Zach brings up a point that I think a lot of people who are clamoring for one qb aren't thinking about. What if the staff had stuck with one qb for every game this season?

There's a good chance, based on the quality of play prior to the switches, that NIU is 2-3 going into homecoming instead of 4-1. Hare got us the points against NU. Would Mac have been able to do what he did had he not gotten injured, based on what you had seen prior to his exit? Would Hare have been able to get enough points for us to beat Kent, based on his play in the game?

Ultimately we'll never know, but ask yourselves this: based on how they've played, disregarding what you think they are capable of doing and only taking into account what they have done during the games themselves, is NIU 4-1 going into homecoming if we stick with 1 qb for the entirety of every game? A good part of me, even though I disagreed with the rotation philosophy from the start, thinks they probably are not.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

On the MAC teleconference, Rod Carey said Drew Hare is still the starting QB, but that they always have a plan for Maddie.

(10-06-2014 08:56 AM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  On the MAC teleconference, Rod Carey said Drew Hare is still the starting QB, but that they always have a plan for Maddie.

#FartNoise

In all seriousness though, I think Carey is stuck in a rough spot right now. He's stuck between trying to win every game and develop a QB. If he lets Hare ride out his difficulties against Kent State or McIntosh ride out his against Northwestern (although I think that was more due to injury), would they (as in the players, not the team) be better off for it in long run? Yes, probably. Would NIU have won either of those games? It's very questionable. So you sacrifice some QB development to get a win. I'm okay with that, but it could have some repercussions down the line.

Imagine what this place would be like if NIU was sitting at 2-3 right now...lol.

EDIT: I now realize all I said was pretty much what Barsema said. So yeah, what he said.

I think it can be argued that if Hare had been more consistent with his passing the last few games and not overthrown the deep ball several times, or threw a bubble screen over TL's head and at Turner's feet, we wouldn't be having this discussion at this point.

He is without a doubt the most complete passer of the 3, but he's yet to show he can perform consistently and won't let the pressure of things not going well affect him.

I can promise you Carey didn't want to have to play Maddie as much as he did Saturday, but he had to do what he had to do to get the win.

It's not a great situation at all, but I don't think it's a coach created bad situation.

We also have to remember Hare and Maddie are RS Sophomores...not sure what Lynch would have looked like starting as a RS sophomore.

I think you get as many wins as possible this year.

It almost seems as if Hare is the starter, but they don't have the confidence in him to make him fully the starter. So you play Maddie a series every game to keep him fresh, as well as not kill Hare's confidence if a situation like Saturday comes up where you have to hit the eject button on Hare because you can say it was all part of the plan.

It'll be interesting to see him Maddie plays more on Saturday, or if it's just a series unless something goes bad with Hare.

(10-06-2014 09:17 AM)7 Wrote:  I can promise you Carey didn't want to have to play Maddie as much as he did Saturday, but he had to do what he had to do to get the win.

It's not a great situation at all, but I don't think it's a coach created bad situation.

I agree. This is not Carey's fault. Although I have yet to figure out what he's doing as far as picking his spots when he substitutes each of them in.

I thought Saturday was a great opportunity to give Maddie a shot at playing it out. Not sure how many more chances you have to do that this year.

(10-06-2014 09:22 AM)7 Wrote:  It almost seems as if Hare is the starter, but they don't have the confidence in him to make him fully the starter. So you play Maddie a series every game to keep him fresh, as well as not kill Hare's confidence if a situation like Saturday comes up where you have to hit the eject button on Hare because you can say it was all part of the plan.

It'll be interesting to see him Maddie plays more on Saturday, or if it's just a series unless something goes bad with Hare.

It's very hard for a sophmore to be productive if he has someone constantly looking over his shoulder that he can be yanked at any time. He needs the experience where he can learn from mistakes and come back out there and adjust so they don't happen in the future.

(10-06-2014 09:47 AM)RitzHuskie Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 09:22 AM)7 Wrote:  It almost seems as if Hare is the starter, but they don't have the confidence in him to make him fully the starter. So you play Maddie a series every game to keep him fresh, as well as not kill Hare's confidence if a situation like Saturday comes up where you have to hit the eject button on Hare because you can say it was all part of the plan.

