Danny Sullivan

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
38,946
Reaction score
26,394
Thinking about this a bit, the smart move might be to save a year of eligibility for Osweiler and not play him this season. This team isn't going to be more than average, no matter how good he is.

I think Erickson wants to redshirt him. But, they've taken such a hit on attendance I'm not sure he feels ASU will back him through another rebuilding season.


The Oregon State game is the most devastating loss Erickson has taken IMO. With the close loss to Georgia, he could still claim progress. But, getting WAXED at home by a mediocre PAC 10 team .... ugh. I never wanted the guy hired, but I don't want to see him fail this badly. Actually, of course, I don't want him to fail at all. My main fear was he'd bring in the thugs and get in trouble.
 

HooverDam

Registered User
Joined
May 21, 2005
Posts
6,560
Reaction score
0
^Osweilers already played this year, they cant redshirt him.
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
^Osweilers already played this year, they cant redshirt him.

Thank you. I keep seeing the suggestion of redshirts for players who've already played and the faulty notion that a player could play a few plays or even a non-conference game and still redshirt. The NCAA rules are clear: One play in an NCAA-sponsored game = one year of eligibility. Period. It's always been this way. No player has ever been able to play a game and still redshirt. Ever.

As for Sullivan this week, I wish they'd just stick him back under center. The running game would improve and Sullivan is more accurate there (because the footwork is more familiar). The passing game could go vertical again.

Brock is mobile, but there's a different between being mobile and being an escape artist. Brock isn't a scrambler. He'll buy himself time and he's capable of picking up a few yards running downfield, but he's not Jake Plummer. He's not going to slip a defensive tackle, run 20 yards reverse and throw a perfect 50-yard fade on a broken play. Just not going to happen.

Furthermore, Brock isn't going to get a new offense -- or a new offensive line. He'll be working under the same rigid guidelines they have for Sullivan, which means putting a lot of effort into making perfect reads, the most sure pass, and throwing it away at the the hint of trouble. They won't be sending him in there to "make something happen." He hasn't earned that type of confidence from them (or he'd already be in there).

At this point I hope Erickson does put Brock in -- early -- just to get it out of the way. Perfect time to do it is at Wazzu, because he wasn't named the starter (so he hasn't had a media horde asking him questions about it all week) and the game won't be on TV. In fact only us die-hards listening to radio will be the only ones all weekend to acknowledge the game even happened. Not sure you could find two major conference teams the national media could care less about right now.
 

Mathew81

Whatever
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Posts
1,432
Reaction score
24
Location
Chandler
Thank you. I keep seeing the suggestion of redshirts for players who've already played and the faulty notion that a player could play a few plays or even a non-conference game and still redshirt. The NCAA rules are clear: One play in an NCAA-sponsored game = one year of eligibility. Period. It's always been this way. No player has ever been able to play a game and still redshirt. Ever.
I think if there's an injury they can petition the NCAA to get a redshirt. But the injury has to happen early on and be pretty serious.

But this is correct in Brock's case; redshirting is off the table.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
119,253
Reaction score
59,868
I think if there's an injury they can petition the NCAA to get a redshirt. But the injury has to happen early on and be pretty serious.

This is my recollection.
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
I think if there's an injury they can petition the NCAA to get a redshirt. But the injury has to happen early on and be pretty serious.

Before a medical redshirt can be awarded the player first has to exhaust his four years of eligibility and then apply for a fifth year of eligibility. Thus, a medical redshirt is never awarded until after the player's academic senior year.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,260
Reaction score
8,286
Location
Scottsdale
Thank you. I keep seeing the suggestion of redshirts for players who've already played and the faulty notion that a player could play a few plays or even a non-conference game and still redshirt. The NCAA rules are clear: One play in an NCAA-sponsored game = one year of eligibility. Period. It's always been this way. No player has ever been able to play a game and still redshirt. Ever.

As for Sullivan this week, I wish they'd just stick him back under center. The running game would improve and Sullivan is more accurate there (because the footwork is more familiar). The passing game could go vertical again.

Brock is mobile, but there's a different between being mobile and being an escape artist. Brock isn't a scrambler. He'll buy himself time and he's capable of picking up a few yards running downfield, but he's not Jake Plummer. He's not going to slip a defensive tackle, run 20 yards reverse and throw a perfect 50-yard fade on a broken play. Just not going to happen.

Furthermore, Brock isn't going to get a new offense -- or a new offensive line. He'll be working under the same rigid guidelines they have for Sullivan, which means putting a lot of effort into making perfect reads, the most sure pass, and throwing it away at the the hint of trouble. They won't be sending him in there to "make something happen." He hasn't earned that type of confidence from them (or he'd already be in there).

