What Connor means to UNT

Ben Gooding · August 4, 2015

I made it up. I was just giving you hypothetical open competition coach speak.

That would be the right thing to say then. Like I said, I haven't heard anything like that and it's something that needs to be publicly stated by Mac, particularly your last sentence. Confidence permeates from the coach all the way down to the water boy. This must be an open competition and the best QB must be our game 1 starter. We can't afford to switch QB's all season. Like I have said on another thread, create packages for McNulty to come in as a decoy, trick plays and even throw him a simple pass route on the rare occasion. Let him hold extra points and fg's, etc. He has earned the right to be a contributor on this team, but not our starting quarterback.

Cr1028 · August 4, 2015

This is exactly what I want to hear. Connor Means and the rest of the QB's should not be evaluated differently. Each one should have a chance. I realize that you have limited snaps so perhaps you give them the first two weeks of camp and make your decisions after that. Chico has GOT to get this one right, we can't afford another carousel. You can also give some of the QB's a chance for action in certain game situations. Let's start giving our younger guys a chance to get some experience and show what they can do!

97bafda85fc80e6dadfe9c66d29d27f8b5c965aa

untjim1995 · August 4, 2015

I made it up. I was just giving you hypothetical open competition coach speak.

Sadly, we knew it wasn't an actual quote...

I am not sure when that was said or who it was said by, but this is a new revelation to me.
All I know I heard was the garbage Mac spewed at CUSA media day practically crowning AM as our starter by comparing him to Derek Thompson. Also, Brett Vito has a better understanding of what is going on in the locker room than most of us and his sentiment is that Andrew McNulty is our clear cut starter at this point.

Vito says that because he knows its true. Smith has to prove himself to be better than McNulty on the field in practice, in an offense he has never run before, while McNulty knows it like the back of his hand. McNulty will start at SMU and at home against Rice, at a bare minimum, probably even against Iowa and USM, too. If he loses the starter's job, it will be against Portland State, which is in early October.

Aldo · August 4, 2015

Smith has to prove himself to be better than McNulty on the field in practice, in an offense he has never run before, while McNulty knows it like the back of his hand.

This. Smith may have all the talent, but if he doesn't know which way Marcus Smith is running in Fall camp, then he's not ready.

My bet is, if McNulty starts against SMU, the soonest we see Smith is in the middle of the Iowa game. Or, if we do terribly in the first half against Rice, *maybe* then.

Ben Gooding · August 4, 2015

It seems that we all agree Smith will be our starter at some point this season. We all agree for the most part that a potential "breakout" season is 2016, not 2015. The probable starter will be Smith in 2016. Why not groom the obvious better QB on the roster for 2016 in 2015? It makes 0 sense to me for AM to take meaningful snaps. Throw the best you have out there and take your inevitable lumps. In game meaningful reps are invaluable and for AM to start this year will put us in the exact same debacle of uncertainty that we are currently in next August.

cogido · August 4, 2015

Conner Means is a quality QB on the rise and will be a future starter for UNT, but this upcoming season will go to McNulty or Smith. That's where all of the real time snaps will be spread. By the way, in response to an earlier post, I did see significant improvement in Derek Thompson in his senior year specifically in his "composure" when he had the ball right after the snap. He stopped rushing the plays. This was an important change.

Army of Dad · August 4, 2015

It seems that we all agree Smith will be our starter at some point this season. We all agree for the most part that a potential "breakout" season is 2016, not 2015. The probable starter will be Smith in 2016. Why not groom the obvious better QB on the roster for 2016 in 2015? It makes 0 sense to me for AM to take meaningful snaps. Throw the best you have out there and take your inevitable lumps. In game meaningful reps are invaluable and for AM to start this year will put us in the exact same debacle of uncertainty that we are currently in next August.

That's only true if Mini Mac doesn't lead us to success.

