CSNbbs

We're going to need to prove that we can throw the ball to ultimately win the MAC Championship. If we don't have a dependable passing attack, we won't be able to compete against Michigan and
Northwestern, and we won't be able to beat Toledo and Miami (Ohio).

If Nicholson or Davis doesn't pan out we'll have a good year, we just won't have a great year. Wolfe won't have a great year, he'll just have a good year.

I guess another way to look at it is if the running game is that good, the passes should be that much easier to complete and we should not have to face 8 or 9 in the box. I also have a fear that a QB who shows flashes of running around and making plays, but doesn't lead his team to the promised land (MAC Championship and a bowl game in our case). Too easy to look back at the end of the year and say, "Gee, if only all those turnovers didn't happen. He looked great running the ball though. I hope the other team represents the MAC very well in the bowl game." We should be careful not to have "buyer's remorse."

Go Huskies!

NIUJDK Wrote:I guess another way to look at it is if the running game is that good, the passes should be that much easier to complete and we should not have to face 8 or 9 in the box. I also have a fear that a QB who shows flashes of running around and making plays, but doesn't lead his team to the promised land (MAC Championship and a bowl game in our case). Too easy to look back at the end of the year and say, "Gee, if only all those turnovers didn't happen. He looked great running the ball though. I hope the other team represents the MAC very well in the bowl game." We should be careful not to have "buyer's remorse."

Go Huskies!

Why would you even say that when a "system" quarterback hasn't been able to take us to the MAC championship either?

Because in the games that really mattered for national recognition, our full team wasn't in there. For the first 4 games we played without Haldi (spare 3 plays) and in the Tole_o game, we had the huge emotional letdown from the Wolfe incident. I think that to replay last year's games with the regulars in their slots, we are in the MCB. I know that injuries are a part of football, but I am answering your question.

NIUJDK Wrote:I guess another way to look at it is if the running game is that good, the passes should be that much easier to complete and we should not have to face 8 or 9 in the box. I also have a fear that a QB who shows flashes of running around and making plays, but doesn't lead his team to the promised land (MAC Championship and a bowl game in our case). Too easy to look back at the end of the year and say, "Gee, if only all those turnovers didn't happen. He looked great running the ball though. I hope the other team represents the MAC very well in the bowl game." We should be careful not to have "buyer's remorse."

Go Huskies!

How do you know a running QB wouldn't help us?

I mean could a running QB do worse than the past few QB's we have had? Which one of our past qb's won the MAC, or even made it to the MACC? Quick answer NONE.

So to say that a running qb may not do as well is silly, what could he not do, not win the MAC? Great no one has done that. We have made one bowl in 20 years, so i'm thinking that a series of running QB's or QB's with the ability to run would be hard pressed to do 'worse' than what we have done.

I think our offense will be fine. It's been our defense that's kept us from winning the MAC West in previous years. It's fun to talk about the QB position since it's a high visibility position, but our defensive secondary has to be Joe and his staff's primary concern.

Field Turf Wrote:I think our offense will be fine. It's been our defense that's kept us from winning the MAC West in previous years. It's fun to talk about the QB position since it's a high visibility position, but our defensive secondary has to be Joe and his staff's primary concern.

I agree, but i think the funny thing is that everyone here is waiting for summer camp to begin with the 5 or so freshman DB's we have...I think it's odd but there seems to be an unspoken agreement that we won't get too excited about it till we see the freshman on the field, almost like the FS or one of the hansbros is just holding a place for a freshman none of us have really seen.

Is there any chance if we see davis play qb that they'll throw in an option or two?

If Davis is as good as a scrambler as it seems, it could be pretty devistating.

crazywilly Wrote:

NIUJDK Wrote:I guess another way to look at it is if the running game is that good, the passes should be that much easier to complete and we should not have to face 8 or 9 in the box.  I also have a fear that a QB who shows flashes of running around and making plays, but doesn't lead his team to the promised land (MAC Championship and a bowl game in our case).  Too easy to look back at the end of the year and say, "Gee, if only all those turnovers didn't happen.  He looked great running the ball though.  I hope the other team represents the MAC very well in the bowl game."  We should be careful not to have "buyer's remorse."

Go Huskies!

How do you know a running QB wouldn't help us?

I mean could a running QB do worse than the past few QB's we have had? Which one of our past qb's won the MAC, or even made it to the MACC? Quick answer NONE.

So to say that a running qb may not do as well is silly, what could he not do, not win the MAC? Great no one has done that. We have made one bowl in 20 years, so i'm thinking that a series of running QB's or QB's with the ability to run would be hard pressed to do 'worse' than what we have done.

