PonyFans.com

Surprised nobody has mentioned DMN article from yesterday in which Bennett admits taking out Eckert in the 2nd quarter was a mistake and that he plans to name a starter on Thursday with the goal of playing only 1 QB for the remainder of the season.

This is the right move. My bet is Eckert.

I will believe that when I see it.

"Eckert was 10-of-12 passing for 97 yards when he was benched."

That is pretty damn sorry.......it almost makes me laugh.
But I am sure when they put Romo in I was the only one who knew the QB draw up the middle was coming. Don't get me wrong, I think Romo is talented, it is the play calling that worries me. If we all know that the QB keeper is coming, wouldn't you think the other team knows it too.
I hope they pick a qb and stick with him.

I agree .... I think. I mean, I hate the QB rotation, but at the same time, they've both played well at times, and neither has been clearly dominant.

Having said that, I like the idea of going with just one.

further neither one will be on the field the day SMU becomes a mildly successful football team.

Stallion wrote:further neither one will be on the field the day SMU becomes a mildly successful football team.

Do you have any idea as to when that might be - 2005, '06, '07, '08.......?

Right now, it is hard to see it happening within the next 2-3 years.

answer -a healthy and experienced Chris Phillips.

I hope that Phillips receives a medical red-shirt. Having an extra year can only help him become a more complete quarterback.

I was wondering how long the QB rotation was going to last. I remember a coach by the name of Landry who tried this in the '70's. It didn't work then and it won't work now.

Thanks Phil, it is about time. Maybe our coaching staff will also stop the rotation and position moving across the board. You just can't expect players to learn new positions every week or two and to create consistency. I know we have a problem with depth, but I still think we are just moving around too much.

PonySnob,

Both SMU and Tulane reside on the Dangerfield Bottom 10 with Tulsa and Houston waiting in the wings. Combined, these 4 schools have a 4-17 record. That leaves Rice and UTEP, our remaining divisional conference mates, both with their own flaws.

Add next year opponent ECU, who were winless and ranked #4 last week in the Bottom Ten until they defeated Tulane and maybe, maybe we have a chance if these Sophs and Freshmen step it up.

First, in a QB rotation the QB rotating out is not benched. Why that keeps showing up in the DMN is beyond me, Calvin you know better.

Second, even with a rotation I am not sure it makes sense to remove a hot QB.

Third, I thought Burns was going to have a free hand with the offense. Guess that did not last if it ever was the case.

If you listen to this week's press conference, it sounds like Bennett did not have that active of a roll in the planned QB rotation other than putting a stamp on it. He was very adament about him now making the decision to go with one QB. He used the we'll see this week in practice line to name a starter. I think Burns is still calling the shots on offense and now Bennett is forcing his hand a little.

We've just been a little too predictable when Romo comes in, or Romo pulls the trigger too quick and looks to run too soon. The last couple of games seem to show the defense is simply waiting for him to take off.

Which (run or pass) does LaTech defend better?

buspen wrote:If you listen to this week's press conference, it sounds like Bennett did not have that active of a roll in the planned QB rotation other than putting a stamp on it. He was very adament about him now making the decision to go with one QB. He used the we'll see this week in practice line to name a starter. I think Burns is still calling the shots on offense and now Bennett is forcing his hand a little.

We've just been a little too predictable when Romo comes in, or Romo pulls the trigger too quick and looks to run too soon. The last couple of games seem to show the defense is simply waiting for him to take off.

The fact that other teams commit to Romo running gives him a passing advantage.

Too predictable? I did not know Romo was making the play calls.

I am not disputing Eckert as the starter or whether a one QB system is better or not, but bagging on Romo is ridiculous.

Romo leads the team in pass efficiency with a 132.41 rating, better by 28 points than Eckert and the team average. He leads in rushing yards, 223, in yards per carry at 6.6, and in yards per game at 55.8. He is also third in scoring with 12 points.

It seems we would be looking for ways to get this guy in the game.

Why not create plays for him as a WR where he has a pass option?

The PonyGrad wrote:The fact that other teams commit to Romo running gives him a passing advantage.

Too predictable? I did not know Romo was making the play calls.

I am not disputing Eckert as the starter or whether a one QB system is better or not, but bagging on Romo is ridiculous.

Romo leads the team in pass efficiency with a 132.41 rating, better by 28 points than Eckert and the team average. He leads in rushing yards, 223, in yards per carry at 6.6, and in yards per game at 55.8. He is also third in scoring with 12 points.

It seems we would be looking for ways to get this guy in the game.

Why not create plays for him as a WR where he has a pass option?

It doesn't say much about your offense when 6 games into the season, your leading rusher has 223 yards. Part of the disparity in pass efficiency is that Eckert has had the WR's drop numerous very catchable footballs. He clearly has a much better arm than Romo but in typical SMU style, our WR's drop too many passes.

The bottom line is that the offense of this team has been [deleted] poor and not a whole lot better than last year. We barely average 2 TD's per game and when your defense is giving up well over 30 points per game, you are not going to win very much. Hopefully next year, the players will have a better sense of Rusty's offense as I am sure it is not living up to his expecations this year.