Fighton247 Board

Just can't see the coaches offering a scholy to a kid that may or may never see game time, becomes even more magnified with reductions. At some point you just have to figure if you're down to playing your 3rd/4th string QB due to what ever reason, it's probably just not your year anyway.

Yea, I'm thinking along these lines. As much as everyone has valid arguments for taking a 2nd QB, with sanctions it just doesn't seem the smart thing to do. We're going to be playing with less depth than we would like in multiple areas and as odd as it may seem, QB is probably the area where you should cut back the most on having a bunch of scholarship guys (only one spot, usually is the starter for the whole season)

There are other coaching staffs out there that see Stanton as an athlete and are recruiting him as such. He can play FB/H-back and be very valuable on STs. It is just an added benefit that he can play QB in an emergency.

Taking a 2nd QB that is purely a QB would be a waste of a ride. Taking a 2nd QB that can be a starting FB one day isn't.

"That can be" is still wasting a schollie. That's what preferred walk-ons will be used for.

The other staffs have roster room to offer him as an athlete...USC does not. It's really that simple.

I get what you're saying, but like ProUSC said, if your QB's just keep getting injured at some point you gotta think that it's just not your year. Like are we really expecting to win a championship after losing TWO qb's?

And you can still win games even with sub par QB play as long as you have a good run game and a good defense, but you need to have very good depth for a good run game and stingy D.

Basically I see it like this: with sanctions you're gonna have areas with low depth. So why have a position go 3 or 4 deep when only one guy is gonna play at a time and doesn't need to be subbed in regularly like most other positions on the field? Instead, why not use those scholarships to shore up our o line (to make sure we got a good run game and can actually protect our QB) or our d line (you can win A LOT of games if you have a nasty dline with plenty of depth). Just my two cents.

Ya, although the need for a 2nd QB is pretty high its probably just not in the cards with the schollie reductions. If the staff feels like stanton could be a good contributor at another position on the field, then I think it could be a good move. If not, probably just chance it and hope both kessler and wittek stay.

Good luck to JS, great kid that has been fighting up hill his whole career here. A fresh start may get him kick started.

Does Garrett Green have any eligibility left?

Totally agree, and these guys accumulate a lot of practice reps (just not necessarily in the full team sessions) over time. It's going to be a pretty dire situation any way you consider it. I would expect the coaches to shift very heavily to run and max protection if we ever really were down to our last scholarship QB, let alone HIS backup. This is kind of ridiculous conjecture anyway, when was the last time a scenario like this came about at that position?

The better argument for a 2nd QB this year or offering a guy in 2014 is the simple fact that it's never a given anyone fulfills their potential, even someone as talented as Max Browne.

Don't be obtuse -- of course people will change their minds, the situation is now different. Different scenarios require different solutions...not to mention that there is now a scholarship open that has already been allocated to the position group.

I would also postulate that losing Scroggins is more damaging, from a backup perspective, becasue he would have been in the system and is better acquainted with it than a new recruit.

PS -- the scenario presented in that thread was that Wittek or Kessler would be leaving...that is not the case.