[stanfan95118]

Does moving Lloyd to safety now mean a QB in this class is more of a priority? I could see Hogan moving on by 2015 as well as Crower if he doesn't have a shot at starting. Even if Crower stays, that makes for a total of 3 QBs for 2015, doesn't it (Crower, Burns, and Chryst)? I would think we would need another one...

[stanfan95118]

Does moving Lloyd to safety now mean a QB in this class is more of a priority? I could see Hogan moving on by 2015 as well as Crower if he doesn't have a shot at starting. Even if Crower stays, that makes for a total of 3 QBs for 2015, doesn't it (Crower, Burns, and Chryst)? I would think we would need another one...

[stupac2]

Does moving Lloyd to safety now mean a QB in this class is more of a priority? I could see Hogan moving on by 2015 as well as Crower if he doesn't have a shot at starting. Even if Crower stays, that makes for a total of 3 QBs for 2015, doesn't it (Crower, Burns, and Chryst)? I would think we would need another one...

Unless Hogan improves pretty drastically next year (certainly possible but I don't think we can expect it) you have to figure he comes back for his final year.

[stupac2]

Does moving Lloyd to safety now mean a QB in this class is more of a priority? I could see Hogan moving on by 2015 as well as Crower if he doesn't have a shot at starting. Even if Crower stays, that makes for a total of 3 QBs for 2015, doesn't it (Crower, Burns, and Chryst)? I would think we would need another one...

Unless Hogan improves pretty drastically next year (certainly possible but I don't think we can expect it) you have to figure he comes back for his final year.

[BostonCard]

Does moving Lloyd to safety now mean a QB in this class is more of a priority? I could see Hogan moving on by 2015 as well as Crower if he doesn't have a shot at starting. Even if Crower stays, that makes for a total of 3 QBs for 2015, doesn't it (Crower, Burns, and Chryst)? I would think we would need another one...

Hogan's status has no bearing on the recruiting class of 2015.  Hogan will be in his final year then, and anyone we bring in will be redshirting that year (remember, even Andrew Luck redshirted his freshman year), assuming Lloyd's move to Safety is permanent.
2014: Hogan, Crower, Burns, and Chryst (redshirting)
2015: Hogan (probably), Crower (maybe), Burns, Chryst, and QB TBD
2016: Burns, Chryst, QB TBD and QB TBD

You need to have at least three four QB's on the roster at any time.  And I do not subscribe to the idea that just because you got an elite QB one year, you shouldn't get one the next year.  A year after we got the #2 QB in the country (Trent Edwards) we got the #10 QB (TC Ostrander).  And then, we didn't have a 4* QB until Andrew Luck.  But a year after Luck, we signed two QB's (Nunes, who was a 4* player) and Taysom Hill, who went on a mission and never enrolled.  A year after that we signed another two more 4* QB's (Nottingham and Lloyd), one of whom went on a mission.  And a year after that we signed another two QB's (Crower and Hogan).  Let's review what happened to our embarrassment of riches at the position: Nunes was ineffective and suffered a career ending injury, Hill never enrolled, Nottingham never cracked the starting job and transferred, Lloyd is being moved to safety, Hogan became the starter after Luck (and, briefly, Nunes); he has a chance to be a four-year starter.  Crower is now our back-up.

Yes, in a perfect world, you sign one elite QB every other year.  That QB then redshirts one year, is the back-up for two years, and the starter his RS Jr. and Sr. year, and you sign a decent guy for the out years.  But reality is as follows: elite QB's with grades and interest in Stanford sometimes come around in bunches, and then sometimes there is a drought.  Then, some of the elite QB's you sign don't work out.  Maybe they get injured.  Maybe they are ineffective.  Maybe the lower rated guy you signed because you needed a QB to fill a position of need takes the position.  Sometimes, a true freshman takes control of the position, and the redshirt sophomore he jumps transfers to get a shot at starting elsewhere (I'm thinking of you, Zac Kline).

The bottom line is that every year, you recruit your arse off to get the QB you think will be best for your team.  That may be the highest rated QB by the recruiting services, but if you don't think he's going to be a good fit, because he is an arrogant prick.  Apparently that is the situation with a QB for the 2015 class.  Hopefully the guy that we do get does the job, or that Burns and/or Chryst are all that we hope they are and that if we don't get a great recruit in 2015, we do in 2016.