At this point I hope Erickson does put Brock in -- early -- just to get it out of the way. Perfect time to do it is at Wazzu, because he wasn't named the starter (so he hasn't had a media horde asking him questions about it all week) and the game won't be on TV. In fact only us die-hards listening to radio will be the only ones all weekend to acknowledge the game even happened. Not sure you could find two major conference teams the national media could care less about right now.


I was at the Oregon St game. And while Sullivan was pressured at times, more often than not he had more than enough time to make a read and the throw. Problem was, he simply makes the wrong reads and his throws are horrifically bad.
Brock can't be any worse, even with the same offense and same line. Sullivan is one of the worst starting NCAA Div I QB's I've seen in a very long time. It's an incredibly sad statement on ASU that they somehow got themselves into a situation where Sullivan was forced to be their starter... wow is he terrible.
 

HooverDam

Registered User
Joined
May 21, 2005
Posts
6,560
Reaction score
0
ASUs o-line is still a long way from being 'good' but its better than it has been the last 2 years. I dont think it can be blamed very much for Sullivans struggles, he's just not good. Any pass beyond about 15 yards is just amazingly off the mark. How many times have you seen Sully throw one this year and you think "geez I have no idea who that was even too."

Rudy Carpenter was no Danny White, but I feel like if he was ASUs QB this year theyd likely be 4-0.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,260
Reaction score
8,286
Location
Scottsdale
ASUs o-line is still a long way from being 'good' but its better than it has been the last 2 years. I dont think it can be blamed very much for Sullivans struggles, he's just not good. Any pass beyond about 15 yards is just amazingly off the mark. How many times have you seen Sully throw one this year and you think "geez I have no idea who that was even too."

Rudy Carpenter was no Danny White, but I feel like if he was ASUs QB this year theyd likely be 4-0.


DITTO!

;)
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
Problem was, he simply makes the wrong reads and his throws are horrifically bad.

Couldn't disagree with you more. Sullivan is almost perfect on his reads. The problem is he's not making (or not allowed to make) the throws that aren't perfect reads.
 

MaoTosiFanClub

The problem
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Posts
12,797
Reaction score
6,804
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
Couldn't disagree with you more. Sullivan is almost perfect on his reads. The problem is he's not making (or not allowed to make) the throws that aren't perfect reads.
Then why is his completion % so low? Just wondering, I have no idea and you're more in touch with what's going on over there than I am.

I think Sullivan is pretty bad but I think he's getting somewhat of a bad rap because his supporting cast is pretty awful. He's not the worst QB I've seen in an ASU uniform like some are claiming.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,260
Reaction score
8,286
Location
Scottsdale
Then why is his completion % so low? Just wondering, I have no idea and you're more in touch with what's going on over there than I am.

I think Sullivan is pretty bad but I think he's getting somewhat of a bad rap because his supporting cast is pretty awful. He's not the worst QB I've seen in an ASU uniform like some are claiming.

Magahee and Williams are top-tier WR's. Nance is a top-tier RB. And, in the only game I saw first-hand (OSU), the o-line gave him more than enough time... His supporting cast isn't as bad as so many want to believe...
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
Then why is his completion % so low? Just wondering, I have no idea and you're more in touch with what's going on over there than I am.

- He's not that accurate (because of funky footwork).

- His receivers aren't that good/overrated.

- He's being micro-managed to the point where he's only throwing to the wide-open receiver.
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
Magahee and Williams are top-tier WR's. Nance is a top-tier RB. And, in the only game I saw first-hand (OSU), the o-line gave him more than enough time... His supporting cast isn't as bad as so many want to believe...

McGaha is a premier POSSESSION receiver. He'll be a fine third- or fourth-option for someone in the NFL, a chain mover in the slot. How many catches did he have against OSU? 15 for 165? Sullivan's finding him and getting the ball to him.

That's part of the problem.

Williams wasn't playing from the LOS last week because of a hamstring. The rest of the receivers are almost lost causes. Take Gerrell Robinson for example, who has four dropped passes that hit him between the numbers. This is a guy who can do real damage in YAC but he has hands of stone. Or Kerry Taylor, who should be putting up six or seven catches a game, but is suddenly spending more time freelancing on his routes (part of it because ASU's short passing game just doesn't stretch the coverage to get him open).