Who is the best running QB in the NFL? Michael Vick. Super Bowl rings? 0.

National champion QB 2005 - Leinert
National champion QB 2004 - Leinert / Mauck
National champion QB 2003 - Krenzel

The winning teams don't have running quarterbacks. they have quarterbacks who don't make a lot of mistakes, have decent strength arms that are accurate, and can avoid the sack. Reading the defense is also a key attribute to success.

If we were to analyze the conference winners I am pretty sure that we would see the same thing.

CONF Winner Quarterback Comp/Att/Int Rush/Yd/Ave Games Per GM Coaches
PAC 10 USC Matt Leinert 269-412-6 49-(44) -0.9 13 4-4 1
SEC Auburn Jason Campbell 188-270-7 58-30 0.5 13 4-2 2
Big 12 Oklahoma Jason White 255-390-9 23-(56) -2.4 13 2-(4) 3
MW Utah Alex Smith 241-317-4 135-631 4.7 12 11-53 5
C-USA Louisville Stefan Lefors 189-257-3 71-333 4.7 12 6-27 7
ACC Virginia Tech Bryan Randall 170-306-9 136-511 3.8 13 10-39 10
Big 10 Michigan Chad Henne 240-399-12 55-(137) -2.5 12 4-(11) 12
WAC Boise State Jared Zabransky 206-327-12 130-326 2.5 12 11-27 13
Big East Pittsburgh Tyler Palko 130-409-7 129-139 1.1 12 11-12 28
MAC NIU Josh Haldi 94-179-4 39-89 2.3 9 4-10 29
MAC Toled_o Bruce Gradkowski 280-399-8 91-191 2.1 13 7-15 38
Sun Belt N Texas State Scott Hall 134-237-4 61-11 0.2 12 5-1 -
Looks nicer on Excel, but essentially in analyzing each conference winner and comparing to 9 (really 8) games, you see what the other QBs represent - runners or passers. Essentially the overwhelming majority of the QBs are passers and not runners. A couple runners, Alex Smith and Jared Zabransky are in spread systems that want them to option and run. We do not employ that system. I don't know, it seems to me that the successful guys are not running the ball with their QBs.

NIUJDK Wrote:

crazywilly Wrote:

NIUJDK Wrote:I guess another way to look at it is if the running game is that good, the passes should be that much easier to complete and we should not have to face 8 or 9 in the box.  I also have a fear that a QB who shows flashes of running around and making plays, but doesn't lead his team to the promised land (MAC Championship and a bowl game in our case).  Too easy to look back at the end of the year and say, "Gee, if only all those turnovers didn't happen.  He looked great running the ball though.  I hope the other team represents the MAC very well in the bowl game."  We should be careful not to have "buyer's remorse."

Go Huskies!

How do you know a running QB wouldn't help us?

I mean could a running QB do worse than the past few QB's we have had? Which one of our past qb's won the MAC, or even made it to the MACC? Quick answer NONE.

So to say that a running qb may not do as well is silly, what could he not do, not win the MAC? Great no one has done that. We have made one bowl in 20 years, so i'm thinking that a series of running QB's or QB's with the ability to run would be hard pressed to do 'worse' than what we have done.

Who is the best running QB in the NFL? Michael Vick. Super Bowl rings? 0.

National champion QB 2005 - Leinert
National champion QB 2004 - Leinert / Mauck
National champion QB 2003 - Krenzel

The winning teams don't have running quarterbacks. they have quarterbacks who don't make a lot of mistakes, have decent strength arms that are accurate, and can avoid the sack. Reading the defense is also a key attribute to success.

If we were to analyze the conference winners I am pretty sure that we would see the same thing.

CONF Winner Quarterback Comp/Att/Int Rush/Yd/Ave Games Per GM Coaches
PAC 10 USC Matt Leinert 269-412-6 49-(44) -0.9 13 4-4 1
SEC Auburn Jason Campbell 188-270-7 58-30 0.5 13 4-2 2
Big 12 Oklahoma Jason White 255-390-9 23-(56) -2.4 13 2-(4) 3
MW Utah Alex Smith 241-317-4 135-631 4.7 12 11-53 5
C-USA Louisville Stefan Lefors 189-257-3 71-333 4.7 12 6-27 7
ACC Virginia Tech Bryan Randall 170-306-9 136-511 3.8 13 10-39 10
Big 10 Michigan Chad Henne 240-399-12 55-(137) -2.5 12 4-(11) 12
WAC Boise State Jared Zabransky 206-327-12 130-326 2.5 12 11-27 13
Big East Pittsburgh Tyler Palko 130-409-7 129-139 1.1 12 11-12 28
MAC NIU Josh Haldi 94-179-4 39-89 2.3 9 4-10 29
MAC Toled_o Bruce Gradkowski 280-399-8 91-191 2.1 13 7-15 38
Sun Belt N Texas State Scott Hall 134-237-4 61-11 0.2 12 5-1 -
Looks nicer on Excel, but essentially in analyzing each conference winner and comparing to 9 (really 8) games, you see what the other QBs represent - runners or passers. Essentially the overwhelming majority of the QBs are passers and not runners. A couple runners, Alex Smith and Jared Zabransky are in spread systems that want them to option and run. We do not employ that system. I don't know, it seems to me that the successful guys are not running the ball with their QBs.

