Good luck to him. I just hope that Campbell and staff have no interest in bringing him back to Penn State. They should aspire to do better.
Beau in Portal
- Thread starter Anon231980
- Start date
Weāve got the bigger, the more expensive, and the nothing matters. When do we start winning?
Could do worse than bringing back BP, but again, I'll trust Campbell and crew to get what they need.
Penn State needs to do much, much better than Pribula to compete with the top echelon of the sport. 11 TD to 7 int at Missouri, when you have Ahmad Hardy in the backfield running to the tune of 1500+ yard is not even average QB play.
I do not care whether it is a guy who Franklin recruited to PSU, one that comes from ISU, or from the portal, just prioritize finding someone who can run Campbell's offense next year and then recruit a QB. If that is Becht? Fine If it is Grunk? Also fine. If is someone in the portal that will cost 2 to 3m also fine. That is the current price for a top tier QB. Just have a fair competition and let the better QB start. If Grunk is not willing to put himself in the position to lose the starting spot, also understandable, I am sure he will find a landing spot.
This is a program reset. Following the bowl game every player will need to prove their worth to the current staff. No favoritism should be shown to anyone. ISU players coming in, Franklin players remaining, and portal players will all be provide a pool to draw from. Whoever does not buy in needs to jet.
Last edited:
Im not going to blame Pribula for leaving last year. He left James Franklin, not the real Penn State. Now that the real Penn State has returned to college football for the first time since probably somewhere around 2009....if Coach Campbell wants him, it's all good. If not, then that is also all good 
I'm not sure why people are undervaluing Becht so much: He is an excellent college quarterback who has a history of winning in the clutch.
I think Becht is a very good college QB and I believe he provides PSU with a much higher likelihood of winning next year. Grunk was serviceable with Kaytron and Nick in the backfield and a senior (though under performing) line. This all changes next year. Furthermore, the playbook was truncated for him, mostly play action passes off a single read. Next year Grunk will need to learn a completely new playbook and work within a completely different system.
People are mistaken to think that you trade an accomplished starter's performance (Becht) against future eligibility (Grunk) because there is no guarantee that the latter will stay, None, and you never want any player to be able to leverage the team--i..e, guarantee me the starting role or I am gone. Kyle McCord pulled that **** with OSU and they sent him packing. Hired Will Howard and the rest is history. So, if it is portal guys every year like Miami, Indiana and other teams are doing, so be it. Bring in good high school players and see how they develop but if they are not turning into the likes of Julian Sayin cut bait and move on. So, if Grunk lacks the nerves to compete then he should go elsewhere. But no team with high end aspirations will hand him the job.
No coach worth their salt will guarantee a player sh*t. They will do what is best for their team and will give them the highest likelihood of success. Campbell also does not strike me as someone that gets leveraged. So, if the player doesn't like it tough sh*t.
To me this all hinges on whether Campbell and his offensive brain trust believe Rocco is much better than Grunk and gives us a much better chance of winning. If the difference is just marginal between the two then you go with Grunk. However, I think at this stage given his experience both on field and with Campbell's system that Rocco is significantly better than Grunk. We can't worry whether Grunk leaves if Rocco is our starter. We can go back to the portal in '27. I don't think '26 should be a "rebuilding year" and with a good QB we can win 10 games and be a playoff contender.
" If the difference is just marginal between the two then you go with Grunk. "
I am curious why you believe this. In my opinion, given the state of college football today you need to discard remaining eligibility in favor of head to head performance on any given year. That is because programs are always vulnerable to being left annually by QBs as their stock improves. So, if that is true, and players can transfer out year to year, there should be no "loyalty" to a player. If it is transactional, then let it be truly transactional. Assess them strictly on performance and bring in talent to compete. If they lack the stones to do so (Pribula at Missouri) you move on. That is not to say you do not recruit younger players and if they hit you pay and TRY to keep them. But there should be no assumption that these jobs, and that's what they are, are theirs to keep without having to compete for them.
Ryan Day is arguably one of the very best developers of QB talent. When Kyle McCord (or his daddy) went to Day and demanded a guarantee to start, Day told him to pound rocks. He then brought in Howard and won a National Championship.
There are players who play the short game versus the long game. Dante Moore started at UCLA but saw that that was not going to maximize his long term value, so he transferred to Oregon, sat behind Dillon Gabriel, and this year is projected to be a top 5 pick. On the flip side, you have the McCords of the world who are impatient and demand assurances and then have to play at Syracuse and was drafted in the 6th round. Where would Allar have been drafted if he had gone to Kiffin, Brohm, Day and so on? Development is key to long term success, so if your objective is to play now and can get paid well for this in a weaker team your returns may be short term.
JMO--2026 was a rebuilding year even with Franklin here--we were not set up well for the future.