Nance is NOT a top-tier RB. He's a second-stringer on a good offense, the change of pace guy you bring in for the every-down back. Nance has no big-play ability whatsoever. This is as far as his career goes. The guy who does have every-down big-play ability -- DeWitty -- has been MIA. I can only assume he's continued his poor practice habits.

All that said, I do agree with you the parts don't add up to what we're seeing. They should be better, and Sullivan is *part* of that problem. But the bigger problem is who is running the offense. I suspect Erickson has bit off more than he can chew and there's a dearth of coaching for the QBs. We saw this the past two years as Carpenter continued to disintegrate and no effort was made to move the other QBs forward on the depth chart. Reality is none of them are improving, and I think the coaches went into this season thinking they could improve just by eliminating sacks and interceptions. They're more or less doing that. They've also stripped the big play potential from the offense. Defenses have no fear of ASU going downfield, and that's all on the coaches, not the QB, not the receivers, and not the OL. They stick to the shotgun which limits a vertical passing game and gives the defense a one-up on the running game.

You can bash Sullivan all you want -- and some of it would be fair -- but realize Sullivan is doing EXACTLY what the coaches want him to do. That's why he's still in there and why Brock isn't. They don't want Sullivan to challenge the defense by throwing into coverage, which is what you need to do four or five times a game to make a play. In the NFL they call it "throwing a receiver open." Warner has made a career out of it. Of course, Warner could hit a gnat on the run 30 yards down field and Sullivan can't, but the coaches have made little effort to express confidence in ANY of the QBs to give it a shot. They just don't have any expectations of the QB at all. You will never get great play from your QB under those conditions.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,260
Reaction score
8,286
Location
Scottsdale
McGaha is a premier POSSESSION receiver. He'll be a fine third- or fourth-option for someone in the NFL, a chain mover in the slot. How many catches did he have against OSU? 15 for 165? Sullivan's finding him and getting the ball to him.

That's part of the problem.

Williams wasn't playing from the LOS last week because of a hamstring. The rest of the receivers are almost lost causes. Take Gerrell Robinson for example, who has four dropped passes that hit him between the numbers. This is a guy who can do real damage in YAC but he has hands of stone. Or Kerry Taylor, who should be putting up six or seven catches a game, but is suddenly spending more time freelancing on his routes (part of it because ASU's short passing game just doesn't stretch the coverage to get him open).

Nance is NOT a top-tier RB. He's a second-stringer on a good offense, the change of pace guy you bring in for the every-down back. Nance has no big-play ability whatsoever. This is as far as his career goes. The guy who does have every-down big-play ability -- DeWitty -- has been MIA. I can only assume he's continued his poor practice habits.

All that said, I do agree with you the parts don't add up to what we're seeing. They should be better, and Sullivan is *part* of that problem. But the bigger problem is who is running the offense. I suspect Erickson has bit off more than he can chew and there's a dearth of coaching for the QBs. We saw this the past two years as Carpenter continued to disintegrate and no effort was made to move the other QBs forward on the depth chart. Reality is none of them are improving, and I think the coaches went into this season thinking they could improve just by eliminating sacks and interceptions. They're more or less doing that. They've also stripped the big play potential from the offense. Defenses have no fear of ASU going downfield, and that's all on the coaches, not the QB, not the receivers, and not the OL. They stick to the shotgun which limits a vertical passing game and gives the defense a one-up on the running game.

You can bash Sullivan all you want -- and some of it would be fair -- but realize Sullivan is doing EXACTLY what the coaches want him to do. That's why he's still in there and why Brock isn't. They don't want Sullivan to challenge the defense by throwing into coverage, which is what you need to do four or five times a game to make a play. In the NFL they call it "throwing a receiver open." Warner has made a career out of it. Of course, Warner could hit a gnat on the run 30 yards down field and Sullivan can't, but the coaches have made little effort to express confidence in ANY of the QBs to give it a shot. They just don't have any expectations of the QB at all. You will never get great play from your QB under those conditions.


Don't disagree much with what you've said here Gadd... though, I think Nance is better than you seem to believe.
All I know is that Sullivan stinks. Period. One of the worst NCAA Div I starters I have ever seen. He is flat out terrible. Footwork, throwing motion, instincts, execution... all horrifically terrible...
The coaches should take a great deal of heat. The team should not have been in a position where Sullivan was somehow the best option.
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
All I know is that Sullivan stinks. Period. One of the worst NCAA Div I starters I have ever seen. He is flat out terrible. Footwork, throwing motion, instincts, execution... all horrifically terrible...
The coaches should take a great deal of heat. The team should not have been in a position where Sullivan was somehow the best option.

