Change of QB1 - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Change of QB1 (/thread-25850.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Change of QB1 (/thread-25850.html)
Pages:
1
2
Change of QB1 - Row80Critic - 11-03-2025
Took 9 weeks, for reasons unknown, but Elijiah will get the start this weekend. Fingers crossed for him, but however he plays, it's the right decision (and has been since the Hawaii game). They can always go back to Gulbranson if Brown is terrible, but to not at least try someone else would be crazy. And, who knows, if Brown lights it up, maybe we'll even see him next year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljVkh92k6xY
RE: Change of QB1 - fullmetal - 11-03-2025
I'm thankful for the wins that Ben engineered (Florida State, especially), but I always thought Brown should have been getting at least garbage time reps, and I see that lack of development opportunity as a poor coaching decision (always be developing your pipeline). If Brown has earned the spot in the coaches' eyes, then I'm glad he's there now. I hope we see Good Brown and not Florida State Brown.
Honestly, I just want a fair, transparent, and accountable QB room regardless of who's starting, and I want all the QBs to buy into that. I just wasn't sure that was happening until recently, but I think the decisions have been mostly right now. Every one of those guys should want to graduate with a degree from Stanford and take pride in their time here, and I would love to see them be happy alumni in their future years, regardless of whether they go pro, grad transfer, or begin life outside of being an athlete.
[edit]: BTHO UNC!
RE: Change of QB1 - Row80Critic - 11-03-2025
(11-03-2025, 02:10 PM)fullmetal Wrote: I'm thankful for the wins that Ben engineered (Florida State, especially), but I always thought Brown should have been getting at least garbage time reps, and I see that lack of development opportunity as a poor coaching decision (always be developing your pipeline). If Brown has earned the spot in the coaches' eyes, then I'm glad he's there now. I hope we see Good Brown and not Florida State Brown.
Honestly, I just want a fair, transparent, and accountable QB room regardless of who's starting, and I want all the QBs to buy into that. I just wasn't sure that was happening until recently, but I think the decisions have been mostly right now. Every one of those guys should want to graduate with a degree from Stanford and take pride in their time here, and I would love to see them be happy alumni in their future years, regardless of whether they go pro, grad transfer, or begin life outside of being an athlete.
[edit]: BTHO UNC!
Yeah, I can't help but wonder if there was more going on behind the scenes -- attitude, money, coaching pride, something? Elijiah failed to get the start 2 years in a row under totally different circumstances, but in neither case did he lose out to a player that seemed better on the field. The mystery will only deepen in my mind if he goes out and lights it up this Saturday. Of course, if he throws 10 interceptions maybe it will all become clear... Stanford was a 9.5 point underdog by most accounts before the press conference and is now a 7.5 point underdog, so at least the Vegas betting world thinks it's the right move (or at least a discontinuation of the wrong move).
RE: Change of QB1 - newguy - 11-04-2025
better late than never.
RE: Change of QB1 - qwerty49 - 11-04-2025
IMHO as long as we have the current OL, it doesn’t matter who we have at QB. I think the overwhelming majority of BG’s bad throws were due to pressure from bad protection or from the mediocre running game forcing us to pass too often. It would be great if EB can improve on that but I’m not so sure.
RE: Change of QB1 - Mudhead - 11-04-2025
(11-04-2025, 01:35 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: IMHO as long as we have the current OL, it doesn’t matter who we have at QB. I think the overwhelming majority of BG’s bad throws were due to pressure from bad protection or from the mediocre running game forcing us to pass too often. It would be great if EB can improve on that but I’m not so sure.
Amen and Amen. Browns touchdown drive vs Pitt was not against the starters. He had some time to throw and his receivers got open and made good to excellent catches.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad to see Brown get the start. We need to find out whether we have our QB for the future in Brown or whether we need to be in the portal, aggressively. Brown could be that guy . Right now, the most important talents a Stanford QB has to have are escapability and being able to throw on the run. A dead run. Gilbranson doesn’t have that and from what we have seen , Brown doesn’t either, though he has a stronger arm and a better touch than Gilbranson. But only if you assure me of a good OL next year is Brown the QB of the future.
Gilbranson got in turnover trouble because he rarely had the opportunity to go through his progressions. Further, the fact that our passing attack has become limited to quick throws has made it possible for defenses to attack the run with linebackers who don’t have to do much pass defense and dbacks who have little concern for a deep ball.
That in turn leas to the deterioration of what was once a decent to good running attack. And so a virtue less cycle of OL failures has led to no run attack and a one dimensional offense consisting of quick, short passes.
Brown almost can’t succeed in this environment but he is the best option we have now . Maybe we will see enough to think of him for next year . But nothing matters until we have a good OL.