Paulie Walnuts · August 4, 2015

It seems that we all agree Smith will be our starter at some point this season. We all agree for the most part that a potential "breakout" season is 2016, not 2015. The probable starter will be Smith in 2016. Why not groom the obvious better QB on the roster for 2016 in 2015? It makes 0 sense to me for AM to take meaningful snaps. Throw the best you have out there and take your inevitable lumps. In game meaningful reps are invaluable and for AM to start this year will put us in the exact same debacle of uncertainty that we are currently in next August.

I think you still have to try your best to win every single game you play. It wouldnt be fair to the Seniors to go about it any other way.

GOMG2013 · August 4, 2015

As long as Wilson stays healthy I don't think we have anything to worry about at RB. But his durability does cause some concern, especially if we're operating a lot from under center with his more-angular frame for a running back.

wilson passes the eye test for sure, but most of us are basing him having this breakout season off of 220 yards last year, and high school. Some are acting like RB is locked down and are totally ignoring what happened last season. Some also believe that a better QB will fix the running game. Hilarious football logic.

A strong running game is supposed to help a young or inexperienced QB, but UNT fans are expecting the opposite. I have read several times on this board that we lined up against all kinds of fronts geared to stop the run and if we had a better QB we would have fared better. No, if we had better backs, we would have been better.

There is also this myth that DT kept defenses honest and McNulty didn't and that was the difference in the 2014 running game. FALSE. Teams keyed on our running game in 2013 and against the good defenses DT looked bad. Tulane, LA Tech, USTA lined up close on our WRS and dared us to throw. We beat up on weak defenses with our running game In 2013, and we won't be successful in 2015, unless this is fixed.

Ben Gooding · August 4, 2015

wilson passes the eye test for sure, but most of us are basing him having this breakout season off of 220 yards last year, and high school. Some are acting like RB is locked down and are totally ignoring what happened last season. Some also believe that a better QB will fix the running game. Hilarious football logic.
A strong running game is supposed to help a young or inexperienced QB, but UNT fans are expecting the opposite. I have read several times on this board that we lined up against all kinds of fronts geared to stop the run and if we had a better QB we would have fared better. No, if we had better backs, we would have been better.
There is also this myth that DT kept defenses honest and McNulty didn't and that was the difference in the 2014 running game. FALSE. Teams keyed on our running game in 2013 and against the good defenses DT looked bad. Tulane, LA Tech, USTA lined up close on our WRS and dared us to throw. We beat up on weak defenses with our running game In 2013, and we won't be successful in 2015, unless this is fixed.

A better QB will fix the run. That's common knowledge.

GOMG2013 · August 4, 2015

A better QB will fix the run. That's common knowledge.

hilarious.

it's a good thing all these top high school, college, and pro backs have all had quality qbs to help them...

Harry · August 4, 2015

wilson passes the eye test for sure, but most of us are basing him having this breakout season off of 220 yards last year, and high school. Some are acting like RB is locked down and are totally ignoring what happened last season. Some also believe that a better QB will fix the running game. Hilarious football logic.

He passes the eye test but can he stay healthy for an entire season? That is the key question. He hasn't been able to so far. Reminds me of Rex Rollins in away. He has terrific game speed but hasn't be able to be consistently healthy. Sometimes these guys with great athleticism struggle with staying healthy.

North Texas Shep · August 4, 2015

How about we get a quality running back and a quality QB! Crazy, I know. Other teams in our conference pull it off year after year. No reason why we can't. Hell, junior colleges even do it.

Paulie Walnuts · August 4, 2015

hilarious.
it's a good thing all these top high school, college, and pro backs have all had quality qbs to help them...

Okay then - how about this logic... Any 1 dimensional offense is going to have a tough time being successful. Thus, a better QB wont necessarily FIX the run. But a better QB will HELP fix the run. If a defense lines up with 8 in the box and dares you to throw it... you gotta be able to throw it. Otherwise, they stack up against the run all day. If you think any RB is going do better against a stacked defense - well that is poor logic. Hell you also have to have the kind of WRs that can beat press-man coverage and an offensive line that can pick up the blitz. Team game. Takes more than just a stud RB - but that sure will help too.

