Author Topic: Not about the Quarterback play.  (Read 35062 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13843
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #150 on: August 31, 2013, 01:11:50 PM »
Mueller tho.  Really the star turd

Credit where credit is due. Mueller was the only one who looked like he should be on a d-1 roster. If he was a change of pace sub guy, I would love him.

yes, which is what he was last year and now he is our best d-lineman.

Offline Ira Hayes

  • Created #RayRayForAD
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1985
  • The Marine that went to war.
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #151 on: August 31, 2013, 01:14:07 PM »
I thought Waters was exactly what was advertised.

well, a lot of people were advertising him as "a better runner than you think" which was not as advertised because he was worse than I thought. though I guess that's pretty subjective. He'd be great under Mike Leach. He's not so great under LHC Bill Snyder.

Well we're used to Collin, Freeman, Ell, and Bishop. He's not going to break a tackle, but he's not extremely slow. He is a Chad May/Paul Watson QB.

I have no idea who paul watson is but chad may was not a "better runner than I think". he was equally as poor a runner as all other exclusively pocket passing slow QBs.

Ever heard of Carl Straw? I'm seriously questioning your KSU fan status. Fatty would be disappointed.

Offline DOD Take 2

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 694
  • Corndogs Jackie! Corndogs for all these people!
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #152 on: August 31, 2013, 01:31:46 PM »
 :shocked:
Mueller tho.  Really the star turd

Credit where credit is due. Mueller was the only one who looked like he should be on a d-1 roster. If he was a change of pace sub guy, I would love him.

yes, which is what he was last year and now he is our best d-lineman.

I think our d-line and linebackers suck, but about 100 of the 215 that NDSU ran for came on 2 plays. The run at the end of half and the 70 yard run from the 3. Against FCS, 115 is too much to give up anyway. I think they really sucked in the passing game, no pressure and no ability to make a play in space.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 88510
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #153 on: August 31, 2013, 01:39:26 PM »

I thought Waters was exactly what was advertised.

well, a lot of people were advertising him as "a better runner than you think" which was not as advertised because he was worse than I thought. though I guess that's pretty subjective. He'd be great under Mike Leach. He's not so great under LHC Bill Snyder.

Well we're used to Collin, Freeman, Ell, and Bishop. He's not going to break a tackle, but he's not extremely slow. He is a Chad May/Paul Watson QB.

I have no idea who paul watson is but chad may was not a "better runner than I think". he was equally as poor a runner as all other exclusively pocket passing slow QBs.

Ever heard of Carl Straw? I'm seriously questioning your KSU fan status. Fatty would be disappointed.

No. And don't try to tell me what fatty would think you dumbass.

Offline Ira Hayes

  • Created #RayRayForAD
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1985
  • The Marine that went to war.
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #154 on: August 31, 2013, 01:41:39 PM »

I thought Waters was exactly what was advertised.

well, a lot of people were advertising him as "a better runner than you think" which was not as advertised because he was worse than I thought. though I guess that's pretty subjective. He'd be great under Mike Leach. He's not so great under LHC Bill Snyder.

Well we're used to Collin, Freeman, Ell, and Bishop. He's not going to break a tackle, but he's not extremely slow. He is a Chad May/Paul Watson QB.

I have no idea who paul watson is but chad may was not a "better runner than I think". he was equally as poor a runner as all other exclusively pocket passing slow QBs.

Ever heard of Carl Straw? I'm seriously questioning your KSU fan status. Fatty would be disappointed.

No. And don't try to tell me what fatty would think you dumbass.

fatty is sad.

Offline Dr Rick Daris

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 23381
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #155 on: August 31, 2013, 01:44:36 PM »
watson was an ok runner. prob about the same as waters. may, much worse.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 01:54:18 PM by rick daris »

Offline eastcat

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2502
  • Labeled by children.
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #156 on: August 31, 2013, 02:02:02 PM »
he seemed to throw alot of passes low, maybe some of them were intentional. 
he missed an easy outlet pass to Hubert.
he doesn't have a real live arm.
he threw 2 picks.
is he any better of a thrower than a guy like seth doege?  i'm not so sure, and i wouldn't want seth doege as my starting QB.

He averaged 9.7 yards an attempt behind an offensive line that couldn't stop a 4 man rush to save their life. If you think waters sucked last night you should pick another sport to follow because you clearly know nothing about this one.

Coaching and O-Line lost the game.