BC

[BostonCard]

Does moving Lloyd to safety now mean a QB in this class is more of a priority? I could see Hogan moving on by 2015 as well as Crower if he doesn't have a shot at starting. Even if Crower stays, that makes for a total of 3 QBs for 2015, doesn't it (Crower, Burns, and Chryst)? I would think we would need another one...

Hogan's status has no bearing on the recruiting class of 2015.  Hogan will be in his final year then, and anyone we bring in will be redshirting that year (remember, even Andrew Luck redshirted his freshman year), assuming Lloyd's move to Safety is permanent.
2014: Hogan, Crower, Burns, and Chryst (redshirting)
2015: Hogan (probably), Crower (maybe), Burns, Chryst, and QB TBD
2016: Burns, Chryst, QB TBD and QB TBD

You need to have at least three four QB's on the roster at any time.  And I do not subscribe to the idea that just because you got an elite QB one year, you shouldn't get one the next year.  A year after we got the #2 QB in the country (Trent Edwards) we got the #10 QB (TC Ostrander).  And then, we didn't have a 4* QB until Andrew Luck.  But a year after Luck, we signed two QB's (Nunes, who was a 4* player) and Taysom Hill, who went on a mission and never enrolled.  A year after that we signed another two more 4* QB's (Nottingham and Lloyd), one of whom went on a mission.  And a year after that we signed another two QB's (Crower and Hogan).  Let's review what happened to our embarrassment of riches at the position: Nunes was ineffective and suffered a career ending injury, Hill never enrolled, Nottingham never cracked the starting job and transferred, Lloyd is being moved to safety, Hogan became the starter after Luck (and, briefly, Nunes); he has a chance to be a four-year starter.  Crower is now our back-up.

Yes, in a perfect world, you sign one elite QB every other year.  That QB then redshirts one year, is the back-up for two years, and the starter his RS Jr. and Sr. year, and you sign a decent guy for the out years.  But reality is as follows: elite QB's with grades and interest in Stanford sometimes come around in bunches, and then sometimes there is a drought.  Then, some of the elite QB's you sign don't work out.  Maybe they get injured.  Maybe they are ineffective.  Maybe the lower rated guy you signed because you needed a QB to fill a position of need takes the position.  Sometimes, a true freshman takes control of the position, and the redshirt sophomore he jumps transfers to get a shot at starting elsewhere (I'm thinking of you, Zac Kline).

The bottom line is that every year, you recruit your arse off to get the QB you think will be best for your team.  That may be the highest rated QB by the recruiting services, but if you don't think he's going to be a good fit, because he is an arrogant prick.  Apparently that is the situation with a QB for the 2015 class.  Hopefully the guy that we do get does the job, or that Burns and/or Chryst are all that we hope they are and that if we don't get a great recruit in 2015, we do in 2016.

BC

[AthleticsDynasty]

Taking a QB in 2015 never made sense(6 QBs on the roster is overkill). With Lloyd moving to safety its a bit more feasible although still far from a necessity.

[AthleticsDynasty]

Taking a QB in 2015 never made sense(6 QBs on the roster is overkill). With Lloyd moving to safety its a bit more feasible although still far from a necessity.

[fullmetal]

It's insurance against unforeseen or unexpected attrition.  You don't want to have to work out David Carr the week before a final division-deciding game, for instance...better safe than sorry.

[fullmetal]

It's insurance against unforeseen or unexpected attrition.  You don't want to have to work out David Carr the week before a final division-deciding game, for instance...better safe than sorry.

[washingtonismoney]

Iman Marshall: LSU and Stanford "stuck out" among his recent offers.

http://www.presstelegram.com/sports/2013...year-ahead

[washingtonismoney]

Iman Marshall: LSU and Stanford "stuck out" among his recent offers.

http://www.presstelegram.com/sports/2013...year-ahead

[JohnR34231]

According to Shaw, this is not necessarily a permanent move for him to defense, but more an attempt to get him on the field and get some playing time while Hogan is still at the helm.

[JohnR34231]

According to Shaw, this is not necessarily a permanent move for him to defense, but more an attempt to get him on the field and get some playing time while Hogan is still at the helm.

[StannyBoy]

According to Shaw, this is not necessarily a permanent move for him to defense, but more an attempt to get him on the field and get some playing time while Hogan is still at the helm.

If he moves back to offense it will be because he wasn't going to get PT at safety. If he can crack the 2 deep he's definitely staying on defense.

