Who will be the starting quarterback when the season begins for Boise State next fall?

I don't even know what I'm talking about, but you gotta love the guy whose last name is six letters long but uses only 3 letters of the alphabet, including the same vowel back-to-back... TWICE. :bluethumb:

Naanee all the way!

I still think Z will start, but I would not be surprised to see Taylor Tharpe becoming the Starter mid season if Z doesn't produce.

4 way tie so far.....

I'm very sure this is going to come to Sanford vs. Zabranski. We know Z has the stuff the be the starter but he isn't showing it right now. If he makes big strides throughout the summer I imagine he will be the starter. If he continues to struggle Sanford will start vs. UI, as he is playing the best right now during spring.

I see that Jared Zabransky has taken a slight lead over Sanford in this poll. I sure hope that is not indicative of what will actually happen. Personally I would prefer Sanford be the quarterback next fall. He has four years of experience in this offense. He is the son of a football coach. He knows the offense, etc.

He has stood in the shadows for four years now. It's time he got his chance. The other quarterbacks, including Zabransky, can fight for the starting spot NEXT year (in 2005) after he's gone. :bluethumb:

I hope that Z improves enough over the summer to earn the starting spot. It seems that it would be advantageous in so many ways to have him be the starter. Having a three year starter is nice-if for some reason he isn't the future QB(Bush,Tharp etc), it would still be nice to go into spring next year with a QB who has a year of xp. Sanford would be the best backup in the WAC, and would be great insurance if Z went down. I just don't like the idea of having a career backup being the starter, this is his last year, unfortunately he is not the future(long term). If the competition is close, start Z, if Sanford is far and away the better player-then it its a no-brainer. Under no circumstances should we use a two QB system-they just don't work!

I think, when you have a situation like this, that being when there is no CLEAR winner, that the guy who has the most experience should be named the starter. Having the same QB start for three years would be nice, but if he has done nothing to stand out from the others then there is absolutely no sense in naming him as the starter just so he can start for three years. Is there?

Secondly, there have been times when Zabransky has looked good, but there have been other times when he has just looked awful. Whereas Sanford has been consistent. I say you go with the guy who is consistent. That makes much more sense to me than naming someone to start even tho he has not done anything to stand out above the others, just so he can be a starter for three years. :angel:

Sanford should start next fall and then Zabransky, Tharp and Hamdan can battle it out next season. Sanford has paid his dues. He deserves the chance to show what he can do as the starter.

Then in 2005you may have a FOUR year starter emerge, i.e. Hamdan. Zabransky should be used this fall much like he was last season, i.e., bring him into the game in running QB or option situations. Just do it more often. :wave:

If there is no clear-cut winner, then , in my opinion you start Zabransky, he is just as experienced as Sanford and there is the potential, with more experience for him to continue to develop where as with Sanford he's probably pretty close to tapped out, development wise. I have complete confidence that Hawk and Co. are more then capable of making the best decision.

Just as experienced as Sanford? Sanford: 4 years vs. Zabranski: 2 years....?

I should have been clear. More game time experience, not significantly more, but more. Point I was getting at, is it is just as rediculous to start a guy because he is a senior, as it is start a guy because he has more eligibility. You guys would obviously prefer to start Sanford because he is more seasoned, while I would prefer to start Z in the interest of getting him seasoned, and the potential of him being a long term QB. It seems to me they are both valid points, and it will come down to the coaching staffs preference.

Wrong. I would prefer they start Sanford because he has been more consistent.

That's true. If he continues to be more consistent, then I believe that we should start him as well. Consistency has become are defining charachteristic-and that all starts with the QB. Here's to consistent, and may the most consistent man win!