had Strock gone in and lit it up would be one thing, but Reardon going right back in after sitting a series was the plan. Not much different two years ago with Fisher spelling Keith.

Polish hammer, Good Morning I do agree with you on one thing Strock does need to lead his team down field to open up more qpportunities but at the same time that is difficult with a three and out. What I do lnow is that from what I am told Reardon is not the one a couple coaches want out there. There is some things going on in my opinon that will cause a shake up. That is all I am going to say for now

PD Wrote:Smart move: KSU has wisely stuck with QB Colin Reardon through the 2014 struggles, avoiding temptation to make another hole in a dyke already in need of plugging up. No sense for a QB controversy in the midst of fixing the ground game, upgrading the offensive line/wideouts, and getting the defense collectively back up to par. Time will tell if dual threat freshman QB George Bollas (Aurora) emerges by the spring, or enough quality wideouts emerge to make Nathan Strock's arm a true weapon.

(10-03-2014 06:38 AM)MAC tOAMU Wrote:  

(10-01-2014 09:33 PM)KSU 93 Wrote:  On a different topic I spoke to somebody in athletics today. Obviously Haynes is safe but he said the program was putting a strain on the whole dept

Interesting.... Are you able to expand on/share more? Curious.

Sure. They felt their was a drop in recruiting between the coaches. So they want to give Haynes time. BUT their has been a lot of pressure from Joel to market and sell tickets. Students aren't supporting the team and donors for football have dropped off again.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I believe Haynes has recruited better than Hazell who left gaping holes. And if Nielson believes the donations have fallen he needs to look within. As he's chasing big whales they're neglecting the smaller donors. I've been donating for years and have donated to every project, yet since him and his partner came on board I feel they just take some things for granted and don't put the work in. We all saw the shady 90Ksu marketing campaign that lined his pockets with bonuses after tickets were purchased with department funds as well as the failed big dollar donor to the basketball program that is going to prison. Again, perhaps Joel needs to look within first.