[StannyBoy]

According to Shaw, this is not necessarily a permanent move for him to defense, but more an attempt to get him on the field and get some playing time while Hogan is still at the helm.

If he moves back to offense it will be because he wasn't going to get PT at safety. If he can crack the 2 deep he's definitely staying on defense.

[AthleticsDynasty]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=7902.msg79491#msg79491 date=1387915131]
According to Shaw, this is not necessarily a permanent move for him to defense, but more an attempt to get him on the field and get some playing time while Hogan is still at the helm.

If he moves back to offense it will be because he wasn't going to get PT at safety. If he can crack the 2 deep he's definitely staying on defense.
[/quote]

I think unless Lloyd really ex ells on D he'll move back to QB in 2016 to compete for the starting job

[AthleticsDynasty]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=7902.msg79491#msg79491 date=1387915131]
According to Shaw, this is not necessarily a permanent move for him to defense, but more an attempt to get him on the field and get some playing time while Hogan is still at the helm.

If he moves back to offense it will be because he wasn't going to get PT at safety. If he can crack the 2 deep he's definitely staying on defense.
[/quote]

I think unless Lloyd really ex ells on D he'll move back to QB in 2016 to compete for the starting job

[washingtonismoney]

I think unless Lloyd really ex ells on D he'll move back to QB in 2016 to compete for the starting job

This seems unrealistic.

1) If Lloyd were on the starting QB track, he wouldn't be moved. The QB position, perhaps more than others, are about reps -- mental and otherwise. There are examples of a player being moved back to be QB, but they're rare.

2) We have at least two hotshot recruits behind Lloyd.

3) Lloyd asked to be moved somewhere, reportedly. This is someone who sees the writing on the wall.

If Lloyd plays on offense again, it'll be as a special package running QB guy. I'd be very surprised if he took a meaningful snap as a conventional QB.

[washingtonismoney]

I think unless Lloyd really ex ells on D he'll move back to QB in 2016 to compete for the starting job

This seems unrealistic.

1) If Lloyd were on the starting QB track, he wouldn't be moved. The QB position, perhaps more than others, are about reps -- mental and otherwise. There are examples of a player being moved back to be QB, but they're rare.

2) We have at least two hotshot recruits behind Lloyd.

3) Lloyd asked to be moved somewhere, reportedly. This is someone who sees the writing on the wall.

If Lloyd plays on offense again, it'll be as a special package running QB guy. I'd be very surprised if he took a meaningful snap as a conventional QB.

[AthleticsDynasty]

[quote author=AthleticsDynasty link=topic=7902.msg79550#msg79550 date=1388030932]
I think unless Lloyd really ex ells on D he'll move back to QB in 2016 to compete for the starting job

This seems unrealistic.

1) If Lloyd were on the starting QB track, he wouldn't be moved. The QB position, perhaps more than others, are about reps -- mental and otherwise. There are examples of a player being moved back to be QB, but they're rare.

2) We have at least two hotshot recruits behind Lloyd.

3) Lloyd asked to be moved somewhere, reportedly. This is someone who sees the writing on the wall.

If Lloyd plays on offense again, it'll be as a special package running QB guy. I'd be very surprised if he took a meaningful snap as a conventional QB.
[/quote]

I would think getting on the field be it on defense or any other way would better prepare you to compete for the starting job than sitting on the bench would. Its not like he'll forget the playbook

[AthleticsDynasty]

[quote author=AthleticsDynasty link=topic=7902.msg79550#msg79550 date=1388030932]
I think unless Lloyd really ex ells on D he'll move back to QB in 2016 to compete for the starting job

This seems unrealistic.

1) If Lloyd were on the starting QB track, he wouldn't be moved. The QB position, perhaps more than others, are about reps -- mental and otherwise. There are examples of a player being moved back to be QB, but they're rare.

2) We have at least two hotshot recruits behind Lloyd.

3) Lloyd asked to be moved somewhere, reportedly. This is someone who sees the writing on the wall.

