There has been a lot of talk lately about the Cobb kid having a true shot at being the starting QB this season for UK. What does this truly say about Hartline? Was he never going to have a shot at QB other than back up duty? What are the differences in Hartline and Cobb. If Cobb wins the starting job did the coaching staff waste a scholarship on Hartline?

Cobb is the man. He is so talented at WR and there is such a need there that my guess is that the coaches see him as possibly being a starting QB this year. Why else would they give him 90% of the snaps at QB? I also heard if he is the backup QB he could return punts/kicks. I say start him at QB but I'm sure he will be involved in the offense where ever he plays. How much buzz would it create around the program if a true freshman were to come in at QB and beat U of L? This kid is special and I've been posting this on this board for the last few weeks. Mark my words he is going to be a star.

I am not sure by your wording, but Randall Cobb is not getting 90% of the snaps at the quarterback position and Mark Hartline 10%. Randall Cobb is getting 90% of his plays at the quarterback position and 10% of his plays at wide receiver.

http://www.kentucky.com/817/story/485290.html

 

“I'm getting a little more nervous every day, because I know each day, I'm one day closer to being in that game,” Hartline said.

 

http://www.amnews.com/public_html/?module=displaystory&story_id=42988&format=html

 

"I didn't have a good day. I threw too many balls off the defense, and didn't play the way I need to," Hartline, who stayed after practice to work on his throws, said.

The Kentucky staff is not going to hand the starting quarterback position to Mike Hartline on a silver platter. They are creating competition which is healthy. Evidently, they think Randall Cobb is a dynamic enough player that they need to get him on the field.

 

Remember, the UK coaches put out that NFL draft pick Andre Woodson was beaten out by Curtis Pulley just two summers ago. I have often wondered if this was true or Rich Brooks or Joker Phillips' way of motivating a (at the time) lazy Andre Woodson.

 

Same case here, maybe?

The Kentucky staff is not going to hand the starting quarterback position to Mike Hartline on a silver platter. They are creating competition which is healthy. Evidently, they think Randall Cobb is a dynamic enough player that they need to get him on the field.

 

Remember, the UK coaches put out that NFL draft pick Andre Woodson was beaten out by Curtis Pulley just two summers ago. I have often wondered if this was true or Rich Brooks or Joker Phillips' way of motivating a (at the time) lazy Andre Woodson.

 

Same case here, maybe?

 

Very possible. Regardless, the QB situation makes me very nervous this year.

We have no idea how they will play. I like UK in all other facets of the game vs UofL (maybe not WR) but the QB play is so up in the air that it makes me nervous as well.

All of us UK fans should be cautiously optimistic about our squad in 2008.

 

Everyone is making a big deal of UK's fortunes without Curtis Pulley. He was a talented yet unproven quarterback, so his loss does not make or break UK's fortunes this season, in my opinion.

 

I anticipated about a .500 season with Pulley and about the same without.

I agree with that. IMO Pulley was also essentially unproven as a QB. Although he could have been a help to the receiving corp.

It sounds to me like Cobb is a less experienced, more talented Pulley. I'm not terribly concerned about losing Pulley (though of course I'd prefer he was still on the team).

I agree that Randall Cobb sounds like a Pulley-like great athlete playing quarterback.

 

However, the two players seem to be very different when it comes to responsibility, focus, commitment, and leadership.

I agree that Randall Cobb sounds like a Pulley-like great athlete playing quarterback.

 

However, the two players seem to be very different when it comes to responsibility, focus, commitment, and leadership.

 

That is what it sounds like to me, also.

Cobb is the man. He is so talented at WR and there is such a need there that my guess is that the coaches see him as possibly being a starting QB this year. Why else would they give him 90% of the snaps at QB? I also heard if he is the backup QB he could return punts/kicks. I say start him at QB but I'm sure he will be involved in the offense where ever he plays. How much buzz would it create around the program if a true freshman were to come in at QB and beat U of L? This kid is special and I've been posting this on this board for the last few weeks. Mark my words he is going to be a star.

The bolded part has me extremely confused. If he is such a stud at WR and UK has a definite need at the WR position why would the coaches see him as being a starting QB this year?

The bolded part has me extremely confused. If he is such a stud at WR and UK has a definite need at the WR position why would the coaches see him as being a starting QB this year?

Perhaps your qb need is greater.

I am not sure by your wording, but Randall Cobb is not getting 90% of the snaps at the quarterback position and Mark Hartline 10%. Randall Cobb is getting 90% of his plays at the quarterback position and 10% of his plays at wide receiver.

 

That's what I meant. He is spending 90% of his time at QB.