Kelly Bryant
- Thread starter WoadBlue
- Start date
Hell, I'd trade any THREE players on our roster for Kelly Bryant. Dude plays with the moxie and guts of a 5th-year senior. He isn't Deshaun, but he plays without fear like Deshaun did.
Gotta love when you see that from a young QB. Definitely not something that can be taught
Absolutely. Something Chazz simply did not do. I know the talent around Bryant is much different, but that has nothing to do with how Bryant runs with determination and guts and refuses to get tackled when he tucks it and heads for the pylon. Also has nothing to do with how Bryant takes abuse and fights through injury and still comes back on the field to lead his guys. That can't be taught. You have it or you don't.
Yeah he looks like a deer in headlights out there. I think he's scared of getting hit hard tbh
How often was he hit in HS? How often did he have be a very smart playing, fundamentally sound QB to win in HS?
Central to the reason Ron Curry never had a chance to become better than a low average college QB, with no shot as NFL QB, was that in HS he so dominated on pure athleticism that he never had to master fundamentals or learn to overcome the speed or quickness or toughness of others. Reports of Curry scoring TDs in HS often noted that he was untouched.
Curry was not afraid of being hit, but I don't think he could ever translate the way he got away with everything in HS to playing QB in college where he was not going to get away with anything. So his QB play often became mechanical, as if he were checking himself during plays to make certain he was doing it right.
The smartest thing Bunting did as HC was give Durant about 50 % of the snaps though Curry was a senior and Durant a freshman.
A legitimate question. Surratt's high school competition was bad (Linconlton). What is that, 2A?
I don't know NC HS football at all any more. But I know how small Lincolnton is. Way too small to play Hickory, to name a nearby town and school.
For some reason I was thinking he was a sophomore. Either way, he'll be a force to be reckoned with next year.
Also, the weaker competition in HS makes a guy like Chazz appear more athletic than he actually is. Curry had the athleticism to be a freak at the college level. Surratt does not. Which means that those fundamentals and adaptations are even more important for him to have any chance of success at this level.
I don’t think Chazz is scared to get hit @TarHeelNation11 as much as he is just not wanting to get hit in order to complete the play. Does that make sense? He doesn’t shy away from contact, but players (especially QBs) should avoid contact when possible. He and Harris took a pretty good beating to start the season. Consider Harris survived all those games in the SEC and quickly gets rag-dolled behind this line.
Also, lulz at the OP. I’m guessing he pines for a Ryan Finley type guy
Also, lulz at the OP. I’m guessing he pines for a Ryan Finley type guy
Yes, what you said makes sense. Not sure at this point if I agree or not, but it does make sense. Hell, I just need to see Surratt out there again so we can get more data and observations on him. I'm sure he'll see the field against WCU. Might have to bring the binoculars.
Its not the way he tries to avoid contact. Its the way he kinda clutches up when he's about to get hit. He kinda hesitates as if he's thinking "oh shit" every time.
This is coming from a former QB who didn't like getting hit lol
Surratt: faster straight line speed than Ellliott. Stronger arm to heave the ball deeper than Elliott. Harder pass than Elliott - more zip on the ball - many times way too much zip for the particular route. Fedora's conclusion - MUST be a much better QB than Elliott.
My assessment - Fedora thinks like a kid picking teams for backyard football.
During Spring, most observes came away believing each of the 3 (Byrd, Elliott, Surrat) had issues, but they were quite close, with Elliott best all around. Yet as soon as the awful Harris hit town, Fedora is going with him as #1, with Surratt as either #2 or #1B - and Elliott and Byrd relegated to NO PT unless the other 2 were injured.
Superficially-assessing Fedora only got exposed so that everyone should see because both Harris and Surratt got injured, and he was forced to play Elliott.
Elliott is a much more consistent runner and passer than Surratt. He is 'nifty,' at each. He seems rather obviously to 'know' what should be done on each play. He never looks halfway mechanical, the way Surratt looks almost any time a play is other than wide open for him. With Surratt. we have a dumbed-down playbook; not so with Elliott. With Surratt, the offense looks as if everyone is waiting on the QB to make some BIG play. With Elliott, the offense runs smoothly with other guys assuming that the purpose is for Elliott to manage things for somebody to score after the team moves the chains several times.
My guess from all that and the Fedora history: Byrd is at least as good an all around QB right now as is Surratt, but Fedora, focused on the Big play Potential of a backyard football QB, is obsessed with keeping Surratt happy. That way, he could manage to see anything he wants to see come Spring, including that Surratt is #1 and Elliott is back to no PT unless #1 is injured - and Byrd is an after thought.
^
-elliot was tied for 1st one week before the first game. Neck and neck. Sorry this doesn't fit your narrative.
-If all else was equal overall, I'd choose the big play potential person too.
-If all else equal overall I'd go with the most experienced player (Harris)
-Marquise was not a good practice player. No reporters who saw practice thought he'd be a starter. But during gameday he was a playmaker and helped light up the scoreboard regardless of a few flaws. Some guys are better on gameday, some are worse. Elliot was like Marquise in this way, not good enough in the final week of practice to earn the starter role, but obviously decent on gameday.
-elliot was tied for 1st one week before the first game. Neck and neck. Sorry this doesn't fit your narrative.
-If all else was equal overall, I'd choose the big play potential person too.
-If all else equal overall I'd go with the most experienced player (Harris)
-Marquise was not a good practice player. No reporters who saw practice thought he'd be a starter. But during gameday he was a playmaker and helped light up the scoreboard regardless of a few flaws. Some guys are better on gameday, some are worse. Elliot was like Marquise in this way, not good enough in the final week of practice to earn the starter role, but obviously decent on gameday.
Goddangit, we are gonna have to put a ban on ever talking about Marquise Williams on this board.
oops. I need another example of a guy who was bad in practice, great in games.