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13843
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #157 on: August 31, 2013, 02:07:24 PM »
he seemed to throw alot of passes low, maybe some of them were intentional. 
he missed an easy outlet pass to Hubert.
he doesn't have a real live arm.
he threw 2 picks.
is he any better of a thrower than a guy like seth doege?  i'm not so sure, and i wouldn't want seth doege as my starting QB.

He averaged 9.7 yards an attempt behind an offensive line that couldn't stop a 4 man rush to save their life. If you think waters sucked last night you should pick another sport to follow because you clearly know nothing about this one.

Coaching and O-Line lost the game.

ok, wise guy, how do you intend to win games with waters if our o-line sucks? 

Online Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37993
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #158 on: August 31, 2013, 02:22:53 PM »
he seemed to throw alot of passes low, maybe some of them were intentional. 
he missed an easy outlet pass to Hubert.
he doesn't have a real live arm.
he threw 2 picks.
is he any better of a thrower than a guy like seth doege?  i'm not so sure, and i wouldn't want seth doege as my starting QB.

He averaged 9.7 yards an attempt behind an offensive line that couldn't stop a 4 man rush to save their life. If you think waters sucked last night you should pick another sport to follow because you clearly know nothing about this one.

Coaching and O-Line lost the game.

We couldn't convert a 3rd down to save our life, though. Maybe it was just nerves. I don't know. I do know that Waters just wasn't good enough last night.

Offline DOD Take 2

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 694
  • Corndogs Jackie! Corndogs for all these people!
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #159 on: August 31, 2013, 02:32:19 PM »
he seemed to throw alot of passes low, maybe some of them were intentional. 
he missed an easy outlet pass to Hubert.
he doesn't have a real live arm.
he threw 2 picks.
is he any better of a thrower than a guy like seth doege?  i'm not so sure, and i wouldn't want seth doege as my starting QB.

He averaged 9.7 yards an attempt behind an offensive line that couldn't stop a 4 man rush to save their life. If you think waters sucked last night you should pick another sport to follow because you clearly know nothing about this one.

Coaching and O-Line lost the game.

ok, wise guy, how do you intend to win games with waters if our o-line sucks?

I thought pass protection against 4 & 5 man rushes was acceptable last night.   :dunno:
It looked like Waters left the pocket before he had to sometimes. Not great pocket presence.

Offline felix rex

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 8967
  • Knows what Brent did
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #160 on: August 31, 2013, 03:02:19 PM »
Yards per attempt tho :ridinghorse:  :Jeffy: :001_wink:
"How will I recruit to Manhattan? Well, distance. And the proud state of basketball. It start there, and then daily flights to Dallas, because I'm really good at going out. Like top five good. Ask my wife. She wants me to be happy."

Online Skipper44

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7629
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #161 on: August 31, 2013, 03:12:47 PM »
 I  believe  the  team converted  only 1 (one)  third down  with  Waters :barf:
« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 03:15:48 PM by Skipper44 »

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #162 on: August 31, 2013, 03:13:33 PM »

I thought Waters was exactly what was advertised.

well, a lot of people were advertising him as "a better runner than you think" which was not as advertised because he was worse than I thought. though I guess that's pretty subjective. He'd be great under Mike Leach. He's not so great under LHC Bill Snyder.

Well we're used to Collin, Freeman, Ell, and Bishop. He's not going to break a tackle, but he's not extremely slow. He is a Chad May/Paul Watson QB.

I have no idea who paul watson is but chad may was not a "better runner than I think". he was equally as poor a runner as all other exclusively pocket passing slow QBs.

Ever heard of Carl Straw? I'm seriously questioning your KSU fan status. Fatty would be disappointed.

No. And don't try to tell me what fatty would think you dumbass.

fatty is sad.

Who the eff are you?

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #163 on: August 31, 2013, 03:16:12 PM »
He'd be great under Mike Leach. He's not so great under LHC Bill Snyder.

all along i was scared that waters would start and we would call plays as if klein were still back there. and that's what happened. i think waters could be a pretty good qb in a spread system. if they're going to run the same ol stuff (which is fine), rough ridin' play sams.

yes. this is exactly what I'm saying.

 :clap:

Offline Ira Hayes

  • Created #RayRayForAD
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1985
  • The Marine that went to war.
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #164 on: August 31, 2013, 04:38:23 PM »

I thought Waters was exactly what was advertised.

well, a lot of people were advertising him as "a better runner than you think" which was not as advertised because he was worse than I thought. though I guess that's pretty subjective. He'd be great under Mike Leach. He's not so great under LHC Bill Snyder.

