There is something missing. Is it huff not wanting to share the spotlight with a hall of farmers kid? It is they just aren’t as good as advertised?
WE ARE . . .
- Thread starter ThunderCat98
- Start date
One of the things that cracks me up when I read the other QBs are worse and couldn’t beat fancher out.
If that is true that means all of our QBs were absolutely horrible in high school and shouldn’t have been recruited. Fancher seems like a good guy but he is absolutely terrible as a QB. We don’t run the wing t so when you are a QB you have to pass. His passing is awful dreadful insert any other word you want to put in there.
If we have that many QBs on the roster and none of them are able to beat him out then that is a monstrously bad job of recruiting as well as development.
Also as an FYI Chad Pennington was a 4th stringer his freshman year at Marshall. Due to injuries he to the first 3 he had to play. He threw 5 ints in his first game but came back to help lead us to the IAA championship game. The next year he was redshirted. So arguably the greatest QB in our history was 4th team through camp as a freshman, was thought so little of by the staff they brought in a QB the next year and redshirted him, he then went on to be a hall of famer at MU and a first round draft pick.
I’m not saying any of our backups will be CP but none of these guys have played in a real game to see what they can do. All I hear is in practice they don’t do well. Well if fancher does it definitely doesn’t translate to the field.
If that is true that means all of our QBs were absolutely horrible in high school and shouldn’t have been recruited. Fancher seems like a good guy but he is absolutely terrible as a QB. We don’t run the wing t so when you are a QB you have to pass. His passing is awful dreadful insert any other word you want to put in there.
If we have that many QBs on the roster and none of them are able to beat him out then that is a monstrously bad job of recruiting as well as development.
Also as an FYI Chad Pennington was a 4th stringer his freshman year at Marshall. Due to injuries he to the first 3 he had to play. He threw 5 ints in his first game but came back to help lead us to the IAA championship game. The next year he was redshirted. So arguably the greatest QB in our history was 4th team through camp as a freshman, was thought so little of by the staff they brought in a QB the next year and redshirted him, he then went on to be a hall of famer at MU and a first round draft pick.
I’m not saying any of our backups will be CP but none of these guys have played in a real game to see what they can do. All I hear is in practice they don’t do well. Well if fancher does it definitely doesn’t translate to the field.
We can only hope you are as knowledgeable about football as you are politics
…..CP’s redshirt was unique at the time. Pruett had coached Eric Kresser at UF, and since we were still IAA, Kresser, with one year of eligibility remaining, could xfer down a level and play immediately.
In retrospect, turned out pretty well for all involved.
Still doesn’t change the fact that Pennington was 4th team as a freshman and was redshirted a year after taking us to the IAA championship game. If Chad Pennington was thought of as a future first round draft pick by Pruett would have never brought Kresser with him. I’m not debating if Kresser was a good pick up I’m just saying that the evaluation of Pennington as a freshman was he was 4th team and even after he was the qb in the IAA championship game Pruett redshirted him. By redshirting him Pruett took the chance Pennington could have transferred but he must not have been that worried he could have replaced him.
I have a damn hard time believing any coach would ignore what the rest of the staff and team could see IF it were that obvious that another QB was better than Fancher. Huff wants to win and move up, he's not gonna be so damn arrogant that he wouldn't look at other kids if a staff member or even team members told him to.
Let's all step back from the emotion and think about that situation.
And frankly, I wouldn't trust anyone's judgement who works for the university, they may not know shit, or may be one of those who think Cole Pennington is as good as his father already. Lol!
Sam just said we won’t win again until Georgia State…I’ll take him up on that and say we will win before that.
I kept to my stance of not posting until 24 hours after the game... It was harder this week than it has been in the past.
A few points -
1. Fancher is not the guy -- Huff had the stones to sit Colombi and go to Fancher last year. Does he have the stones to make a change again this year if we get rolled the next two games?
2. Our playcalling was beyond abysmal -- Tricket loves WR screens as much as Legg and they are just as ineffective as they have been. 4th and 1 in scoring position tied 0-0? How about a play with one WR running a route so Fancher can overthrow him? Kick a F'n field goal to take the lead, give it to Ali, do literally anything that makes sense.
3. Too much zone -- We have players on defense but our scheme yesterday was not good. Way way too much zone in the secondary. If we can't cover Albany man-to-man, it's a problem. Also, the one man blitz is the worst. Sending one random LB (and usually tipping it off before the snap) is a no win situation. The blitz doesn't get home and you take a guy out of coverage.
4. Special teams is an issue -- Penalties, poor kicks, letting punts bounce instead of fair catching them, etc.
Overall, we looked like an FCS team and were incredibly fortunate to escape our home opener with a win.
I dont know what ECU has, because they got rolled by Michigan this week (just like we would have), so I guess we will learn a lot more about where we stand after next weekend.
A few points -
1. Fancher is not the guy -- Huff had the stones to sit Colombi and go to Fancher last year. Does he have the stones to make a change again this year if we get rolled the next two games?
2. Our playcalling was beyond abysmal -- Tricket loves WR screens as much as Legg and they are just as ineffective as they have been. 4th and 1 in scoring position tied 0-0? How about a play with one WR running a route so Fancher can overthrow him? Kick a F'n field goal to take the lead, give it to Ali, do literally anything that makes sense.
3. Too much zone -- We have players on defense but our scheme yesterday was not good. Way way too much zone in the secondary. If we can't cover Albany man-to-man, it's a problem. Also, the one man blitz is the worst. Sending one random LB (and usually tipping it off before the snap) is a no win situation. The blitz doesn't get home and you take a guy out of coverage.