If Lloyd plays on offense again, it'll be as a special package running QB guy. I'd be very surprised if he took a meaningful snap as a conventional QB.
[/quote]

I would think getting on the field be it on defense or any other way would better prepare you to compete for the starting job than sitting on the bench would. Its not like he'll forget the playbook

[socalstanfan1]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=7902.msg79551#msg79551 date=1388031606]
[quote author=AthleticsDynasty link=topic=7902.msg79550#msg79550 date=1388030932

I would think getting on the field be it on defense or any other way would better prepare you to compete for the starting job than sitting on the bench would. Its not like he'll forget the playbook

If Lloyd takes a year, and gets no reps,with the other QBs while Burns and Crystal continue to make progress, I don't see realistically he can not fall behind. It isn't just about remembering the play book in some abstract way. It's about working on timing, seeing the defense, refining mechanics for both footwork and throwing motion.

The good news, in my opinion, is that if Lloyd is as good an athlete as everyone says, I think he can make an excellent safety, probably pretty quickly.  Didn't Notre Dame have to move several people into the D Backfield this year due to a nip umber of vacancies. But they managed to do fairly well. Mason is a great teacher/coach. If he stays, I'm predicting he turns Lloyd into a solid safety in 2014, and perhaps much better than just solid by the next season.

[socalstanfan1]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=7902.msg79551#msg79551 date=1388031606]
[quote author=AthleticsDynasty link=topic=7902.msg79550#msg79550 date=1388030932

I would think getting on the field be it on defense or any other way would better prepare you to compete for the starting job than sitting on the bench would. Its not like he'll forget the playbook

If Lloyd takes a year, and gets no reps,with the other QBs while Burns and Crystal continue to make progress, I don't see realistically he can not fall behind. It isn't just about remembering the play book in some abstract way. It's about working on timing, seeing the defense, refining mechanics for both footwork and throwing motion.

The good news, in my opinion, is that if Lloyd is as good an athlete as everyone says, I think he can make an excellent safety, probably pretty quickly.  Didn't Notre Dame have to move several people into the D Backfield this year due to a nip umber of vacancies. But they managed to do fairly well. Mason is a great teacher/coach. If he stays, I'm predicting he turns Lloyd into a solid safety in 2014, and perhaps much better than just solid by the next season.

[OutsiderFan]

Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

[OutsiderFan]

Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

[JohnR34231]

Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

As was said earlier in the thread, if Lloyd stays at QB we probably don't need to recruit another QB in 2015; if he moves to defense we probably do. That's why it is germane to this board.

Either way, I think any QB we recruit in 2015 should be capable of playing another position. If Burns and Chryst turn out the way we hope (and stay healthy) it will be a long time before he sees the field at QB.

[JohnR34231]

Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

As was said earlier in the thread, if Lloyd stays at QB we probably don't need to recruit another QB in 2015; if he moves to defense we probably do. That's why it is germane to this board.

Either way, I think any QB we recruit in 2015 should be capable of playing another position. If Burns and Chryst turn out the way we hope (and stay healthy) it will be a long time before he sees the field at QB.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=7902.msg79566#msg79566 date=1388064864]
Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

As was said earlier in the thread, if Lloyd stays at QB we probably don't need to recruit another QB in 2015; if he moves to defense we probably do. That's why it is germane to this board.

Either way, I think any QB we recruit in 2015 should be capable of playing another position. If Burns and Chryst turn out the way we hope (and stay healthy) it will be a long time before he sees the field at QB.
[/quote]
I don't understand the logic here.  You can't just add up the number of QB's on the roster and determine whether we need one.  Even had Lloyd stayed at QB, he would have had almost no impact on a class of 2015 recruit.  Lloyd has three years of eligibility left; he would have two years left when a recruiting class of 2015 QB comes in (who would presumably redshirt his first year anyways).  So that leaves an overlap between the two of 1 year when both would be active on the roster.  If a QB recruit is good enough to start as a redshirt freshman, then we want him on the roster no matter how many we already have.  If not, Lloyd would be departed by the time a recruiting class of 2015 Qb would have an impact on the roster.  What you need to do is add up the number of QB's in any two or three year period.  I like three years with the target year being the middle.  So, we will have Burns, Cryst and any 2015 recruit in 2015, and Cryst, any 2015 recruit and any 2016 recruit the following year.  I wouldn't panic if we didn't get someone in 2015, but that would certainly put pressure on us to get someone in 2016.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=7902.msg79566#msg79566 date=1388064864]
Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

As was said earlier in the thread, if Lloyd stays at QB we probably don't need to recruit another QB in 2015; if he moves to defense we probably do. That's why it is germane to this board.

