The way Carey and his staff have handled the QB situation, specifically Childers has been nothing short of stellar. From last spring, they knew this kid’s skills best fit our offensive scheme. They gave him every chance to win the job in fall camp, but he clearly was not ready. They went to the obvious choice to open the season (Graham), and when he went down, they went with the QB who had the most experience (Santa) even those his skills were not ideal to this offense. They continually worked with Childers, giving him spot reps in games until he was ready.
In some ways Santa”s pick (picks) came at a perfect time for Carey to use the player he may have wanted in there all along. The timing could not have been better; 3 consecutive games against our weakest opponents. Combine this (the timing of his starts) with the play calling, you have the perfect recipe for development/confidence building. We will never know, but running this offense (with Childers) against BC, Nebraska, SDSU would have not only been unsuccessful and confidence eroding; but would have likely resulted in a injury to the young QB.
Like him or hate him (Carey), Childers, from a coaching perspective, has been handled flawlessly.

Are you Rod or his wife?

In all honesty, I don’t think this was a grand master scheme executed in a premeditated manner. You can make the argument, but I personally am so-so with how the QB situation went down

(10-23-2017 01:28 PM)Djud Wrote:  The way Carey and his staff have handled the QB situation, specifically Childers has been nothing short of stellar. From last spring, they knew this kid’s skills best fit our offensive scheme. They gave him every chance to win the job in fall camp, but he clearly was not ready. They went to the obvious choice to open the season (Graham), and when he went down, they went with the QB who had the most experience (Santa) even those his skills were not ideal to this offense. They continually worked with Childers, giving him spot reps in games until he was ready.
In some ways Santa”s pick (picks) came at a perfect time for Carey to use the player he may have wanted in there all along. The timing could not have been better; 3 consecutive games against our weakest opponents. Combine this (the timing of his starts) with the play calling, you have the perfect recipe for development/confidence building. We will never know, but running this offense (with Childers) against BC, Nebraska, SDSU would have not only been unsuccessful and confidence eroding; but would have likely resulted in a injury to the young QB.
Like him or hate him (Carey), Childers, from a coaching perspective, has been handled flawlessly.

I hope he continues to get better. I wanted Santa to stay in because I thought he had more promise as a passer and I don't know how Graham beat him out. But I agree that Childers has potential and does seem to fit the NIU offense better. I was also a Maddie fan when he was competing against Hare and McIntosh (?). But Hare turned out to be pretty good and I think Maddie would have also.

(10-23-2017 01:36 PM)JB04 Wrote:  Are you Rod or his wife?

In all honesty, I don’t think this was a grand master scheme executed in a premeditated manner. You can make the argument, but I personally am so-so with how the QB situation went down

And it could have been handled better how?

(10-23-2017 01:45 PM)Djud Wrote:  

(10-23-2017 01:36 PM)JB04 Wrote:  Are you Rod or his wife?

In all honesty, I don’t think this was a grand master scheme executed in a premeditated manner. You can make the argument, but I personally am so-so with how the QB situation went down

And it could have been handled better how?

I think we should have started with Santa vs Boston College, and worked Childers in periodically starting then. I think with Santa we would have won, plus he had some experience too. Then Childers would have had a few more reps. Need more?

QBs under Rod's system seem to get hurt alot. I do not think you can just pass it all off as bad luck.

(10-23-2017 01:51 PM)JB04 Wrote:  

(10-23-2017 01:45 PM)Djud Wrote:  

(10-23-2017 01:36 PM)JB04 Wrote:  Are you Rod or his wife?

In all honesty, I don’t think this was a grand master scheme executed in a premeditated manner. You can make the argument, but I personally am so-so with how the QB situation went down

And it could have been handled better how?

I think we should have started with Santa vs Boston College, and worked Childers in periodically starting then. I think with Santa we would have won, plus he had some experience too. Then Childers would have had a few more reps. Need more?

I think the thread title refers to his handeling of Childers not Santa (or Graham).

(10-23-2017 01:28 PM)Djud Wrote:  The way Carey and his staff have handled the QB situation, specifically Childers has been nothing short of stellar. From last spring, they knew this kid’s skills best fit our offensive scheme. They gave him every chance to win the job in fall camp, but he clearly was not ready. They went to the obvious choice to open the season (Graham), and when he went down, they went with the QB who had the most experience (Santa) even those his skills were not ideal to this offense. They continually worked with Childers, giving him spot reps in games until he was ready.
In some ways Santa”s pick (picks) came at a perfect time for Carey to use the player he may have wanted in there all along. The timing could not have been better; 3 consecutive games against our weakest opponents. Combine this (the timing of his starts) with the play calling, you have the perfect recipe for development/confidence building. We will never know, but running this offense (with Childers) against BC, Nebraska, SDSU would have not only been unsuccessful and confidence eroding; but would have likely resulted in a injury to the young QB.
Like him or hate him (Carey), Childers, from a coaching perspective, has been handled flawlessly.

