QB/WR Braxton Miller (B1G POY, National Champion, OSU HOF)

[sepia5]

Was he on the sideline while Brax was in?

When you game-plan to use two quarterbacks, you aren't "benching" the quarterback that starts when it's time to bring in the other quarterback. No one would have said Coop was benching Stanley Jackson when he brought in Germaine for a series and vice versa. Boeckman was "benched" for Pryor. Zwick was "benched" for Smith. You can't be "benched" unless it was your job in the first place. The freaking cornerbacks aren't "benched" just because the offense is on the field. The running backs aren't "benched" when we go with a set that involves five wide receivers.

 

[SEREbuckeye]

The freaking cornerbacks aren't "benched" just because the offense is on the field.

Thats the dumbest analogy you could use to try and make a point.

Of course the CB's arent benched - there isnt an opportunity to play defense while on offense. Plus a 5 receiver set leaves you no room for a RB. However you are picking one QB over the other. Anytime a QB is on the field the others still have an opportunity to be in but they arent by the coaches decision.

Dont compare apples to oranges, it doesnt make sense.

 

[3074326]

All I know is that it is getting tiresome to hear:

"Braxton is better than Joe" - based off of what? 2 quarters and high school games? GTFOH.

"Braxton is a GREAT threat just sitting there" - yeah? again, based off someone playing NCAA 12 on XBox? Or tape from high school? Sure he looked athletic against Akron, but so did Joe B, I'd call it a wash.

People on here are just wanting blowouts against every school so the first thing they look for is retooling an area like QB clamoring that the "next best thing is on the bench waiting"

We have no clue of Braxton's composure, playbook knowledge, or even passing abilities against a solid defense, so how can we say its better than Joe B? We can't.

If we are going to say people are the "next best thing" based off of high school ranks, remember names like Rob Rose, Conner Smith, Mo Wells, Rob Schoenhoft, Jamario Oneal, Sirjo Welch, Sabino - all guys that were highly touted out of high school that didnt do much other than special and scout team play.

I have no disagreements with this post.

But I just have a hard time believing Braxton's athletic ability wouldn't help the team a few snaps per game.

 

[TheStoicPaisano]

Perhaps, it could also disrupt the flow of the game, which Bollman and Fickell alluded to. Plus you have to have timing to be an effective QB, playing a scattered drive here and there won't develop that.

There's a reason only one QB tandem has won a national title, and it was in large part because Tebow couldn't be stopped on the ground. Do you think Miller can replicate Tebow's ground performances, knowing defenses won't respect his arm because he's coming in cold? Pryor had trouble with it in the OU game.

 

[3074326]

Perhaps, it could also disrupt the flow of the game, which Bollman and Fickell alluded to. Plus you have to have timing to be an effective QB, playing a scattered drive here and there won't develop that.

There's a reason only one QB tandem has won a national title, and it was in large part because Tebow couldn't be stopped on the ground. Do you think Miller can replicate Tebow's ground performances, knowing defenses won't respect his arm because he's coming in cold? Pryor had trouble with it in the OU game.

Wildcat-like running plays with the starting QB on the sideline have been used both effectively and without disrupting the offense outside of Gainesville.

Just think it could be a boost for the offense and throw defenses off a bit.

 

[sepia5]

Thats the dumbest analogy you could use to try and make a point.

Of course the CB's arent benched - there isnt an opportunity to play defense while on offense. Plus a 5 receiver set leaves you no room for a RB. However you are picking one QB over the other. Anytime a QB is on the field the others still have an opportunity to be in but they arent by the coaches decision.

Dont compare apples to oranges, it doesnt make sense.

Eh, hyperbole to demonstrate that just because you're sitting on the bench at any given time, you aren't necessarily "benched." My point still stands, and you conveniently ignored my Jackson/Germaine example. Just because someone is in at your position at any given time, it doesn't mean you're "benched."

 

[GoodLifeSean]

Wildcat-like running plays with the starting QB on the sideline have been used both effectively and without disrupting the offense outside of Gainesville.

