Why have we not .... ?
Moderators: greenyellow, Autzenoise, UOducksTK1
-
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:00 am
Why have we not .... ?
Taking the training wheels off Braxton? Ok, I know I may get the normal response from fans " hey, he's just a freshman ..relax " that being said I first will say I LIKE Braxton, he's a tough dude, plays hard & with heart!!
Here's my take, obviously I am NOT at Duck practices so I will never see what coaches see. Is Braxton such a bad passer that coaches don't have faith in him in GAMES too allow him to throw longer than 20 yards?? Hell, I seen in his first game throw a nice pass to Breeland for a TD. This was WASHINGTON and I would have liked to see go all in, and at least TRY too throw some deeper balls, instead we just predictably ran 90% of the time ... I really wouldn't have cared if he threw interceptions because we were at least trying too mix it up AND beat our hated rival! 7 for 13.... this could not have been our GAME PLAN could it?? I know our chances of winning were minimal at best, but damn I would have liked us to do more than just RUN??
One last note ... I was proud of the DEFENSE! Score does not show it, but those guys played hard. Yeah we made some mistakes in pass coverage, but overall great job AND run defense imo was outstanding for the most part.
Here's my take, obviously I am NOT at Duck practices so I will never see what coaches see. Is Braxton such a bad passer that coaches don't have faith in him in GAMES too allow him to throw longer than 20 yards?? Hell, I seen in his first game throw a nice pass to Breeland for a TD. This was WASHINGTON and I would have liked to see go all in, and at least TRY too throw some deeper balls, instead we just predictably ran 90% of the time ... I really wouldn't have cared if he threw interceptions because we were at least trying too mix it up AND beat our hated rival! 7 for 13.... this could not have been our GAME PLAN could it?? I know our chances of winning were minimal at best, but damn I would have liked us to do more than just RUN??
One last note ... I was proud of the DEFENSE! Score does not show it, but those guys played hard. Yeah we made some mistakes in pass coverage, but overall great job AND run defense imo was outstanding for the most part.
-
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 11:22 pm
Re: Why have we not .... ?
Lol, because he is not a division 1 QB. I’m in Las Vegas and Unlv has 3 qbs that would start over him, and that is no BS. It doesn’t look like he can read coverage and holds the ball too long taking big sacks. He is terrible in the passing game.
-
- Two Star Recruit
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 2:06 pm
Re: Why have we not .... ?
In the practice reports, you read about him connecting on deep passes and the coaches say he looks great in practice, but all that's really told me is that practice reports are meaningless.picksix wrote:
Here's my take, obviously I am NOT at Duck practices so I will never see what coaches see. Is Braxton such a bad passer that coaches don't have faith in him in GAMES too allow him to throw longer than 20 yards??
- midwestduck82
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:35 pm
- Location: Michigan
Re: Why have we not .... ?
2.4 yds per attempt is a very disturbing stat to see. I never thought I'd see this at a division 1 college that wasn't Georgia Tech or Navy. He definitely can't read defensive coverages. His attempts over 4 yards were an interception and almost an interception.
He is young though. That's not me making an excuse for him. I'm just saying he will have plenty of film to look over this off season and will be able to see that his reads were terrible. Taggart said that he was a student of the game so hopefully he hits the film room a bunch this winter. He lacks the knowledge, not the heart and ability.
Play calling has been terrible. I thought they realized the strengths of the team without Herbert last week. They had RBs and WRs getting the ball in a variety of ways against Utah. This week was the same old things that contributed to the 3 previous loses.
He is young though. That's not me making an excuse for him. I'm just saying he will have plenty of film to look over this off season and will be able to see that his reads were terrible. Taggart said that he was a student of the game so hopefully he hits the film room a bunch this winter. He lacks the knowledge, not the heart and ability.
Play calling has been terrible. I thought they realized the strengths of the team without Herbert last week. They had RBs and WRs getting the ball in a variety of ways against Utah. This week was the same old things that contributed to the 3 previous loses.
-
- Four Star Recruit
- Posts: 590
- Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:02 pm
- Location: Behind the potato curtain
-
- All-American
- Posts: 10577
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:22 am
- Contact:
Re: Why have we not .... ?
They also don't report all the int he throws.picksix wrote:Taking the training wheels off Braxton? Ok, I know I may get the normal response from fans " hey, he's just a freshman ..relax " that being said I first will say I LIKE Braxton, he's a tough dude, plays hard & with heart!!
