Started By
Message

QB Next Year

Posted on 1/2/15 at 12:46 am
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111546 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 12:46 am
Gossip follows:

Staff was in a lot of disagreement over who the best QB was and who should be getting snaps.

Doesn't bode well for a true competition this spring.

#WDDWD
Posted by Jagd Tiger
The Kinder, Gentler Jagd
Member since Mar 2014
18139 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:14 am to

Mauk is the fair haired boy at least until Lock has a year of experience. The fact that Printz and Berk never saw the field even when MM was hobbling around and or struggling mightily tells us pretty much what we need to know. It's a Mauk-Lock progression of legacy for better or for worse. We are stuck with a QB that wins a lot, even if he looks bad much of the time doing it.
Posted by RamboMizzou
Springfield
Member since Jan 2014
10183 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:40 am to
DREW Lock. I love Mauk but, he was too bad for my liking this year. Drew needs the go-ahead.
Posted by 5thTiger
Member since Nov 2014
7996 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:41 am to
I see us doing the same thing with lock that we did with Maty and Franklin. Redshirt next year, then a 3 to 1 series split during his freshman and maty's senior year
Posted by Jagd Tiger
The Kinder, Gentler Jagd
Member since Mar 2014
18139 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:08 am to
quote:

I love Mauk but, he was too bad for my liking this year


Odom will have to be a magician to keep our defense at the level it will need to be for another 10 win season.
Mauk was the beneficiary of the best Mizzou D in the Pinkel era.


Posted by Stlweir
St Louis
Member since Nov 2013
239 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:24 am to
Mauk often wins ugly but he wins. He won with one of the weaker receiving corps in the last decade.
Posted by Jagd Tiger
The Kinder, Gentler Jagd
Member since Mar 2014
18139 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:27 am to
quote:

Mauk often wins ugly but he wins. He won with one of the weaker receiving corps in the last decade.


and yet I could see Berkstresser winning with the D we had this year, so winning doesn't mean "best".



Posted by reedus23
St. Louis
Member since Sep 2011
25485 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:27 am to
quote:

I see us doing the same thing with lock that we did with Maty and Franklin. Redshirt next year, then a 3 to 1 series split during his freshman and maty's senior year


This. IMO, at least starting with the Chase Daniel era, it was all pre-ordained and there has never been a true QB competition. It would flow from Daniel to Gabbert to Franklin to Mauk and now to Lock. If there was a thought of Mauk going in the draft next year, you might not see Lock redshirt but since I think those chances are slim to none, I think Mauk will reshirt and it will play out like you said.
Posted by reedus23
St. Louis
Member since Sep 2011
25485 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:28 am to
quote:

Mauk often wins ugly but he wins.


I really think Mauk is a gamer. I just don't think his skill levels and decision making are on par. I won't question his heart anytime though.
Posted by JesusQuintana
St Louis
Member since Oct 2013
33366 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 10:40 am to
Mauk has 14 wins in 18 starts.

Don't think we'll be seeing a change anytime soon. I really hope some of these young WR are ready to step up.
Posted by reedus23
St. Louis
Member since Sep 2011
25485 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 10:55 am to
I was gonna start a new thread about that but didn't. Regardless of who the QB is, I'm a little worried about who they are going to throw to.

Leading returning receivers:

Culkin 19/173/1 (catches/yards/touchdowns)
Hansbrough 11/58/0
Brown 4/31/0
Leftwich 3/36/0
Moore 2/33/0
Reese 1/12/0
Mauk 1/1/0

OUCH!!!

Other options:

Blair
DiLosa
Richard
Floyd
Hall
Blanton (TE)

We NEED Zanders and 1 or more of the RB's or DB's to move to WR. I see no other way around it. At strictly the WR spot, we have 8 guys for 3 spots, including the commits. Compare that to 9 guys for 1 spot at the RB position.
Posted by JesusQuintana
St Louis
Member since Oct 2013
33366 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 11:04 am to
Right, I really don't know why we took so many RBs and didn't land a JUCO WR. Doesn't make a lot of sense, but I'm sure they have a plan.

May see a lot of two TE sets next year. Reese was getting a lot of run in the bowl game and the coaches love Blanton.
Posted by surgicalvenom
Omaha
Member since Jan 2014
5368 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 11:13 am to
But lets be honest. If you were a good WR recruit, would you be looking at Mizzou? Your career is attached to the QB, and would you trust MM to get you the ball? If you're a dad looking at your son, would you recommend Mizzou right now?

My son is just starting to think about the D1 recruiting process. Of course I'm hoping Mizzou is interested, his fav is LSU. But even he has noticed the QB mess with both programs.

At the Chicago Nike skills camp(I was there with my son), Lock was well received, but if he doesn't start (or at least get a fair shot) what high 3 or 4 star receiver is going to be attracted to Mizzou?
Posted by Jagd Tiger
The Kinder, Gentler Jagd
Member since Mar 2014
18139 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 11:24 am to
quote:

We NEED Zanders and 1 or more of the RB's or DB's to move to WR.


we also need to get our Slot more involved, use him in motion rather than having Culkin skippy dancing behind Mauks butt...

Henson has a lot of work to do.
Posted by surgicalvenom
Omaha
Member since Jan 2014
5368 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 11:35 am to
"Skippy Dancing" never heard it before, but I like it. Gonna use that one with my son if he doesn't run his routes hard.
Posted by Jagd Tiger
The Kinder, Gentler Jagd
Member since Mar 2014
18139 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 11:44 am to
quote:

"Skippy Dancing" never heard it before, but I like it. Gonna use that one with my son if he doesn't run his routes hard.


trying to think of a way to describe that stupid stutter step Culkin does when he pats Mauks rear.. (and then we inevitably run up the middle) our entire O scheme could use a lot of improvements. This years offense just looks very "high schoolish", nothing we do is well disguised, it's really up to Henson to get it done and all the staff to make sure the QB is capable.
This post was edited on 1/2/15 at 11:46 am
Posted by reedus23
St. Louis
Member since Sep 2011
25485 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 11:46 am to
I was as big of a Printz fan as there was and had hoped he would win the starting gig. Having said that, not all of Mauk's problems can be laid at his feet. I'd be curious to know what his numbers would be like if we didn't have so many drops or if a drop at least didn't go against his numbers.
Posted by mizzoukills
Member since Aug 2011
40686 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 12:00 pm to
quote:

I'd be curious to know what his numbers would be like if we didn't have so many drops or if a drop at least didn't go against his numbers.



I'd argue that a lot of those drops were due to a poorly thrown ball
Posted by surgicalvenom
Omaha
Member since Jan 2014
5368 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 12:14 pm to
The OL seems to getting their run blocking together and we have larger RB's coming in. Maybe we become a run first offense to help Mauk. Afterall, we did break Arkansas down with the run, which I think was pretty damn impressive.
Posted by reedus23
St. Louis
Member since Sep 2011
25485 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 12:20 pm to
We also only threw the ball 19 times against Minnesota. Mauk completed 63% but obviously had the 2 INT's plus an INT on the 2 point conversion that doesn't show up in the stats.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter