Bartels or Heidelbaugh?

[Siouxperfan7]

1 minute ago, UND08 said:

Cam Newton is 6'5" 245 lbs and doesn't feel "safe" playing quarterback...so I don't always think that bigger quarterbacks are less prone to getting hurt than smaller ones...

I think it's more important that you have depth at QB if you are going to run your QB a lot.  I was watching the Air Force/Fresno game last Friday night (insomnia)...and Air Force's QB went down with an injury in the 4th quarter (happens a lot to them with their flexbone offense).  The backup came in and it was like nothing changed...that's what you need if you are going to give your QB 15+ carries per game in my opinion...

Still don't understand why Rudolph insists on running Studs (or any other QB we got back there) so much.  We have a 1-2 punch a running back that is better than most of the country.  Sure it's good to design a few plays for a guy as athletic at Studs, but definitely should be used more sparingly.  Or else things like this happen!

[geaux_sioux]

5 minutes ago, UND08 said:

Cam Newton is 6'5" 245 lbs and doesn't feel "safe" playing quarterback...so I don't always think that bigger quarterbacks are less prone to getting hurt than smaller ones...

I think it's more important that you have depth at QB if you are going to run your QB a lot.  I was watching the Air Force/Fresno game last Friday night (insomnia)...and Air Force's QB went down with an injury in the 4th quarter (happens a lot to them with their flexbone offense).  The backup came in and it was like nothing changed...that's what you need if you are going to give your QB 15+ carries per game in my opinion...

Durability has nothing to do with size. Some people just are and some just aren't. It's a God given gift that you can't measure in a physical.

[petey23]

2 hours ago, UNDBIZ said:

Now that would be one incredibly short QB.

and an even smaller man

[UND08]

1 hour ago, geaux_sioux said:

Durability has nothing to do with size. Some people just are and some just aren't. It's a God given gift that you can't measure in a physical.

Agree 100%.

 

1 hour ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

Still don't understand why Rudolph insists on running Studs (or any other QB we got back there) so much.  We have a 1-2 punch a running back that is better than most of the country.  Sure it's good to design a few plays for a guy as athletic at Studs, but definitely should be used more sparingly.  Or else things like this happen!

I agree...although we've seen it be effective at multiple times the last couple years.  There have been games where he's been in that 13-15 carry mode...To me he should be in the 3-5 attempts per game mindset (with any others coming on scrambles).  Enough to show it on film but minimize chance of injury.  He's a good runner...but certainly not dynamic.  Stick to the Manitoba Moose and SantiaGOOOOOO (made me chuckle the first time the Alerus guy did this...but it's not as funny when I hear it after a 1 yard run)...

[UND-FB-FAN]

1 hour ago, UND08 said:

Cam Newton is 6'5" 245 lbs and doesn't feel "safe" playing quarterback...so I don't always think that bigger quarterbacks are less prone to getting hurt than smaller ones...

I think it's more important that you have depth at QB if you are going to run your QB a lot.  I was watching the Air Force/Fresno game last Friday night (insomnia)...and Air Force's QB went down with an injury in the 4th quarter (happens a lot to them with their flexbone offense).  The backup came in and it was like nothing changed...that's what you need if you are going to give your QB 15+ carries per game in my opinion...

That's a fair point. UND doesn't have that quarterback depth yet. Unfortunate since quarterback depth was already a concern last season. 

[UND-FB-FAN]

1 hour ago, geaux_sioux said:

Durability has nothing to do with size. Some people just are and some just aren't. It's a God given gift that you can't measure in a physical.

To say "nothing" is a stretch, but I see where you're coming from. 

[UND08]

5 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

That's a fair point. UND doesn't have that quarterback depth yet. Unfortunate since quarterback depth was already a concern last season.

Yeah...QB depth is a tough animal though...because it takes time to develop (like everything else).  I wouldn't have been opposed to a juco QB (tough to find a FBS drop down that's willing to come to Grand Forks and have to battle to unseat an incumbent) that would be serviceable...but in all honesty it would have been tough to find one that could beat out Bartels (which isn't setting the bar high...just the reality of recruiting).  We are going to have to build that depth organically.  I know a lot of people were disappointed we didn't take a QB last year...but I'll trust that the coaches weren't comfortable with any of the prospects that they could have gotten (they don't just sign a QB to sign a QB).  In a way it's too bad that Heidelbaugh and (assuming he stays committed) Boltmann weren't switched around age-wise, as I think Boltmann is less of a project (although if Heidelbaugh can figure out his mechanics he's got the frame and athleticism to be a good one).  We might have a better opportunity at finding a transfer QB this year though, since the position will be wide open for 2018.

[Siouxperfan7]

35 minutes ago, UND08 said:

  We might have a better opportunity at finding a transfer QB this year though, since the position will be wide open for 2018.

If we get another Braden Hanson type QB, I'm all for it!!

Man it would be nice to have the 2012 offence with this years defense!!

[geaux_sioux]

1 hour ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

To say "nothing" is a stretch, but I see where you're coming from. 

I don't think it is at all.  Weston Dressler and Santiago come to mind. A few of my hulking former teammates who couldn't stay healthy do on the other side of the coin.

[UND08]

20 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

If we get another Braden Hanson type QB, I'm all for it!!

Man it would be nice to have the 2012 offence with this years defense!!

I'd rather have our offensive effort vs Southern Utah a few weeks ago consistently every week...it fits our overall philosophy better

[geaux_sioux]

30 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

If we get another Braden Hanson type QB, I'm all for it!!