Here's my take, obviously I am NOT at Duck practices so I will never see what coaches see. Is Braxton such a bad passer that coaches don't have faith in him in GAMES too allow him to throw longer than 20 yards?? Hell, I seen in his first game throw a nice pass to Breeland for a TD. This was WASHINGTON and I would have liked to see go all in, and at least TRY too throw some deeper balls, instead we just predictably ran 90% of the time ... I really wouldn't have cared if he threw interceptions because we were at least trying too mix it up AND beat our hated rival! 7 for 13.... this could not have been our GAME PLAN could it?? I know our chances of winning were minimal at best, but damn I would have liked us to do more than just RUN??
One last note ... I was proud of the DEFENSE! Score does not show it, but those guys played hard. Yeah we made some mistakes in pass coverage, but overall great job AND run defense imo was outstanding for the most part.
- DuckMastaFunk
- Five Star Recruit
- Posts: 1025
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:07 pm
Re: Why have we not .... ?
Sorry to say Burm is worse.snapt wrote:So...who is/was worse? Burmeister or Chris Harper...
- pezsez1
- All Pac-12
- Posts: 5649
- Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:30 pm
- Location: RIP CITY
Re: Why have we not .... ?
I think Harper was worse. Harper couldn't pass AT ALL. Braxton can hit short passes, and his running game is nearly as good, if not equal.
Willie Taggart is a dick.
-
- Five Star Recruit
- Posts: 1051
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:07 am
Re: Why have we not .... ?
You are ridiculous, and so is everyone else that is writing Burmeister off for the rest of his career based off a few starts his true freshman year. Burmeister has the tools to play QB, he just hasn't adjusted to the speed of the game. That doesn't happen overnight for everyone. I absolutely think he can be a capable QB in a few years. Even if one of the future recruits ends up passing him on the depth chart, it would be nice to have a seasoned, serviceable backup for once, assuming Burmeister doesn't end up transferring. Harper never had the arm to play QB. Burmeister has the arm to play it, he just needs to figure out the ins & outs of the college level.DuckMastaFunk wrote:Sorry to say Burm is worse.snapt wrote:So...who is/was worse? Burmeister or Chris Harper...
College is obviously a huge step up from high school, and he played at one of the lower levels in California, so it's probably an even bigger step for him. We just have a spoiled bunch of fans that don't seem to understand that some kids take a little longer to develop than others. Apparently every 18 year old kid needs to be a finished product the second he steps on the field.
Burmeister was brought in to be a potential starter in a couple of years. It wasn't anticipated at the time that every backup ahead of him would transfer, forcing him on to the field.
- Phenom
- All Pac-12
- Posts: 9920
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:49 am
Re: Why have we not .... ?
All of this. Look at his tape. No way was he going to be able to play in college like he played in HS. He was a project.droop10 wrote:You are ridiculous, and so is everyone else that is writing Burmeister off for the rest of his career based off a few starts his true freshman year. Burmeister has the tools to play QB, he just hasn't adjusted to the speed of the game. That doesn't happen overnight for everyone. I absolutely think he can be a capable QB in a few years. Even if one of the future recruits ends up passing him on the depth chart, it would be nice to have a seasoned, serviceable backup for once, assuming Burmeister doesn't end up transferring. Harper never had the arm to play QB. Burmeister has the arm to play it, he just needs to figure out the ins & outs of the college level.DuckMastaFunk wrote:Sorry to say Burm is worse.snapt wrote:So...who is/was worse? Burmeister or Chris Harper...
College is obviously a huge step up from high school, and he played at one of the lower levels in California, so it's probably an even bigger step for him. We just have a spoiled bunch of fans that don't seem to understand that some kids take a little longer to develop than others. Apparently every 18 year old kid needs to be a finished product the second he steps on the field.
Burmeister was brought in to be a potential starter in a couple of years. It wasn't anticipated at the time that every backup ahead of him would transfer, forcing him on to the field.
-
- Senior
- Posts: 4747
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:36 am
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: Why have we not .... ?
^^^What he said^^^droop10 wrote:You are ridiculous, and so is everyone else that is writing Burmeister off for the rest of his career based off a few starts his true freshman year. Burmeister has the tools to play QB, he just hasn't adjusted to the speed of the game. That doesn't happen overnight for everyone. I absolutely think he can be a capable QB in a few years. Even if one of the future recruits ends up passing him on the depth chart, it would be nice to have a seasoned, serviceable backup for once, assuming Burmeister doesn't end up transferring. Harper never had the arm to play QB. Burmeister has the arm to play it, he just needs to figure out the ins & outs of the college level.DuckMastaFunk wrote:Sorry to say Burm is worse.snapt wrote:So...who is/was worse? Burmeister or Chris Harper...
