Who do the Fans want as Starting QB?
- Thread starter BloodyBuddy
- Start date
This.
If Sam doesn't win the starting job then I would go with JB. He played pretty well against some very tough competition (A&M, OU, OSU, K-State, etc...) while Jantz had the team just barely escaping with wins against lessor competition like (UNI, Iowa, and UCONN). I liked JB's decisions with the football better. He didn't force as many dumb throws causing turnovers and when he decided to tuck the ball and run he made quick decisions and he (Steele pay attention to this one) protected the football so he wouldn't fumble it away.
Steele reminded me too much of Brett Favre out there. It was either a highlight reel play or it was a total disaster. IMO we saw far too many disasters from Steele to trust him with the starting gig again.
I wouldn't say putting the ball on the ground 11 times is protecting the football. He may have only lost 3, but 11 times.
I'm still going with Derp-eche Mode.
This a great point, personally I'd like to see JB win the job only because I prefer the style we played with him under center. That said if the coaching staff has confindence that Steele has cleaned up some of his mistakes and that the game slows down a bit for him then we are a much more potent offense with him under center.
Anyone who has a preference for one guy over the other is making that opinion on a less-than-rational basis. Their stats, and win/loss records were very similar. They seem to have similar strengths and similar weaknesses.
Why do people think JB protected the ball? He fumbled it a LOT, but we somehow recovered a bunch of them.
They weren't turnovers, but it wasn't because JB was doing a great job of protecting the ball.
Obviously none of us have seen what improvements Barnett or Jantz have made, but just going on what happened last year my brain says Barnett.
Barnett was a steady QB. Every game he started we were in sans the OU game. Barnett fumbled quite a few times but with fumbles there is a 50/50 shot we recover. With a pick, not so much. Barnett played the zone read very well and those 3 games we won and the KSU game, we were really able to control the clock.
Barnett isn't as flashy as Jantz. But if you can limit TOs, not put yourself in holes, have a great running game, I don't think you need that flash if you are able to hit 5-15 yard pass with great regularity imo.
Jantz, has the higher ceiling. He has more arm strength. He has great escapability to make plays. But he is either too confident in throws he can make or doesn't make great reads because he throws picks. People go on about those 3 4th quarter comebacks but he only needed to make those comebacks because of terrible plays earlier in the game. I don't think that our guys are the kinda team that can handle with regularity, digging out of holes each game.
Whoever makes the biggest improvement in their weaknesses will start, and I think Barnett's weaknesses are easily more correctable. I think it is better to have a QB who gives you the same thing day in, day out.
After first seeing this topic I turned on the OSU game and it was in the middle of the 3rd quarter, 24-7 and Barnett kept his cool and the team slowly climbed back in. I don't think Jantz could of kept his cool in order to do that nor do I think the team saw him, Jantz, as the leader in order to lead the team to comeback like that. He led comebacks against a FCS team, average Iowa team and a bottom tier Big East team. Barnett led us to wins against Tech, KU, a top 5 team, and kept us in the game against another Top 10 team.
Barnett was a steady QB. Every game he started we were in sans the OU game. Barnett fumbled quite a few times but with fumbles there is a 50/50 shot we recover. With a pick, not so much. Barnett played the zone read very well and those 3 games we won and the KSU game, we were really able to control the clock.
Barnett isn't as flashy as Jantz. But if you can limit TOs, not put yourself in holes, have a great running game, I don't think you need that flash if you are able to hit 5-15 yard pass with great regularity imo.
Jantz, has the higher ceiling. He has more arm strength. He has great escapability to make plays. But he is either too confident in throws he can make or doesn't make great reads because he throws picks. People go on about those 3 4th quarter comebacks but he only needed to make those comebacks because of terrible plays earlier in the game. I don't think that our guys are the kinda team that can handle with regularity, digging out of holes each game.
Whoever makes the biggest improvement in their weaknesses will start, and I think Barnett's weaknesses are easily more correctable. I think it is better to have a QB who gives you the same thing day in, day out.
After first seeing this topic I turned on the OSU game and it was in the middle of the 3rd quarter, 24-7 and Barnett kept his cool and the team slowly climbed back in. I don't think Jantz could of kept his cool in order to do that nor do I think the team saw him, Jantz, as the leader in order to lead the team to comeback like that. He led comebacks against a FCS team, average Iowa team and a bottom tier Big East team. Barnett led us to wins against Tech, KU, a top 5 team, and kept us in the game against another Top 10 team.
You're spot on, JB was fast and loose with the ball all year. I think it's the way each guy struggled holding onto the ball, I think Steele's turnover's just stood out more because several were "what the **** were you thinking" moments. Steele had a couple of the worst quarters I've seen in 30 years of watching football, when he went bad, he went all out. The positive thing is that each guys mistakes seem correctable.
I'm a Steele Jantz fan because he's exciting to watch. Sure, he made some bone-head plays last year, but the way he scrambles and makes something out of nothing is awesome to watch.
I'm a Barnett fan because I like his cool and calm attitude. I feel like he's a younger Arnaud, very good leader and just a sense of confidence.
I can't speak on Richardson because I've never seen him play.
I'm a Barnett fan because I like his cool and calm attitude. I feel like he's a younger Arnaud, very good leader and just a sense of confidence.
I can't speak on Richardson because I've never seen him play.
I want to begin this post by saying that what follows is sincere and honest. I am not trying to rile anyone up or rock any boats. I legitimately want to know the answers to the 3 questions that follow:
#1- How do we see the 3 wins by each of these QBs as even?