RE: Change of QB1 - Mick - 11-04-2025
(11-04-2025, 03:14 AM)Mudhead Wrote:(11-04-2025, 01:35 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: IMHO as long as we have the current OL, it doesn’t matter who we have at QB. I think the overwhelming majority of BG’s bad throws were due to pressure from bad protection or from the mediocre running game forcing us to pass too often. It would be great if EB can improve on that but I’m not so sure.
Amen and Amen. Browns touchdown drive vs Pitt was not against the starters. He had some time to throw and his receivers got open and made good to excellent catches.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad to see Brown get the start. We need to find out whether we have our QB for the future in Brown or whether we need to be in the portal, aggressively. Brown could be that guy . Right now, the most important talents a Stanford QB has to have are escapability and being able to throw on the run. A dead run. Gilbranson doesn’t have that and from what we have seen , Brown doesn’t either, though he has a stronger arm and a better touch than Gilbranson. But only if you assure me of a good OL next year is Brown the QB of the future.
Gilbranson got in turnover trouble because he rarely had the opportunity to go through his progressions. Further, the fact that our passing attack has become limited to quick throws has made it possible for defenses to attack the run with linebackers who don’t have to do much pass defense and dbacks who have little concern for a deep ball.
That in turn leas to the deterioration of what was once a decent to good running attack. And so a virtue less cycle of OL failures has led to no run attack and a one dimensional offense consisting of quick, short passes.
Brown almost can’t succeed in this environment but he is the best option we have now . Maybe we will see enough to think of him for next year . But nothing matters until we have a good OL.
Agreed. All we need is five guys who actually belong in the NFL, but for some reason, choose to stay at Stanford.
SkiBum80 - SkiBum80 - 11-04-2025
Agree with several insightful comments focusing on improving OLine as means to improve QB. My slight amendment is to hope for focus of investment on Line, both O & D.
If you build it (Line), they (QB, RB, DB) will come.
RE: Change of QB1 - Goose - 11-04-2025
I think we all agree that the OL and receivers Stanford has definitely puts severe constraints on the running game and the QB's ability to execute the passing game while remaining upright. I admit I was surprised that there has been a definite change in QB1. Based on the press conference statements and (perhaps even more) the tone of the Reich's comments it isn't just letting Brown start a game. That can be done without a definitive change of QB1 taking place. It can be that having the QB1 watch the game from the sidelines and getting his head right is the goal of starting a different player. Based on the comments, this is not a one-time thing but a full on change.
It was pretty clear in the Pitt game that Gulbranson was late on several throws and was not putting the ball in a place that his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. Normally that is why you put an experienced QB out there. He won't be a turnover machine and will put the ball where it needs to be. Gulbranson has demonstrated he can put the ball "on the money" and can executed impromptu plays (like the long pass to 86) well if he has the time. In the last two games, he has been off target a lot more and is throwing passes he shouldn't. Gulbranson's pocket presence has been poor all along. He doesn't anticipate the rush and adjust immediately. While IMO he has improved a little in this area, it also has led to more ill-advised throws. We don't know what the personnel dynamic was between the coaches and players involved, but the coaches apparently decided that wasn't "fixable" at this point.
The staff apparently has decided that Brown is now a better choice. It may be simply that he isn't shell-shocked and Gulbranson is. It may also be that his somewhat better mobility is considered vital given the lack of a run game and a porous OL. Brown is an accurate passer. He may not be as good with the long pass (I have no basis to know) as one would like but given our pass protection that probably does not matter. We are all hoping for the best. Three weeks ago IMO many of us fans thought that the UNC and Kal games were winnable. The decision to change QB1 indicates the coaching staff felt that situation slipping away. Let's hope that Brown can provide the impetus necessary to fix that.
RE: Change of QB1 - mutoo1 - 11-04-2025
(11-04-2025, 10:24 AM)Goose Wrote: I think we all agree that the OL and receivers Stanford has definitely puts severe constraints on the running game and the QB's ability to execute the passing game while remaining upright. I admit I was surprised that there has been a definite change in QB1. Based on the press conference statements and (perhaps even more) the tone of the Reich's comments it isn't just letting Brown start a game. That can be done without a definitive change of QB1 taking place. It can be that having the QB1 watch the game from the sidelines and getting his head right is the goal of starting a different player. Based on the comments, this is not a one-time thing but a full on change.
