Tiano may end up at TE bit would not surprise me how this turns out
Printable View
Tiano may end up at TE bit would not surprise me how this turns out
Reminds me of Ryan Tannehill, the Dolphins QB from Texas A&M. Good looking prospects. Recruit enough of these type of guys and you end up with NFL caliber QBs running your offense every year.
Big kid that runs well.. just needs to put something on the ball..
Smith and Spivey are both being recruited as ATH so these commits don't rule them out. I would expect a commitment from Harrison Moon (Tiano's teammate) today and possible Jalen Thompson.
This should be the best class we have ever signed.
Really like his quick release. Runs well, throws a clean crisp pass. Should be competition at the QB position for the next few years.
This is the type of croot I'll get fired up about. Big, and can throw and run. Perfect for Mullen, perfect for the college game. I like that we are stockpiling the same type of QB. I know it may seem like teams can better gameplan for one type of player, but that works both ways. We have to create the best system for that same player. This helps us be more consistent and at the end of the day, Croom was right that execution trumps everything else.
And I actually think the whole 'two different style QBs to gameplan for' is a bit overrated. True, if we go into a game with Tyler Russell and Dak, the other team will have to have two different schemes ready, to some degree. But for one thing, we saw that no matter who is the QB, we'll run a lot of the same stuff. And for another, Dak is far more difficult to gameplan for than Russell. So you might as well just go into a game with one QB, or one style of QB, but make that one style be very difficult to gameplan against, period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goat Holder
I don't think having a package QB is overrated. I do think it makes it hard for the defense when in addition to the normal offense, they also have to prepare for a package that focuses on the strenghts of the back-up qb. There is some extra stress on your offense to prepare, but you have to get your backup QB snaps in practice anyway, and you're not trying to make them implement a whole new offense, just a package of plays. And to the extent you can use other backups in the package, you don't even have to use that practice time for all of your starters.Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
The reason it didn't work out that well for us is that Dak couldn't be a package QB because of injuries. So we ended up playing two QB's a bunch with an offense that didn't fit Tyler's skills b/c we didn't have the WR and make the adjustments to maximize his talent, but we had changed the focus of our offense enough that it wasn't really optimized for Dak either.
I don't think this will really be an issue for us going forward. I think our primary qb's are going to be dual threats going forward. When we do have a backup qb that is more of a pocket passer, it's just hard to turn them into a package qb because it's so much harder to come in for spot duty as a passer than it is to come in and run some sort of option offense.
This will become more clear after this year. We have Prescott and Williams as 1/2, essentially the same type QB. We haven't ever really had this since Mullen arrived. Your system did work out well in 2009 and 2012, so there could be something to that. But we need to see this system first before we judge. Perhaps what we are doing now will work better against the better teams, which is precisely where the previous system failed us in 09/12.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
My point is that if you have a package QB, it's because your starter can't do everything you want your QB to do. So sure, having two QBs with different skillsets is better than having one QB who is one-dimensional, but it still isn't better than having one QB who can run every play that you have effectively.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
We have Dak Prescott, who can run any kind of play we have, and is always a threat to throw or run, so we don't need a package QB. That, in and of itself, is difficult for defense to gameplan for. That was my point.
Great pickup. He looks just like Dak back there.
The staff may think that Staley ends up sticking with basketball down the road.
Our last four commitments are big enough and good enough athletes they can play other spots.... Nick Fitzgerald and Elijah Staley are both 6'5 and can run TE or even DE... Vigil could play wr and Tiano could play TE... Mullen can run the qb until his legs fall off with this kind of real depth after next year.
I agree that if you are running a run first spread offense like us, a package qb doesn't help. You need your primary qb to be a dual threat. If he's not, you end up with the issue where the different look from your 'package qb' doesn't make up for the fact that you're running an offense that is not a good fit for your primary qb. If you do have a dual threat, it's hard for a package qb to bring anything to the table different enough to be worth having a separate package. Williams will not really be a package qb. He'll be running the same stuff as Dak, just pared back some depending on what he's capable of running. I think it's going to be like this for the foreseeable future, except maybe we end up with a Relf type runner as a primary qb and do have a smaller, quicker back-up qb that brings a different look in the run game.Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
Just wanted to clarify that Staley is actually 6'7". He's stupid huge.Quote:
Originally Posted by thedawg
This is a good thing. Think of it this way. We can run the QB twice as much and not have as much risk of injury to Prescott. THAT is the beauty of it. And it'll be crisper too since they'll all be practicing the same thing. Think....for once....our entire offense in sync.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
Most of the time, "packages" are reserved for running QBs who are spelling a passing QB. I've never seen a passing QB come in to spell a runner, I don't think.
I'm not sure what you're saying. Williams won't play unless we're killing someone or Dak is hurt. We're not going to be running any packages at all at QB. It's Dak 100% of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Goat Holder
I think what he meant was of dak gets hurt, we won't have to overhaul the offensive gameplan for Williams.Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
That said, hopefully we are smart enough to limit dak's carries against weaker opponents and blowouts. No need I ding him up against usm when we'll need all the carries we can get against Bama and lsu and auburn.
I definitely agree with you in regard to our lesser opponents. I'd let him throw for 200 or so in the first half, then pull him for the second.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgs
In regard to Goat, I would agree except that he said we can run the QB twice as much and have less injury risk for Dak - makes me think he's talking about Williams subbing in regularly.