* The first question was a soft ball on evaluating new QBs that explicitly gave Taylor an out from having to evaluate his actual QBs, but Taylor took the question in an evaluative direction (albeit as a tandem rather than as individuals) anyway. It sort of felt like Taylor anticipated that subpar QB play, especially with an unresolved QB situation, would be an unavoidable subject and he had his shtick prepared. To wit, he said that for the most part Daniels and Lamson are making good decisions and throwing accurately but that so much depends on the play around the QB and everybody has to get better, including the QBs but also protection, running game, and avoiding third and long. I sense Taylor is working with the QBs to improve on certain things but also is giving them a bit of a pass for struggles due to the protection issues. Two weeks in a row Taylor has really emphasized protection more than QB issues, per se. I don't know what to make of Taylor being so generic about QB play. Given his background I have to believe he has a lot of technical knowhow and there are specific teaching points, so my guess is that the generic QB talk is just for public consumption and he sees no need to say much insightful publicly.
* The rationale on wanting to see Lamson, especially early in the season due to the particular insights that come from seeing QBs in live action, made sense. It feels to me that the same rationale would apply to Patu but we haven't yet gotten any indication Patu may be in the mix at any point. My guess is that the separation Taylor talked about in August was really Daniels and Lamson on one side and Patu on the other. Taylor may not have much faith in Patu. Still, as long as the QBs are struggling I will remain curious what Patu can do. By the way, the way Taylor talked about it being a feel thing how he integrated Lamson against Sacramento State makes me think that will be the case going forward as he continues to play multiple QBs. So far he's been able to have pretty clean breaks (post-injury, post halftime) in when he transitions from Daniels to Lamson. A macabre thought is that our prospects going forward increase the likelihood he'll continue to be able to use injuries or transition to garbage time to decide when to switch QBs. What I'm interested to see is if it remains Daniels then Lamson, in keeping with Taylor's instincts entering the season, or if it gets switched up so Lamson gets to go first. One question I wish somebody would ask is how practice reps get divided during the week.
* As ever, I like when people show vulnerability and admit mistakes and Taylor was admirable in that regard in this press conference. The first instance came when he talked about needing to be more cognizant to get Yurosek more involved in the game. [I had wondered if maybe there was cognizance in relying on TEs more for protection given OL struggles but PFF data doesn't really support that and this answer by Taylor suggests to me that the real issue is Taylor didn't call very many plays where Yurosek was prominent in the progression. With inexperienced QBs not very good in moving through progressions, that neutralizes our best offensive weapon.] Later on there were numerous examples of Taylor saying he could do a better job in play calling. I like to see it.
* One question that got into the critical territory some are calling for was the one about struggles defending dual threat QBs. This is relevant because Jayden de Laura is second among Pac-12 QBs in rushing and by far tops in yards per carry. Taylor acknowledged it's something we have to improve in defending because we're going to continue to see it, not only in terms of schematic QB runs but also scrambles and extended plays. He made an interesting comment that all of the key plays for Sacramento State's offense were undesigned QB scrambles and improvised plays (surely the winning touchdown the main thing front and center in his mind). As Taylor's answer made clear, stopping this is easier said than done since defenses have to worry about coverages, run fits, pressuring the QB, levels of the defense, etc. I didn't get any sense of what the plan to get better at this is (and that's probably more of a question for April anyway).
* The rationale on wanting to see Lamson, especially early in the season due to the particular insights that come from seeing QBs in live action, made sense. It feels to me that the same rationale would apply to Patu but we haven't yet gotten any indication Patu may be in the mix at any point. My guess is that the separation Taylor talked about in August was really Daniels and Lamson on one side and Patu on the other. Taylor may not have much faith in Patu. Still, as long as the QBs are struggling I will remain curious what Patu can do. By the way, the way Taylor talked about it being a feel thing how he integrated Lamson against Sacramento State makes me think that will be the case going forward as he continues to play multiple QBs. So far he's been able to have pretty clean breaks (post-injury, post halftime) in when he transitions from Daniels to Lamson. A macabre thought is that our prospects going forward increase the likelihood he'll continue to be able to use injuries or transition to garbage time to decide when to switch QBs. What I'm interested to see is if it remains Daniels then Lamson, in keeping with Taylor's instincts entering the season, or if it gets switched up so Lamson gets to go first. One question I wish somebody would ask is how practice reps get divided during the week.
* As ever, I like when people show vulnerability and admit mistakes and Taylor was admirable in that regard in this press conference. The first instance came when he talked about needing to be more cognizant to get Yurosek more involved in the game. [I had wondered if maybe there was cognizance in relying on TEs more for protection given OL struggles but PFF data doesn't really support that and this answer by Taylor suggests to me that the real issue is Taylor didn't call very many plays where Yurosek was prominent in the progression. With inexperienced QBs not very good in moving through progressions, that neutralizes our best offensive weapon.] Later on there were numerous examples of Taylor saying he could do a better job in play calling. I like to see it.
* One question that got into the critical territory some are calling for was the one about struggles defending dual threat QBs. This is relevant because Jayden de Laura is second among Pac-12 QBs in rushing and by far tops in yards per carry. Taylor acknowledged it's something we have to improve in defending because we're going to continue to see it, not only in terms of schematic QB runs but also scrambles and extended plays. He made an interesting comment that all of the key plays for Sacramento State's offense were undesigned QB scrambles and improvised plays (surely the winning touchdown the main thing front and center in his mind). As Taylor's answer made clear, stopping this is easier said than done since defenses have to worry about coverages, run fits, pressuring the QB, levels of the defense, etc. I didn't get any sense of what the plan to get better at this is (and that's probably more of a question for April anyway).