Rockne's Roundtable

Personally, Tommy borrowed a deck of cards from my buddy one time and never gave them back, so my sympathy level is low.

Possibly correct so I tentatively agree related to the QB. (assuming that Rees is not available for the fall) but depends on Golson looking as good and reading the calls better under the bright lights as he did in the spring game and Hendrix looking better than the spring game and what we saw last year. With Rees we had a known commodity (good and bad). The jury's still out on both Golson and Hendrix.

I'm a big Golson fan myself and would love to see him be as good as it appears that he can be, but being put in the pressure position can play out very well or very poorly. Hoping for the very well scenario for both of them.

You're kidding yourself if you think that losing the only QB who knows how to run your offense is a good thing. He would have been there as a resource for Golson and Kiel. He would also be useful in a transitional phase in those first two games. And it never hurts to have an experienced hand ready to step in the middle of a game, if your starter goes down.

Merlin, do you still have the hotline to Brian Kelly. Ask him what he thinks, off the record. Care to place any money on whether he agrees with you or me? I'm talking more than your lunch money.

If what you are trying to say is that these are two replacable players, then I get your drift. I would love to have Tommy as the safety valve on the bench and Carlo on short yardage and goalline. But we have enough depth now at those positions to sustain the hit. Now if it were Manti and Cierre or Tyler, a whole different ballgame.

Well, genius, send in your application to Jack Swarbrick. How many other coaches can be gathered together, and you still think you're the smartest guy in the room? There are a number of issues involved here. Nothing is gained by Rees not being around. If he wound up playing it would be because the other guys couldn't beat out a "MAC level" quarterback, so if you thought there were a lot of turnovers last year, fasten your seat belt for this year. If one or more of those guys beat him out, you still have him around as an experienced back-up, and as a mentor to guys still trying to add 2 + 2 in this offense. So, there is no upside whatsoever to him being gone.

I think there is upside. One, the other QBs wont have to feel so uptight competing with the returning starter...they can also be better prepared for realistic playing time, knowing that they WILL get in the game and can be better prepared both mentally and physically. I think it can help for both Golson and Hendrix' confidence and leadership knowing its one of them or the both of them and knowing they get their opportunity. Sort of that there time is now. Yes, I agree there is no upside to him being gone regarding a 3rd or 4th string emergency, but thats it. So what if we have some turnovers, I still expect alot of big plays too and we will be a better team with a dual threat pass first QB. Plus the upside is Golson coming out and having a breakout season that will surprise people, we shall see. But we have seen enough of Tommy for me to state my opinion that we will be just fine without him. Its not about me being the smartest guy in the room or applying for the Head Coaching position, I am entitled to my opinion and I pay $ to do so. Sorry that you dont agree 95% of the time, but maybe its you who feels he is the smartest guy in the room because you seem to have a problem with me or any poster that doesnt agree with your opinion.

Lets put this in simple terms Ham. I will use myself as an example...my freshmen year of baseball I was competing with a stud Juco transfer in the fall for the starter at 2B. We both had a great fall and there was talk of me playing the outfield to get us both on the field at the same time. I was always trying to one up him, busting my butt as was he to start. During the Christmas break this stud Jr got into some trouble and nevercame back for the Spring semester. Here it was, all mine to start at the 2 bag as a true freshmen. Instead of going into the season not knowing what my role was or how much I would be playing, I was now the man at a young age. I was able to kind of relax a bit even though there was still pressure (by the coaches suggestion) and concentrate mentally and physically on getting myself prepared to play.You get yourself in a different mindset when you are the guy. So it isnt hogwash. You can develop a confidence and swagger when you know its your opportunity. It happens all the time...look at Jeremy Lin. One man goes down and the next guy is in. Just saying it could be helpful to the guys now getting their opportunityto do something.

Merlin, I don't find it prudent to generalize from a particular. Is the scenario you describe a possibility here? Of course. You can spin any number of hypotheticals that would make it better, but they depend on too many unknowns. I'll go with the knowns that suggest losing Rees adds nothing positive to the situation, and agree to disagree.

+1 for a great post. I could not agree with you more. Rees was going to be a luxury in whatever role he filled. If he started the first couple as Hendrix or Golson got there feet wet and ready to go, great. Thank you for the calmness and be ready he might get called on when the young guys struggle, and they will at times. Or if he was the backup and sounding board, he would be a huge help there as well. This will, probably, be a loss that we could feel during the year.

By the way the +1 is in response to Ham's first post.

These are two of the worst players on the team. This is not Michael Floyd. They can be gone and all will be well. Tee Shepard will be missed more than these clowns.