It was pretty clear in the Pitt game that Gulbranson was late on several throws and was not putting the ball in a place that his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. Normally that is why you put an experienced QB out there. He won't be a turnover machine and will put the ball where it needs to be. Gulbranson has demonstrated he can put the ball "on the money" and can executed impromptu plays (like the long pass to 86) well if he has the time. In the last two games, he has been off target a lot more and is throwing passes he shouldn't. Gulbranson's pocket presence has been poor all along. He doesn't anticipate the rush and adjust immediately. While IMO he has improved a little in this area, it also has led to more ill-advised throws. We don't know what the personnel dynamic was between the coaches and players involved, but the coaches apparently decided that wasn't "fixable" at this point.
The staff apparently has decided that Brown is now a better choice. It may be simply that he isn't shell-shocked and Gulbranson is. It may also be that his somewhat better mobility is considered vital given the lack of a run game and a porous OL. Brown is an accurate passer. He may not be as good with the long pass (I have no basis to know) as one would like but given our pass protection that probably does not matter. We are all hoping for the best. Three weeks ago IMO many of us fans thought that the UNC and Kal games were winnable. The decision to change QB1 indicates the coaching staff felt that situation slipping away. Let's hope that Brown can provide the impetus necessary to fix that.
it could also be as simple as bg is injured so there's no choice.
RE: Change of QB1 - SamuelMcF - 11-04-2025
(11-04-2025, 07:30 PM)mutoo1 Wrote:(11-04-2025, 10:24 AM)Goose Wrote: I think we all agree that the OL and receivers Stanford has definitely puts severe constraints on the running game and the QB's ability to execute the passing game while remaining upright. I admit I was surprised that there has been a definite change in QB1. Based on the press conference statements and (perhaps even more) the tone of the Reich's comments it isn't just letting Brown start a game. That can be done without a definitive change of QB1 taking place. It can be that having the QB1 watch the game from the sidelines and getting his head right is the goal of starting a different player. Based on the comments, this is not a one-time thing but a full on change.
It was pretty clear in the Pitt game that Gulbranson was late on several throws and was not putting the ball in a place that his receiver could catch it but the defender could not. Normally that is why you put an experienced QB out there. He won't be a turnover machine and will put the ball where it needs to be. Gulbranson has demonstrated he can put the ball "on the money" and can executed impromptu plays (like the long pass to 86) well if he has the time. In the last two games, he has been off target a lot more and is throwing passes he shouldn't. Gulbranson's pocket presence has been poor all along. He doesn't anticipate the rush and adjust immediately. While IMO he has improved a little in this area, it also has led to more ill-advised throws. We don't know what the personnel dynamic was between the coaches and players involved, but the coaches apparently decided that wasn't "fixable" at this point.
The staff apparently has decided that Brown is now a better choice. It may be simply that he isn't shell-shocked and Gulbranson is. It may also be that his somewhat better mobility is considered vital given the lack of a run game and a porous OL. Brown is an accurate passer. He may not be as good with the long pass (I have no basis to know) as one would like but given our pass protection that probably does not matter. We are all hoping for the best. Three weeks ago IMO many of us fans thought that the UNC and Kal games were winnable. The decision to change QB1 indicates the coaching staff felt that situation slipping away. Let's hope that Brown can provide the impetus necessary to fix that.
it could also be as simple as bg is injured so there's no choice.
He isn't
RE: Change of QB1 - PVTree - 11-05-2025
Since it's highly likely that we won't go bowling (USB will be very tough to beat), the staff may have thought that it's time to look into the future (since there's not seemingly a brobdingnagian disparity between Gulbranson and Brown) and give Brown a test run. It may also keep him from transferring if he thinks he has an advantage to be the starter next year.
After 2 games, I wanted the quarterback switch. Now, after Gulbranson has had some decent games, I'm not as confident that it's the right move. I hope it is and that Brown takes us to the USB game 1 win away from bowling.
RE: Change of QB1 - Maple Leaf - 11-05-2025
per the North Carolina game depth chart Dylan Rizk is listed as the #2 QB
https://storage.googleapis.com/stanford-prod/2025/11/04/pSMzH3d3YjfWQqffMVahDcKPj0gDpstTcu079Ql8.pdf
RE: Change of QB1 - 82lsju - 11-05-2025
(11-05-2025, 05:35 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote: per the North Carolina game depth chart Dylan Rizk is listed as the #2 QB
https://storage.googleapis.com/stanford-prod/2025/11/04/pSMzH3d3YjfWQqffMVahDcKPj0gDpstTcu079Ql8.pdf
will be interesting to see what the ACC availability report says tomorrow
RE: Change of QB1 - ADPinWDC - 11-05-2025
Perhaps Andrew Luck lobbied for Brown -- future of the Program. Reich is leaving.
CJ Williams would also lobby for Brown, even though CJ is a Senior.
Luck must recruit a replacement for Reich.
Any candidate wants to see what is coming back for 2026.