Ummmmm are we going for a national title here?

Or are we trying to win the MAC? And how many points have been brought up that we have not won the mac with pocket guys, time to move on. Comparing us to those other teams with WR weapons is just stupid, I don't know what you are out to do here, but....It really seems like you hate davis. I'm thinking nicholson is my guy, but I 100% agree with everyone that pocket passers have not won the MAC here so I don't get what you are trying to do?

The NFL is not college football either by the way. Charlie ward, Andre ware...ect ect. Running QB's who won the heisman...So running QB's can do well in college, like lead a team to a championship game, MIKE VICK.

I am assuming that you think the receivers aren't any good. And in that regard I reluctantly worry about that myself.

I was providing factual data to support my premise that the teams are winning their conferences with pocket passers. Just dismissing it as teams going for the national championship avoids the correlation of conference champions to QB playing style. Harris didn't win the MAC when he was at Bowling Green.

I am also probably hoping that Nicholson wins it based upon what I have heard. I really would like to see his mechanics and delivery in person. There is something about running quarterbacks that I do not like. They don't win. I guess it dates back to the Bobby Douglas days with the Bears.

I believe that we are thinking the same thing about Dan Nicholson which is a good thing. And we both want the Huskies to win - so it is merely an academic exercise as to how they decide who the man is going to be. I think that the DBs might be the ones who are going to be the ones to determine if we win or not.

Just my thoughts, but with the running game you guys have you should do very well offensively with a QB that can just complete passes. I don't care if he is mobile or a pocket passer. If he can keep the defense off balance by completing passes than your offense will be deadly once again.

For NIU to get over that hump and win the MAC they just need a couple of breaks that haven't got in the last couple of years. A couple of turnovers here and there to go there way and get a couple of stops defensively with maybe a bad break or two to happen to the other team.

NIU has been just as talented as Toledo and BG the past couple of years. The difference has been that UT and BG have got the breaks for the most part. Yes, NIU beat BG last year but Toledo got the breaks in the UT/NIU game and then NIU lost out when Toledo beat BG. In 2002 it was the same with Toledo just sneaking by NIU because of getting the majority of the breaks in the game and then NIU getting the bad break in that Toledo was able to beat BG in the Rockets finale. In 2003 NIU was coming back with a rush, but a simple 3rd and 33 play went for a long TD for Toledo and that completely changed the game around again. Just a bad break for NIU.


One of these years NIU is going to get the breaks and they are going to win the division because of it. It isn't because they had a pocket passer or a mobile QB.....it's just the way the breaks have gone the last few years.

NIUJDK Wrote:I am assuming that you think the receivers aren't any good. And in that regard I reluctantly worry about that myself.

I was providing factual data to support my premise that the teams are winning their conferences with pocket passers. Just dismissing it as teams going for the national championship avoids the correlation of conference champions to QB playing style. Harris didn't win the MAC when he was at Bowling Green.

I am also probably hoping that Nicholson wins it based upon what I have heard. I really would like to see his mechanics and delivery in person. There is something about running quarterbacks that I do not like. They don't win. I guess it dates back to the Bobby Douglas days with the Bears.

I believe that we are thinking the same thing about Dan Nicholson which is a good thing. And we both want the Huskies to win - so it is merely an academic exercise as to how they decide who the man is going to be. I think that the DBs might be the ones who are going to be the ones to determine if we win or not.

But the fact is WE have not won with a pocket passer.

Who cares what other schools have done they have different players they play different teams ect ect. NIU has not won a title with a pocket passer, that is a fact.

crazywilly Wrote:

NIUJDK Wrote:I am assuming that you think the receivers aren't any good.  And in that regard I reluctantly worry about that myself.

I was providing factual data to support my premise that the teams are winning their conferences with pocket passers.  Just dismissing it as teams going for the national championship avoids the correlation of conference champions to QB playing style.  Harris didn't win the MAC when he was at Bowling Green.

