05-04-2021, 05:38 PM
So who is mostly likely to start at QB this season?
2021 Starting QB
05-04-2021, 06:39 PM
Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
05-04-2021, 06:56 PM
(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
05-04-2021, 07:44 PM
If McKee leaves after one year then it’s West (maybe) and Patu. They could put Patu in the single wing and run 90% of the time but that would drive even more season ticket holders away.
The staff needs to get over the regular take only one QB per year mantra. Some years you won’t get any which is where they are heading..... AGAIN.
The staff needs to get over the regular take only one QB per year mantra. Some years you won’t get any which is where they are heading..... AGAIN.
If McKee leaves after one year then it’s West (maybe) and Patu. They could put Patu in the single wing and run 90% of the time but that would drive even more season ticket holders away.
The staff needs to get over the regular take only one QB per year mantra. Some years you won’t get any which is where they are heading..... AGAIN.
The staff needs to get over the regular take only one QB per year mantra. Some years you won’t get any which is where they are heading..... AGAIN.
05-04-2021, 09:40 PM
(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
05-04-2021, 09:43 PM
(05-04-2021, 09:40 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
None?
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
(05-04-2021, 09:40 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
None?
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
05-04-2021, 11:33 PM
(05-04-2021, 09:40 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
I think the operative word there is "could" as in "he is eligible to" not "could" as in "might".
BC
(05-04-2021, 09:40 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
I think the operative word there is "could" as in "he is eligible to" not "could" as in "might".
BC
(05-04-2021, 11:33 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(05-04-2021, 09:40 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
I think the operative word there is "could" as in "he is eligible to" not "could" as in "might".
BC
exactly, it was an alternative scenario to VB card's post about McKee being the QB for 3 (or 4) years
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(05-04-2021, 11:33 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(05-04-2021, 09:40 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:56 PM)82lsju Wrote:(05-04-2021, 06:39 PM)VB Card Wrote: Hopefully Tanner McKee, as that will give us 3 (4 if he doesn't develop into a pro) years of him as the starter and raises the future potential of the offense.
I think he could enter the draft after next season as he'll be more than three years after his high school graduation.....
What evidence is there that this is even within the realm of possibility?
I think the operative word there is "could" as in "he is eligible to" not "could" as in "might".
BC
exactly, it was an alternative scenario to VB card's post about McKee being the QB for 3 (or 4) years
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
05-05-2021, 12:10 PM
(05-05-2021, 06:13 AM)winflop Wrote: <snip>
- McKee is a massive recruiting bust
This seems premature to me. Are you saying this because Tanner McKee didn't beat out Jack West for the first-game starter in 2020? After all, McKee was a true freshman who hadn't played competitive football in over two years. Common sense would dictate that McKee will be better this fall than he was last fall.
I actually think our offense will be pretty good in 2021. The defense, on the other hand, could be bad for the third year in a row, which is really concerning to me.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
(05-05-2021, 06:13 AM)winflop Wrote: <snip>
- McKee is a massive recruiting bust
This seems premature to me. Are you saying this because Tanner McKee didn't beat out Jack West for the first-game starter in 2020? After all, McKee was a true freshman who hadn't played competitive football in over two years. Common sense would dictate that McKee will be better this fall than he was last fall.
I actually think our offense will be pretty good in 2021. The defense, on the other hand, could be bad for the third year in a row, which is really concerning to me.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
05-05-2021, 12:59 PM
(05-05-2021, 12:10 PM)Papa John Wrote:(05-05-2021, 06:13 AM)winflop Wrote: <snip>
- McKee is a massive recruiting bust
This seems premature to me. Are you saying this because Tanner McKee didn't beat out Jack West for the first-game starter in 2020? After all, McKee was a true freshman who hadn't played competitive football in over two years. Common sense would dictate that McKee will be better this fall than he was last fall.
I actually think our offense will be pretty good in 2021. The defense, on the other hand, could be bad for the third year in a row, which is really concerning to me.