Well we're used to Collin, Freeman, Ell, and Bishop. He's not going to break a tackle, but he's not extremely slow. He is a Chad May/Paul Watson QB.

I have no idea who paul watson is but chad may was not a "better runner than I think". he was equally as poor a runner as all other exclusively pocket passing slow QBs.

Ever heard of Carl Straw? I'm seriously questioning your KSU fan status. Fatty would be disappointed.

No. And don't try to tell me what fatty would think you dumbass.

fatty is sad.

Who the eff are you?

I am just another somebody that you've never heard of.   :Carl:

Offline PowercatPat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4427
  • #BID
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #165 on: August 31, 2013, 04:59:21 PM »
I wish we could put Waters' arm on Sam's body.

Offline Rams

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3384
  • Worst poster on this board by far
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #166 on: August 31, 2013, 05:05:01 PM »
I wish we could put Waters' arm on Sam's body.
:facepalm:
"Son. This is why we are wildcats. Hard work, pride, the heart of this country. And if that's not enough for you, you can just move to California with your punk friends."

Offline DOD Take 2

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 694
  • Corndogs Jackie! Corndogs for all these people!
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #167 on: August 31, 2013, 05:47:33 PM »
Anyone else watch OSU have little to no success with the awesome passer, only to put in the dynamic QB and start driving the ball on MSU? Now in control of the game and going to win. Snyder might want to take notice of how the running QB opened up the offense. And even though Walsh can't throw as well as Chelf, the defense is respecting the run and the passing game has improved.

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #168 on: August 31, 2013, 06:14:56 PM »
If Water is the superior QB why do we need to keep Sams behind him.  Why not a position change for him to change the dynamic of the composition of players on the field. Has Hubert shown he is a capable of a running back as Sams is?
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline Lucas Scoopsalot

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2757
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #169 on: August 31, 2013, 06:43:23 PM »
If Water is the superior QB why do we need to keep Sams behind him.  Why not a position change for him to change the dynamic of the composition of players on the field. Has Hubert shown he is a capable of a running back as Sams is?
He just doesn't seem like the running back type to me
Luke's stock is rising as Winters continues to validate his greatness. Add Luke and Winters to my list! Also, EMAWBLAST! and Tobias!

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #170 on: August 31, 2013, 07:01:25 PM »
If Water is the superior QB why do we need to keep Sams behind him.  Why not a position change for him to change the dynamic of the composition of players on the field. Has Hubert shown he is a capable of a running back as Sams is?
He just doesn't seem like the running back type to me
I would certainly agree to that.  I would also say that he does look like more of a QB than a RB.  But I would say he is too dynamic to be off the field and he seems more valuable running the ball right now than your number 1 RB because of his sheer speed and elusiveness.
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #171 on: August 31, 2013, 07:01:56 PM »
If Water is the superior QB why do we need to keep Sams behind him.  Why not a position change for him to change the dynamic of the composition of players on the field. Has Hubert shown he is a capable of a running back as Sams is?

:sdeek: WOAH!

If this post came from almost anyone other than you I would have taken it as facetious.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #172 on: August 31, 2013, 07:04:02 PM »
If Water is the superior QB why do we need to keep Sams behind him.  Why not a position change for him to change the dynamic of the composition of players on the field. Has Hubert shown he is a capable of a running back as Sams is?
He just doesn't seem like the running back type to me
I would certainly agree to that.  I would also say that he does look like more of a QB than a RB.  But I would say he is too dynamic to be off the field and he seems more valuable running the ball right now than your number 1 RB because of his sheer speed and elusiveness.

My god, he would get killed as a running back. Tremaine Thompson is speedy and elusive, do you want to try him out at running back too?

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13843
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #173 on: August 31, 2013, 07:04:30 PM »
If Water is the superior QB why do we need to keep Sams behind him.  Why not a position change for him to change the dynamic of the composition of players on the field. Has Hubert shown he is a capable of a running back as Sams is?
He just doesn't seem like the running back type to me
I would certainly agree to that.  I would also say that he does look like more of a QB than a RB.  But I would say he is too dynamic to be off the field and he seems more valuable running the ball right now than your number 1 RB because of his sheer speed and elusiveness.

wtf

Offline yoga-like_abana

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13503
  • Don't @ me boy, cause I ain't said crap
    • View Profile
Re: Not about the Quarterback play.
« Reply #174 on: August 31, 2013, 07:05:55 PM »
:dnr: this thread but the oline was not good.. up the middle on d not good and hubert is a terrible back