Millhouse
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2011
- Messages
- 29,727
- Like
- 35,601
Rewind to spring 2012.
Assumptions that I think are reasonable (Bullet points make this so much more persuasive. If need be, I'll make a powerpoint with extra animations)
Would a coach in that position really care if they stopped the development of a QB for 2013-14 if they thought that QB could help the offense somewhere else in 2012?
If Marrone was thinking this way, his decision to keep Hunt at QB doesn't neccesarily mean he thought Hunt was a better QB. His escape to the NFL would've been threatened no matter what if Hunt or Broyld had to take snaps.
You still need bodies at QB. We still had Kinder, Loeb, whoever else so that's a hole in this theory. But if you take 2 qbs who aren't going to play and just focus on who will help more immediately at another offensive position, the answer has to be Broyld
Thinking back to Rahme's stuff from that summer, they thought Broyld was going to be a huge weapon that year. He wasn't and the offense was excellent anyway but for this, it only matters what they were thinking before the 2012 season.
If you were going to move Broyld to another position, wouldn't linebacker be at least close to the top of the list? We had good running backs and WR. He might've made a bigger difference on defense but if Marrone preferred a smaller improvement in the offense to a bigger improvement in the defense, that would explain why he stayed on offense.
I'm not saying they would've moved Broyld if they thought he would be a great QB, I'm just saying they might've moved him if their goals were more short term than the rest of us
Assumptions that I think are reasonable (Bullet points make this so much more persuasive. If need be, I'll make a powerpoint with extra animations)
- Marrone knew he wanted out. (Grumpiness, luncheons, rumblings)
- He knew the NFL was the place for him.
- He knew he'd bring most of the SU staff with him if he got a shot at an NFL job. (Evidence that concern for SU's success in 2013 on is only secondary to him)
- Since his offenses at SU weren't very good his first 3 seasons at SU, he thought it was almost essential for his own job prospects that the offense be good in 2012.
Would a coach in that position really care if they stopped the development of a QB for 2013-14 if they thought that QB could help the offense somewhere else in 2012?
If Marrone was thinking this way, his decision to keep Hunt at QB doesn't neccesarily mean he thought Hunt was a better QB. His escape to the NFL would've been threatened no matter what if Hunt or Broyld had to take snaps.
You still need bodies at QB. We still had Kinder, Loeb, whoever else so that's a hole in this theory. But if you take 2 qbs who aren't going to play and just focus on who will help more immediately at another offensive position, the answer has to be Broyld
Thinking back to Rahme's stuff from that summer, they thought Broyld was going to be a huge weapon that year. He wasn't and the offense was excellent anyway but for this, it only matters what they were thinking before the 2012 season.
If you were going to move Broyld to another position, wouldn't linebacker be at least close to the top of the list? We had good running backs and WR. He might've made a bigger difference on defense but if Marrone preferred a smaller improvement in the offense to a bigger improvement in the defense, that would explain why he stayed on offense.
I'm not saying they would've moved Broyld if they thought he would be a great QB, I'm just saying they might've moved him if their goals were more short term than the rest of us
Last edited: