Interesting article from Cougar Sports Network.
https://cougarsportsnetwork.com/2019/02/01/breaking-down-the-graduate-transfer-qb-myth/
https://cougarsportsnetwork.com/2019/02/01/breaking-down-the-graduate-transfer-qb-myth/
Implications of QB graduate transfers
- Thread starter Coug95man2
- Start date
I liked the article.
In an ideal world a team would sign 18 players every year and redshirt half of them...18(4) + 9 = 81. In an ideal world they would all be great students, not have career-ending injuries and contribute happily on the team so that nobody transferred, leaving 85-81 = 4 remaining scholarships. That permits room for either one redshirt per class for those who did not redshirt and later got injured, or room for 4 JC or other transfers, or room to give 4 long term walk-ons a scholarship, or some combination thereof.
Of course, it never works out that way. There are academic, social, injury and playing time casualties. Usually we have close to a full 25 scholarships to give, and we could typically take 3-5 transfers without causing any long term problems.
From what I've been able to see, CML's ideal playbook is to take 1 QB, 5 OL, 1RB, 7 guys who could play either WR or CB, and then with a Claeys style DC also take 2 DT's, 2 DE's, 2 MLB/Rush and 4 OLB/Safeties. That leaves one extra (this year a long snapper) and if we don't get 2 DT's we take what we can get. Lately that has been a 3rd DE that shows potential to eventually be a DT. In general, for all but the OL, QB and MLB, CML takes speed over size. Walk ons bolster a number of positions.
That brings us to QB. One scholie QB per year, but always happy to take a good looking walk on. Leach's philosophy that competition is a good thing is nowhere more apparent than at QB, and once a kid is on the roster CML doesn't appear to play favorites. Earn your time by being accurate, making good decisions, being coachable and earning the confidence of the team.
CML doesn't guarantee a starting position to a transfer QB, but I suspect that he is candid about the kid's opportunity to earn the starting spot. As the article says, this approach did not hurt Oregon's QB recruiting and I doubt that it will hurt Mike Leach's QB recruiting. Every D1 QB expects to compete to get the starting position. A kid who has been in your program for several years has a number of advantages over a grad transfer. If the grad transfer earns the starting position, then either the grad transfer is very good, the guys he is beating out are not yet fully ready, or both. In any event, recruiting this year's HS QB is not impacted.
In an ideal world a team would sign 18 players every year and redshirt half of them...18(4) + 9 = 81. In an ideal world they would all be great students, not have career-ending injuries and contribute happily on the team so that nobody transferred, leaving 85-81 = 4 remaining scholarships. That permits room for either one redshirt per class for those who did not redshirt and later got injured, or room for 4 JC or other transfers, or room to give 4 long term walk-ons a scholarship, or some combination thereof.
Of course, it never works out that way. There are academic, social, injury and playing time casualties. Usually we have close to a full 25 scholarships to give, and we could typically take 3-5 transfers without causing any long term problems.
From what I've been able to see, CML's ideal playbook is to take 1 QB, 5 OL, 1RB, 7 guys who could play either WR or CB, and then with a Claeys style DC also take 2 DT's, 2 DE's, 2 MLB/Rush and 4 OLB/Safeties. That leaves one extra (this year a long snapper) and if we don't get 2 DT's we take what we can get. Lately that has been a 3rd DE that shows potential to eventually be a DT. In general, for all but the OL, QB and MLB, CML takes speed over size. Walk ons bolster a number of positions.
That brings us to QB. One scholie QB per year, but always happy to take a good looking walk on. Leach's philosophy that competition is a good thing is nowhere more apparent than at QB, and once a kid is on the roster CML doesn't appear to play favorites. Earn your time by being accurate, making good decisions, being coachable and earning the confidence of the team.
CML doesn't guarantee a starting position to a transfer QB, but I suspect that he is candid about the kid's opportunity to earn the starting spot. As the article says, this approach did not hurt Oregon's QB recruiting and I doubt that it will hurt Mike Leach's QB recruiting. Every D1 QB expects to compete to get the starting position. A kid who has been in your program for several years has a number of advantages over a grad transfer. If the grad transfer earns the starting position, then either the grad transfer is very good, the guys he is beating out are not yet fully ready, or both. In any event, recruiting this year's HS QB is not impacted.
Personally, I don't see how Oregon is proof that grad transfers are a good idea. We've beaten them like a drum ever since they've started using them. Who gives a crap about recruiting if your team isn't meeting expectations?
We all understand why we are taking grad transfer QB's. It's fine and it's what we had to do. Trying to justify as a normal and good thing is stupid.
We (and CML) are proof it can be a good thing and worth giving a shot in certain circumstances. I just don't get the constant hand-wringing over it given our resume and Leach's decision-making/results up to now.
It’s pretty simple. We have mentally weak fans. There is nothing wrong with bringing in an experienced QB. We have an advantage... not every team can bring in grad transfers due to mandatory application deadlines (UW). We need to take every advantage we can. It’s a great tool to have in our tool box.
Oregon's problems aren't tied to signing grad transfer QB's though. Vernon Adams was good and the second guy was awful but replaced by Justin Herbert in short order. Herbert has provided stability at the position.
Oregon's problems aren't because they took a couple graduate transfers.
Oregon recruited and signed a couple 4-star prospects who decided to transfer. Sh!t happens.
That's not what the article was saying, and the point was obviously missed on you since you have your mind made up that this is the worst thing that could happen to WSU.
I'll spell out what the article was saying: it is what it is, and the sky is certainly not falling. Again, neither good or bad.
I never said the sky was falling. I'm excited about both Cooper and Cruz. Doesn't mean that we didn't blow it in 2016 and 2017 when recruiting QB's. If getting grad transfers is such a great frickin' thing, why isn't Oregon still doing it? Oh yeah, because neither Adams or Prukop led Oregon to the records that they expect at Oregon. We got incredibly lucky with Minshew. I hope we get lucky again with Gubrud.
When you look around at the 2018 QB transfers, here are the 2018 records for the Power 5 teams that had transfers (and whether or not the transfer started):
Dru Brown, Oklahoma State: didn't play, 7-6 (three fewer wins than 2017)
Keller Chryst: Tennessee: started six games, 5-7
AJ Bush: Illinois: started 10 games , 4-8
Wilton Speight: UCLA: started 7 games, 3-9 (three fewer wins than 2017)
Joe Burrow: LSU: started 13 games, 10-3
Chris Chugunuv: Ohio State: didn't throw a single pass, 13-1
Jeff George: PItt....didn't enroll?
Of the other 7 QB's that went to Power 5 schools besides Minshew, Joe Burrow is the only one that started and ended up making a meaningful impact and his team had a one game improvement. Three guys didn't end up taking a snap, two played around half the season and their teams failed to make bowls and one started the majority of the games but his team still sucked. That means that looking at the 2018 season, there's about a 25% chance that a team is going to be successful and get a full season out of their transfer QB. Again, we are in a situation where we need to go after a transfer QB again, but trying to sell it off as some good thing is just ignoring reality. I guarantee that Leach would prefer that he didn't have to go that route. We'll get by and we might be great.......but a lot of people are expending a lot of effort trying to prove that it's a good strategy when it's not. It's just something that Leach feels like he needs to do.
Last edited: