Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="billsin01, post: 775442, member: 837"]
I said this all offseason and I think most here thought I was insane (and probably still do ... and perhaps rightfully so). But yeah, I absolutely wonder if either of these two staffs gave enough consideration to Broyld at QB.

The interesting comparison to me is WVU in 2005 with Pat White. So, before everyone loses their s--t, I understand that white was a far more highly regarded QB prospect and probably in another class in terms of sheer athleticism.

However, it's still an interesting study in terms of a guy that can be a serious threat running the ball despite not offering much in the passing game. White threw the ball for an OK percentage (57%) but rarely threw the ball at all (114 attempts in 12 games). He also replaced a guy in Adam Bednarik who was nothing special but completed 73% of his passes (145 rating) and ran for 3.0 ypc -- not terribly effective but not awful.

So would Broyld have taken over this season and led us to a Sugar Bowl victory? Uh, no. Is he our version of Pat White? Not likely.

But you still can't help but wonder what this offense might look like with a dangerous runner at QB and a slew of good RBs running behind a good offensive line, right? Instead, arguably our most dangerous offensive player is relegated to a role where he's touching the ball 4-5 times a game and while the theory is that he's getting it in space, he's only averaging 9.7/catch.

Long-term it's probably better to work on developing Hunt and some sort of  more balanced offense, but I still think the idea of Broyld at QB was discarded a bit too hastily.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?