I agree with you to a point, I do not believe any way shape or form that he was given a chance for the job in the summer, not a chance. I do think deep down though the coaching staff did realize he was the best fit, you could tell that just from comments Carey made in the spring. I just don't think Carey had the guts to start a RS-FR at QB. As time went on, that decision became easier and easier. Would NIU be in the Access Bowl discussion had Childers started the year? Tough to say. I do applaud Coach Carey for pulling the trigger on this in the middle of the year, but someday somehow I hope that personnel decisions can be fully evaluated in the summer when they were meant to be evaluated.

The fact that he didn't start the year as the 2st string QB was a huge,critical part of his development.

(10-23-2017 02:20 PM)Djud Wrote:  The fact that he didn't start the year as the 2st string QB was a huge,critical part of his development.

Agreed.

Looking back I don't think Childers is the difference at SDSU, but vs BC , Childers or Santa would have won that game.

(10-23-2017 02:24 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(10-23-2017 02:20 PM)Djud Wrote:  The fact that he didn't start the year as the 2st string QB was a huge,critical part of his development.

Agreed.

Looking back I don't think Childers is the difference at SDSU, but vs BC , Childers or Santa would have won that game.

I think it was technically burglary, with conversion (into points).

If you think Childers beats BC did you just not watch the UB game or...?

(10-23-2017 02:56 PM)7 Wrote:  If you think Childers beats BC did you just not watch the UB game or...?

Childers would have gotten first team reps at end of summer and would have been ready for BC instead of being buried on depth chart

I love all the speculation and mind reading lol.

I may have to reverse fields... the more I hear Carey’s press conference the more obvious it is that Graham was (and possibly still is) his first choice at QB. Childers’s development could not have been more timely for Carey; it has given Graham the time to heal. If and when he is ready, Graham will be back in the mix. Carey has an absolute disdain for turnovers; he made that point clear again today. Santa’s quick hook is testament to this. I get the impression the only time we will see Santa is due to an injury; and even then the leash will be very short.

(10-24-2017 05:48 PM)Djud Wrote:  I may have to reverse fields... the more I hear Carey’s press conference the more obvious it is that Graham was (and possibly still is) his first choice at QB. Childers’s development could not have been more timely for Carey; it has given Graham the time to heal. If and when he is ready, Graham will be back in the mix. Carey has an absolute disdain for turnovers; he made that point clear again today. Santa’s quick hook is testament to this. I get the impression the only time we will see Santa is due to an injury; and even then the leash will be very short.

If there is one thing we know for one hundred percent certain it is that graham is behind both santa and Childers. Either Santa or Childers beats BC. 50 percent completion percentages don't win many games. If Graham starts again there will be many huskie fans bailing and Carey should be fired

(10-24-2017 05:55 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(10-24-2017 05:48 PM)Djud Wrote:  I may have to reverse fields... the more I hear Carey’s press conference the more obvious it is that Graham was (and possibly still is) his first choice at QB. Childers’s development could not have been more timely for Carey; it has given Graham the time to heal. If and when he is ready, Graham will be back in the mix. Carey has an absolute disdain for turnovers; he made that point clear again today. Santa’s quick hook is testament to this. I get the impression the only time we will see Santa is due to an injury; and even then the leash will be very short.

If there is one thing we know for one hundred percent certain it is that graham is behind both santa and Childers. Either Santa or Childers beats BC. 50 percent completion percentages don't win many games. If Graham starts again there will be many huskie fans bailing and Carey should be fired

We don’t know this for sure, it’s your opinion

(10-24-2017 05:59 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  We don’t know this for sure, it’s your opinion

Just block him and move on. It's not even worth trying to reason with him.

(10-24-2017 05:48 PM)Djud Wrote:  I may have to reverse fields... the more I hear Carey’s press conference the more obvious it is that Graham was (and possibly still is) his first choice at QB. Childers’s development could not have been more timely for Carey; it has given Graham the time to heal. If and when he is ready, Graham will be back in the mix. Carey has an absolute disdain for turnovers; he made that point clear again today. Santa’s quick hook is testament to this. I get the impression the only time we will see Santa is due to an injury; and even then the leash will be very short.

Graham was Carey's #1 at the beginning of the year; Childers was not ready to start until recently per Carey today. As for now, it is possible (based on Carey’s comments today), but I don't think it matters. Graham has been out almost 8 weeks, instead of the 2-4 weeks initially thought, and may start throwing next week or the week after per Carey today. That only leaves 2 regular season games after Graham starts throwing. Unless Childers gets hurt or bombs out he remains the starter. It was definitely Santa’s pick in the Kent St. game that sealed his fate in Carey's mind. If Graham does make it back this year at all, it sounds like he would not be ready until the MACC, if we make it. IMO Graham should not start over Childers; regardless, making a change for the MACC when Graham has not played in then over 3 months would be just plain stupid!

Oh yea; MD you meant Graham had a 40 % completion percentage in the BC game (not 50%), and no, you don’t win many games with a 40% completion rate.