THE PAC12 THREAD v.4

[trojanfan12]

Let's be honest, it is usually a desperate and or depleted team that starts a true frosh at the helm. Most if not all head coaches would rather redshirt their first year to let them learn the play book and put on some muscle.

Agree. The only reason Barkley got to start was because Sanchez unexpectedly declared for the draft after only 1 season as the starter.

 

[Vitamike]

I guess I was more going for the angle of not having to start a true freshman at QB because we had better options. Sure, it's going to be rare for schools to have 4 year starting QB's threatening their records anymore. The ones capable of reaching those will all leave early. That's today's game.

Agree. The only reason Barkley got to start was because Sanchez unexpectedly declared for the draft after only 1 season as the starter.

I'll be honest, you two could just be a bit behind the times is all.

Sure I can agree to this assessment for the most part however the times are changing, and there are many reasons why...

Read this ...

Why starting a true freshman quarterback is so hard

They talk about why it's hard but point to a number of reasons why it may be getting easier.

Interesting enough, they point to three PAC true freshman QB's as examples in the past three years.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'll be honest, you two could just be a bit behind the times is all.

Sure I can agree to this assessment for the most part however the times are changing, and there are many reasons why...

Read this ...

Why starting a true freshman quarterback is so hard

They talk about why it's hard but point to a number of reasons why it may be getting easier.

Interesting enough, they point to three PAC true freshman QB's as examples in the past three years.

Other than talking about true freshman starters at qb, not sure what this article has to do with....well, anything that was discussed.

 

[RegentDenali]

Agree. The only reason Barkley got to start was because Sanchez unexpectedly declared for the draft after only 1 season as the starter.

I remember that. But shit happens and Barkley ended up doing great considering the hell the program was going to go through during his career there.

For the huskies, Browning ended up the best option, because Drunk Sark left us in terrible shape at the QB position, and Karta-Samuels didn't progress enough. Thank god Browning stepped up and developed like he did. Considering the issues with the WR play last year, Browning really helped save the season.
Fingers crossed he takes it to the next level this year. With Ross back, that should help a lot too.
If things go to plan, we shouldn't have to go true freshman again for a long time.

If Jacob Sirmon keeps his commitment to the 2018 class, were in excellent shape for years to come.

 

[Vitamike]

Other than talking about true freshman starters at qb, not sure what this article has to do with....well, anything that was discussed.

Well first of all, I meant to quote this post below along with yours and not the one I quoted from Wiz...

Let's be honest, it is usually a desperate and or depleted team that starts a true frosh at the helm. Most if not all head coaches would rather redshirt their first year to let them learn the play book and put on some muscle.

So sorry for the confusion. The point I was trying to make is times are changing and although the article's title implies that it is hard to start true freshman at QB, they give quite a few reasons as to why it may be getting easier.

Couple that with the fact that redshirting a Freshman may lead to only two years running the offense as more and more we see the most talented college players declaring for the draft early and NFL teams biting on the chance to draft them is tell, tell. I think a lot of this is a result of the last CBA which offers NFL teams lower rookie deals and first round talent a 5th year option.

 

[TheDayMan]

Speaking of drunk sark, whatever happened to sark? Last I heard he was gonna sue usc, what happened with that?

 

[RegentDenali]

Well first of all, I meant to quote this post below along with yours and not the one I quoted from Wiz...
So sorry for the confusion. The point I was trying to make is times are changing and although the article's title implies that it is hard to start true freshman at QB, they give quite a few reasons as to why it may be getting easier.

Couple that with the fact that redshirting a Freshman may lead to only two years running the offense as more and more we see the most talented college players declaring for the draft early and NFL teams biting on the chance to draft them is tell, tell. I think a lot of this is a result of the last CBA which offers NFL teams lower rookie deals and first round talent a 5th year option.

It also depends on how pro-ready these QBs are. Some NCAA programs runs the type of offenses that better grooms QBs for the pro game than others. The NFL is such a weird beast because some teams will draft certain positions that year based on are they ready to start playing as rookies, while others are drafting based on more on potential and a lot of development will still need to be required.

Some NCAA QBs end up seniors and are playing at a really high level, but they don't declare for the NFL because they know they won't get drafted high enough and they're better off just finishing school and hoping the last year of playing gets them more NFL attention.

 

[socaljim242]

Speaking of drunk sark, whatever happened to sark? Last I heard he was gonna sue usc, what happened with that?

Good question. I've heard nothing on that and it might have gotten settled. I think he was owed like three years maybe they paid him half of what he was owed. I know uSC was saying he wasn't owed anything because he was asked plenty of times if he had a drinking problem and he kept saying no . Even signed paperwork that said he';s been asked to seek help and if something alcohol related happens again he's gone. Then he come's back with I was drunk when i signed that so it doesn't count.lol

 

[Vitamike]

It also depends on how pro-ready these QBs are. Some NCAA programs runs the type of offenses that better grooms QBs for the pro game than others. The NFL is such a weird beast because some teams will draft certain positions that year based on are they ready to start playing as rookies, while others are drafting based on more on potential and a lot of development will still need to be required.

