Texas A&M Football
Sponsored by

Starkel has been cleared to play?

10,154 Views | 90 Replies | Last: 8 yr ago by Tamu_mgm
Dallasag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That starkel offense was a completely different offense than we're running right now.

He wasnt exactly lighting it up through the air and he might've been the slowest qb I've ever seen on the run where he got hurt.

Mond has earned his spot, stick with it. Hope Sumlin has learned his QB lesson.
Stone44
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Was not impressed with Stark---Mond is getting better every game. He is our QB until Grant gets here . He will lead to victory over the Gators today.
Luigi Vampa
How long do you want to ignore this user?
StrykerAg said:

Redshirt Starkel, continue playing Mond for the season. Let them compete in the offseason. Hopefully the loser understands injuries happen and they can go in at anytime and does not transfer.


Starkel has used his RS year, and would not qualify for a medical RS, so he will just be a normal backup.
_mpaul
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks so much for using "piqued" rather than "peaked."
Signel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Stark was more accurate but far less mobile. I'd bet money that Sumlin plays them both....
zephyr88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Signel said:

Stark was more accurate but far less mobile. I'd bet money that Sumlin plays them both....
hang on... here we go again... Sumlin is gonna go full Sumlin... AGAIN?!?!?!
ebag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Signel said:

Stark was more accurate but far less mobile. I'd bet money that Sumlin plays them both....


Mond has a better completion percentage than starkel. Starkel completed less than 50% of his passes.
BanderaAg956
How long do you want to ignore this user?
pingpro4 said:

I agree it would be nice to see what he can do but the constant rotation of QBs is one of the biggest issues since 2013. Time to stick with one kid and give him a shot


You mean stick with one QB like we did against UCLA before Starkel's injury?

Oh wait, we changed QB's for no reason in the UCLA game, turn about is fair play... but I don't expect Sumlin to be fair!
TxAg76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TE-aXm-AS said:

StrykerAg said:

Redshirt Starkel, continue playing Mond for the season. Let them compete in the offseason. Hopefully the loser understands injuries happen and they can go in at anytime and does not transfer.


Starkel has used his RS year, and would not qualify for a medical RS, so he will just be a normal backup.

He doesn't have a RS option, true. You only get one. But why would Starkel not qualify for a medical exemption? I don't think he played enough time to push him over that limit (although I'm not sure of the exact parameters of the limit)
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TxAg76 said:

TE-aXm-AS said:

StrykerAg said:

Redshirt Starkel, continue playing Mond for the season. Let them compete in the offseason. Hopefully the loser understands injuries happen and they can go in at anytime and does not transfer.


Starkel has used his RS year, and would not qualify for a medical RS, so he will just be a normal backup.

He doesn't have a RS option, true. You only get one. But why would Starkel not qualify for a medical exemption? I don't think he played enough time to push him over that limit (although I'm not sure of the exact parameters of the limit)


(Frank White bat signal)
Luigi Vampa
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TxAg76 said:

TE-aXm-AS said:

StrykerAg said:

Redshirt Starkel, continue playing Mond for the season. Let them compete in the offseason. Hopefully the loser understands injuries happen and they can go in at anytime and does not transfer.


Starkel has used his RS year, and would not qualify for a medical RS, so he will just be a normal backup.

He doesn't have a RS option, true. You only get one. But why would Starkel not qualify for a medical exemption? I don't think he played enough time to push him over that limit (although I'm not sure of the exact parameters of the limit)


Because he's eligible to play now. You don't get a medical redshirt granted when you're only ruled out for 5.5 games. I forget the exact rule, but I think you have to be ruled medically ineligible to play for at least 10 of the 12 games or something like that. Also, I was under the impression that medical redshirts were only granted when you had expended all normal eligibility, but I could be wrong on that.
No Spin Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KidDoc said:

pingpro4 said:

Name the last A&M QB to show the improvement he has during a season

Johnny Football 2012.


No Spin Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
zephyr88 said:

Signel said:

Stark was more accurate but far less mobile. I'd bet money that Sumlin plays them both....
hang on... here we go again... Sumlin is gonna go full Sumlin... AGAIN?!?!?!


With our luck Sumlin will find a way to epic fail on this. Nothing against Starkel, but I hope he doesn't see the field tonight.
zephyr88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No Spin Ag said:

zephyr88 said:

Signel said:

Stark was more accurate but far less mobile. I'd bet money that Sumlin plays them both....
hang on... here we go again... Sumlin is gonna go full Sumlin... AGAIN?!?!?!