Man it would be nice to have the 2012 offence with this years defense!!

This years defense would be awful thanks to that offense. It's not a winning strategy to have an offense that antagonizes your own defense. At least when you run the ball and go 3 and out the clock runs a bit, passing not so much.

[Parkers Pros]

It's like everyone is writing off Heidlebaugh already. You kidding me??  We don't know what we have yet in him. Everyone needs to take their meds, come out from the ledge and relax. 

[AJS]

Whoever starts this weekend, it's the person the coaches think give this team the best chance to win this game. Would everyone feel better with Studsrud, obviously, but it sounds like that's not the option. A couple positives, whoever starts on Saturday probably will know by Wednesday, so they can get the 1st team reps in practice and more importantly mentally prepare knowing they are the guy. It can't be easy going from bench all year to you are the guy the next play. UNC is a decent team and this would have been a battle regardless is Studs was playing, but they don't have as solid of a defense as Weber State. 

Side note: Special teams still worry me more than the QB situation. They can't have a repeat of last week or they won't win. If UND wins on Saturday, it'll take a huge defensive effort, like we say in the 2nd half of the Weber game. The QB will need to control the game, the running game will need to lead and the QB will have to protect the ball and make timely passes. Having Stanley back would be huge as well.

[UNDColorado]

3 minutes ago, AJS said:

Whoever starts this weekend, it's the person the coaches think give this team the best chance to win this game. Would everyone feel better with Studsrud, obviously, but it sounds like that's not the option. A couple positives, whoever starts on Saturday probably will know by Wednesday, so they can get the 1st team reps in practice and more importantly mentally prepare knowing they are the guy. It can't be easy going from bench all year to you are the guy the next play. UNC is a decent team and this would have been a battle regardless is Studs was playing, but they don't have as solid of a defense as Weber State. 

Side note: Special teams still worry me more than the QB situation. They can't have a repeat of last week or they won't win. If UND wins on Saturday, it'll take a huge defensive effort, like we say in the 2nd half of the Weber game. The QB will need to control the game, the running game will need to lead and the QB will have to protect the ball and make timely passes. Having Stanley back would be huge as well.

I am holding out hope that the kickoffs are better at 4,800 feet. Taubs was kicking touchbacks at ISU which is a couple hundred feet lower in elevation. I will watch him in warm ups to see how he long he is kicking.

[Irish]

6 hours ago, Oxbow6 said:

Ugh..........if true and UND misses the playoffs due to his inability to play in the last 2 games with UND getting another snub at 7-4 a GoFundMe account will be started to buy out Rudolph's contract.  Who's in?

I'm in - Given the fact that Bubba has been hard on the recruiting trail, why are we in this position?  

[Siouxperman8]

2 minutes ago, UNDColorado said:

I am holding out hope that the kickoffs are better at 4,800 feet. Taubs was kicking touchbacks at ISU which is a couple hundred feet lower in elevation. I will watch him in warm ups to see how he long he is kicking.

I kicked in Greeley and figured I got 10-15 yards more distance with the elevation.  Hopefully he can get touchbacks.

[geaux_sioux]

22 minutes ago, UNDColorado said:

I am holding out hope that the kickoffs are better at 4,800 feet. Taubs was kicking touchbacks at ISU which is a couple hundred feet lower in elevation. I will watch him in warm ups to see how he long he is kicking.

For the love of God just kick down the near sideline and hit it as deep as possible. 

[SWSiouxMN]

On 10/30/2016 at 6:49 PM, geaux_sioux said:

I know I've said it before but if he didn't get that Achilles injury he would be our starter right now and would have been last year. It was a horrible break for him and the program because it pushed Studs out there before he was ready. He should be a RS soph backup being groomed to start for next year right now. Too bad. As a result we're still scrambling for qb depth.

I hope the depth can get adressed.  Edina kid coming in for 2017, get one for 2018 (little bias from my home area but I wish/hope the staff would push for Trey Lance, think he would be just fine in the offense), and so on.

[geaux_sioux]

20 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said:

I hope the depth can get adressed.  Edina kid coming in for 2017, get one for 2018 (little bias from my home area but I wish/hope the staff would push for Trey Lance, think he would be just fine in the offense), and so on.

I think we need to bring in two the next two years.

[Sioux95]

6 hours ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

Still don't understand why Rudolph insists on running Studs (or any other QB we got back there) so much.  We have a 1-2 punch a running back that is better than most of the country.  Sure it's good to design a few plays for a guy as athletic at Studs, but definitely should be used more sparingly.  Or else things like this happen!

Are we sure Studs isn't calling his own number?

[UND08]

13 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

I think we need to bring in two the next two years.

I think two this year would be good...especially if one is a JUCO.  Then going into next year we'd have:

1. Studsrud (2017)
2. JUCO (2018)
3. Heidelbaugh (2019)
4. Boltmann (2021 assuming redshirt)
5. Bolinske (2020)

Note that the above list isn't a depth chart.  I'd prefer that Heidelbaugh develops and beats out a JUCO for the #2 job next year...but a serviceable transfer provides good insurance in case he doesn't.

In 2018 you'd have a 3 way race for the QB1 job between Heidelbaugh, the transfer and Boltmann.  The only age gap would be the class of 2020 assuming that the PWO Bolinske doesn't develop into a starting caliber QB (probably a tough road for him but who knows).  I don't think you'd need more than two after this year, so long as the QBs we bring in are productive.