The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(09-13-2017 09:20 AM)bronconick Wrote:  

(09-12-2017 08:51 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:He could have had Wassink in every game we played last year for valuable experience.. We all know what he did.. I also don't buy the Flacko argument...The kids a runner.. Good option candidate...

One of the issues about WMU last year was that for many of them, we weren't pounding away super-early with a Massive lead where we'd have plenty of time for backup QBs. Sure, we could have capped a couple last drives off with some, which we should have, but it wouldn't have done much.

NC Central, Central, Akron, Ball State, Buffalo were ~40 point wins. Any coach planning for the future has their backup run the offense in blowouts when you have a 5th year senior QB.

Flacco had one (1) pass attempt in 2016.

I wonder what Fleck's plan was if Claeys didn't get involved in the player revolt before the bowl game. He got the last open job.

I wonder how early the Minnesota back-channeling began with Fleck's agent. I mean, maybe Claeys was already a lame duck right after the sexual assault incident.

(09-13-2017 01:53 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  Totally disagree.

You don't develop a QB by holding him out. There were ample opportunities to get him snaps last year. He didn't, and the proof of his motive is that he played Flacco more the previous year than he did last year. Did Flacco get worse, or was Peej more interested in running up scores to complete his 4 year plan to get out of Dodge?

Fleck was never lookiing to the future of WMU, he was always looking to the future of PJ the film flam man.

Lester has no choice but to give Wassink a simple playbook, and make sure he doesn't destroy his confidence in 2 games. Of course the Flecktards think he should be throwing over the middle to that crowd of amazing receivers the Fleckster brought in.........so amazing that the backups are all true freshmen.

Name one WR the master recruiter brought in after Davis?

Well he used Flacco situationally as a runner the year before, not mop up duty, and we didn't really need him for that last year so that's kind of apples to oranges.

He brought in Thompson, Watson, Eskridge, Curtis. Hell he brought in Phillips too before we ended up needing him more on defense. You think all those guys suck(ed)? Watson looks fine to me when Wassink can put the ball on the money (the one bounce at USC was bad but he's made some tough grabs). We know what Eskridge can do. Curtis is a work in progress.

Look I agree that Fleck didn't really care about the future last year. It's not a shock to anybody that he's a pretty self centered dude. But this crusade is just absurd. We get it, you hate Fleck. And yes, the holes in the roster are not Lester's fault, really. Great. You're gonna have a hard time convincing anyone he couldn't recruit.

(09-13-2017 02:20 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(09-13-2017 09:20 AM)bronconick Wrote:  

(09-12-2017 08:51 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:He could have had Wassink in every game we played last year for valuable experience.. We all know what he did.. I also don't buy the Flacko argument...The kids a runner.. Good option candidate...

One of the issues about WMU last year was that for many of them, we weren't pounding away super-early with a Massive lead where we'd have plenty of time for backup QBs. Sure, we could have capped a couple last drives off with some, which we should have, but it wouldn't have done much.

NC Central, Central, Akron, Ball State, Buffalo were ~40 point wins. Any coach planning for the future has their backup run the offense in blowouts when you have a 5th year senior QB.

Flacco had one (1) pass attempt in 2016.

I wonder what Fleck's plan was if Claeys didn't get involved in the player revolt before the bowl game. He got the last open job.

I wonder how early the Minnesota back-channeling began with Fleck's agent. I mean, maybe Claeys was already a lame duck right after the sexual assault incident.

There's a lot of smoke out there that he already knew by mid-December.

So - to be clear - Lester and company have NO BLAME in how bad they looked on Saturday. None at all. Zip, zero, nada.

(09-13-2017 02:56 PM)broncofan1 Wrote:  So - to be clear - Lester and company have NO BLAME in how bad they looked on Saturday. None at all. Zip, zero, nada.

No one is saying that. The thread title says "part" of the blame goes elsewhere.

(09-13-2017 12:20 PM)brovol Wrote:  Playing subs is always a controversial thing, be that who to play, how soon do you get them in, and even how much it actually helps the players. If the question is whether our QB situation would be better today had Fleck gotten the backup QB in the games more often last year, the answer is a definitive no. The backup was clearly Flacco, and presumably he would have been the QB getting the mop-up time. I am fine with getting backup players in games, but you better have the game well in hand, because we all have seen games that were "over", and the team that had the game "won" ends up losing, with the coach looking like an idiot. Further, last season we were fighting for a high ranking, as it meant a LOT, and the clear reality is that if a MAC team doesnt win by a crap-ton it will be dismissed. I do not disparage our coaching staff for keeping that factor in mind, nor do I hold it against them for "playing for today" instead of next year.

