We are Notre Dame West

Both 2-2. Both have fans wondering why the coach is sticking with a sophomore QB who shows brilliance at times but is painful to watch most of the time. CBS Sportsline has an article about it. Too many turnovers. Fans fear that they will be stuck with him for three years while coach tries to develop him.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Great we've inherited Notre Dame's classic preseason hype that falls to pieces within the first 6 games. We basically picked up all of Notre Dame's weaknesses and only a few of the good things about them (money, independence, media coverage). Woo hoo :munch:

Cougarbib2 wrote:
Fans fear that they will be stuck with him for three years while coach tries to develop him.

I'm not sure I have that fear. I think the coaching staff would eventually pull the plug on Heaps if he keeps struggling at this level, even if that means playing Lark for a single year. I think most of the anxiety and debate thus far has focused on that the coaching staff does THIS season.

Dcr36 wrote:

Fans fear that they will be stuck with him for three years while coach tries to develop him.

I'm not sure I have that fear. I think the coaching staff would eventually pull the plug on Heaps if he keeps struggling at this level, even if that means playing Lark for a single year. I think most of the anxiety and debate thus far has focused on that the coaching staff does THIS season.

I think the ND fear is that he will improve enough to remain the starter and have enough success to avoid a switch while at the same time avoiding greatness. For ND greatness means Heisman and NC that they have long hungered and thirsted for since the last ones.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

If Larks could play he would at least be the back up, Nelson clearly is not a D-1 starting caliber QB, so if Lark can't even usurp him as the back up then I have little to no faith of him coming in and playing better than Heaps is playing.

kfilly20 wrote:
If Larks could play he would at least be the back up, Nelson clearly is not a D-1 starting caliber QB, so if Lark can't even usurp him as the back up then I have little to no faith of him coming in and playing better than Heaps is playing.

I really don't understand why people continue to believe this. Based on what evidence? A game in which he was hurt over a year ago?



I'm not sure that Nelson would be better than Heaps, I believe so, but we have no evidence. I do believe however that Nelson would be starting at Utah State if he had stayed there. They are a D1 team, they may even be a better D1 team than we are.

kfilly20 wrote:
If Larks could play he would at least be the back up, Nelson clearly is not a D-1 starting caliber QB, so if Lark can't even usurp him as the back up then I have little to no faith of him coming in and playing better than Heaps is playing.

I have not seen enough of Nelson to know if he is a D1 starter. Neither have you. I have seen enough of Jake Heaps to know he isn't one right now. If you are judging Nelson on 2010 keep in mind he was injured and still beat out Jake Heaps until the injury worsened. He started as a freshman at USU - laugh if you will - his replacement kicked our butts in 2010 - and their Freshman QB is playing better than Jake Heaps in 2011. Idk if Nelson will play better than Jake has been - know even less on Lark. Getting really curious.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib2 wrote:

If Larks could play he would at least be the back up, Nelson clearly is not a D-1 starting caliber QB, so if Lark can't even usurp him as the back up then I have little to no faith of him coming in and playing better than Heaps is playing.

I have not seen enough of Nelson to know if he is a D1 starter. Neither have you. I have seen enough of Jake Heaps to know he isn't one right now. If you are judging Nelson on 2010 keep in mind he was injured and still beat out Jake Heaps until the injury worsened. He started as a freshman at USU - laugh if you will - his replacement kicked our butts in 2010 - and their Freshman QB is playing better than Jake Heaps in 2011. Idk if Nelson will play better than Jake has been - know even less on Lark. Getting really curious.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Nelson is not the answer. You put him in and take away all chances of stretching the field, and become way more predictable to opposing defenses. Nelson would make just as many bad throws as heaps and would make fewer good, deep throws. He brings the added element of the run, and we should continue to let him contribute that the way the offense is set up now.



The fact that Lark can't pass Nelson on the depth charts, is also a huge concern about his ability to provide the team with anything better than what we got. My only hope about Lark being a solution is that maybe he might have a better mental make up and could get it done under pressure. Maybe Heaps is a great practice QB and can make all the throws, but isn't strong enough mentally.

I just really honestly cannot fathom how anyone thinks Nelson would solve our woes on offense. It really baffles me. And once again, if Lark can't pass Nelson what does that say about him?

hawkwing wrote:



I'm not sure that Nelson would be better than Heaps, I believe so, but we have no evidence. I do believe however that Nelson would be starting at Utah State if he had stayed there. They are a D1 team, they may even be a better D1 team than we are.

Nelson would not have started over Borel. Would a senior Nelson start over a freshman Keeton? I don't know we haven't seen Nelson healthy as you pointed out. This is kind of like arguing that Max Hall wouldn't have started over Ben Olsen. We'll never know because Max Hall wouldn't have come had Olsen stayed. BYU fans are glad that Olsen left because we know what the results were with Hall. I imagine USU fans are pleased that they had the years with Borel instead of getting Nelson back.

Wickchad84087 wrote:

I'm not sure that Nelson would be better than Heaps, I believe so, but we have no evidence. I do believe however that Nelson would be starting at Utah State if he had stayed there. They are a D1 team, they may even be a better D1 team than we are.

Nelson would not have started over Borel. Would a senior Nelson start over a freshman Keeton? I don't know we haven't seen Nelson healthy as you pointed out. This is kind of like arguing that Max Hall wouldn't have started over Ben Olsen. We'll never know because Max Hall wouldn't have come had Olsen stayed. BYU fans are glad that Olsen left because we know what the results were with Hall. I imagine USU fans are pleased that they had the years with Borel instead of getting Nelson back.

Or would he have been even better? We have no idea. Not quite like Ben Olson who we know how he did starting for another team. For all we know Nelson could have been head and shoulders better than Borel has been, or he could have been far far worse.