With our luck Sumlin will find a way to epic fail on this. Nothing against Starkel, but I hope he doesn't see the field tonight.
Absolutely, I have zero against Nick. Sucks that he got hurt. But to interject another QB back into the equation at this point doesn't make sense. He was not that mobile to start with - coming off an injury, I don't see how he magically became more mobile. Stick with Mond.
CrazyDayDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.
TxAg76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.
zephyr88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.
TCU, UH, UTEP or Oklahoma?
CrazyDayDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.
TxAg76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.

Mazzone does a good job of tailoring it to the abilities of the QB. He doesnt set it up for the dual threat guys the same way he sets up for the less mobile Osweiler and Rosen types.
TxAg76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
zephyr88 said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.
TCU, UH, UTEP or Oklahoma?

Depends on who's coaching at SMU and TxTech
BanderaAg956
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.

Mazzone does a good job of tailoring it to the abilities of the QB. He doesnt set it up for the dual threat guys the same way he sets up for the less mobile Osweiler and Rosen types.


So why doesn't he use his slow duel threat QB when we need to run?
TXAGBQ76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As does Starkel
CrazyDayDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.

Mazzone does a good job of tailoring it to the abilities of the QB. He doesnt set it up for the dual threat guys the same way he sets up for the less mobile Osweiler and Rosen types.

That's what I thought to...until I saw that moronic play call that got Nick injured.
amercer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No Spin Ag said:

zephyr88 said:

Signel said:

Stark was more accurate but far less mobile. I'd bet money that Sumlin plays them both....
hang on... here we go again... Sumlin is gonna go full Sumlin... AGAIN?!?!?!


With our luck Sumlin will find a way to epic fail on this. Nothing against Starkel, but I hope he doesn't see the field tonight.
Azeew
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Drew_Hill said:

pingpro4 said:

Name the last A&M QB to show the improvement he has during a season



Hes gone from completely awful to just kinda awful. Who cares. Give Starkel a chance maybe he blows too but lets at least find out.
You are an idiot.
zephyr88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.
Martell is a prima donna little *****...
CrazyDayDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
zephyr88 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.
Martell is a prima donna little *****...

Point being that Starkel does not fit Mazzone's RPO and will probably transfer.

I always like the Tua kid from Hawaii. He would be ideal for Mazzone's offense. Kind of surprised he didn't get any reps after Bama went up 24-3. A LOT of people think he is better than Hurts.
aarjon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He's ass my dude.
halfastros81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I would think they'd try to get a med redshirt for Starkel provided they don't need him to play for remainder of season. Having competition at QB is a good thing, rising tide lifts all boats.
TxAg76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.

Mazzone does a good job of tailoring it to the abilities of the QB. He doesnt set it up for the dual threat guys the same way he sets up for the less mobile Osweiler and Rosen types.

That's what I thought to...until I saw that moronic play call that got Nick injured.

I hear ya. But was it really the call? Or was it the execution?
BSCE84ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mond needs to stay in until he gets hurt. He will improve and maybe stay with the team for several years. If we are far ahead maybe let Starkel play in last quarter for experience.

You put Starkel in as starter and here we go again on the transfers.
TrillOBrien
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Drew_Hill said:

Champ Bailey said:

Mond is better.


You know that how? Seeing Starkle play for one half and giving us a 30 point lead. Mond isnt good just FYI.
dumb post is dumb
TxAg76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
zephyr88 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

TxAg76 said:

CrazyDayDuck said:

Love how the "experts" here dismiss Mond's UCLA's performance yet point to Starkel's stats as if there would be no improvement with him.

Although I agree that Mond should start. Not because he is necessarily the better of the two (after all Starkel did win the starting spot before he got hurt), but rather because Mazzone's RPO got Starkel killed. Mond is better suited for the RPO.

Starkel will probably transfer after the season.

I think he'll transfer too, sadly.

The weird thing is, Martell seemed like he would fit Mazzone's RPO perfectly. Yet Mazzone preferred Starkel over Martell.

Starkel is a drop back passer. He should never be running unless the pocket collapses.
Martell is a prima donna little *****...

I think it could be as simple as Mazzone preferring bigger body types. And/or didn't care for Martell's attitude. He certainly wasn't lacking in that department.
Could have been an arm strength issue too. Both Starkel and Mond can throw it thru a wall, not sure on Martell.
83Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A duel threat QB is ideal for Mazzones offense. Mond has improved dramatically from the first game. Set the single game passing record for a freshman A&M QB. His scrambling ability , Kirk TD, and pass to Buckley on the money was a big part of why we looked respectable against Bama. Mond is your starter.
TXAGBQ76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wait; what? Now we are going to have QBs dueling for the starting job? Will the duel threat happen during practice or during the game?
Page 2 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.