I thought this would probably happen. I just wish we could get evrybody healthy and they would stay healthy.

And playing QB can also have a lot of value down the road when a guy goes back to WR...

 

I can picture a few double reverse passes in the near future :thumb:

And playing QB can also have a lot of value down the road when a guy goes back to WR...

 

I can picture a few double reverse passes in the near future :thumb:

 

Antwaan Randle El anybody?

I don't fault Brooks for sticking with Hartline. When you pick a starter, you have to give him a chance to play. But, 8 games in and Hartline has shown zero improvement, while Cobb at least gives the offense an added dimension and gives them a chance to move the ball.

 

I think this is the right move at this point, but I don't fault Brooks for waiting to make the move.

 

With UK's defense and two "winnable" games coming up (Mississippi State and Vandy) to get bowl eligible, I think this move had to be made now. UK's defense is good enough to keep them in the game against those teams, IMO, so the difference could be an offense with Cobb that can potentially produce 7-14 more points...that could easily be the difference in a W or L in those games and consequently, the difference in making a bowl or not.

 

But, I understand wanting to stick with Hartline. If he develops and starts producing, then you can use Cobb in other places on the offense and it makes the unit as a whole stronger. Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way.

 

Actually, I thought Hartline did improve quite a bit. However, Cobb is such a strong athlete and is learning more and more of the offense. He is a more dangerous weapon to have on the field and now is probably the right time to make the move. Cobb has seen the level of play in the SEC and the game is slowing down for him. I agree that he opens things up, but I also agree that Brooks did the right thing in sticking with Hartline as long as he did.

Like running the option?

Randall Cobb looks like he is totally suited to running a spread attack.

 

I know that Kentucky has been intent on having a pro-style offense. We currently have a few big, tall, pro size quarterbacks. Only thing is, they can't run, but they can't pass either.

Randall Cobb looks like he is totally suited to running a spread attack.

 

I know that Kentucky has been intent on having a pro-style offense. We currently have a few big, tall, pro size quarterbacks. Only thing is, they can't run, but they can't pass either.

 

It doesn't matter if your receivers drop as many balls as UK WRs have this fall. Hartline has not been Woodson accurate, but he has gotten better. I agree that now is probably the best time for a change.

At this point, UK needs a playmaker under center, and that is not Michael Hartline. He may have improved some, but the the skill players around him are not what he needs to be successful. Hartline is more of a distributor/manager-type of QB. UK needs a guy who can create and make some plays, especially when things break down, in an attempt to generate a few extra points each week. Points that could be the difference in a W or L and becoming bowl eligible considering the defense is good enough to keep them in most games.

 

I like Hartline. I never once called for him to be benched in lieu of Cobb. And, I think he could be a solid player in the right situation with the right players around him. But, that's not UK right now, so I think making the switch to Cobb is the right move for this season and UK's drive to make a bowl game. Its not about who is the better player as much as its about who is the best fit for the current situation and who gives them the best chance to generate some offense and win. The answer to that question right now is Randall Cobb.

 

I do not think playing QB the remainder of the season is going to set Cobb back in his development at WR. Besides, at this point, you have to play to win which means putting your players where they give you the best chance to win. Not leaving them somewhere so they can gain "valuable" experience for the future while your teams flounders and loses 7 of its last 8 games.

 

Hopefully, UK can work on the offense in the offseason and get some things turned around. Hopefully, Cobb can return to WR where he looks like a star in the making and some of the other guys can mature and improve to the point that they can be productive and reliable. And, hopefully, Hartline, one of the backups, or one of the incoming freshmen can give them what they need from the QB position.

 

But, as for now, Brooks made the right decision for the present and the future, IMO.

It doesn't matter if your receivers drop as many balls as UK WRs have this fall. Hartline has not been Woodson accurate, but he has gotten better. I agree that now is probably the best time for a change.

 

:thumb:

 

Michael Hartline is definitely not the only reason the UK offense has struggled. If anyone is expecting Cobb to come in and turn this offense around completely, I'm afraid they'll be disappointed.

 

That's why I think they needed to put Cobb at QB right now. Not because he's a "better" QB than Hartline (I'm not convinced he is). But, he is a better athlete and playmaker. Considering the state of UK's offense...struggling line and running game, WR's who are inconsistent and not dependable...getting Cobb in a position where he's handling the ball every play and allowing him to make plays, is the best chance they have to improve the offense with a "quick fix".

