Good video
- Thread starter WarthogRebel
- Start date
Sounds like we are loaded. Schedule also loaded though. Not many guaranteed wins on the schedule.
I have seen a few other videos that break down UNLV football, and they all seem to have two things in common. First they all put UNLV at around 6-6 or better and have them losing at least 3-4 to the Power Five conference teams (Oregon State is still included in that group for now). Second they all have a big question mark in regards to the QB position.
If Sluka comes out and hits a home run, then I see UNLV being at the high end of the estimated win total of 9+.
If Sluka comes out and hits a home run, then I see UNLV being at the high end of the estimated win total of 9+.
But on the flip side i dont see a game like we had in Michigan last year that us a guaranteed loss. Sure a couple very difficult games but winnable imo.
Technically, there should never be any game considered as a "guaranteed win, however if you look at the schedule, there are some "definite should be wins" as we get to play the entire bottom half of the MWC who are all likely to be terrible. Id put 6 in that category. Reno, Hawaii, SDSU, SJSU, and Utah St along with Utah Tech... remember, these arent the same programs that have given us trouble in the past... SJSU lost their coach and QB, SDSU is in a full rebuild, Reno is terrible, and Utah St.'s program is a mess right now.
Sluka playing lacrosse is something I did not know. Getting past people and accepting contact while doing what you need to do are keys in that sport. The others guy seems good also. Would we ever rotate qbs?
Hopefully only situationally at most. Maybe a package here or there for a few plays to keep defenses guessing. Just because we have 2 capable QBs doesnt mean you wnat to have them both alternating snaps. Teams need rhythm and cadence and each QB will be different and that can really cause a ton of issues like False starts or turnovers because of early snaps. Also each QB has a different throwing motion and preference for handing the ball off. It just doesnt work.
where having 2 QBs does work is making the starter earn the role, and continue to maintain elevated play, and the occasional misdirect or change of pace during a game. I dont want to see some crazy system where they try 2 different QBs all the time and it doesnt work.
One drive, one guy, another drive the next. Could work, might not also for reasons you gave. Just frustrating for players that it likely will be a 55 to 45 type of choice and the guy at 45 gets very few snaps.
No, it doesnt. Not at D1, if it did, you'd see the teams that can get 2 5 star QBs doing it... You have to have a #1 and there's always a #2 guy. Both QBs knew the situation they were signing into. That's why they're in a tough competition. We need 1 to come out on top, not play in a time share.
I don’t like a general platoon system. Don’t mind if a guy comes in for a series now and again, prefer it as the right time, right place instead of strictly scripted.
But I think you need to tab somebody as “the guy” … then you need to decide upon length of the leash …. That’s personnel management, coaching.
I haven’t had any reason to doubt this staff.
John Madden is credited with saying, “if you have two quarterbacks, you actually have none.”
Similar threads
