So Tyler Russell took the first string snaps today in practice
- Thread starter msumhsfan
- Start date
Stansbury thing can go away for a while thankfully
Relf and Russell seem to be dead even and my point was to state that Russell, after a good scrimmage, got the bulk of the first string snaps. Since that was a first for him it would seem that he is making headway and thus a good topic to talk about. Obviously he is not struggling to find a place in the offense, in fact he has proven he is the better passer, which i would think you would want the better passer to be the QB. Last fall you were very critical of Russell simply because you thought he could not run the ball. He ran the spread option in high school, yes this is not high school its the SEC, so he is a proven runner and now has a year in the system. He has made good runs this spring. Im sure both will play, but your overly critical views of Russell are not warranted considering how well the guy has been doing this spring
Relf and Russell seem to be dead even and my point was to state that Russell, after a good scrimmage, got the bulk of the first string snaps. Since that was a first for him it would seem that he is making headway and thus a good topic to talk about. Obviously he is not struggling to find a place in the offense, in fact he has proven he is the better passer, which i would think you would want the better passer to be the QB. Last fall you were very critical of Russell simply because you thought he could not run the ball. He ran the spread option in high school, yes this is not high school its the SEC, so he is a proven runner and now has a year in the system. He has made good runs this spring. Im sure both will play, but your overly critical views of Russell are not warranted considering how well the guy has been doing this spring
I think that the biggest strength is having both Russell and Relf. As a Freshman I think that it would put a lot of pressure on TR to produce with his arm. With Relf he simply does not have the arm when you they know that you are going to be throwing the ball like being down 14 with 7 minutes to go. Having both gives us a strenght. It also makes the opponent to prepare for 2 different offenses because with TR in the game we are not really going to be a threat running the ball by the QB and I am not talking about a Matt Wyatt option. With Relf it really adds to the running game because someone with have to account for the QB on every play.</p>
SLUdog said:
They may have sucked, but some like Todd Jordan and Fant were pro-style QB's.
Also, think about Mississippi- Brett Favre, Jason Campbell, Steve McNair- they could have run any offense as well. The key is identifying those Mississippians- and they don't come along every year- that can play at the D-I level and bringing them in and fitting the offense around their abilities.
I don't buy the "we can't get a good QB at MSU theory", if one exists. If Texas Tech and Central Michigan can get functional QB's, then so can we. We have to do a better job of developing them, though.
at putting OLs in front of them that are capable of blocking on the occasions that we have them. I'm specifically thinking about Fant & Conner. I don't think I've ever seen a QB on any level take beatings worse than the ones Fant took pretty much weekly. Is there any wonder he couldn't do much?
Could the fans have a problem with an incumbent QB with SEC experience, who helped us win games, improving enough to beat out The Next Big Thing that's never done **** in the SEC other than redshirt.
everyone on the team is an extension of each other.
The QB is better if the line can block, and if he has weapons to throw to, and runners that can take the pressure off of him, as well as a defense that can stop the other teams defense, and etc.
How many times have we had good WR's that didn't drop balls consistently? We probably underutilzed a guy like Moulds because of our QB situation.
We have had good RB's in general.
We have had good defenses at times.
We have had solid special teams at times as well.
The QB is better if the line can block, and if he has weapons to throw to, and runners that can take the pressure off of him, as well as a defense that can stop the other teams defense, and etc.
How many times have we had good WR's that didn't drop balls consistently? We probably underutilzed a guy like Moulds because of our QB situation.
We have had good RB's in general.
We have had good defenses at times.
We have had solid special teams at times as well.
to have a problem with anybody I support because they are tired of me rubbing their noses in **** all these years for being wrong....
But this one especially hurts them because 2/3 of the people here said Russell would never RS and would start by mid-season at the latest...then it was Mullen did a good job by RS'ing him, now he can start 4 years...and now they are pissing themselves because he may probably wont even start this Fall
it's called panic
Personally, I think Relf is going to run the offense well, Russell is going to provide a solid spark when he plays, and we will win 7-8 games in 2010
But this one especially hurts them because 2/3 of the people here said Russell would never RS and would start by mid-season at the latest...then it was Mullen did a good job by RS'ing him, now he can start 4 years...and now they are pissing themselves because he may probably wont even start this Fall
it's called panic
Personally, I think Relf is going to run the offense well, Russell is going to provide a solid spark when he plays, and we will win 7-8 games in 2010
was that Russell was not the kind of QB that Mullen ideally wanted. Also, that Mullen basically gave Russell an out if he wanted to look elsewhere due to the coaching change. The source said Mullen went to Russell and said something like "I don't want you here unless you are 100% sure you want to be here" (kind of a wink, wink, nudge, nudge maneuver). The story went on to say basically that if Mullen had to do that whole recruiting season his way (i.e. not taking over Croom's class) that he would have made his focus getting Randall Mackey over Russell.
The story makes/made sense because of how Mullen values a mobile QB over a pure-pocket passer. It made more sense with how hard Mullen went after Cam Newton.
The story makes/made sense because of how Mullen values a mobile QB over a pure-pocket passer. It made more sense with how hard Mullen went after Cam Newton.
what did you want him to do, he redshirted, which most qbs do. He did do something the last time he played and that win a state championship, remember that one.
coach, you sure know alot, when you and Mullen have these daily talks, is it in his office or on the field? Tyler, nor anybody with any common sense, ever said he was a runner.
coach, you sure know alot, when you and Mullen have these daily talks, is it in his office or on the field? Tyler, nor anybody with any common sense, ever said he was a runner.
because me sticking it in the *** of most of these doorknobs once aGAIN around here is getting so bad to the point I'm really starting to feel bad about being right....
I'm getting guilty to the point I'm thinking of predicting Stansbury in a Final four just to make the dumbasses feel better when we don't make the Tourney so they can jump on me
I'm getting guilty to the point I'm thinking of predicting Stansbury in a Final four just to make the dumbasses feel better when we don't make the Tourney so they can jump on me
a year of ahead of Mackey, did the source point that out? Spurrier and Saban, who are decent coaches, both recruited Tyler late into janurary. Last year was Mullens first year as a head coach so how does anybody know type of offense/qb/system he prefers?He won a championship with Leake as a qb and he didnt run the ball. Tyler and Relf will be a good combo and Tyler plays good under pressure, ask Panola
Coach34 said:
Dear God if you were only as great as you think you are at times. You really must have worked on Clinton's spin staff.
i posted last weekabout how you run this same "play" over and over (I was the only one saying x.......). Sometimes you have to learn more than two plays to make it work, buddy.Coach34 said:
that you think you were the only person here that thought Russell wasn't ready last season. Duh, he didn't play. Don't you think that if he was ready, he would have played. Common sense.
Relf could not hit the broad side of a barn if he tried last season and the normal anti crowd are playing him up to be the best QB ever(only because he can run, run not throw) If he is the best one and Mullen calls it that way then fine. but some of these ******** are ready to claim Relf ***** golden eggs cause he can run the ball and completely forget that the position he is competing for primarily throws the damn ball, and he cant throw it.
The ultimate decision comes down to Mullen but some people aren't giving Tyler a chance. I have watched a lot of the practices and Tyler is running the ball very well (I know he is no Relf at "running" the ball but he is much better at passing) and seeing as he ran the spread option in high school (once again I know this isn't high school) he should be fine whenever the time comes for him to play. I am excited about the progress he has made and will continue to make and I truly believe he will be as good as he was played up to be. It amazes me how some of the same people who were ready to run him out of town are now all of a sudden behind him after Newton ditched us. He was our QB of the future before Newton and I still firmly believe that he is still our QB of the future.