As someone who has coached QBs and studied with Steve Axman, I'll just say I disagree with you on Sullivan's mechanics. His instincts are definitely game for criticism because he doesn't have any.

But imagine how bad a freshman is going to look under the same restrictions Sullivan has:

- One time through the progression and throw the ball away
- Take no risks
- If in doubt, throw it away
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,260
Reaction score
8,286
Location
Scottsdale
As someone who has coached QBs and studied with Steve Axman, I'll just say I disagree with you on Sullivan's mechanics. His instincts are definitely game for criticism because he doesn't have any.

But imagine how bad a freshman is going to look under the same restrictions Sullivan has:

- One time through the progression and throw the ball away
- Take no risks
- If in doubt, throw it away

Gadd, as has been said, you are indeed much closer to this situation than any of us... However, don't be surprised if Sullivan doesn't last the season, and never gets even a sniff from a NFL team. He is bad dude... just, B. A. D. BAD!
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
However, don't be surprised if Sullivan doesn't last the season, and never gets even a sniff from a NFL team

Of that I have no doubt. I don't even have a problem with changing the QB, and I couldn't believe Erickson didn't do it in the second half. But the argument is to try something new.

My problem is people who think Sullivan is the only problem and think Brock going in will change everything. This whole situation has been romanticized.

More than anything I hope this has revealed to Erickson a need for a young QB coach for next season.
 

The Commish

youknowhatimsayin?
Joined
Jun 16, 2004
Posts
2,201
Reaction score
11
Location
San Francisco
Of that I have no doubt. I don't even have a problem with changing the QB, and I couldn't believe Erickson didn't do it in the second half. But the argument is to try something new.

My problem is people who think Sullivan is the only problem and think Brock going in will change everything. This whole situation has been romanticized.

More than anything I hope this has revealed to Erickson a need for a young QB coach for next season.

I don't think Brock is the answer, but in short this is what I think:

- Team has zero confidence in Sullivan. Sullivan has zero confidence in himself.
- Brock has shown flashes and is more mobile.
- We have nothing to lose at this point by putting Brock in. Let him get the experience and build on it. He can't possibly be any worse than Sullivan.
- Life needs to be injected into this group. For college athletes, the mental highs and lows can be the difference in winning and losing.
- Staff/schemes need to be reevaluated. Olsen needs to go. Erickson should shoulder that blame because Olsen is one of his re-tread "cronies" that has proven nothing in the last 10 years.
 

ASUCHRIS

ONE HEART BEAT!!!
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Posts
16,664
Reaction score
14,994
I think Sullivan is pretty bad but I think he's getting somewhat of a bad rap because his supporting cast is pretty awful. He's not the worst QB I've seen in an ASU uniform like some are claiming.


He may not be the worst, but we're splitting hairs. The sooner he stops wasting reps starting, the better. I was open minded going into the year, but after watching every game it's obvious that Sullivan is not a Pac 10 qb.
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
- Staff/schemes need to be reevaluated. Olsen needs to go. Erickson should shoulder that blame because Olsen is one of his re-tread "cronies" that has proven nothing in the last 10 years.

I don't know this to be sure, but I'm relatively certain this is not Olson's offense, not his scheme, maybe not even his game plan. He doesn't even have contact with players on the practice field. He just stands on the sideline by himself with him no say. At this point I think he's just fulfilling his contract because ASU doesn't have the money to hire someone else.

This offense is Erickson's and Erickson's alone. He has no one else to blame here but himself.
 

HooverDam

Registered User
Joined
May 21, 2005
Posts
6,560
Reaction score
0
I don't know this to be sure, but I'm relatively certain this is not Olson's offense, not his scheme, maybe not even his game plan. He doesn't even have contact with players on the practice field. He just stands on the sideline by himself with him no say. At this point I think he's just fulfilling his contract because ASU doesn't have the money to hire someone else.

This offense is Erickson's and Erickson's alone. He has no one else to blame here but himself.

Whoevers offense it is, it needs to go away next year and ASU needs to hire a new offensive coordinator. Either an up and comer somewhere or Lubick.
 

Kel Varnsen

Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Jun 28, 2003
Posts
33,369
Reaction score
11,994
Location
Phoenix
I just heard on the radio that Osweiler will play this weekend. Didn't get any details, though, so I'm figuring at least a few series/drives here and there.
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
11
Location
Gilbert
There aren't any details yet other than Erickson has promised Oz will get into the game at some point. He hasn't figured out when and under what pretense.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
556,153
Posts
5,433,900
Members
6,329
Latest member
cardinals2025
Top