4. Special teams is an issue -- Penalties, poor kicks, letting punts bounce instead of fair catching them, etc.
Overall, we looked like an FCS team and were incredibly fortunate to escape our home opener with a win.
I dont know what ECU has, because they got rolled by Michigan this week (just like we would have), so I guess we will learn a lot more about where we stand after next weekend.
You proved my point and I was actually countering the argument you're arguing with me.
I do not believe Huff just blindly chose Fancher.
I'm also not saying anyone behind Fancher outright sucks. They just are not any better at this point to overtake Fancher. Could be youth could be time in the playbook, could be injury. Who knows.
All I am saying is that "put the other guy in" isn't necessarily the answer because if "the other guy" was better then he would be playing.
Also the person I talked to does know a thing or two and no he's not a Pennington fan boy. He was just being honest about what he saw and what he told us was exactly what we watched on Saturday.
I don't know if anyone actually realizes that any excuse we make is actually a pretty heavy idictment on Huff.
"We went Vanilla"
Wait you mean we purposesly threw nothing but sideline throws abd refused to adjust even though we were 1/11 on 3rd down?
"Well yea. We didn't want to put anything on film"
You mean Huff is so scared of other teams seeing what we may or may not have so he arrogantly refused to turn the players loose and almost lost to a previously 3-9 FCS team out of paranoia?
"Well the player just believed their hype and overlooked this team"
They were so cocky that even their allegeded talent mismatches couldn't easily win this game like every other time?
It took us 3 quarters to pull ahead. To Albany. Three quarters and we could never put it to bed either. We were losing. To Albany. At the half.
There is no spin. This was one of the worst coached and executed games I have ever watched Marshall play. This wasn't to a peer program. This was to an FCS program that according to Paul Swann in post game was picked to finish 11th in their conference.
Huff went to Fancher because Colombi got hurt. It wasn't because he thought we needed a change.
A few things:
Fancher wasn't great, but he was not our biggest problem on Saturday. We are poorly coached, as evidenced by our lack of discipline and poor "gameplan" (if we even had one). It doesn't help that we had numerous receivers drop balls that hit them in the hands, including a td pass. I'm more concerned about the fact that a lower-tier school was able to run up the gut on our vaunted D on several drives over the course of the game. That and the blocked field goal, which was just . . . ugh.
Fancher wasn't great, but he was not our biggest problem on Saturday. We are poorly coached, as evidenced by our lack of discipline and poor "gameplan" (if we even had one). It doesn't help that we had numerous receivers drop balls that hit them in the hands, including a td pass. I'm more concerned about the fact that a lower-tier school was able to run up the gut on our vaunted D on several drives over the course of the game. That and the blocked field goal, which was just . . . ugh.
See, but Fancher is our biggest problem. His stats look good, but that's because almost every one of his throws were high percentage throws within 5-8 yards of the LoS and mostly to the sideline. He never once pushed the team downfield. There were a couple ad lib throws off the scramble and a couple to the TE late in the game, but even some of those high percentage throws were not good.
If you were looking at this game with absolutely no bias, no preconceived notions, no loyalties, and just as an impartial analyst you need to ask one question in regard to the offense.
Is the offense this conservative because Trickett is just bad at calling plays or do the coaches know that they are limited to what they can actually call based on their knowledge of Fancher's limitations?
What we saw the other night was just a continuation of what we saw out of him through all of the games he played in last season. The times he had big play throws usually only happened at Georgia Southern when their DB fell down or maybe he bit the play fake. Either way our WR was WIDE open and Fancher just heaved one up and it looked like a great play.
He threw deep 2-3 times on Saturday. One was the INT and before that he just lobbed one up between two crossing WRs. Neither were out of their routes yet and neither were looking for a pass. He just throws the ball. He doesn't pass it and when he does throw he just lobs it like he's playing catch.
When he does look good is when he's on the move. Why our coaches refuse to lean on that I don't know. Maybe they know one bad hit and we're really screwed. Then there's the refusal to run tempo until we absolutely had to. And even then we got into the RZ and started that "check with me" garbage allowing Albany to get settled in. That goes back to Doc. Our offense even under Cato ran at it's best when it was up tempo and hitting the hot reads over and over and over again never giving the defense a chance to get set. Why we refuse to use that more often just boggles my mind.
If we go down somehow and shred ECU then I'm going to be even more perplexed by Huff because Albany would have been a tremendous opportunity to get backups in the game. Especially the backup QBs because we will need one at some point. We have every single season since 2015.
So did we choose to nearly squander that game or are we that far off from where we need to be at this point in Huff's tenure? Either answer is concerning.
That's true... But he stuck with Fancher even when Colombi was back healthy.
I dont know what any of our other Qb's have, or dont have, in terms of talent. But you have to take a risk at some point. Fancher is a C+ quarterback. We need a guy who can make a big play now and again and Fancher just doesn't. He dinks, he dunks, he throws WR screens and he misses anything down field.
Fancher may be a part of the issue. I think Trickett is the bigger issue. He is terrible, wasn't good at FAU. Limited play calling, bad situational play calling. jmho.
This is a stupid take. The only reason we are seeing some of the former greats come back and get involved with this team is because of Huff.
Meh. It always happens when a new coach comes in and reaches out. Doc did the same thing when he first got here. After a while people get complacent and don't care about making all the impressions they did when they started.
I agree that the playcalling Saturday was beyond pathetic overall and situationally terrible.
I am pretty knowledgeable about both, so I guess we are SOL.
**Early contender for overreaction post of the season!