I think what he is saying is that if McKee doesn't win the starting job this year he is a bust, not that he is a bust because he didn't start against Oregon last year.
I agree that the defense will be average at best, so if we are going to have a good year the offense has to be very good.
(05-05-2021, 12:10 PM)Papa John Wrote:(05-05-2021, 06:13 AM)winflop Wrote: <snip>
- McKee is a massive recruiting bust
This seems premature to me. Are you saying this because Tanner McKee didn't beat out Jack West for the first-game starter in 2020? After all, McKee was a true freshman who hadn't played competitive football in over two years. Common sense would dictate that McKee will be better this fall than he was last fall.
I actually think our offense will be pretty good in 2021. The defense, on the other hand, could be bad for the third year in a row, which is really concerning to me.
I think what he is saying is that if McKee doesn't win the starting job this year he is a bust, not that he is a bust because he didn't start against Oregon last year.
I agree that the defense will be average at best, so if we are going to have a good year the offense has to be very good.
05-05-2021, 02:21 PM
(05-05-2021, 12:10 PM)Papa John Wrote:(05-05-2021, 06:13 AM)winflop Wrote: <snip>
- McKee is a massive recruiting bust
This seems premature to me. Are you saying this because Tanner McKee didn't beat out Jack West for the first-game starter in 2020? After all, McKee was a true freshman who hadn't played competitive football in over two years. Common sense would dictate that McKee will be better this fall than he was last fall.
I actually think our offense will be pretty good in 2021. The defense, on the other hand, could be bad for the third year in a row, which is really concerning to me.
Yes, if a 5-star recruit with a year under his belt can't beat out a guy who (IMnsHO) isn't even a mediocre starting QB, then he is a bust
(05-05-2021, 12:10 PM)Papa John Wrote:(05-05-2021, 06:13 AM)winflop Wrote: <snip>
- McKee is a massive recruiting bust
This seems premature to me. Are you saying this because Tanner McKee didn't beat out Jack West for the first-game starter in 2020? After all, McKee was a true freshman who hadn't played competitive football in over two years. Common sense would dictate that McKee will be better this fall than he was last fall.
I actually think our offense will be pretty good in 2021. The defense, on the other hand, could be bad for the third year in a row, which is really concerning to me.
Yes, if a 5-star recruit with a year under his belt can't beat out a guy who (IMnsHO) isn't even a mediocre starting QB, then he is a bust
05-05-2021, 03:32 PM
(05-05-2021, 02:56 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: FWIW, West was actually quite serviceable against Oregon. Night and day from the game-that-shall-not-be-mentioned.However McKee isn't superman, so he can get hurt. The old adage that the backup QB is the least important player until he becomes the most important player always applies. We should be very happy that West has developed well enough that we aren't totally doomed if he has to have a spot start. We always hope nobody gets hurt, we have seen enough in the last few years to know not to expect that.
(Not that it really matters because McKee will be the starter.)
That said, if West should actually beat out McKee as the starter it undoubtedly would mean West had taken a quantum leap forward.
(05-05-2021, 02:56 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: FWIW, West was actually quite serviceable against Oregon. Night and day from the game-that-shall-not-be-mentioned.However McKee isn't superman, so he can get hurt. The old adage that the backup QB is the least important player until he becomes the most important player always applies. We should be very happy that West has developed well enough that we aren't totally doomed if he has to have a spot start. We always hope nobody gets hurt, we have seen enough in the last few years to know not to expect that.
(Not that it really matters because McKee will be the starter.)
That said, if West should actually beat out McKee as the starter it undoubtedly would mean West had taken a quantum leap forward.
05-05-2021, 05:57 PM
Since Shaw probably won’t use Patu then it’s next man up if and when McKee and West get hurt. Hello Mr. Paultz.
05-05-2021, 09:01 PM
Yeah, if any QB is running the single-wing, it'll be Sanders. Sure hope Shaw is going to prove the naysayers wrong about his QB developmental abilities.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »