PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby JasonB » Sun Sep 28, 2003 12:35 pm

With Tate at QB, in order to score, the Mustangs have to do everything perfectly. They HAVE to have positive gains on first down, he has to complete his 4 yard passes, etc. In order for us to move the ball, everything has to go perfectly right.

This means, by default, we are not going to score many points. So we have to keep mistakes to a minimum. A lot of teams can recover from a fumbled punt, or an INT for a touchdown because they can score points. We can't do that.

The fact is, that this is a young FB team that is going to make mistakes out there. We can't expect our kids to play a perfect game, because we need that to win.

That right there is the reason NOT to play Tate Wallis. If Bartel isn't the answer, than stick Phillips in there. But either give Bartel the ball and allow him to develop, or stick Phillips in there and tag him as the QB of the future. This is for multiple reasons:

1) Wallis is NOT the QB of the future, so there is no point in giving him time out there.

2) The team is NOT going to play perfect football. They are young and going to make mistakes. So you have to have someone who can drive the offense and has the POTENTIAL to make up for those mistakes. Tate might be able to "manage" a game or whatever, but he is not going to make the big play and allow us to recover from mistakes. As long as he plays, once the team makes mistakes, we cannot recover.

I just wanted to get that off my chest Image. I understand that Tate at this point in time has more mobility and can run the option and all that stuff, but he isn't the QB of the future, and we need to get the guys who WILL be playing in the future out there on the field getting game experience.

I don't know, just my opinion. Maybe the coaches saw that Nevada would kill us with a pass rush and wanted to run the option and hold the ball. But once Phillips is ready to run that kind of option, he should be in the game under those circumstances.
JasonB
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 7130
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Allen, Tx, USA

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby Nacho » Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:01 pm

Jason I was right there with you until you wimped out at the end. I'm assusming that you are a lot bigger than me so don't take that literally.

I agree with you 100% otherwise. Go with Bartel or Phillips. Kind of late to go with Phillips though. Season is almost half over. Probably better to go with Bartel and win some 13-12 games. I can see us wiping the floor with UTEP 13-12.
Nacho
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6043
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:01 am

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby LA_Mustang » Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:01 pm

Great post with very solid points. I totally agree.
SMU-12 NCAA appearances, 1 Final Four
2014-15 & 2016-17 AAC Men's Basketball Champs

Image
User avatar
LA_Mustang
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 15604
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 4:01 am
Location: El Porto, CA 90266

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby Hoop Fan » Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:23 pm

Needless to say, I agree. Wallis should be a situational tight end. If the Oline cant protect Bartel, gotta play Phillips. I cringe to think about the crowd at the Utep game.
Hoop Fan
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6814
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2000 4:01 am

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby KnuckleStang » Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:27 pm

Possibly against my better judgement, I gotta defend Wallis. Eli Manning he ain't, but it sounded to me like that monster Kordova was in our backfield about every other play. He was running for his life, because our O-line has yet to show they can deal with any kind of blitz whatsoever. I was actually surprised Nevada didn't do even more of that. We will probably see a strong pass rush all year, no matter who we play, so given that, I'd rather stick with a guy who's CAPABLE of running for his life. He didn't take it to the house, but he did make something positive happen a few times with his mobility. Bartel's arm will do us no good if he doesn't have time, and I don't think he'll get it.

I was against putting Phillips in this year, but I admit I'm starting to change my mind about that.
User avatar
KnuckleStang
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2605
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 4:01 am
Location: Lynchburg, VA, USA

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby Stallion » Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:28 pm

One additional point-although Bartel maybe less mobile I'm pretty sure the stats will bear me out that Tate Wallis has taken many more sacks than Bartel over the last two years.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 09-28-2003).]
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris

When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
Stallion
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 44302
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Dallas,Texas,USA

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby EP Pony Fan » Sun Sep 28, 2003 2:05 pm

If Wallis isn't the choice at QB - I haven't seen him enough to know - why not move him to safety? I keep reading that (A) he's got good speed, (B) he has good size, (C) he's extremely smart and has a thorough understanding of the game and (D) we've been hit by injuries in the secondary. Could Wallis do the job at one of the safety spots?
User avatar
EP Pony Fan
Varsity
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2002 3:01 am
Location: El Paso

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby SMUstang » Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:27 pm

Didn't Bennett convert Wallis from a linebacker last year? Let him play at another position. He's a good athlete and we can use a good athlete. Just don't use him at QB.
SMUstang
Heisman
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Horseshoe Bay, TX, USA

Re: The problem with Tate Wallis at QB...

Postby KnuckleStang » Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:02 pm

Tate was actually a tight end. Same difference.
User avatar
KnuckleStang
Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 2605
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 4:01 am
Location: Lynchburg, VA, USA


Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 142 guests