GOMG2013 · August 4, 2015

Okay then - how about this logic... Any 1 dimensional offense is going to have a tough time being successful. Thus, a better QB wont necessarily FIX the run. But a better QB will HELP fix the run. If a defense lines up with 8 in the box and dares you to throw it... you gotta be able to throw it. Otherwise, they stack up against the run all day. If you think any RB is going do better against a stacked defense - well that is poor logic. Hell you also have to have the kind of WRs that can beat press-man coverage and an offensive line that can pick up the blitz. Team game. Takes more than just a stud RB - but that sure will hel

A stud QB can make a running game respectable, but it's not going to make an average RB look like a stud. A stud RB is going to look like a stud.

In our case, we want to be a run first, smash mouth offense. Our backs weren't even close to pulling that off last year and considering that is supposed to be our bread and butter, it should be a lot more quality and depth at the position. A true freshman with limited reps looked like our most talented back.

LongJim · August 4, 2015

I've said it before and I'll say it again--whoever is at QB will look 100% improved with more pass-catching weapons this year. Here's hoping the new and older guys step it up and join Harris at the grownup table.

Army of Dad · August 5, 2015

Okay then - how about this logic... Any 1 dimensional offense is going to have a tough time being successful. Thus, a better QB wont necessarily FIX the run. But a better QB will HELP fix the run. If a defense lines up with 8 in the box and dares you to throw it... you gotta be able to throw it. Otherwise, they stack up against the run all day. If you think any RB is going do better against a stacked defense - well that is poor logic. Hell you also have to have the kind of WRs that can beat press-man coverage and an offensive line that can pick up the blitz. Team game. Takes more than just a stud RB - but that sure will help too.

The only thing I'll add is that a great back will be able to make the defense pay by getting through the first and second lines of defense and taking it to the house. Even the great ones have a bunch of 1-3 yard runs until they break one.

Ben Gooding · August 5, 2015

A stud QB can make a running game respectable, but it's not going to make an average RB look like a stud. A stud RB is going to look like a stud.
In our case, we want to be a run first, smash mouth offense. Our backs weren't even close to pulling that off last year and considering that is supposed to be our bread and butter, it should be a lot more quality and depth at the position. A true freshman with limited reps looked like our most talented back.

We weren't talking individual running backs, we were talking the running game. And it is common knowledge that a quality (not great) QB will help the running game flourish.

Our backs weren't close to pulling that off bc QB play was pathetic. Head coaches, DC'S, opposing teams' fans, our own fans, etc. knew we didn't have consistent QB play. So they took a very low risk (see QB play) chance by stacking our box and we never had an answer on the way to a 4-8 season.

Cr1028 · August 5, 2015

We weren't talking individual running backs, we were talking the running game. And it is common knowledge that a quality (not great) QB will help the running game flourish.
Our backs weren't close to pulling that off bc QB play was pathetic. Head coaches, DC'S, opposing teams' fans, our own fans, etc. knew we didn't have consistent QB play. So they took a very low risk (see QB play) chance by stacking our box and we never had an answer on the way to a 4-8 season.

It is difficult to beat 8 in the box when they know you can't throw downfield.

MeanGreenTexan · August 5, 2015

Conner Means is a quality QB on the rise and will be a future starter for UNT, but this upcoming season will go to McNulty or Smith. That's where all of the real time snaps will be spread. By the way, in response to an earlier post, I did see significant improvement in Derek Thompson in his senior year specifically in his "composure" when he had the ball right after the snap. He stopped rushing the plays. This was an important change.

I don't believe this, or he would have already leapfrogged Greer. I believe, after Smith plays 2, we'll be forced to get another JUCO QB while we either:

a. continue to twiddle our thumbs recruiting HS QBs

b. have a new coach (HC/OC/RC, not sure where the blame lies) that will go out & find a quality HS QB.

...either way, I don't think Means sees any significant PT during his NT career.