Since Harper and Rasor only got token appearances, some might assume they don't have an inside track. Or the young HC didn't appreciate or see the need to give any backup QB development time in blowout victories. Not to mention what happens if MH goes down w an injury in the 4th quarter of a blowout game. (I liked the mobility I saw in both.)

Since Harper and Rasor didn't see real PT, why didn't either redshirt Frosh QB get PT?

Nobody suggested taking MH out in the 2nd quarter for a "bunch of games". But when you're up over 4 touchdowns in Q2 vs a doormat, why not put in a reserve QB with our 1s against the opponents 1s? And when we're pushing a 50-point spread in Q3 vs No CO, why not insert a reserve?

Beyond stats, playing time provides motivation, competition, lessons and confidence.

I will say that Plough probably left some guys longer than I probably would have in order to do a little bit of running up the score after we got screwed out of the playoffs the previous year. We learned that we have to give ourselves every advantage in the committee's eyes by experience and if that means letting our starters beat the hell out of Northern Colorado... so be it.

Got it. QB transitions in our history to consider. Even during our legendary 82 season, our backup sophomore QB (Barry) got snaps. Then Roger Wilkinson was the apparent heir, but juco QB Chris Peterson came in and won the job. (RW converted to RB.)

You're the one who mentioned "let the subs close out the second quarter" in blowouts. Let's explore that. We had 2 games that were blowouts, like you said. The Illinois St game was a playoff game and also, only 28-10 after 3 quarters. Montana St was up 30-8 on us, we had the ball on our own 19 with 10:42 left and Montana St still had to stop a 2 point conversion to prevent that game from going into OT. So the other two games, you want the reserves to come in and play, what, one or two series in the second quarter? Throw 15-20 passes total between the two games? And you think that will help develop them for next year because they're playing against the starters for two teams who were a combined 4-19? That's not going to do much of anything, especially if you're splitting those throws up among two QBs. And playing them at the end of the game, almost no coach is going to say "hey I know we're up 49-10 or 52-0 entering the fourth quarter, but we're going to continue to run our hurry up offense and throw the ball just so we can get the reserves some experience". I understand the thinking, but it's not going to happen, even with the backups.

As for the two blowouts, the box score tells me Harper was the QB for our only two 4th quarter drives against Cal Poly. And against NCU, Harper came in for the drive that started with 3:58 left in the 3rd quarter. So the backups played nearly a quarter and a half. We actually played 3 backup QBs that day. Only 2 threw passes but I was at that game and remember a fourth QB coming in. So we did insert the reserves in the third quarter, exactly like you wanted.

The only way you're going to develop a QB is by letting them play consistently. Not by playing like 4 drives over the course of a season. And unfortunately, you can really only have 1 QB on the field at a time. This isn't RB where you can split carries or WR where you can spread the ball around. And really, they're probably going to develop better going against our defense in practice than they would going against an awful Poly or Northern Colorado team.

Harper and Hastings were neck to neck during spring ball. And i think Harper ran the opposing teams offensive schemes against our defense during the season. There will be competition for the position, but my guess is our guy will be Harper.

I'm curious to see who wins the QB battle. I think its wide open. I'd love to see a runner/passer start.

The ability to scramble/create on foot is important in today's game. In the games Miles was mobile and able to get out of the pocket, he was even more effective than usual.

The Idaho game is one example. He made a few really huge plays with his legs.

I think it's especially going to have to be part of the playbook this upcoming season purely based on our sustained losses to the offense. We're losing the production of Larison, Hutton, Davis, Tompkins, Williams, etc. I don't think we'll just magically replace that level of production so some yards are going to HAVE to come on the ground from the QB. Miles could do some rollouts, but utilizing his feet was pretty much the weakest aspect of his game.

Winston Williams has at least another year of eligibility.

Quarterback ....... Yards

M. Hastings, 2024 ... -153
H. Rodriguez, 2021 ... 240 / 30 game
Jake Maier, 2019....... - 82
Ben Scott, 2016 .............2
Randy Wright, 2012 .. - 44

I really liked Hunter Rodriguez. He had some wheels. That season (2021) was off to a great start, then Hunter was concussed at Weber. That Idaho State game was weird, Hunter did not have a good game and I wonder if his concussion and laying out a couple of games affected him. The keys were turned over to Miles and he struggled a bit that year and the SDSU game was painful. Also lost the causeway. I agree that it would be good to have a QB who can extend plays and run when necessary. The flip side is to not be a pull it down and run after first read is not there QB. That impairs development and risks injuries.