Some NCAA QBs end up seniors and are playing at a really high level, but they don't declare for the NFL because they know they won't get drafted high enough and they're better off just finishing school and hoping the last year of playing gets them more NFL attention.

And why I specifically stipulated the 'most talented college players'

Look no further than Jared Goff, played as a true Freshman and then was gone two years after that as the No. 1 pick overall. The NFL is thirsty for next level talent at the QB spot and Goff is not the anomaly rather another quality QB gone after three years removed from HS.

UCLA's Josh Rosen has tremendous upside, and putting him under center as the Bruins are planning this year, may be enough to elevate his NFL draft stock in 2018 as a top NFL draft prospect, as long as he plays up to his potential and hype. So last years true Freshman campaign may turn out to be his break in year and UCLA gets two quality years out of him. Of course if he under achieves in the next two seasons, then this whole scenario is moot.

The point is, with all of the HS QB's joining the ranks at the college with private QB coaches, all the camps, 7 on 7 leagues, the Elite 11 and sech and then add in the fact that early enrollment in college has been trending up for some time, redshirting a very talented QB may end up looking like Jameis Winston college career.

You only get the guy on the field for two years!

 

[Olyduck]

Speaking of drunk sark, whatever happened to sark? Last I heard he was gonna sue usc, what happened with that?

they moved the law suit to private arbitration. no news on word of his job prospects. Maybe Dartmouth. their mascot is a giant keg

 

[Olyduck]

 

[Olyduck]

So if the Big 12 expands and goes to 14, which SEC, Big 10 and ACC are already at, does this force the Pac 12 to go 14?

 

[WizardHawk]

So if the Big 12 expands and goes to 14, which SEC, Big 10 and ACC are already at, does this force the Pac 12 to go 14?

No. The only reason they went to 12 was to get the ccg for better chances at reaching the national championship game. Even that took a hell of a lot of work and coaxing behind the scenes. It was a bloody miracle it happened at all.

As I've said many times, the deal breaker is that it would eliminate the guaranteed california road trip for all non california teams. I mean every school would pay millions to get exposure to fertile recruiting grounds so why would they give up those built in trips to those grounds in lieu of extra money? They won't. This isn't some minor consideration, it's major.

Add to that the fact that UCLA and Cal have been traditionally VERY opposed to ANY expansion and now really no school in the conference wants more teams.

Now if they could add more teams from california or somehow go to 16 - 4 divisions and find a way to get cali trips in it for everyone maybe, but only if the the super conference only league ever comes into play.

I just don't see any real scenario where expansion EVER happens again in the Pac.

 

[wazzu31]

Not really fair using Goff, the guy is garbage and is a third round pick if he stayed for his senior year. Most Pac 12 freshmen QB are pro ready and the best QB on the team. Nobody wanted to play behind Cal's shitty line 3 years ago.

 

[Olyduck]

No. The only reason they went to 12 was to get the ccg for better chances at reaching the national championship game. Even that took a hell of a lot of work and coaxing behind the scenes. It was a bloody miracle it happened at all.

As I've said many times, the deal breaker is that it would eliminate the guaranteed california road trip for all non california teams. I mean every school would pay millions to get exposure to fertile recruiting grounds so why would they give up those built in trips to those grounds in lieu of extra money? They won't. This isn't some minor consideration, it's major.

Add to that the fact that UCLA and Cal have been traditionally VERY opposed to ANY expansion and now really no school in the conference wants more teams.

Now if they could add more teams from california or somehow go to 16 - 4 divisions and find a way to get cali trips in it for everyone maybe, but only if the the super conference only league ever comes into play.

I just don't see any real scenario where expansion EVER happens again in the Pac.

yeah I was thinking unless they added Fresno and San Diego State to add another southern and northernish Cal schools but neither really adds huge value.

 

[Olyduck]

next question if Big 12 expands to say BYU and Colorado State, how does that impact the Pac 12 with overlapping footprint?

 

[WizardHawk]

I will add that going to 12 was also about building toward creating their network and at that time expanding the TV footprint mattered. You can't launch a network without advertisers thinking you have enough reach for their products, but now that's it live expanding the conference won't be something the other teams are interested in just for the sake of expanded revenue. More money but less trips to California is just a total deal breaker.

 

[WizardHawk]

next question if Big 12 expands to say BYU and Colorado State, how does that impact the Pac 12 with overlapping footprint?

How so? It's not like those schools are in fertile recruiting grounds or major TV footprints.

If any of them expanded to include a California team then that would be a massive blow, pretty much anywhere else doesn't seem like it has any real impact to me.

 

[Olyduck]

How so? It's not like those schools are in fertile recruiting grounds or major TV footprints.

If any of them expanded to include a California team then that would be a massive blow, pretty much anywhere else doesn't seem like it has any real impact to me.

just spit balling thoughts

 

[CCF151]

The only way I could see the North teams agreeing to an expansion would be if the Unis added were from Texas and they were put in the North. A guaranteed trip to Texas with the occasional game in Cali might be sweet enough.