Either way, I think any QB we recruit in 2015 should be capable of playing another position. If Burns and Chryst turn out the way we hope (and stay healthy) it will be a long time before he sees the field at QB.
[/quote]
I don't understand the logic here.  You can't just add up the number of QB's on the roster and determine whether we need one.  Even had Lloyd stayed at QB, he would have had almost no impact on a class of 2015 recruit.  Lloyd has three years of eligibility left; he would have two years left when a recruiting class of 2015 QB comes in (who would presumably redshirt his first year anyways).  So that leaves an overlap between the two of 1 year when both would be active on the roster.  If a QB recruit is good enough to start as a redshirt freshman, then we want him on the roster no matter how many we already have.  If not, Lloyd would be departed by the time a recruiting class of 2015 Qb would have an impact on the roster.  What you need to do is add up the number of QB's in any two or three year period.  I like three years with the target year being the middle.  So, we will have Burns, Cryst and any 2015 recruit in 2015, and Cryst, any 2015 recruit and any 2016 recruit the following year.  I wouldn't panic if we didn't get someone in 2015, but that would certainly put pressure on us to get someone in 2016.

BC

[AthleticsDynasty]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=7902.msg79569#msg79569 date=1388066733]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=7902.msg79566#msg79566 date=1388064864]
Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

As was said earlier in the thread, if Lloyd stays at QB we probably don't need to recruit another QB in 2015; if he moves to defense we probably do. That's why it is germane to this board.

Either way, I think any QB we recruit in 2015 should be capable of playing another position. If Burns and Chryst turn out the way we hope (and stay healthy) it will be a long time before he sees the field at QB.
[/quote]
I don't understand the logic here.  You can't just add up the number of QB's on the roster and determine whether we need one.  Even had Lloyd stayed at QB, he would have had almost no impact on a class of 2015 recruit.  Lloyd has three years of eligibility left; he would have two years left when a recruiting class of 2015 QB comes in (who would presumably redshirt his first year anyways).  So that leaves an overlap between the two of 1 year when both would be active on the roster.  If a QB recruit is good enough to start as a redshirt freshman, then we want him on the roster no matter how many we already have.  If not, Lloyd would be departed by the time a recruiting class of 2015 Qb would have an impact on the roster.  What you need to do is add up the number of QB's in any two or three year period.  I like three years with the target year being the middle.  So, we will have Burns, Cryst and any 2015 recruit in 2015, and Cryst, any 2015 recruit and any 2016 recruit the following year.  I wouldn't panic if we didn't get someone in 2015, but that would certainly put pressure on us to get someone in 2016.

BC
[/quote]

It doesn't matter if he redshirts there simply isn't room for 6 QBs on a roster.

3 is good you have a starter, a backup and a scout team QB

4 is the ideal number of QBs on a roster a starter, a backup and 2 scout team QBs.

A 5th isn't horrible because he can find some reps in fall camp, although most of the in season practices he probable won't be  and can slide in to the 2nd scout team spot if someone gets hurt or suspended of something.

A 6th just doesn't work. He'll never get a rep. He would practically be taking a year off from football

[AthleticsDynasty]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=7902.msg79569#msg79569 date=1388066733]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=7902.msg79566#msg79566 date=1388064864]
Why is this in the recruiting thread?  Shouldn't speculating about Lloyd's playing future be on the main board?  One position change doesn't impact who Stanford will be recruiting, much if at all.

As was said earlier in the thread, if Lloyd stays at QB we probably don't need to recruit another QB in 2015; if he moves to defense we probably do. That's why it is germane to this board.

Either way, I think any QB we recruit in 2015 should be capable of playing another position. If Burns and Chryst turn out the way we hope (and stay healthy) it will be a long time before he sees the field at QB.
[/quote]
I don't understand the logic here.  You can't just add up the number of QB's on the roster and determine whether we need one.  Even had Lloyd stayed at QB, he would have had almost no impact on a class of 2015 recruit.  Lloyd has three years of eligibility left; he would have two years left when a recruiting class of 2015 QB comes in (who would presumably redshirt his first year anyways).  So that leaves an overlap between the two of 1 year when both would be active on the roster.  If a QB recruit is good enough to start as a redshirt freshman, then we want him on the roster no matter how many we already have.  If not, Lloyd would be departed by the time a recruiting class of 2015 Qb would have an impact on the roster.  What you need to do is add up the number of QB's in any two or three year period.  I like three years with the target year being the middle.  So, we will have Burns, Cryst and any 2015 recruit in 2015, and Cryst, any 2015 recruit and any 2016 recruit the following year.  I wouldn't panic if we didn't get someone in 2015, but that would certainly put pressure on us to get someone in 2016.

