We all know with Brewer's injury, the shirt is coming off of Lawson. We know that at some point, he us going to take over for our current QB Motley. Let him takeover now! This weekend to get more ready. God forbid we do not play him until we are on the ropes at ECU! Put the kid in the game this weekend for first team reps with the first team. This is critical in my opinion.
Critical Decision Saturday. Play Lawson Now! Do not wait
- Thread starter lucustookis
- Start date
Why again, was Andrew Ford behind Motley on the depth chart? Question for someone who knows - I do not. I had just heard he was a pretty accurate passer, like 70% completion rate, when we recruited him. Now he's left the program, and the passing game shut down when we insert the guy who was ahead of him.
Need to get Lawson ready quickly or else become one dimensional running & short, limp passes. Time for Beamer to think of team and put in Qb with most upside. If media proclaimed Heisman man Rosy Rosen can do it at ucla, forget about Beamer's loyalty/seniority mindset and put in Mr Electric II, Dwayne Lawson!
You guys don't think Durkin deserves a shot first? Never know what a man can do until he's under those lights.
That's a great question. I have been wondering the same thing.
He was a pretty good QB recruit that SL personally recruited, and a second year player. Seems like he could be a better risk than a true freshman we've been told is "raw".
Exactly and I'd like to see him get a shot for the sake of fairness. At least a half, but does he know the playbook? So many variables to consider, but the kid's got gusto, a big arm, a hulk body and he can run the ball.
Feel they have to say "Who's our best option for the future?" Durkin? Lawson? Can't say it's Motley. Beamer's loyalty has always been a liability.
So Beamer says that the original OSU game plan was for Lawson to get some snaps...but he didn't say at what position. QB?
https://virginiatech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1800696
Either way, it sounds like there's no intention whatsoever to redshirt Lawson. Beamer also says in this article that Motley is absolutely, 100% positively the guy at QB, no bones about it....at least until he and the other coaches can get a chance to look into it a little deeper. Not exactly the most ringing endorsement I've ever heard.
https://virginiatech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1800696
Either way, it sounds like there's no intention whatsoever to redshirt Lawson. Beamer also says in this article that Motley is absolutely, 100% positively the guy at QB, no bones about it....at least until he and the other coaches can get a chance to look into it a little deeper. Not exactly the most ringing endorsement I've ever heard.
Durkin should definitely get a look! VT needs someone who can manage the game and throw brisk ball downfield - accurately. Unless Motley has been hiding his passing ability, does not look like he has enough of an arm to not make VT's O one dimensional.
Start Motley at Furman, bring in Durkin & Lawson for at least 1 Qtr, providing VT has a lead.
Start Motley at Furman, bring in Durkin & Lawson for at least 1 Qtr, providing VT has a lead.
For moral, start Motley but see what Durkin can do, and then see what Lawson can do when he knows the O better.
Ain't no fooling around anymore in B'burg with the new AD in town
Ain't no fooling around anymore in B'burg with the new AD in town
I'm on board with having Motley start, and bring in Durkin in the 2nd half. Keep the shirt on Lawson if possible.
I'm pretty sure redshirt on Lawson never was in the plan but I'm not sure why. Probably because he's 20 y.o.
Frank did it before. Remember the 2007 LSU fiasco? Tyrod's RS was burned in that game. The rest is history...
TT was head and shoulders ahead of Lawson in development and knowledge of our playbook. We need to play Lawson until he gets it but not as a starter , at least not yet. Durkin is ranked behind Lawson for a decent reason which I will not disclose but nothing sinister. We need to get them both ready to play. SBW was right ,there was never a plan to RS Lawson
Yup. Lawson has come out and said there was a plan for him to come in and play against OSU, but it just never worked out after Brewer went down.
Just the the prospect of strong arm/quick feet Big Lawson coming in for series-if Motley continues progressing, will force opposing defenses to prepare for both.
Could interchange Motley/Lawson and use big, strong Durkin as an H-back, ... just to keep D's guessing.
Could interchange Motley/Lawson and use big, strong Durkin as an H-back, ... just to keep D's guessing.
Motley Lawson and Durkin as the wildcat . We have about three games to get Lawson ready to play if Motley doesn't continue to progress.
I noticed that too but I think the d coach was sending the house since we had a huge lead and backup qb in. I wish they had let him pass more to keep the d honest and get him some experience.
I agree. Lawson clearly looked clueless despite playing an entire series. There is no question about his potential, but he is clearly not ready. Hope the coaches continue the development of both kids. We are going to need both until Brewer comes back.