Just think it could be a boost for the offense and throw defenses off a bit.

I think this is the arguement in my head as well. The offense had clearly begun to sputter. Sometimes you have to force a spark to start a fire. I am however hoping for the sandbagging/MACrifice theory is correct.

 

[jlb1705]

Perhaps, it could also disrupt the flow of the game, which Bollman and Fickell alluded to. Plus you have to have timing to be an effective QB, playing a scattered drive here and there won't develop that.

If they believe all of that, then why did they even entertain the idea of using two QBs?

At best it's contradictory, and at worst it is indecisive and noncommittal.

 

[jwinslow]

All I know is that it is getting tiresome to hear:

all I know is it gets really tiresome to hear people's arguments reshaped into strawmen like this

"Braxton is better than Joe" - based off of what? 2 quarters and high school games? GTFOH.

when that wasn't what was being said at all

Then you have the audacity to call out people for faulty comparisons while continuing this absurd one

"Braxton is a GREAT threat just sitting there" - yeah? again, based off oneeone playing NCAA 12 on XBox? Or tape from high school? Sure he looked athletic against Akron, but so did Joe B, I'd call it a wash.

I've watched Bauserman struggle to scramble for years. I've seen him struggle with composure in the pocket, throw a lot of low balls, hesitate on most throws even without pass rush, and settle for too many checkdowns.

That doesn't require any access to practice or inside info. That tendency has been on display every spring game.


He made some strides as camp concluded and I hoped Akron was a continuation of that. unfortunately he reverted back to many of his old struggles a week later

People on here are just wanting blowouts against every school so the first thing they look for is retooling an area like QB clamoring that the "next best thing is on the bench waiting"

Again you make a mockery of this discussion board by attempting to lump the diverse and specific opinions of thousands of posters into one caricature to mock. Problem is the only one that embarrasses is yourself.

Most here aren't even calling for Bauserman to lose his starting job. They are just frustrated to not see a change of pace, supposed Co starter when the other QB is really struggling.

And yes, Braxton is a major change of pace no matter how many times you try to inflate Joe's runs against Akron to eliminate their differences.

We have no clue of Braxton's composure, playbook knowledge, or even passing abilities against a solid defense, so how can we say its better than Joe B? We can't.

again, that isn't what people are saying. They want to see him play before garbage time.

Even against the woeful zips, he barely saw the field with the starters. He ran once, hit his TE for a nice gain, only to see Fragel and Brewster ensure his drive was over with their mistakes.

If we are going to say people are the "next best thing" based off of high school ranks, remember names like Rob Rose, Conner Smith, Mo Wells, Rob Schoenhoft, Jamario Oneal, Sirjo Welch, Sabino - all guys that were highly touted out of high school that didnt do much other than special and scout team play.

hooray. More strawmen.

 

[TheStoicPaisano]

If they believe all of that, then why did they even entertain the idea of using two QBs?

At best it's contradictory, and at worst it is indecisive and noncommittal.

OK, I haven't paid the closest attention, but when did Fickell ever say they were going to use a strict platoon system? He seemed awfully confident with Bauserman as the #1 by the 8/21 jersey scrimmage when he got 75% of the first-team snaps. Platoon the way I understand it is McGloin/Bolden, or McCarron/Sims before Saban put his faith in one guy.

From their actions, they seem pretty committed to Bauserman as the starter and are comfortable bringing Miller in with a big lead or if JB was to get hurt. Through a combination of circumstances (though no fault of Joe or Braxton), they never got the big lead they probably expected to have with a couple minutes left in the first half.

 

[TheStoicPaisano]

Wildcat-like running plays with the starting QB on the sideline have been used both effectively and without disrupting the offense outside of Gainesville.

Just think it could be a boost for the offense and throw defenses off a bit.

Rightly or wrongly, I don't think the staff sees the Wildcat a viable part of the offense (I know Ginn and Herron have run it before, but as a one-off thing).