 

Cobb is UK's most dangerous threat...with him at WR, I think its much easier for teams to scheme to stop him and UK's offense. Put him at QB and it may open some things up for everybody.

I don't fault Brooks for sticking with Hartline. When you pick a starter, you have to give him a chance to play. But, 8 games in and Hartline has shown zero improvement, while Cobb at least gives the offense an added dimension and gives them a chance to move the ball.

 

I think this is the right move at this point, but I don't fault Brooks for waiting to make the move.

 

With UK's defense and two "winnable" games coming up (Mississippi State and Vandy) to get bowl eligible, I think this move had to be made now. UK's defense is good enough to keep them in the game against those teams, IMO, so the difference could be an offense with Cobb that can potentially produce 7-14 more points...that could easily be the difference in a W or L in those games and consequently, the difference in making a bowl or not.

 

But, I understand wanting to stick with Hartline. If he develops and starts producing, then you can use Cobb in other places on the offense and it makes the unit as a whole stronger. Unfortunately, it didn't work out that way.

 

I always knew you got it......get it.

I always knew you got it......get it.

 

Buddy, if there's one thing I do in life, it's this...I get it. Got it?:jump:

 

Wiggly-woo.

It doesn't matter if your receivers drop as many balls as UK WRs have this fall.

 

Yeah, but Cobb is completing the same % as Hartline, and doing it without having himself to throw to. So he must be throwing more catchable balls.

 

Cobb has only seen significant time at QB in two games, Norfolk State and Florida. Here's how he compares to Hartline over those two games.

 

Cobb - 15/29 (51.7%) - 165 yards (5.7 YPA) - 1 TD - 1 Int (101 yards rushing and 2 rushing TDs)

Hartline - 16/31 (51.6%) - 93 yards (3.0 YPA) - 0 TD - 1 Int (4 yards rushing)

 

So at worst, its a draw at QB, but Cobb brings a ton more running.

Yeah, but Cobb is completing the same % as Hartline, and doing it without having himself to throw to. So he must be throwing more catchable balls.

 

:thumb:

Yeah, but Cobb is completing the same % as Hartline, and doing it without having himself to throw to. So he must be throwing more catchable balls.

 

Cobb has only seen significant time at QB in two games, Norfolk State and Florida. Here's how he compares to Hartline over those two games.

 

Cobb - 15/29 (51.7%) - 165 yards (5.7 YPA) - 1 TD - 1 Int (101 yards rushing and 2 rushing TDs)

Hartline - 16/31 (51.6%) - 93 yards (3.0 YPA) - 0 TD - 1 Int (4 yards rushing)

 

So at worst, its a draw at QB, but Cobb brings a ton more running.

 

Its definately not a draw, IMO. Cobb is much more capable of winning games as QB. Hartline completes the same amount of passes, but they are all for 1-5 yards. Cobb moves the ball down the field.

Ill bite................

 

We find someone else to blame. :lol:

 

Oh that easy,Tubby.:lol:

Yeah, but Cobb is completing the same % as Hartline, and doing it without having himself to throw to. So he must be throwing more catchable balls.

 

Cobb has only seen significant time at QB in two games, Norfolk State and Florida. Here's how he compares to Hartline over those two games.

 

Cobb - 15/29 (51.7%) - 165 yards (5.7 YPA) - 1 TD - 1 Int (101 yards rushing and 2 rushing TDs)

Hartline - 16/31 (51.6%) - 93 yards (3.0 YPA) - 0 TD - 1 Int (4 yards rushing)

 

So at worst, its a draw at QB, but Cobb brings a ton more running.

 

But defenses have to play Cobb to run as much if not more than to pass. They know that Hartline isn't the threat to run and can play the pass more effectively. They can't get too deep on Cobb or he is likely to break off a big run.

 

I do agree 110% that Cobb brings a MUCH bigger dual threat. There is no doubt about that. I think that the first part of the season has allowed Cobb, a true freshman, to learn the offense and to experience the speed of SEC opponents. I liked Hartline's improvement, but do agree that it was time for a change. Cobb is just a dynamic athlete and I hope he does well.