Yeah what was up with that series for Lawson? Comes in, fumbles 2 snaps....gets back on the bench.
A real confidence boosting drive.
A real confidence boosting drive.
Good. I don't mind them passing the ball in that situation w/ bringing Motley in. Get as many snaps as possible. Seriously was impressed with McMillian as well....I wasn't sure if he would be a legit RB for us...I was completely wrong.
I'd like to see any back up QB - don't care who - getting some game reps with the first team - and ready to come in and compete if the first QB gets put out of the game. We don't do that and so the offense shuts down when we lose our QB. Guess that's why I like the 2 QB system better, like Glennon-Taylor, or Randall-MV2 (back when we were winning ACC championships).
You only play a 2 QB system when you have 2 viable starters. IMO we don't have that. OK Motley has played decent but he's no Brewer IMO. What's that quote? "If you have two starting quarterbacks you have none."
If you don't recruit and develop 2 QB's you don't have it. If you recruit 2 QB's and don't develop but one then you don't have it. If a 2nd QB doesn't get game reps then he won't be ready to win a game when the starter goes down.
If we're talking about mop up time I agree with you....but I'm not a fan of splitting reps between QB's.
lol coaching is a damn if you do and damn if you don't business, how many are critical of Shane and the number of RBs playing. I will be glad when Brewer is healthy, going to be an interesting battle then. Motley is progressing leaps every game. As for Lawson getting snaps during the game, right now I feel they are best used on Motley. McMillian is going to be a great RB for us,he was my favorite recruit in that class and it was loaded.
I'm just talking about what it takes to really have a number 2 guy ready to go and that means he's got to be involved. IMO that means the number 2 QB getting a series or 2 during the course of the game and not just mop up because he needs reps with the first team. That's not a true 2 QB system because the first guy is still getting the majority of the reps and still without question the first guy. In a 2 QB system you have two capable guys splitting time. Either way you still have a chance to run your offense if one guy goes down. A lot of people don't agree with me about the 2 QB system but we were better prepared in it to still pull out a big win if we lose our QB.
Currently, we have one QB that can play. We do need to get Lawson ready but we also need to get Motley better than he is now. Lawson is not far enough along to let him go in and throw passes. They are trying to get him ready as fast as they can but he has a long ways to go. We'll see how it goes from here on out.
I was surprised by the insane amount of fumbled snaps-looked like decent snaps that qb's just weren't focused - Motley and Lawson.
Clearly, Motley has a much better grasp of the offense as a RS Jr than Lawson, but when VT is winning big, ya just have to leave Lawson in at least a few series to get his feet wet - sink or swim. Lawson made a fine throw that was dropped by WR for potential long gain/TD.
Though I know it's unnecessary to make this request (lol) - correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Motley look solely in the direction of the receiver he is throwing to??? I think VT needs to have Motley roll out more vs stand in the pocket, Only looking in the direction he's planning to throw. He was a running qb in HS and before getting thrust into OSU game, surely he can throw some short, mid-range passes as he rolls out, keeping the LB's closer, freeing TE's, lest Motley pull the ball down and run,
I was one of the legion calling for Lawson after Brewer got hurt. Motley has exceeded my expectations, but he has a long way to go. But, Lawson is potentially one play away from being the starting Qb, put Lawson in for a series or 2 in first half-let him throw some passes so D's don't stack the box knowing the run is coming.
Clearly, Motley has a much better grasp of the offense as a RS Jr than Lawson, but when VT is winning big, ya just have to leave Lawson in at least a few series to get his feet wet - sink or swim. Lawson made a fine throw that was dropped by WR for potential long gain/TD.
Though I know it's unnecessary to make this request (lol) - correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Motley look solely in the direction of the receiver he is throwing to??? I think VT needs to have Motley roll out more vs stand in the pocket, Only looking in the direction he's planning to throw. He was a running qb in HS and before getting thrust into OSU game, surely he can throw some short, mid-range passes as he rolls out, keeping the LB's closer, freeing TE's, lest Motley pull the ball down and run,
I was one of the legion calling for Lawson after Brewer got hurt. Motley has exceeded my expectations, but he has a long way to go. But, Lawson is potentially one play away from being the starting Qb, put Lawson in for a series or 2 in first half-let him throw some passes so D's don't stack the box knowing the run is coming.
Lawson's drawback yesterday was not giving it on the read option and keeping it. If you don't hand it off the D doesn't have to play the RB. McMillian would of had a couple nice gains if he had.
Similar threads
