Who will be next year's starting QB?

I would not be shocked if Zeno is mixed in some, even if Reed is good to go

Miles over Zeno but Reed to start the season sans injury

Agreed.

I think it's

Reed
O'Neil
Zeno

At this point, as long as it is the guy who is QB1 in game 5 and game 10, I am probably happy. At least happier than now.

It's been one year

Really hope Reed gets pushed hard this offseason. Either that or the hope the staff can develop O'Neill beyond Reed's abilities and start him instead.

Either way, we need much, much better QB play (particularly in the passing game) from our starter. If that doesn't happen, it'll likely be the beginning of the end of at least some of the staff.

Disagree. We need better QB play but it's not as horrible as you make it sound.

I'm more interested in offensive philosophy/play calling scheme than I am in QB. That is what is going to make or break us

O'Neill is the heir apparent. And he could become QB1 sooner than later.

vander54 said:

---

Disagree. We need better QB play but it's not as horrible as you make it sound.

---

I think you're a bit too beholden to Reed's performances against Auburn and USC. Reed was pretty good against both, but those were the only two games of the season he had ~2+ weeks to prepare for.

If we can only expect good-to-great performances out of him when he has an abundance of time to prepare, I'm thinking that's nowhere near good enough.

Johnny Boyziel 2 said:

---

Sparkie said:

---

The opposing defenses are excited about Reed tipping off run or pass.

---

You should keep posting this in every thread that mentions Reed. Someone might eventually think it's clever.

---

You are right. Its all a ruse. Reed is going to wait and switch feet positioning to throw off a defense when it really matters. Feel better?

.

The real question we all want the answer to is:

WHO IS QB2???!!

83Aggie said:

---

O'Neill is the heir apparent. And he could become QB1 sooner than later.

---

And how the hell do you know this?

O'Neill has 6 passing attempts. Although he did look good in that one drive, it's not a predictor of anything.

vander54 said:

---

Nope. But try again

Reed improved during his second stint as the starter. He finished with one of the highest QBRs we've had in many years. Statistically he was one of the top Freshmen QBs in the nation and he had to play 5 of his 8 starts without Moss. Basically on RB3 for majority of his time.

He needed to improve and did so in the second half of the year. He still has work to do but he has better WR and a full offseason to work with them. Plus we should be healthy and stronger at RB to take some of the pressure off of him.

---

Yeah I might as well try again.

I don't believe QBR is as good an indicator of a great QB as you do. The top range of QBRs definitely includes the best QBs, but also includes some non-draftable ones (Army and Navy QBs). How are we to know which camp Reed belongs to on that one statistic alone?

I believe I saw a stat saying that our rushing efficiency did not drop off appreciably when we lost Moss. If you've got stats that refute that, please show me. Till then, I'm not giving Reed extra credit for enduring "lesser" RB play.

And in his second stint as starter (I assume you mean from 3rd Q vs LSU onwards), I'm not that impressed:


vs LSU: Great outcome for our team considering the circumstances, but if you look closely, the majority of our scoring came on short fields courtesy of Nussmeier INTs. Furthermore, the LSU defense never figured out that Reed could keep the ball (terrible inter-team communication). Reed never replicated his rushing success after this game, so I'm inclined to chalk up the good result to LSU's mistakes more than anything

@SCAR: Pretty ok start all things considered, but got completely shut out in the 2nd half once the SCAR defense adjusted to him. I'm not really impressed by that.

vs NMST: You should expect good QBs to rip through rent-a-wins like these, and Reed kinda sorta did that. However, he was still missing easy throws to an open Shane Calhoun in the first half. That's not stuff a good QB does against this level of competition.

@AUB: The high water mark of his career here so far. Solid overall.

vs TEX: Annnd back down to earth. That INT in the 1st half was mind boggling, I have no idea what he actually saw on the field then. Couldn't move the ball hardly at all.

vs USC: Another solid QB performance. Would've looked even better if Noah had caught that TD too.



I really don't see how you'd like Reed's performances excepting the Auburn and USC games. I'd say they're no better than a 4.5/10 cumulatively. Can we at least agree on that?

Quote:

---

@SCAR: Pretty ok start all things considered, but got completely shut out in the 2nd half once the SCAR defense adjusted to him. I'm not really impressed by that.

---

It was actually his foot placement tipping the play calls that lost us the game. The loss had nothing to do with Moss going down or the defense forgetting how to tackle.

Yeah if Reed was tipping during the SCAR game, I definitely agree with you, and I would also say losing Moss didn't dramatically affect our rushing efficiency for the whole season due to some stats I saw earlier. If anyone can corroborate or disprove that, I'd like to see it because I can't remember where I saw the stat.

I can't say the SCAR loss had nothing to do with the defense though, the quantity of missed tackles was egregious. But I will give you about a 75/25% split of blame offense to defense. Gotta score points to win.

Yeah our yards/carry took a rather big hit after Moss went down.

Plus we didn't really have the home run threat. Moss had 6 games with at least 1 run over 20 yards. Daniels only had 4 and he played in 4 more games than Moss.

Actually, I'd like to see rushing efficiency stats, not the raw data chief. There are a multitude of different reasons why the raw numbers wouldn't necessarily tell us the whole story, including but not limited to these:

-Moss spent 8.25 games as RB1 to Daniels's 5.75. That could affect the types of runs each RB was asked to make

-Our best opponents came later in the season when and after Moss went down. Who's to say Moss didn't rack up a bunch of yards on fewer carries against inferior teams when it was easier?

-Assuming you're right about Reed tipping plays, it stands to reason it was figured out by our opponents starting in the SCAR game, just like you said. With Moss going down in that same game, it would mean Moss possibly benefited from racking up all his touches before our opponents could easily key in on the play.

Opponent-adjusted efficiency metrics are what we need.

Rushing efficiency stats matter, but QBR doesn't? No wall of text will help you to prove whatever point you are trying to make. If you couldn't see the drop off in talent from Moss to Daniel's, then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe get your eyes checked.

ETA: our toughest opponents were South Carolina, New Mexico State, Auburn, Texas, and USC? You are so bad at this.

I said I think the QBR metric is flawed because it doesn't appear to generate a list of the best college QB down to the worst by my estimation or by the NFL's estimation.

The QBs for Army and Navy both rank higher in QBR than Reed this year. Should we get rid of Reed and get either of them to come run our offense? I don't think so, but maybe you do.

I think it's quite valid to doubt a metric when it spits out some weird outliers. Doesn't make me inconsistent to doubt the foundation of one metric and trust another as long as I have good reasons.

By the way, if you or Vander (I seem to remember him previously sharing some previous efficiency metrics with us) have any efficiency metrics that show our rushing attack was appreciably better with Moss rather than Daniels, I'll concede on this point. Just haven't seen it yet


And yeah, I'd say at time-of-play, Texas and South Carolina were better than Notre Dame and Mizzou. Everyone else from the first 8 games showed crippling amounts of haplessness.

Reed needs to learn to throw 1st option, throw 2nd option, then either throw 3rd option vs run.

If he drops, option 1 no open then runs then he is not going to last the season. Against good/fast defenses, he has no chance running consistently.

If you don't use your eyes to notice how drastically our team changed after losing Moss I don't even know what to say to you. However, both things can be true where we had a worse rushing attack and Reed just isn't a good passer yet. He is young and time will tell if he can improve or not.

I sent it to the pool boy. He knows stuff.