I was responding to another thread...

[WildCard]

and when I hit send I got notice that thread had been removed. It then dawned on me the original post was in violation of the 'new" policy on external links. I was not referencing the source, only a quote from the article. I am reposting my response without reference to the article; just a quote from the article. If that is unsatisfactory I understand removal of this thread.


From the article. Here is what I don't really understand:

First, let me say again that QB Stephen Johnson is my all-time favorite Wildcat. The former Wildcat battled through significant injuries that led to three offseason surgeries. He was not close to being 100% healthy at any point during his senior season.​

Then why on earth was Johnson playing as much as he did? If he was banged up to the point that he could not pass worth a damn, isn't it time to put in another QB? I'm sure either back up was capable of handing off to Snell and, with better passing productivity, I don't think Johnson's 29 YPG rushing would have been missed too badly.

So did the staff think a sore and hurting Johnson was still a better passer/QB option than Barker or Hoak? If so, that seemingly makes Wilson is a cinch to start. And, FWIW, Johnson is one of my all time favorites for "surviving" the beating he took in some of those games.

Peace

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Bait

 

[UKandBaconLover]

I think we didn't really have receivers breaking open, especially deep, and we weren't especially great at pass protection so our best option was to have a somewhat mobile option at qb. Idc if we had Brett Favre throwing, we weren't going to have an exceptional passing game last year with the receiver and line issues I mentioned. Johnson was the best of the situation we had imo.

 

[goukcatsgo]

Dead horse beating

 

[CatGotMyTongue]

Card fan..ignore him

 

[dallasg23]

Because he won games. Barker did not. End of conversation.

 

[Dallas-Wild]

Not exactly breaking news, as much time as you spend here you should know.

 

[CB3UK]

It would definitely seem to imply that he was still a better option than Barker or Hoak. That doesn't necessarily mean that Wilson will be a better option than Hoak; Wilson isn't Johnson.

 

[billoliver40]

and when I hit send I got notice that thread had been removed. It then dawned on me the original post was in violation of the 'new" policy on external links. I was not referencing the source, only a quote from the article. I am reposting my response without reference to the article; just a quote from the article. If that is unsatisfactory I understand removal of this thread.


From the article. Here is what I don't really understand:

First, let me say again that QB Stephen Johnson is my all-time favorite Wildcat. The former Wildcat battled through significant injuries that led to three offseason surgeries. He was not close to being 100% healthy at any point during his senior season.​

Then why on earth was Johnson playing as much as he did? If he was banged up to the point that he could not pass worth a damn, isn't it time to put in another QB? I'm sure either back up was capable of handing off to Snell and, with better passing productivity, I don't think Johnson's 29 YPG rushing would have been missed too badly.

So did the staff think a sore and hurting Johnson was still a better passer/QB option than Barker or Hoak? If so, that seemingly makes Wilson is a cinch to start. And, FWIW, Johnson is one of my all time favorites for "surviving" the beating he took in some of those games.

Peace

A lot of us had the same thought after Johnson gave a farewell to football interview and disclosed his upcoming surgeries. Agreed that at first glance this certainly all but hands Wilson the reigns, but agreed the idea a kid with bum shoulders and knees being the best chance to win
Is concerning on a lot of levels
Just stuff to keep the buzz going.

 

[TeoJ]

and when I hit send I got notice that thread had been removed. It then dawned on me the original post was in violation of the 'new" policy on external links. I was not referencing the source, only a quote from the article. I am reposting my response without reference to the article; just a quote from the article. If that is unsatisfactory I understand removal of this thread.


From the article. Here is what I don't really understand:

First, let me say again that QB Stephen Johnson is my all-time favorite Wildcat. The former Wildcat battled through significant injuries that led to three offseason surgeries. He was not close to being 100% healthy at any point during his senior season.​

Then why on earth was Johnson playing as much as he did? If he was banged up to the point that he could not pass worth a damn, isn't it time to put in another QB? I'm sure either back up was capable of handing off to Snell and, with better passing productivity, I don't think Johnson's 29 YPG rushing would have been missed too badly.

So did the staff think a sore and hurting Johnson was still a better passer/QB option than Barker or Hoak? If so, that seemingly makes Wilson is a cinch to start. And, FWIW, Johnson is one of my all time favorites for "surviving" the beating he took in some of those games.

Peace

Why do you try so hard?

 

[robo222]

People gotta write stuff... and I think where the quote came from, might not of even been a professional??? Sort'a like one of us getting to write for ..... KSR maybe?