Siciliano a couple weeks ago:
"Some things Joe may do better, some things Braxton may do better, but we don't have two separate game plans for the two quarterbacks."

Italics mine. If they're running the same package, you're asking Miller to come in cold and effectively execute at a higher level than Bauserman has thus far. And then switch later in the game. And then switch again.

Just get the kid in when he can play a quarter and develop some timing with Bobek & Co. in a low-pressure but live-fire situation.

 

[BlufftonBuckeye]

OK, I haven't paid the closest attention, but when did Fickell ever say they were going to use a strict platoon system? He seemed awfully confident with Bauserman as the #1 by the 8/21 jersey scrimmage when he got 75% of the first-team snaps. Platoon the way I understand it is McGloin/Bolden, or McCarron/Sims before Saban put his faith in one guy.

From their actions, they seem pretty committed to Bauserman as the starter and are comfortable bringing Miller in with a big lead or if JB was to get hurt. Through a combination of circumstances (though no fault of Joe or Braxton), they never got the big lead they probably expected to have with a couple minutes left in the first half.

I can;t say definitively, but I'm pretty sure Braxton is not only supposed to get PT in the event of a blowout or injury. Per Fick and co's comments, they have a "plan" to get him in games, and unless the "flow" dictates otherwise, they'll put him in.

Outside of him not being in the game Saturday, I don't think we have any reason to believe that he isn't going to get any serious PT.

It stands to reason that, in a tight game, Fick would be more comfortable with a guy he trusts to not lose, whereas Braxton would be more of a "go win" move, know what I mean?

 

[3074326]

Rightly or wrongly, I don't think the staff sees the Wildcat a viable part of the offense (I know Ginn and Herron have run it before, but as a one-off thing).

Siciliano a couple weeks ago:
"Some things Joe may do better, some things Braxton may do better, but we don't have two separate game plans for the two quarterbacks."

Italics mine. If they're running the same package, you're asking Miller to come in cold and effectively execute at a higher level than Bauserman has thus far. And then switch later in the game. And then switch again.

Just get the kid in when he can play a quarter and develop some timing with Bobek & Co. in a low-pressure but live-fire situation.

I'm not talking about a separate gameplan, I'm talking about a handful of plays. Running ones, specifically. I guess I can't be sure, but I feel like Braxton could effectively come in cold and run better than Joe. And that's not an insult to Joe.

 

[SEREbuckeye]

That doesn't require any access to practice or inside info. That tendency has been on display every spring game.

I was with you on a lot of things but you lost a ton of credibility on this post when you brought up a spring game performance. lol. The spring game isnt a real game, and it isnt always an actual display of a players development and future abilities. You should know that there are always players who shine in spring games and then become flat during the season.

As for being embarrassed on here - sorry man, I know you're a mod and I dont mean to come off disrespectful but at the end of the day its just an online message board - this isnt a real group of friends that I work with and hope to have the respect of. Im not going to be "embarrassed" or even emotionally distressed by an internet group.

In the end I think peeps just need to let it go, understand that Joe B had an off day and give him another chance rather than for calling for more Braxton sightings after last game.

 

[TheStoicPaisano]

I'm not talking about a separate gameplan, I'm talking about a handful of plays. Running ones, specifically. I guess I can't be sure, but I feel like Braxton could effectively come in cold and run better than Joe. And that's not an insult to Joe.

Then give the ball to a running back. If you're bringing in a cold QB for a 'handful of plays', you're asking him to play with one tied behind his back because he'll have no chance to get his rhythm down. With no reason to respect the passing game, the opponent will simply walk more guys into the box.

I know I sound like a broken record but QB play is so heavily dependent on developing a rhythm and timing, and packages/platoons don't let that progression occur. It's why there are so few successful platoons.

I believe Miller is one of the more complete freshman quarterbacks in the last decade. But one series means no passing rhythm which means half of his skill set is taken away...what can anybody hope to learn from that?