It's nice to hear how one of the writers is seeing how things are playing out to some degree. I'm sure if we were to take all of the opinions of all of the people who see practice daily, we'd probably get a pretty complete story. But it still has me wondering if they would be the same as in the eyes of Langsdorf or Riley? I had a friend tell in his opinion, it's going to boil down to if the reward exceeds the risk in choosing a QB. His opinion, which is probably as useless as Sam's or anyone else's, is the higher reward is probably Bush, but that is definitely a risk. It's a risk that if things start slowly, some fans will use that as justification for their less than excited attitude with the hiring. It's also a risk that it can be a strain on the team. The older players and those with a history with TA might not be as supportive if a young kid comes in and doesn't shine immediately, putting their former leader on the bench.
It's really a crap shoot, and is why I'm glad we have some well paid guys making that decision. I'm a little disappointed we haven't really heard much about Darlington, as he seemed like a solid player who in the right situation, could be an asset. Stanton from what I'm told has the tools. He's got decent feet, a good arm, can throw with touch, but is struggling between the ears. By that I don't mean a lack of knowledge of the playbook (which is common for all the QBs), but a lack of confidence in reading and pulling the trigger. Fyfe is a bit of the same; they look, they see, they pause and think, and then try to make the throw...that's the problem. Bush seems to be a little better at that. He seems like while he's done that same thing, once the coaches explain the read and timing, he comes back with it without the hitch from the hesitation. TA, I honestly don't know, because we don't really know when those spasms started. For those who have had the pleasure, you know the thought of moving freely, much less throwing a football, seems all but impossible. His just giving it a go is pretty admirable.
Just touching on the comment on do we want a player who may have had his confidence shaken because that may be a sign of weakness, of course we do and it's human nature to need some time to recover from a bruised ego. There was a guy who played basketball at Nebraska in the early 80s who I kind of became friends with. He averaged over 30 a game in high school and was 'Mr. Everything in his state. When Moe started to work his magic on him, yanking him after any missed shot, telling him not to shoot during practice, he looked like he wasn't even sure how to hold the ball by the time he was a junior. I played in some leagues and AAU tournaments with him, and the guy was a complete stud, great perimeter stroke, could drive and pull up as well. I didn't know about his high school stats and only knew him for what I saw during Husker games, so I was kind of teasing him for going all Walter Davis on us and lighting up the tourney. He told me that's what it always used to be like. Then he explained it had really gotten into his head being yanked for any missed shot, having Moe not speak to him if he'd shoot, just basically being told he was kind of a second class citizen on the roster. The guy went on to play some ball in Europe and was known as an excellent scorer there.
Coaches can have immense impact on a player, both positive and negative. It doesn't mean a player is 'weak'. Players can respond very differently to different coaching styles. I'm really excited about the second half of practices. Hopefully we'll start to see the new system being absorbed and starting to mesh on the field.