Maybe... Brown can deliver for Big Game and we get off a four game skid.
If Micah Ford is also back, that could be some help.
After the last game, Brown could have gone to Luck and asked for the bump up. Luck would listen.
lex24 - lex24 - 11-05-2025
(11-05-2025, 08:11 PM)ADPinWDC Wrote: Perhaps Andrew Luck lobbied for Brown -- future of the Program. Reich is leaving.
CJ Williams would also lobby for Brown, even though CJ is a Senior.
Luck must recruit a replacement for Reich.
Any candidate wants to see what is coming back for 2026.
Maybe... Brown can deliver for Big Game and we get off a four game skid.
If Micah Ford is also back, that could be some help.
After the last game, Brown could have gone to Luck and asked for the bump up. Luck would listen.
You’re suggesting that Brown went over the head of his head coach t and asked Luck to start? I highly doubt that. And if that’s the case, I wouldn’t start him on principle.
RE: Change of QB1 - 82lsju - 11-06-2025
(11-05-2025, 06:09 PM)82lsju Wrote:(11-05-2025, 05:35 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote: per the North Carolina game depth chart Dylan Rizk is listed as the #2 QB
https://storage.googleapis.com/stanford-prod/2025/11/04/pSMzH3d3YjfWQqffMVahDcKPj0gDpstTcu079Ql8.pdf
will be interesting to see what the ACC availability report says tomorrow
no Gulbranson on the availability report
Quote:Out
WR #4 Jordan Onovughe
RB #6 Tuna Altahir
CB #8 Cam Richardson
LB #14 Wilfredo Aybar
WR #19 David Pantelis
CB #34 Javion Randall
DL #50 R.J. Gaskins
OL #53 Nathan Mejia
OL #55 Simione Pale
OL #60 Nick Fattig
OL #76 Jack Leyrer
WR #81 JonAnthony Hall
Probable
S #5 Jay Green
CB #6 Collin Wright
S #21 Scotty Edwards
CB #31 Aaron Morris
https://theacc.com/sports/2025/8/28/availability-reporting-football.aspx
RE: Change of QB1 - BostonCard - 11-06-2025
(11-04-2025, 08:08 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:Quote:it could also be as simple as bg is injured so there's no choice.
He isn't
Quote:no Gulbranson on the availability report
The plot thickens. IS he on double-secret probation?
BC
RE: Change of QB1 - Goose - 11-06-2025
(11-06-2025, 09:30 PM)BostonCard Wrote:It could be simpler than that. Is he still on the roster and still on the team? Comment from anyone with any insight into that would be welcome. I can see lots of different scenarios where he might have decided not to play football at Stanford going forward.(11-04-2025, 08:08 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:Quote:it could also be as simple as bg is injured so there's no choice.
He isn't
Quote:no Gulbranson on the availability report
The plot thickens. IS he on double-secret probation?
BC
RE: Change of QB1 - qwerty49 - 11-06-2025
(11-04-2025, 06:25 AM)Mick Wrote:(11-04-2025, 03:14 AM)Mudhead Wrote:(11-04-2025, 01:35 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: IMHO as long as we have the current OL, it doesn’t matter who we have at QB. I think the overwhelming majority of BG’s bad throws were due to pressure from bad protection or from the mediocre running game forcing us to pass too often. It would be great if EB can improve on that but I’m not so sure.
Amen and Amen. Browns touchdown drive vs Pitt was not against the starters. He had some time to throw and his receivers got open and made good to excellent catches.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad to see Brown get the start. We need to find out whether we have our QB for the future in Brown or whether we need to be in the portal, aggressively. Brown could be that guy . Right now, the most important talents a Stanford QB has to have are escapability and being able to throw on the run. A dead run. Gilbranson doesn’t have that and from what we have seen , Brown doesn’t either, though he has a stronger arm and a better touch than Gilbranson. But only if you assure me of a good OL next year is Brown the QB of the future.
Gilbranson got in turnover trouble because he rarely had the opportunity to go through his progressions. Further, the fact that our passing attack has become limited to quick throws has made it possible for defenses to attack the run with linebackers who don’t have to do much pass defense and dbacks who have little concern for a deep ball.
That in turn leas to the deterioration of what was once a decent to good running attack. And so a virtue less cycle of OL failures has led to no run attack and a one dimensional offense consisting of quick, short passes.
Brown almost can’t succeed in this environment but he is the best option we have now . Maybe we will see enough to think of him for next year . But nothing matters until we have a good OL.
Agreed. All we need is five guys who actually belong in the NFL, but for some reason, choose to stay at Stanford.
You forgot your sarcasm emoji, bro.
I’ll just settle for 5 guys who are better than what we have now.