Wassink had a bad game against MSU, and that had nothing to do Fleck not getting the backup in last year. It likely has more to do with the coaching he has had the past eight months, and those who prepared him for Saturdays game, and during training camp after selecting him as the starter over several other presumably quality QB's on the roster. Lester needs to own this too, and I'm sure he will. Wassink was a highly coveted QB out of HS, and was universally considered a blue chip recruit when Fleck got him. Nobody here or anywhere else suggested otherwise, and the kid had the benefit of practicing with one of the best QB's in school history (Terrell), and is now coached by perhaps the all time best WMU QB. He needs to be better, and I assume he will be, but his problems thus far are absolutely not because of Fleck.

I get the bitterness with Fleck, because I have it myself, but lets not get too many hundreds of thousand miles away from reality here. Fleck took us from an average MAC program coming off a dismal year, with very little excitement in the program, and took us to the frigging Cotton Bowl, in the middle of the national top 25, with better facilities, and tremendous enthusiasm; and he did it even after many of the "experts" on this forum laughed at his methods and ridiculed him, predicting that we would never win with him. Those same people want to trash him now, and that is fine if you are trashing him for the trashy stuff, but otherwise the guy did more than what we paid him to do, and the last several years were irreplaceable for this suffering Bronco.

You nail it every time.

(09-13-2017 02:28 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  

(09-13-2017 01:53 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  Totally disagree.

You don't develop a QB by holding him out. There were ample opportunities to get him snaps last year. He didn't, and the proof of his motive is that he played Flacco more the previous year than he did last year. Did Flacco get worse, or was Peej more interested in running up scores to complete his 4 year plan to get out of Dodge?

Fleck was never lookiing to the future of WMU, he was always looking to the future of PJ the film flam man.

Lester has no choice but to give Wassink a simple playbook, and make sure he doesn't destroy his confidence in 2 games. Of course the Flecktards think he should be throwing over the middle to that crowd of amazing receivers the Fleckster brought in.........so amazing that the backups are all true freshmen.

Name one WR the master recruiter brought in after Davis?

Well he used Flacco situationally as a runner the year before, not mop up duty, and we didn't really need him for that last year so that's kind of apples to oranges.

He brought in Thompson, Watson, Eskridge, Curtis. Hell he brought in Phillips too before we ended up needing him more on defense. You think all those guys suck(ed)? Watson looks fine to me when Wassink can put the ball on the money (the one bounce at USC was bad but he's made some tough grabs). We know what Eskridge can do. Curtis is a work in progress.

Look I agree that Fleck didn't really care about the future last year. It's not a shock to anybody that he's a pretty self centered dude. But this crusade is just absurd. We get it, you hate Fleck. And yes, the holes in the roster are not Lester's fault, really. Great. You're gonna have a hard time convincing anyone he couldn't recruit.

I like Eskridge, after that not seeing much to get excited about. Kind of telling when the true freshmen have beat out second year guys like Borsema, Graves, and Curtis and Watson can't catch a ball that hits them in the chest.

By not utilizing Wassink AT ALL last year, you effectively lost a year of development for this kid...That is the Fleck crime..I don't give a crap about ever haering Flecks name again....He did a disservice to all of our young QB's left on our roster this year..I back the Dip 100%.

I blame Fleck for taking us to a MAC championship and the gosh damn Cotton Bowl... what an a$$ hole! He's gone! Move the F$&@ on!!!!!!!!!!!

Eskridge is all you like, really?

Darius not exciting enough for you?

What a slap in the face of... I don't know... basically our entire defense, special teams, Franklin, Bellamy, Bogan, etc.. and like someone else pointed out, Wassink was a heckuva recruit coming out of South Christian. He'll be fine.

We need to see how this staff evaluates and develops talent... none of which we can yet evaluate so early in their tenure...

(09-13-2017 05:10 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  Eskridge is all you like, really?

Darius not exciting enough for you?

What a slap in the face of... I don't know... basically our entire defense, special teams, Franklin, Bellamy, Bogan, etc.. and like someone else pointed out, Wassink was a heckuva recruit coming out of South Christian. He'll be fine.

I'm was talking WRs and QBs. After Davis he didn't bring in much to write home about, Eskridge being the exception.

I think we have a good one in Luke Sanders... he's too young right now but he's getting some quality snaps...and getting beat up... I see him as our next Mica Zhul.

Quote:NC Central, Central, Akron, Ball State, Buffalo were ~40 point wins. Any coach planning for the future has their backup run the offense in blowouts when you have a 5th year senior QB.

I think in those games, we scored a lot at the End, and were more close earlier on -- close Enough not to pull the QB tooo quickly. That said, Fleck was too conservative with it, and when near the end, not passing it wasn't a great idea. Flacco could have gotten, say, 5 passes in those games instead of none -- and a bit more running there too. Ehhhh, not much. Terrell was only pulled until it was at the point in which there was NO HISTORICAL WAY the opposing team could mount a comeback to make it a close one (even if team sucked).

