QB "battle"

[18IsTheMan]

Hopefully just regular coach talk by Beamer, but he declined to say who the starting QB would be and said that decision would be made and announced to the team tomorrow.

We better hope this is typical coach speak. Not because we know LaNorris is going to be great, but because we know Ashford isn't. He's a career 49.5% passer with 9 TDs and 9 INTs. Yes, he has SEC experience, but it hasn't produced desirable results. And, yes, I know LaNorris is green, but to have a modicum of success this year, we need him to live up to the potential he flashed in extremely limited action last year.

Moreover, from a psychological perspective, we need LaNorris to pan out. He has been anointed by many fans as the future of USC football. Yes, I know that notion is absurd to some, and is unfair to put on Sellers. Nevertheless, the future will look a lot bleaker if a career 49.5% passer from the portal is better than anyone we could recruit out of high school. We also need to show that we can recruit a QB. We haven't a QB that we've recruited have any success here since Bentley, and his tenure produced mixed results, at best.

If we end up with Ashford, we are in for 2020 redux. I'm excited for this season mostly because I'm excited about Sellers. Take that out and I'll have as much enthusiasm as I did for Collin Hill, which is to say, none at all.

 

[Evilchicken]

I wish I could care. Honestly man, I’m so uninspired by this football program I’d rather watch paint dry.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I wish I could care. Honestly man, I’m so uninspired by this football program I’d rather watch paint dry.

I'm very excited about Sellers. Maybe naively excited. But I haven't been this excited about a recruit in quite some time. If he's not QB, I won't have much enthusiasm for the season.

 

[will110]

Hopefully just regular coach talk by Beamer, but he declined to say who the starting QB would be and said that decision would be made and announced to the team tomorrow.

We better hope this is typical coach speak. Not because we know LaNorris is going to be great, but because we know Ashford isn't. He's a career 49.5% passer with 9 TDs and 9 INTs. Yes, he has SEC experience, but it hasn't produced desirable results. And, yes, I know LaNorris is green, but to have a modicum of success this year, we need him to live up to the potential he flashed in extremely limited action last year.

Moreover, from a psychological perspective, we need LaNorris to pan out. He has been anointed by many fans as the future of USC football. Yes, I know that notion is absurd to some, and is unfair to put on Sellers. Nevertheless, the future will look a lot bleaker if a career 49.5% passer is better than anyone we could recruit out of high school. We also need to show that we can recruit a QB. We haven't a QB that we've recruited have any success here since Bentley, and his tenure produced mixed results, at best.

If we end up with Ashford, we are in for 2020 redux. I'm excited for this season mostly because I'm excited about Sellers. Take that out and I'll have as much enthusiasm as I did for Collin Hill, which is to say, none at all.

Every time there's been a report about Ashford looking good, I've said the same thing. If somehow Ashford wins the job, that says a lot more about Sellers than it does Ashford. It won't be good for the program, that's for sure.

 

[cidcock18]

its coach talk. Lanorris will be the starter

 

[18IsTheMan]

its coach talk. Lanorris will be the starter

I'm 85% certain of that.

 

[Lurker123]

I vote coachspeak. Motivation, or keeping complacency at bay, take your pick.

 

[cidcock18]

I'm assuming they're keeping it a competition to let everyone continue to improve. At some point, it would probably be helpful to go ahead and let the starter build cohesion with the first group

 

[Lurker123]

I'm assuming they're keeping it a competition to let everyone continue to improve. At some point, it would probably be helpful to go ahead and let the starter build cohesion with the first group

Especially given his lack of experience.

As someone e pointed out, the guy who transferred in was told he'd get a shot at starting. It's good to keep your word too.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Especially given his lack of experience.

As someone e pointed out, the guy who transferred in was told he'd get a shot at starting. It's good to keep your word too.

Yes, I mentioned this in the other Ashford thread as well. He was promised a real shot at competing for the starting job, and seems satisfied that he's been given that chance, however this turns out.

 

[Uscg1984]

If I were a coach and there was any reasonable doubt by my opponents about who my starter would be, I would wait until the last possible moment to publicly announce it.

