Starting QB position still open after spring game

[Clutch0364]

Sigh.. Some ppl just don't want..

But...but...South Al. Haha

It's a tired argument at this point.

[Boomer]

But...but...South Al. Haha

It's a tired argument at this point.

----I have posted this before---I want the guy to start that wins the position according to Johnson and HUD-----I base my choice on past performance , philosophy, and gut choice----I think that Nixon can pass better than Haack can run and I like the running game with its time eating characteristics---I like the pressure it puts on defenses with 2 runners instead of just one guy----both have won big at the HS level and both have made some big plays as subs---Nixon against Tulane and Haack I think against T ST---I think the fact that Nixon was in the game against Tulane showed that he had won the position as backup at that time---Again mine is MY evaluation of past performance, Offense style likes, and just a gut feeling!!!

[campo118]

----I have posted this before---I want the guy to start that wins the position according to Johnson and HUD-----I base my choice on past performance , philosophy, and gut choice----I think that Nixon can pass better than Haack can run and I like the running game with its time eating characteristics---I like the pressure it puts on defenses with 2 runners instead of just one guy----both have won big at the HS level and both have made some big plays as subs---Nixon against Tulane and Haack I think against T ST---I think the fact that Nixon was in the game against Tulane showed that he had won the position as backup at that time---Again mine is MY evaluation of past performance, Offense style likes, and just a gut feeling!!!

If you hadn't already, you've officially lost all credibility…

[Turbine]

I think that Nixon can pass better than Haack can run and I like the running game with its time eating characteristics---I like the pressure it puts on defenses with 2 runners instead of just one guy

IF so .... the next "Q" becomes how many QB runs are required to compliment the stable of dedicated running backs compared to number of passes required to keep defenses on their heels?

If the number of emergency QB runs equals the number of trashed passes, you have a good point.

[BrockMeaux]

If you hadn't already, you've officially lost all credibility…

To be fair to Boomer, you left off an important qualifier to his statement. In his opinion, Nixon can pass well enough and run really well, whereas Haack is a good passer but not a good runner; basically that Nixon's strength as a runner/weakness as a passer is a greater sum than Haack's strength as a passer/weakness as a runner. You can take issue with that if you want (I probably would; Haack isn't Michael Vick but he's also not a statue. By the same token, Nixon isn't Dan Marino but he's got the ability to make the necessary throws), but he's not saying that Nixon passes better than Haack.

[Just1More]

Sigh.. Some ppl just don't want..

I'm not the least bit concerned about the opinions on here insofar as QB likes and preferences are. We only need to be concerned if Hud has his broader thinking cap on when he decides which QB to go with... eventually. Even coaches are currently enamored with the infamous "dual threat" QB. I find it a little funny calling it a "dual" situation... when the running aspect of that duality is a singular component... and the passing component produces a multiplicity of ball carrying options. In other words, if a QB can run and only pass to one receiver... he's a "dual threat". If he can run and pass to multiple receivers... he's a "devastating threat".

If we have a corps of receivers this coming season... in any regard... and we do not go with the best passing QB... that also has the best head for our offense and opposing defenses... then Hud isn't a broad thinking head coach. If he quickly reverts to the "dual threat" guy... because it sure does make SBC defenses look like crap when you can either run... or throw to one receiver... then we are at best an 8 win regular season... no wins over equal to better opponents... and probably not an undisputed SBC champion... again.

If we want to break through and beat equal to better... we up our chances with a decent running QB... that has the best head for the game... and a great arm to touch our skill people at short, middle and deep spots all over the field. Pretty much "period... end of statement" for me. But that doesn't mean it will happen.

[Just1More]

To be fair to Boomer, you left off an important qualifier to his statement. In his opinion, Nixon can pass well enough and run really well, whereas Haack is a good passer but not a good runner; basically that Nixon's strength as a runner/weakness as a passer is a greater sum than Haack's strength as a passer/weakness as a runner. You can take issue with that if you want (I probably would; Haack isn't Michael Vick but he's also not a statue. By the same token, Nixon isn't Dan Marino but he's got the ability to make the necessary throws), but he's not saying that Nixon passes better than Haack.

Wow! You've not only interpreted what Boomer's written... but you've determined what he meant! That's a little scary.

[Boomer]

If you hadn't already, you've officially lost all credibility…

------Ah did you see the next 2 words??? than Haack CAN RUN---Now if you still feel a credibility gap please explain!!!

[campo118]

My apologies Boom… I did misread your post. And Brock, damn good Boomereese translation. I think I now get it, and although I may not agree, it at least could be argued… Originally I thought you were saying Nixon passes better than Haack and runs better than Haack…

[CrazyCajun]

Haack was also trying to run Broadway plays and Nixon hasn't played against anyone long enough for them to know he isn't a great thrower. How many incomplete passes will it take them to figure out to stack the box and get to 3rd and long. The truth is we don't know what haack or Nixon can do with extended playing time. Also, just because haack isnt great at the zone read... Doesn't mean he can't run. Lots of QB's are good running that don't run the zone read.

[Boomer]

To be fair to Boomer, you left off an important qualifier to his statement. In his opinion, Nixon can pass well enough and run really well, whereas Haack is a good passer but not a good runner; basically that Nixon's strength as a runner/weakness as a passer is a greater sum than Haack's strength as a passer/weakness as a runner. You can take issue with that if you want (I probably would; Haack isn't Michael Vick but he's also not a statue. By the same token, Nixon isn't Dan Marino but he's got the ability to make the necessary throws), but he's not saying that Nixon passes better than Haack.

----WOW Brock ---thanks for restoring my credibility!!! Well I think so, but waiting on his apology!!!

[Boomer]

My apologies Boom… I did misread your post. And Brock, damn good Boomereese translation. I think I now get it, and although I may not agree, it at least could be argued… Originally I thought you were saying Nixon passes better than Haack and runs better than Haack…

-----And Sir your apology is accepted with my greatest humility as to the 2 times I have been wrong----JOKE---no problem but this is a very entertaining issue I thing you would agree!!!