It'll be interesting to see him Maddie plays more on Saturday, or if it's just a series unless something goes bad with Hare.

It's very hard for a sophmore to be productive if he has someone constantly looking over his shoulder that he can be yanked at any time. He needs the experience where he can learn from mistakes and come back out there and adjust so they don't happen in the future.

Are you willing to sacrifice wins for that?

(10-06-2014 09:22 AM)7 Wrote:  It almost seems as if Hare is the starter, but they don't have the confidence in him to make him fully the starter. So you play Maddie a series every game to keep him fresh, as well as not kill Hare's confidence if a situation like Saturday comes up where you have to hit the eject button on Hare because you can say it was all part of the plan.

Never thought of that. Good point.

If NIU stuck with one qb, they are still 4-1 the only difference is that they would have won by more points in each of the W's and there would be a MUCH MUCH higher comfort level for that QB and rhythm with the players around him. A good article on Huskiewire this morning about NIU lacking any identity, something I said several days ago. That is because of the QB situation. You need to play one QB, because you are not helping any of the QBs in this type of random rotation.

(10-06-2014 10:31 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  If NIU stuck with one qb, they are still 4-1 the only difference is that they would have won by more points in each of the W's and there would be a MUCH MUCH higher comfort level for that QB and rhythm with the players around him. A good article on Huskiewire this morning about NIU lacking any identity, something I said several days ago. That is because of the QB situation. You need to play one QB, because you are not helping any of the QBs in this type of random rotation.

They don't lack an idenity on offense because they're playing 2 QBs. They lack an idenity on offense because their starting QB doesn't fit the system here. They're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

This is not patting myself on the back because I have posted plenty of dumb things on here, but I've been saying this about Hare since fall practice. He does not have the athletic ability to run this offense how it's supposed to be run. They're running an offense right night with nothing set up off the QB run. Nobody has to respect Hare's running ability. It would be one thing if Hare was showing the ability to be a really stronger passer, but he's not.

I have no idea what happens with the QB situation this year, but Hare is not going to be the starter here for the duration of his eligibility.

I think you have confused coach, or coaches.

If I had to guess, as a discussion I had with another alum, seems Carey wants Maddie to be starter for one reason or another.

Only real conclusion is that unless you are Carey, you don't know what he is thinking.

Unless maybe you are his shrink, his wife and he talks in his sleep, Xavier from XMen or God. Everyone is guessing.

(10-05-2014 02:23 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(10-05-2014 01:53 AM)17Huskies Wrote:  I didn't see anyone that was the answer out there today.

There shouldn't be a need for an answer, there should not be a question during Week 6

You wouldn't have tried something different? We weren't scoring against a weak D.

(10-06-2014 12:00 PM)7 Wrote:  They don't lack an idenity on offense because they're playing 2 QBs. They lack an idenity on offense because their starting QB doesn't fit the system here. They're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

This is not patting myself on the back because I have posted plenty of dumb things on here, but I've been saying this about Hare since fall practice. He does not have the athletic ability to run this offense how it's supposed to be run. They're running an offense right night with nothing set up off the QB run. Nobody has to respect Hare's running ability. It would be one thing if Hare was showing the ability to be a really stronger passer, but he's not.

I have no idea what happens with the QB situation this year, but Hare is not going to be the starter here for the duration of his eligibility.

Agree. I honestly think we are going to see Root back their next season. They talked really highly of him this preseason and with the red-shirt year should really understand the offense for next year and put on some muscle.

Hare is just a RS Sophmore. His number are better than Harnish's when he was the QB his sophomore year. Jesus guys, give the guy a chance, Let him grow. He can run, he is only 1 yard less per carry than maddie is right now. His arm is clearly better, but he hasn't had the time to develop with the WRs because he's always being pulled. He needs to be THE guy, or else what is the end game? a 2 QB system for 3 years...please. I like Maddie too, but he can't throw, it's pretty clear that he has a weak arm, and he is NO Lynch or Harnish when it comes to running the ball. Anyway, use Hare, use Maddie I don't care, but use just one.