I am also probably hoping that Nicholson wins it based upon what I have heard.  I really would like to see his mechanics and delivery in person.  There is something about running quarterbacks that I do not like.  They don't win.  I guess it dates back to the Bobby Douglas days with the Bears.

I believe that we are thinking the same thing about Dan Nicholson which is a good thing.  And we both want the Huskies to win - so it is merely an academic exercise as to how they decide who the man is going to be.  I think that the DBs might be the ones who are going to be the ones to determine if we win or not.

But the fact is WE have not won with a pocket passer.

Who cares what other schools have done they have different players they play different teams ect ect. NIU has not won a title with a pocket passer, that is a fact.

Does George Bork count?

crazywilly Wrote:But the fact is WE have not won with a pocket passer.

Who cares what other schools have done they have different players they play different teams ect ect. NIU has not won a title with a pocket passer, that is a fact.

I don't disagree with you about not winning the title. I guess trying a running QB to try a running QB to see if we can win that way is something I don't agree with. I could be wrong and time will tell.

crazywilly Wrote:

NIUJDK Wrote:I am assuming that you think the receivers aren't any good.  And in that regard I reluctantly worry about that myself.

I was providing factual data to support my premise that the teams are winning their conferences with pocket passers.  Just dismissing it as teams going for the national championship avoids the correlation of conference champions to QB playing style.  Harris didn't win the MAC when he was at Bowling Green.

I am also probably hoping that Nicholson wins it based upon what I have heard.  I really would like to see his mechanics and delivery in person.  There is something about running quarterbacks that I do not like.  They don't win.  I guess it dates back to the Bobby Douglas days with the Bears.

I believe that we are thinking the same thing about Dan Nicholson which is a good thing.  And we both want the Huskies to win - so it is merely an academic exercise as to how they decide who the man is going to be.  I think that the DBs might be the ones who are going to be the ones to determine if we win or not.

But the fact is WE have not won with a pocket passer.

Who cares what other schools have done they have different players they play different teams ect ect. NIU has not won a title with a pocket passer, that is a fact.

We have not won a title using a WR, a Kicker, or a LB either. That is a fact. So, should we get rid of those positions also?

Quote: NIU has been just as talented as Toledo and BG the past couple of years. The difference has been that UT and BG have got the breaks for the most part. 

Blamming losses on "the breaks" is like blaming losses on officiating. Luck is the residue of effort. NIU got breaks last time they played Toledo. The pass that slid through the Toledo defender's hands for an NIU touchdown. Toledo's horrible punt, causing them to virutally abandon the punting game.

Huskies could not capitalize.

Good teams make their own "breaks".

Field Turf Wrote:

crazywilly Wrote:

NIUJDK Wrote:I am assuming that you think the receivers aren't any good.  And in that regard I reluctantly worry about that myself.

I was providing factual data to support my premise that the teams are winning their conferences with pocket passers.  Just dismissing it as teams going for the national championship avoids the correlation of conference champions to QB playing style.  Harris didn't win the MAC when he was at Bowling Green.

I am also probably hoping that Nicholson wins it based upon what I have heard.  I really would like to see his mechanics and delivery in person.  There is something about running quarterbacks that I do not like.  They don't win.  I guess it dates back to the Bobby Douglas days with the Bears.

I believe that we are thinking the same thing about Dan Nicholson which is a good thing.  And we both want the Huskies to win - so it is merely an academic exercise as to how they decide who the man is going to be.  I think that the DBs might be the ones who are going to be the ones to determine if we win or not.

But the fact is WE have not won with a pocket passer.

Who cares what other schools have done they have different players they play different teams ect ect. NIU has not won a title with a pocket passer, that is a fact.

We have not won a title using a WR, a Kicker, or a LB either. That is a fact. So, should we get rid of those positions also?

No one said get rid of the QB there amigo.

Reading...It's fun and Useful! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I know that people on this board disagree, but fact is Joe Novak runs a conservative offense in the mold of his main influences Bo Schemblechler, Woody Hayes and Bill Mallory. Josh Haldi fit like a glove in what Novak tries to do. Is Novak about to abandon his approach of running the football supported by a conservative, possession oriented passing attack? Joe's been doing what Joe's been doing for an awfully long time. Keep in mind also that the Huskies have been built to run the football, most notably on the offensive line. The Huskies also lack the receiver talent needed for a big passing attack.

While I do think Novak will open things up more given that the old formula has yet to net us a MAC title, I wouldn't be expecting earth-shattering change. In 2005 it will be all about Garrett Wolfe running the football and Phil Horvath managing to do his best Josh Haldi impersonation.

My bad Willy, I meant we should get rid of soccer style kickers and go with a straight on kicker instead. Then we are just as assured of winning a title as we are if we switched to a scrambling QB.