BC
[/quote]

It doesn't matter if he redshirts there simply isn't room for 6 QBs on a roster.

3 is good you have a starter, a backup and a scout team QB

4 is the ideal number of QBs on a roster a starter, a backup and 2 scout team QBs.

A 5th isn't horrible because he can find some reps in fall camp, although most of the in season practices he probable won't be  and can slide in to the 2nd scout team spot if someone gets hurt or suspended of something.

A 6th just doesn't work. He'll never get a rep. He would practically be taking a year off from football

[BostonCard]

It's not that simple.  Hogan and Crower are in the same class, and so with Chryst, although we would have had five scholarship QB's on the roster before Lloyd converted to safety (Hogan, Crower, Lloyd, Burns, and Chryst), in two years we will go from five scholarship QB's to three unless we get a quarterback in the next two years, and after that we'll have to recruit a quarterback every year for the following four just to have four QB's on the roster.  Although QB's tend to have good grades, and Stanford is a good destination for pro-style QB's, I don't think we would want to be in a position of needing to get a quarterback, and seeing no top prospects with grades.

Three QB's is simply not enough.  Yes, you can occupy three with one starter, one backup and one scout player, but you also have to ensure that you have somebody healthy who can play the position effectively. If you have three, an injury or transfer would be devastating, especially if one of the three turns out to be ineffective. As I posted above, consider what happened to the ridiculous QB roster we had after Andrew Luck.  At one time, we had signed Luck, then Nunes and Taysom Hill (Hill was slated to come in two years later after his Mission) in the subsequent class, then Nottingham an Lloyd (again, Lloyd was slated to come in two years later), then Hogan and Crower before we finally took a pass at taking a QB the year Hill would have come back (and we heavily recruited some guy named Jameis Winston to come that year).  Conceivably, we could had Luck, Nunes, Hill, Nottingham, Lloyd, Hogan, and Crower (and if he had turned down FSU Winston, too) all on the roster in 2012.  So, here's what happened to our embarassment of riches: Luck graduated and went to the NFL before exhausting his eligibility.  Nunes started a handful of games after Luck left, was ineffective, and was benched for Hogan.  He later suffered a career ending injury.  Hill went on his mission and then enrolled at BYU and is starting for the Cougars in the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl.  Nottingham lost out to Nunes (and later Hogan) for the starter's job and transferred to Columbia.  Lloyd went on his mission and came back, redshirting last year, and was used in the Lloyd package this year; he appears headed to safety.  Hogan won the starter's position as a redshirt freshman and has led us to back to back Rose Bowls.  Crower is the current backup.  Keep in mind that Hogan was the seventh quarterback on the list to have signed, and all I can say is thank goodness.

What would happen in a year if, say, Hogan goes to the NFL after next year, Crower graduates and decides not to come for a fifth year, Lloyd starts for us at safety, and Burns gets injured?  We are down to a redshirt freshman playing for us with no backup (obviously, Lloyd would become the emergency backup).  And although I have every expectation that Chryst will be great for us, what if he flops?  Or look at the year after.  Hogan and Crower will have exhausted eligibility.  We'd be looking at one of Burns or Chryst as starter and the other as back-up, and behind them a true freshman.

BC

[BostonCard]

It's not that simple.  Hogan and Crower are in the same class, and so with Chryst, although we would have had five scholarship QB's on the roster before Lloyd converted to safety (Hogan, Crower, Lloyd, Burns, and Chryst), in two years we will go from five scholarship QB's to three unless we get a quarterback in the next two years, and after that we'll have to recruit a quarterback every year for the following four just to have four QB's on the roster.  Although QB's tend to have good grades, and Stanford is a good destination for pro-style QB's, I don't think we would want to be in a position of needing to get a quarterback, and seeing no top prospects with grades.