SJ had 10 TOs in 3 wins against an FCS school, a bottom-of-the-barrel Big East school, and an Iowa team that was a shell of what they have been in recent years.
JB led wins against (then #19) Tech on the road, #2 OSU, and KU.
WE had two teams once we entered Big XII play: That one that was embarrassing against UT, BU, Mizzou, and 1/2 of A&M, then there was that one that COMPETED and even won a few against 1/2 A&M, @Tech, OSU, KU, @OU, & @K-State.
BTW when JB came out in NYC we were down 1 point and he had led 2 FG drives that were the only points we had until "prevent" time in the 4th quarter.
#2- How have we come to the conclusion that SJ is more "athletic" than JB?
JB has a better 40 and shuttle time. JB ended the season as our 2nd leading rusher (even with sacks counting against him), most of which weren't designed runs but plays where he escaped and got positive yardage. Steele is bigger and a little stronger (not much according to weight-room boards), but does that make him more "athletic"?
#3- How did we come to the conclusion that a guy who, if he hasn't already, will take his final meaningful snaps within months of now has a higher ceiling than the kid that QB'd us to our biggest win EVER in his 2nd start as a 19 year-old (R)Freshman who has 3 years left?
Again, I am sincerely and honestly asking this with the purest of curiosities.
#1- How do we see the 3 wins by each of these QBs as even?
SJ had 10 TOs in 3 wins against an FCS school, a bottom-of-the-barrel Big East school, and an Iowa team that was a shell of what they have been in recent years.
JB led wins against (then #19) Tech on the road, #2 OSU, and KU.
WE had two teams once we entered Big XII play: That one that was embarrassing against UT, BU, Mizzou, and 1/2 of A&M, then there was that one that COMPETED and even won a few against 1/2 A&M, @Tech, OSU, KU, @OU, & @K-State.
BTW when JB came out in NYC we were down 1 point and he had led 2 FG drives that were the only points we had until "prevent" time in the 4th quarter.
#2- How have we come to the conclusion that SJ is more "athletic" than JB?
JB has a better 40 and shuttle time. JB ended the season as our 2nd leading rusher (even with sacks counting against him), most of which weren't designed runs but plays where he escaped and got positive yardage. Steele is bigger and a little stronger (not much according to weight-room boards), but does that make him more "athletic"?
#3- How did we come to the conclusion that a guy who, if he hasn't already, will take his final meaningful snaps within months of now has a higher ceiling than the kid that QB'd us to our biggest win EVER in his 2nd start as a 19 year-old (R)Freshman who has 3 years left?
Again, I am sincerely and honestly asking this with the purest of curiosities.
Last edited:
#1 - UCONN + Iowa = Tech + KU. No advantage to anyone there. SJ looked bad against UNI. OSU game we won because our defense held a 50 PPG offense to 17 in regulation, though Barnett played well in the comeback portion of the game. Hard to erase that pick-6 from my brain though. Brutal. I do agree that SJ probably doesn't bring us back to win that game. Edge to JB here.
#2 - I think most people point to some of the ridiculous plays that SJ made against Iowa last year as to why he's more "athletic". I don't really see that much of a difference in the two.
#3 - I think we're talking about higher ceiling this fall. Obviously JB could develop into a Heisman contender in 2 years, but that doesn't really affect this QB battle now. Both make plenty of mistakes, but SJ seems to have a little more big play ability in him. Maybe we're just taking too many plays from the Iowa game and extrapolating them across his entire body of work so far (see my #2).
It seemed to me like Barnett had a lot more dropped passes last year. I'm not sure statistically if this stands up, but it looked like guys had a harder time catching his passes. But, I felt like Barnett was actually more on point with his passes than Jantz as a whole. Jantz made much better throws at times and his escapability was great, but his INTs were too high (even though I think a couple of those picks were just great defensive plays). On the flip side...Barnett fumbled way too much. Fortunately we jumped on most of them because even 1 more TO in some of those games decides a W/L.
They are so close on a lot of levels but play differently as QBs. I like Jantz's pro arm, and if his accuracy and decision making improve he could really be good. I like Barnett's poise and he makes better reads, IMO. Both can escape the pocket and create plays.
At this point, who knows? Both have a good base but both have so much to improve on. I'm going with Jantz because of the arm strength and Barnett still has 3 years to grow.
They are so close on a lot of levels but play differently as QBs. I like Jantz's pro arm, and if his accuracy and decision making improve he could really be good. I like Barnett's poise and he makes better reads, IMO. Both can escape the pocket and create plays.
At this point, who knows? Both have a good base but both have so much to improve on. I'm going with Jantz because of the arm strength and Barnett still has 3 years to grow.
I agree with #1. Edge to JB.
As for number #2 and #3, to those people who say SJ is more athletic or has a higher ceiling, unless Jantz can do those things with regularity he shouldn't be starting. Seneca could do those things with regularity. Jantz has shown flashes and Rhoads even said he has been flashy this spring. Until those "flashes" are his regular game, I think he needs to be #2 QB.
It's a modern day Meier vs. Reesing. Similar builds in comparison, too. Very interesting.
I would agree with this comparison.
I wish there was time for the loser of this battle (if it were Jantz anyway), to learn a new position. I think regardless of what happens this year, JB starts next year, so him moving to WR wouldn't make a lot of sense, but given the time, I think SJ could be good there. No point in moving now, though.