But my point is: Even loosening that, but still generally conservative, wouldn't have made too much a difference. And regardless, that was Flacco, not Wassink.

(09-13-2017 06:27 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:NC Central, Central, Akron, Ball State, Buffalo were ~40 point wins. Any coach planning for the future has their backup run the offense in blowouts when you have a 5th year senior QB.

I think in those games, we scored a lot at the End, and were more close earlier on -- close Enough not to pull the QB tooo quickly. That said, Fleck was too conservative with it, and when near the end, not passing it wasn't a great idea. Flacco could have gotten, say, 5 passes in those games instead of none -- and a bit more running there too. Ehhhh, not much. Terrell was only pulled until it was at the point in which there was NO HISTORICAL WAY the opposing team could mount a comeback to make it a close one (even if team sucked).

But my point is: Even loosening that, but still generally conservative, wouldn't have made too much a difference. And regardless, that was Flacco, not Wassink.

The OC was a Flacco slappy. He couldn't let go of his golden years with Joe. Flacco was 5'10" on a good day, and never saw a pass play that didn't warrant a run. His arm motion bordered on sidearm. None the less Peej kept bringing in ONE QB a year, they'd leave, then he'd roll the dice with another.....rinse repeat.

I think Wassink will be fine, because he'll have proper guidance. But it will take 3 years to reestablish proper depth at that position. Right now we are 1 injury from disaster, just as we were last year.

the start is exactly what was or should have been expected. HUGE step up in scheduling for a team with a new staff, QB who hasn't started a game since HS, and VERY inexperienced receiving corp...none of this should be a shock. The MSU game was extremely predictable following the performance at USC.

IMO, the season starts this weekend. GO BRONCOS!

(09-13-2017 08:52 PM)Wheres_Waldo? Wrote:  the start is exactly what was or should have been expected. HUGE step up in scheduling for a team with a new staff, QB who hasn't started a game since HS, and VERY inexperienced receiving corp...none of this should be a shock. The MSU game was extremely predictable following the performance at USC.

IMO, the season starts this weekend. GO BRONCOS!

Word. We'll be fine.

(09-13-2017 10:00 PM)PezKingGL1 Wrote:  

(09-13-2017 08:52 PM)Wheres_Waldo? Wrote:  the start is exactly what was or should have been expected. HUGE step up in scheduling for a team with a new staff, QB who hasn't started a game since HS, and VERY inexperienced receiving corp...none of this should be a shock. The MSU game was extremely predictable following the performance at USC.

IMO, the season starts this weekend. GO BRONCOS!

Word. We'll be fine.

We'll be fine unless:

1. Wassink sustains an injury and has to be replaced as starter
2. Wassink plateaus and doesn't develop further

Right now we couldn't beat CMU, NIU or UT. And possibly EMU. We'll have to get much better by the time we take them on.

We all knew QB and WR were going to be a problem heading into this season. They would have been regardless of who the head coach is. I think Wassink is very talented and I think there is enough talent on the roster at WR but it is going to take time to develop these guys. Spring ball and fall camp and practice are great but these guys need in game experience to really get it going. Now that the Broncos have finished the P5 portion of their schedule I am thinking that we see these players starting to show improvement by leaps and bounds.

If Wassink were to get hurt it would probably be a disaster. Not because the Broncos would have to go with a true freshman QB (Goddard) but because I think we all are expecting the Broncos to challenge for another MACC because of all the talent on the roster but that is highly unlikely to happen with a true freshman QB.

I actually think the Broncos are fine at QB. I think Wassink will work out to be a good one. They have 2 very talented true freshman QBs on the team, Goddard and Riddle and they have 2 very talented QBs in their current recruiting class.

If after Idaho and Wagner the Broncos still have major issues then maybe we should start to worry but I don't think we should worry too much after the first 2 games against P5 competition.

(09-13-2017 07:22 PM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  I think Wassink will be fine, because he'll have proper guidance. But it will take 3 years to reestablish proper depth at that position. Right now we are 1 injury from disaster, just as we were last year.

Welcome to college football. How many schools out there (besides Ohio St., Alabama, etc.) have "depth" at the QB position? It's just not common because if you have two very good quarterbacks, one is probably going to leave and find another opportunity to play elsewhere. That's just the way it is.

If Terrell went down, Flacco was probably good enough to run the offense and manage things somewhat. Obviously didn't have the arm Terrell had, but we weren't going to be a complete disaster.

If Wassink doesn't clean things up by mid-season, we have some options IMO (Goddard, Riddle, etc.). My hunch is that once we get into these upcoming games vs. Idaho, Wagner, Ball State, he'll be better and develop as the season goes on.