Three QB's is simply not enough.  Yes, you can occupy three with one starter, one backup and one scout player, but you also have to ensure that you have somebody healthy who can play the position effectively. If you have three, an injury or transfer would be devastating, especially if one of the three turns out to be ineffective. As I posted above, consider what happened to the ridiculous QB roster we had after Andrew Luck.  At one time, we had signed Luck, then Nunes and Taysom Hill (Hill was slated to come in two years later after his Mission) in the subsequent class, then Nottingham an Lloyd (again, Lloyd was slated to come in two years later), then Hogan and Crower before we finally took a pass at taking a QB the year Hill would have come back (and we heavily recruited some guy named Jameis Winston to come that year).  Conceivably, we could had Luck, Nunes, Hill, Nottingham, Lloyd, Hogan, and Crower (and if he had turned down FSU Winston, too) all on the roster in 2012.  So, here's what happened to our embarassment of riches: Luck graduated and went to the NFL before exhausting his eligibility.  Nunes started a handful of games after Luck left, was ineffective, and was benched for Hogan.  He later suffered a career ending injury.  Hill went on his mission and then enrolled at BYU and is starting for the Cougars in the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl.  Nottingham lost out to Nunes (and later Hogan) for the starter's job and transferred to Columbia.  Lloyd went on his mission and came back, redshirting last year, and was used in the Lloyd package this year; he appears headed to safety.  Hogan won the starter's position as a redshirt freshman and has led us to back to back Rose Bowls.  Crower is the current backup.  Keep in mind that Hogan was the seventh quarterback on the list to have signed, and all I can say is thank goodness.

What would happen in a year if, say, Hogan goes to the NFL after next year, Crower graduates and decides not to come for a fifth year, Lloyd starts for us at safety, and Burns gets injured?  We are down to a redshirt freshman playing for us with no backup (obviously, Lloyd would become the emergency backup).  And although I have every expectation that Chryst will be great for us, what if he flops?  Or look at the year after.  Hogan and Crower will have exhausted eligibility.  We'd be looking at one of Burns or Chryst as starter and the other as back-up, and behind them a true freshman.

BC

[JohnR34231]

If we do recruit a QB in the class of 2015, I hope he will be comfortable with spending the majority of his career riding the pines. Unless he is the second coming of Andrew Luck, that is what will most likely happen.

[JohnR34231]

If we do recruit a QB in the class of 2015, I hope he will be comfortable with spending the majority of his career riding the pines. Unless he is the second coming of Andrew Luck, that is what will most likely happen.

[AthleticsDynasty]

What would happen in a year if, say, Hogan goes to the NFL after next year, Crower graduates and decides not to come for a fifth year, Lloyd starts for us at safety, and Burns gets injured?  We are down to a redshirt freshman playing for us with no backup (obviously, Lloyd would become the emergency backup).  And although I have every expectation that Chryst will be great for us, what if he flops?  Or look at the year after.  Hogan and Crower will have exhausted eligibility.  We'd be looking at one of Burns or Chryst as starter and the other as back-up, and behind them a true freshman.

BC

Hogan and Crower both leave then you recruit a QB but at this point that seems unlikely. 3 QBs is fine, there are many football programs with just 3 scholarship QBs. 6 is a problem, there just aren't enough reps for 6 QBs. Also the 3rd stringer(scout team QB) being a true freshman is common

[AthleticsDynasty]

What would happen in a year if, say, Hogan goes to the NFL after next year, Crower graduates and decides not to come for a fifth year, Lloyd starts for us at safety, and Burns gets injured?  We are down to a redshirt freshman playing for us with no backup (obviously, Lloyd would become the emergency backup).  And although I have every expectation that Chryst will be great for us, what if he flops?  Or look at the year after.  Hogan and Crower will have exhausted eligibility.  We'd be looking at one of Burns or Chryst as starter and the other as back-up, and behind them a true freshman.

BC

Hogan and Crower both leave then you recruit a QB but at this point that seems unlikely. 3 QBs is fine, there are many football programs with just 3 scholarship QBs. 6 is a problem, there just aren't enough reps for 6 QBs. Also the 3rd stringer(scout team QB) being a true freshman is common

[washingtonismoney]

I don't understand this totemic significance of 6 in your mind. For a 2015 QB, this would be the returning depth chart:

Hogan/Burns/Chryst/Crower/2015.

That's five, not six. And, at any rate, my backseat driver suggestion to the coaches would be to bring in a 2015 QB and simply not invite Crower back for a fifth year.

[washingtonismoney]

I don't understand this totemic significance of 6 in your mind. For a 2015 QB, this would be the returning depth chart:

Hogan/Burns/Chryst/Crower/2015.

That's five, not six. And, at any rate, my backseat driver suggestion to the coaches would be to bring in a 2015 QB and simply not invite Crower back for a fifth year.