(10-06-2014 01:58 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  Hare is just a RS Sophmore. His number are better than Harnish's when he was the QB his sophomore year. Jesus guys, give the guy a chance, Let him grow. He can run, he is only 1 yard less per carry than maddie is right now. His arm is clearly better, but he hasn't had the time to develop with the WRs because he's always being pulled. He needs to be THE guy, or else what is the end game? a 2 QB system for 3 years...please. I like Maddie too, but he can't throw, it's pretty clear that he has a weak arm, and he is NO Lynch or Harnish when it comes to running the ball. Anyway, use Hare, use Maddie I don't care, but use just one.

Let me ask you this, are you willing to potentially sacrifice wins in order to have one QB play consistently? Not gonna judge you either way, but just curious.

(10-06-2014 02:04 PM)BarsemaBone2 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 01:58 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  Hare is just a RS Sophmore. His number are better than Harnish's when he was the QB his sophomore year. Jesus guys, give the guy a chance, Let him grow. He can run, he is only 1 yard less per carry than maddie is right now. His arm is clearly better, but he hasn't had the time to develop with the WRs because he's always being pulled. He needs to be THE guy, or else what is the end game? a 2 QB system for 3 years...please. I like Maddie too, but he can't throw, it's pretty clear that he has a weak arm, and he is NO Lynch or Harnish when it comes to running the ball. Anyway, use Hare, use Maddie I don't care, but use just one.

Let me ask you this, are you willing to potentially sacrifice wins in order to have one QB play consistently? Not gonna judge you either way, but just curious.

That's an interesting question and I've seen it come up a few times. In my honest opinion, the QB will perform better knowing his job is safe. It also gives the rest of the team the time to work and develop with a single QB. So I guess, yes, at this point in time I'd be fine if we lost a game for a RS soph to develop. Because there is no guarantee the other QB comes in and wins the game. Maddie performed well Saturday, but he also made one very big mistake. But Carey needs to pick a guy and stick with him, and I think the rest of the team will benefit.

(10-06-2014 02:18 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 02:04 PM)BarsemaBone2 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 01:58 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  Hare is just a RS Sophmore. His number are better than Harnish's when he was the QB his sophomore year. Jesus guys, give the guy a chance, Let him grow. He can run, he is only 1 yard less per carry than maddie is right now. His arm is clearly better, but he hasn't had the time to develop with the WRs because he's always being pulled. He needs to be THE guy, or else what is the end game? a 2 QB system for 3 years...please. I like Maddie too, but he can't throw, it's pretty clear that he has a weak arm, and he is NO Lynch or Harnish when it comes to running the ball. Anyway, use Hare, use Maddie I don't care, but use just one.

Let me ask you this, are you willing to potentially sacrifice wins in order to have one QB play consistently? Not gonna judge you either way, but just curious.

That's an interesting question and I've seen it come up a few times. In my honest opinion, the QB will perform better knowing his job is safe. It also gives the rest of the team the time to work and develop with a single QB. So I guess, yes, at this point in time I'd be fine if we lost a game for a RS soph to develop. Because there is no guarantee the other QB comes in and wins the game. Maddie performed well Saturday, but he also made one very big mistake. But Carey needs to pick a guy and stick with him, and I think the rest of the team will benefit.

Honestly, I'd rather he did that too, but I can understand why he's not. He's being paid to win football games and that's what many of us expect him to do and this is what he thinks he has to do to win football games at the present time.

How many of us would be okay with it if he stuck with Hare for the entire game against Kent and we still couldn't score any points when he was on the field and had lost the game? We're talking about 2 bad games for Hare in a row.

And I don't put as much into the "The QB will perform better knowing his job is safe," argument as you may. Could it work that way for some? Yes. But there are multiple instances where a QB has known his job is safe and yet still performs badly. Sometimes it just comes down to the fact that the QB is just not that good.