College is obviously a huge step up from high school, and he played at one of the lower levels in California, so it's probably an even bigger step for him. We just have a spoiled bunch of fans that don't seem to understand that some kids take a little longer to develop than others. Apparently every 18 year old kid needs to be a finished product the second he steps on the field.
Burmeister was brought in to be a potential starter in a couple of years. It wasn't anticipated at the time that every backup ahead of him would transfer, forcing him on to the field.
- Duck07
- All-American
- Posts: 15960
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:36 am
- Location: Parts Unknown
Re: Why have we not .... ?
Any examples of true fr QB's looking this bad and turning out to be great? We can play the "he'll grow" aspect all we want but Darron Thomas took the field as a true FR and you could see he had something to work with, whereas when Harper played that year nobody felt that way. Either the coaches are completely hamstringing him with the play calling/game-planning and emphasis on what they want him to do, or he simply has his limitations and its likely he won't break through them.droop10 wrote:You are ridiculous, and so is everyone else that is writing Burmeister off for the rest of his career based off a few starts his true freshman year. Burmeister has the tools to play QB, he just hasn't adjusted to the speed of the game. That doesn't happen overnight for everyone. I absolutely think he can be a capable QB in a few years. Even if one of the future recruits ends up passing him on the depth chart, it would be nice to have a seasoned, serviceable backup for once, assuming Burmeister doesn't end up transferring. Harper never had the arm to play QB. Burmeister has the arm to play it, he just needs to figure out the ins & outs of the college level.
College is obviously a huge step up from high school, and he played at one of the lower levels in California, so it's probably an even bigger step for him. We just have a spoiled bunch of fans that don't seem to understand that some kids take a little longer to develop than others. Apparently every 18 year old kid needs to be a finished product the second he steps on the field.
Burmeister was brought in to be a potential starter in a couple of years. It wasn't anticipated at the time that every backup ahead of him would transfer, forcing him on to the field.
Nobody has expected him to play like Herbert did last year, but getting intramural level play out of your backups isn't a good sign either and it doesn't make us spoiled to question or see that.
- OregonFan4Life
- All-American
- Posts: 12378
- Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:32 pm
Re: Why have we not .... ?
No nobody is ridiculous for doubting BB’s ability to become a legit starter at Oregon. I understand he’s a true freshman and growing pains are to be expected. The big problem I’ve seen and others have noted is that he isn’t learning or progressing, in fact he’s regressing if anything. I don’t hate the kid and I don’t doubt he’s talented as well, but after 5 starts, we should’ve seen at least a little bit of improvement and we haven’t seen any of that or any signs of greatness. It’s nothing personal, but based off of his play so far, I don’t see him becoming a legitimate starter here at Oregon with Herbert back for two more years and Shough and others coming in.droop10 wrote:You are ridiculous, and so is everyone else that is writing Burmeister off for the rest of his career based off a few starts his true freshman year. Burmeister has the tools to play QB, he just hasn't adjusted to the speed of the game. That doesn't happen overnight for everyone. I absolutely think he can be a capable QB in a few years. Even if one of the future recruits ends up passing him on the depth chart, it would be nice to have a seasoned, serviceable backup for once, assuming Burmeister doesn't end up transferring. Harper never had the arm to play QB. Burmeister has the arm to play it, he just needs to figure out the ins & outs of the college level.DuckMastaFunk wrote:Sorry to say Burm is worse.snapt wrote:So...who is/was worse? Burmeister or Chris Harper...
College is obviously a huge step up from high school, and he played at one of the lower levels in California, so it's probably an even bigger step for him. We just have a spoiled bunch of fans that don't seem to understand that some kids take a little longer to develop than others. Apparently every 18 year old kid needs to be a finished product the second he steps on the field.
Burmeister was brought in to be a potential starter in a couple of years. It wasn't anticipated at the time that every backup ahead of him would transfer, forcing him on to the field.
-
- Five Star Recruit
- Posts: 1051
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:07 am
Re: Why have we not .... ?
