You want the best player to play. Book is not better than BW or he would be the starter. I don't want Book to start unless he wins the job. I don't want it to be a case of the starter sucks so play a guy that can't even beat out the struggling QB.
No one should want a QB to play strictly because the starter is struggling
- Thread starter Zorich 88
- Start date
This board is notrious for making the backup QB the most popular guy on the team when the first stringer struggles.
We got people clamoring for a 3-star true freshman in Tariq Bracy who is "rotting" on the bench.
Yawning...
Kelly loves potential. Nothing more.
For a QB who has terrible accuracy, had us losing our bowl game, is leading an anemic offense this year...you sure defend this like crazy.
I don't care who the QB is but I can tell you this...if you want 8-4 or 9-3 then BW is your guy.
If you want to reach a little higher than that then BW will not be the guy.
Book or someone else...this offense is in dire need of accurate passing. Nobody and I repeat nobody respects our passing game.
Tommy Rees, Chris Finke, Joe Schmidt all screamed potential.. yawn. Do you think Ian Book beats Michigan? No chance in hell
You're right...he might have thrown some legit strikes in stride to recievers allowing them to run.
He could have just thrown it up in the air into triple coverage and hoped for the best.
BW never would have done that
I agree with this mostly. There are situations though where the back up is pigeonholed by the head coach, or even the entire coaching staff, and never really gets a fair shake after that. It's why so many QBs transfer.
Who knows what the reps-split is right now. The coaching staff might be so focused on getting Wimbush right that Book is being overlooked.
If ND loses, and Wimbush struggles to get the passing game going AGAIN, I don't think ND has anything to lose at that point, and Book should be given a legitimate/extended opportunity to shine.
He's done exceptionally well with limited opportunity ... the way he's able to move the offense in the passing game is night and day between he and wimbush.
It kind of reminds me of the change of pace Tommy Rees used to provide in 2012 when Golson would go down. Rees was so much more decisive with where to go with the ball and threw a much more catchable pass despite Golson just being the far more talented player overall.
Last edited:
Listen Joe Montana was forth string sitting on the bench . It took a bunch of losses before he got his chance . The coaches are not always right . John Huarte sat on the bench for three years before he got his chance and he was Heisman Trophy winner
Book got his chance and one two games for us - the coaches are not always right
agreed they are however much more qualified to make those types of decisions than any message board participant.
Book has played well and led us to a win over LSU last year, in case you forgot. And he was 3/3 with a TD Saturday. He's definitely more accurate than Wimbush.
So you are putting all the credit on Book for the LSU game? Well then, I will use your logic and say BW has led ND to a 3-0 start and led ND to a 10-3 season last year.
So ND won 10 games last season with BW starting all but one. But this season with a weaker sos ND will be lucky to win 8 or 9???
Come on! So you are saying Book will lead this team to 11-12 wins????
You guys that are screaming for Book to be named stater need to really think hard for what your wishing for.
You have seen only ONE DC prepare a game plan for Book. That was NC. Book looked rough to say the least.
Go ahead say it's his first start.
But I have a question for you. When do you want to name him the starter?
Against Stanford? Talk about being rattled and nervous against NC. Give David Shaw and company time to game plan against Book.
Or against VT? At VT on a Saturday night?
Now your into week 7.
He couldn't even hold up against WF on the road.
Book had his shot to start during the off season. Next season he won't even be second string. Phil J. will be the starter or second string behind BW.
Be carful what you wish for.
You have seen only ONE DC prepare a game plan for Book. That was NC. Book looked rough to say the least.
Go ahead say it's his first start.
But I have a question for you. When do you want to name him the starter?
Against Stanford? Talk about being rattled and nervous against NC. Give David Shaw and company time to game plan against Book.
Or against VT? At VT on a Saturday night?
Now your into week 7.
He couldn't even hold up against WF on the road.
Book had his shot to start during the off season. Next season he won't even be second string. Phil J. will be the starter or second string behind BW.
Be carful what you wish for.
No...dont lump me in that crowd
I never said book should be the starter exclusive...
I don't care who it is but BW will not lead this team to where it wants to go starting every game.
Unless you think BK will revamp his offense and do a complete overhaul and pull out the Lou Holtz playbook...Wimbush is keeping this offense from producing.
Phil, book, the samurai...
Doesnt matter who. The current starter can't do it...or at least Brian Kelly's offense.
Somebody is actually going to have to play QB and throw the ball between the 20's.
Honestly...
If BW must play QB then give him sandlot plays. Tell him to just draw it up on his hand..you go here, you go there...ready break.
He could be effective that way and I'm not joking. Run around, drive the defense insane...guys will get ridiculously open. Keep it and run. Flip it to the open guy. Whatever.
Structured offensive passing plays it's wing it and pray.
3 step drop, 5 step drop and fire a strike is NOT good for Wimbush and unfortunately that's exactly what they want him to do.
"No one should want a QB to play strictly because the starter is struggling”
Really? It seems to me that this is the best time to replace the QB. Do you have the same philosophy regarding struggling pitchers being replaced by relief pitchers?
Really? It seems to me that this is the best time to replace the QB. Do you have the same philosophy regarding struggling pitchers being replaced by relief pitchers?
No one should want a QB to play strictly because the starter is struggling
Yeah that statement made me think of all the collapsed bridges never repaired.
We definitely should wait until the QB is playing good before changing.
Perhaps the OP meant we never ever should change the QB no matter what.....unless he's playing well.
Does that also mean we only replace Kelly after a big bowl win or title?
Yes, because QBs are always described that way. However, BW was really only 8-3 last year, because Book should get credit for the UNC and LSU wins.
No. He came in late in the 2nd quarter, and led us to all 21 of our points. The score was 0-0 when he took over.
I'd say Ed Orgeron deserves much of the credit for Notre Dame's win. Why he went for that field goal with the score tied late in the fourth quarter is beyond me. Doesn't mean ND doesn't score late to tie it, but that sends it into OT. And by that point in the game, Guice was starting to plow through our defense, so I would have liked my chances if I were LSU. Brian Kelly is not the only coach to make headscratching calls.
Book was better last year in the LSU game and is three for three this year
Again, I will say give a DC time to game plan for Book and you will no longer ask for Book.
Also, what game should Book start?
At VT?
Home to Stanford?
At WF?
Kinda like daring Wimbush to throw the ball and loading the box..If Book starts let's see what he can do..
Latest posts
-
-
Recruiting Confirming a couple of 2026 targets visiting next week
- Latest: Tyler James