If we can't protect Haack against kentucky, he's not going to have a good night. I expect we will see more of Nixon if that's the case.
Makes me feel good knowing HUD has enough confidence in the players he brought in. I mean who need only one qb? I doubt it even affects a players confidence knowing the 1a is right there waiting on you to mess up.
I guess it would be better if we had 2 scrubs behind him and if he would falter, the season would be over. I hope there is always a 1A and a 1B waiting to take over if 1 falters. Why is everyone making such a huge deal out of this. It's a position battle between 3 unproven guys... How else do these things play out? I hope every player knows there is a guy right behind you waiting to get the job done if they don't.
I can see why Hud would want to make sure both play even though it seems like one (Haack) will play most snaps. At this point, you can't limit yourself and there are too many unknowns heading into the season. Players react different in games than in practice. Also, who knows what weakness UK will show once the game starts. Maybe they can't get to Haack and we slice and dice, or maybe they key on putting pressure on our passing game and Nixon comes in and knocks off a couple of long runs from a zone read. Wherever UK shows a weakness, we need to be able to use it against them in the game.
I know some will discard this post because it refers to McNeese, but I hope most will look to how it applies to our situation this year.
For years McNeese had a two quarterback system. They even went from one going from a national championship game starter to him sharing time the next season and then to him becoming the backup.
This system went on for years. It always seemed to backfire, with the starter feeling threatened about the success of the backup... until one day this freshman comes along and has the confidence in his own ability. Success of the backup did not affect his play. He stepped his game up to another level. When he faced us, he was in total control - of his team... and of us.
My point?
Whomever can step up without looking over his shoulder gives us the best chance to be successful. If they can both do this, great. If we can use them both, by situation, great. Most likely, the one with the "It's my job" mentality will give us the best chance for success.
The biggest thing Haack needs to do, is to NOT turnover the ball. Don't throw into coverage and try to force it in, and step into the pocket getting rid of the ball quickly so that you don't get killed from behind and fumble. Just get the ball to the open guy or throw it away, that way we have a chance. If he turns it over, the game is not going to be close.
Here's what I think:
HUD isn't sitting on a guy that won't get us into the end zone. I like that.
One (probably Haack) will start, and probably get 2 series. If we score, he'll stay in. If he can't get us into the end zone, HUD isn't ____ing around.
I'm not sure why anyone would be upset at this.
If a pitcher struggles, do you leave him in the game? Or do you go to the bullpen?
Why should a guy expect security if he's not making good decisions on the field? If you don't make plays, you should be looking over your shoulder.
With that said, this offense WILL move the football. Can the defense stop anyone?
I'll believe it when I see it.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)