Uconn's starting QB

[RedStickHusky]

If you thought Pindell was going to be your starter even just by a little, it's a great move to name him now and give him the most reps heading into Holy Cross and some good game experience before we hit the better teams on our schedule. I have to think that Lashlee had some significant input into this decision so he could move forward with creating that chemistry and timing. That will make and installing a gameplan much easier in a week or so.

It's all about establishing an identity; I like it. Also think having BS as a QB2 going in to the season is a position of strength.

 

[JMick]

If you thought Pindell was going to be your starter even just by a little, it's a great move to name him now and give him the most reps heading into Holy Cross and some good game experience before we hit the better teams on our schedule. I have to think that Lashlee had some significant input into this decision so he could move forward with creating that chemistry and timing. That will make installing a gameplan much easier in a week or so.

Auburn had a bad habit of playing multiple QB's... whether that was lashlee or malzahn, who knows. it was the only thing I was hesitant about with the hire and our past history with QBs. I'm glad we've nipped that in the bud this early.

 

[ZOOCONN]

Thats a scenario where the staff earns its money making the right choice. If Washington is clearly the better QB, then he plays. Wins are more important than redshirts.

I disagree completely, that is a short sighted way of thinking. Edsall has already said that expectations should be optimistic but realistic, this season is going to be tough and you don't unnecessarily waste a year in the future to win maybe one or two games this season where the max win total will be around 4-5 wins. now if the "scenario" comes up and we are a win away from bowl eligibility in the last say 2-3 games then maybeeeee you consider this move because we all know how important getting bowl eligible is, extra practice etc is invaluable.

 

[Exit 4]

I disagree completely, that is a short sighted way of thinking. Edsall has already said that expectations should be optimistic but realistic, this season is going to be tough and you don't unnecessarily waste a year in the future to win maybe one or two games this season where the max win total will be around 4-5 wins. now if the "scenario" comes up and we are a win away from bowl eligibility in the last say 2-3 games then maybeeeee you consider this move because we all know how important getting bowl eligible is, extra practice etc is invaluable.

Bingo, - if playing Washington is the difference between bowling and not bowling - he plays. It would take an extraordinarily set of injury circumstances for that to happen, but its not totally out of the realm for this season.

You can't sit here today and say certain kids aren't playing the field this year under any circumstances, I think that is equally as foolish for them and for the team. If the kid is ready (key!) and they will help earn Ws (key), they should play.

About the only scenario I wouldnt apply this logic is if we have less than three games left. I really dont want to burn redshirts with less than three games to go....but then again, if that kid is the difference between bowling and not, then they play.

I have interpreted Edsall's commentary to be the opposite - he's fine with playing true freshman if they are better than what he has.

And plenty of kids that redshirted never see the field for academic/transfer reasons - and so there is that risk as well when banking talent.

 

[Bonehead]

What does this all mean???