 

[18IsTheMan]

If I were a coach and there was any reasonable doubt by my opponents about who my starter would be, I would wait until the last possible moment to publicly announce it.

I agree, there's no advantage for Beamer to make the announcement over the weekend as opposed to tomorrow. On the flip side, there's also really no advantaged gained by ODU if we announced over the weekend vs tomorrow. That said, if we're needing gamesmanship to beat ODU, we're screwed.

 

[Uscg1984]

I agree, there's no advantage for Beamer to make the announcement over the weekend as opposed to tomorrow. On the flip side, there's also really no advantaged gained by ODU if we announced over the weekend vs tomorrow. That said, if we're needing gamesmanship to beat ODU, we're screwed.

Unless both we and Kentucky are looking ahead to our 2nd opponents.

 

[Bubba Fett]

Giving Ashford a shot, maybe even having him be the week one starter, is smart. Takes heat off of Sellers and sets him up to come off the bench.

If it ends up that Ashford has to come in for Sellers, well, we're screwed then.

 

[AngloCock]

Ashford would get us 5 wins, which everyone expects, but won’t help in recruiting or for our future. Sellers playing well would get us 7 wins. If he breaks out, we might get 9. Either way, QB is gonna be key to our success.

 

[Lurker123]

Ashford is what you want in a backup. He has SEC experience, even if it's not fantastic experience.

 

[Atlanta Cock]

Ashford would get us 5 wins, which everyone expects, but won’t help in recruiting or for our future. Sellers playing well would get us 7 wins. If he breaks out, we might get 9. Either way, QB is gonna be key to our success.

9?

Good lord.

 

[Thunderstick]

I'm very excited about Sellers. Maybe naively excited. But I haven't been this excited about a recruit in quite some time. If he's not QB, I won't have much enthusiasm for the season.

I haven't been excited about any recruits since Clowney and Lattimore.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I haven't been excited about any recruits since Clowney and Lattimore.

I dunno. I definitely think Sellers has shown something to be excited about. We should be excited about Stewart.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Giving Ashford a shot, maybe even having him be the week one starter, is smart. Takes heat off of Sellers and sets him up to come off the bench.

If it ends up that Ashford has to come in for Sellers, well, we're screwed then.

That would make sense if the roles were reversed and Sellers was the transfer. Give the older, incumbent a guy a shot to prove himself as the starter, so he can't say he wasn't given a shot, even though you know the younger guy is going to supplant him. But Sellers is the incumbent. Paid his dues as a backup last year.

Obviously, if Ashford is simply the better QB (and we better hope his not) then he should start. But I can't see the advantage him naming him the starter if he hasn't actually earned it.

 

[Thunderstick]

I dunno. I definitely think Sellers has shown something to be excited about. We should be excited about Stewart.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

That would make sense if the roles were reversed and Sellers was the transfer. Give the older, incumbent a guy a shot to prove himself as the starter, so he can't say he wasn't given a shot, even though you know the younger guy is going to supplant him. But Sellers is the incumbent. Paid his dues as a backup last year.

Obviously, if Ashford is simply the better QB (and we better hope his not) then he should start. But I can't see the advantage him naming him the starter if he hasn't actually earned it.

Beamer made a promise to Ashford that the QB spot would be competed for and to honor that he is letting it play out until the end.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Beamer made a promise to Ashford that the QB spot would be competed for and to honor that he is letting it play out until the end.

For sure. But if he hasn't earned it, Sellers should get the starting nod. I don't see any psychological advantages to naming someone starter who hasn't earned it.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

For sure. But if he hasn't earned it, Sellers should get the starting nod. I don't see any psychological advantages to naming someone starter who hasn't earned it.

Agree. I would like to see Sellers take it from the start and OWN it!

 

[gamecock stock]

I haven't been excited about any recruits since Clowney and Lattimore.

I'm excited about Sellers. BUT, I understand your sentiment. I want us to win. But I'm not as excited about our football program like I was during the Spurrier years. Maybe I have matured.

 

[18IsTheMan]

So, Sellers it is. I was 85% certain it would be him but am relieved he got the nod.