I think this is a unique circumstance, as a true freshman typically won't see the field unless he's a top prospect. Burmeister is only out there out of necessity, because they have no other options (Alie wouldn't be doing much more). Even when a true freshman does start, it's rare to see one come in and see great success right away. Georgia is getting away with Jake Fromm throwing 7-15 passes a game, because they have an elite defense. Even so, Fromm was also one of the top qb recruits in the country, so he was expected to be more college ready than Burmeister.Duck07 wrote:Any examples of true fr QB's looking this bad and turning out to be great? We can play the "he'll grow" aspect all we want but Darron Thomas took the field as a true FR and you could see he had something to work with, whereas when Harper played that year nobody felt that way. Either the coaches are completely hamstringing him with the play calling/game-planning and emphasis on what they want him to do, or he simply has his limitations and its likely he won't break through them.droop10 wrote:You are ridiculous, and so is everyone else that is writing Burmeister off for the rest of his career based off a few starts his true freshman year. Burmeister has the tools to play QB, he just hasn't adjusted to the speed of the game. That doesn't happen overnight for everyone. I absolutely think he can be a capable QB in a few years. Even if one of the future recruits ends up passing him on the depth chart, it would be nice to have a seasoned, serviceable backup for once, assuming Burmeister doesn't end up transferring. Harper never had the arm to play QB. Burmeister has the arm to play it, he just needs to figure out the ins & outs of the college level.
College is obviously a huge step up from high school, and he played at one of the lower levels in California, so it's probably an even bigger step for him. We just have a spoiled bunch of fans that don't seem to understand that some kids take a little longer to develop than others. Apparently every 18 year old kid needs to be a finished product the second he steps on the field.
Burmeister was brought in to be a potential starter in a couple of years. It wasn't anticipated at the time that every backup ahead of him would transfer, forcing him on to the field.
Nobody has expected him to play like Herbert did last year, but getting intramural level play out of your backups isn't a good sign either and it doesn't make us spoiled to question or see that.
I'm not claiming Burmeister is going to be a star, but I think he can certainly be serviceable and win them some games in a few years. I just hate seeing the posts stating that Burmeister should never see the field again at Oregon based on a couple of games at the beginning of his career. It's as if people don't expect to see any improvement or growth from him over the next couple of years. Of course I'd prefer to see Herbert out there, but I'm not ready to give up on the kid entirely at this point.
Speaking of Darron's freshman year, I remember a guy like Masoli (a sophomore at the time) playing 9 games before having a 200 yard passing game, including multiple games with only 40 yards, only to have a switch flip go off all of a sudden. I had forgotten just how bad it looked early on with him in there. Look at this game log from his sophomore year to see how truly ugly it was until that Arizona game where he turned the corner.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/pl ... elog/2008/
2 of those games he had a completion percentage of 33% or less. I think Burmeister could eventually become very much a Masoli type player. Will that win a championship? Probably not, but I could think of much worse QBs to have out there in a pinch. It would give us the chance to win most games, especially if the defense continues to improve each season.
All of this ignores the fact that Burmeister also has a very green receiving core. Outside of Nelson (who missed multiple games Burmeister started), there's very little experience, so that isn't helping the transition either.
- Duck07
- All-American
- Posts: 15960
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:36 am
- Location: Parts Unknown
Re: Why have we not .... ?
I'm not giving up on him either, but it just seems obvious that he's got a lot more work to do to get to being a viable backup. I put a fair amount of it on the coaches too because of what their approach does from a mental standpoint. "Here, run with the 2's all week throwing the normal offense and then come game day we'll put you in with the 1's" and then do nothing to help set him up to throw down the field in any real capacity. That doesn't help those young WR's either.
08 was a weird year rotating the QB's but Jeremiah wasn't a true freshman. This is also where we in some ways have to accept that our offense isn't built to bring guys wide open through it's concepts but from winning 1 v 1. It's not like Herbert has been throwing to wide open guys the way Marcus was criticized for and allowed Masoli to have success playing within his strengths. It seems moot to discuss it much further unless we're talking about BB in the 4th Qtr with the 2's up by 30.
08 was a weird year rotating the QB's but Jeremiah wasn't a true freshman. This is also where we in some ways have to accept that our offense isn't built to bring guys wide open through it's concepts but from winning 1 v 1. It's not like Herbert has been throwing to wide open guys the way Marcus was criticized for and allowed Masoli to have success playing within his strengths. It seems moot to discuss it much further unless we're talking about BB in the 4th Qtr with the 2's up by 30.