Photo by Lindsay Caudle, TexAgs
Texas A&M Football

Passing on Jarrett Stidham, Sumlin looks to bolster Texas A&M's future

July 13, 2017
21,096

HOOVER, Ala. — If Jarrett Stidham had been offered a football scholarship to Texas A&M, Auburn coach Gus Malzahn would not have been raving about him on Thursday at SEC Media Days.

“He’s a lot better athlete than people think,” Malzahn said. “He’s got a 35-36" vertical. He runs a 4.6. In our league, you have to escape. You have to have a quarterback that can escape pressure, keep his eyes down the field, know when to throw it, know when to run it and protect the football and make good decisions.”

Auburn has that in Stidham. Meanwhile, A&M has uncertainty at quarterback.

Thank A&M coach Kevin Sumlin for that. Seriously, thank him. By denying Stidham, Sumlin looked out for A&M’s long-term interests rather than looking out for himself.

Adding Stidham would have significantly changed A&M’s outlook for this season. They’d have a proven passer instead of likely crowning a starter — redshirt freshman Nick Starkel or true freshman Kellen Mond — who’s never taken a collegiate snap or starting a career backup in senior Jake Hubenak.

“There’s really not a front-runner now,” Sumlin said.

Ronnie Woodard Texas A&M head coach Kevin Sumlin passed on Jarrett Stidham twice, believing in a long-term plan for his program.
There absolutely would be if Stidham was in College Station. He’d surely have been named the starter in the spring like Trevor Knight was last year.

“He’s going to be successful. It’s just a matter of when and what time,” Sumlin said of Stidham. “He brings a lot to the table as a guy that can move around a little bit, but a guy that’s highly accurate and can throw it.”


Stidham passed for 1,265 yards and 12 touchdowns and just two interceptions in three games at Baylor in 2015.

Go ahead and dismiss it. Say he just exploited lame Big 12 defenses.

Then remember that just last season Aggies celebrated a former backup Big 12 quarterback — Knight — who wasn’t the passer that Stidham is.

Everyone knows Sumlin’s job at A&M is in jeopardy after three consecutive 8-5 finishes. Athletic Director Scott Woodward has publicly said that’s not good enough.

So, who could blame Sumlin if he opted for the best chance of self-preservation and snapped up Stidham, a native Texan who reportedly never denied his desire to attend A&M. Stidham even paid for his own third-deck seat to attend A&M’s game against Tennessee last year.

Had Sumlin signed Stidham, he probably couldn’t have signed Mond, a four-star prospect out of the prestigious IMG Academy.  Without Mond A&M likely would not have gotten IMG receiver Jhamon Ausbon, IMG linebacker Santino Marchiol or Stafford receiver Hezekiah Jones — all four-star prospects.

And what if Stidham had a big year at A&M and then decided to enter the NFL draft? The Aggies could enter 2018 with the same uncertainty they have this year.

“We had to make decisions in recruiting at our place,” Sumlin said. “And we made some decisions.”

Detractors can say Sumlin should’ve signed Stidham in 2015 out of Stephenville High School. But that year he had to choose between Stidham and Kyler Murray, who’d led Allen High School to three consecutive state championships.

Sumlin was in a bind. Murray was a five-star prospect, who’d never lost a game he started.
Sumlin was in a bind. Murray was a five-star prospect, who’d never lost a game he started. His father, Kevin, was one of the greatest quarterbacks in A&M history.

Imagine the outcry from Aggies if Sumlin had not offered Murray. And what if Murray then went to a rival? And what if he was successful? Circumstances almost forced Sumlin to take Murray over Stidham.

Imagine the outcry on Nov. 4 if Stidham has a big day passing against the Aggies at Kyle Field.

Now imagine the impact that Mond, Ausbon, Marchiol and Jones could have at A&M. What if they become star players? What if the Aggies are better in the long run because of them? What if they play key roles in A&M emerging as a national power?

You could thank Sumlin for that.
Discussion from...

Passing on Jarrett Stidham, Sumlin looks to bolster Texas A&M's future

Fxbrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
AG
Personally I think coach did right here
fieldtrailer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
AG
Mazz's scheme is a pocket passing spread. Mond a run option spread. How can taking a kid and making him change his style be better than someone with 2 years experience in it? And dont forget Martell who looks like jff without off field issues. Did Mazz run him off? Would be understandable if we were changing scheme for Mond (which we should).

Icing on cake will be hiring a new HC that utilizes same outdated pocket spread.

Was it all for Ausbon?
Lateralus Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
Lot of what ifs.

What if all or some of those guys transfer if Sumlin gets canned at the end of 2017?

Bottom line in my mind was Sumlin should have played for this year. Because playing for next year, especially with a tough Florida on the schedule, likely means Sumlin will win less than half of his SEC games this year. Other than UCLA, that is your season.
jja79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
It's almost like he doesn't care.
Southlake
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
Such a crap shoot dealing with 18-21 year old kids and their parents.

Easy to speculate.

Stidham also has injury issues.

That being said, I personally think Stidham was a take.

But I stand behind Sumlin all the way.

Guess we'll see.
TXM Pride
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
I disagree wholeheartedly with Olin. Stidham could essentially be a 1 and done. Probably 2 years max. A&M very well could have signed both Jarrett and Kellen. It's usually in a QBs best interest to come in and redshirt a year to grow as a player and learn the system. Jarrett could have been the place holder like Trevor and given our young QBs even more time to grow. We will probably be starting an underclassmen again, which apparently is Sumlins signature move. I'm a Sumlin guy, but with how much this team/college football is quarterback driven I would have had to made a serious run at a guy who's shown he can do it at a P5 school already.
M.C. Swag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
nm
cevans_40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
AG
TXM Pride said:

I disagree wholeheartedly with Olin. Stidham could essentially be a 1 and done. Probably 2 years max. A&M very well could have signed both Jarrett and Kellen. It's usually in a QBs best interest to come in and redshirt a year to grow as a player and learn the system. Jarrett could have been the place holder like Trevor and given our young QBs even more time to grow. We will probably be starting an underclassmen again, which apparently is Sumlins signature move. I'm a Sumlin guy, but with how much this team/college football is quarterback driven I would have had to made a serious run at a guy who's shown he can do it at a P5 school already.

If Mond did sign with us in your scenario, Stidham is one and done, and Starkell leaves before this season. Sumlim played this one right. The only mistake in my mind was recruiting Murray at all (as he and his dad ran off Allen).
Spaceball 1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
I think blaming Murray for Allen is unfair. Thats on Sumlin. It looked like promises were made to keep Murray from tu. Those decisions turned toxic, and spoiled both both of them on Sumlin. Beating tu for Murray was great on signing day, now I wish he were a Longhorn. Kyle Allen would still probably be an Ag and Murray never would have been one.
jja79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
Starkel or Mond is leaving after the season anyway don't you think?
Sponge
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
AG
Not interested in anyone that chose baylor.
HSFootballAg24
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
Spaceball 1 said:

I think blaming Murray for Allen is unfair. Thats on Sumlin. It looked like promises were made to keep Murray from tu. Those decisions turned toxic, and spoiled both both of them on Sumlin. Beating tu for Murray was great on signing day, now I wish he were a Longhorn. Kyle Allen would still probably be an Ag and Murray never would have been one.
I respectfully disagree. It was almost entirely the fault of the Murrays
Bunk Moreland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
This reads like an old Lopez article.
TXM Pride
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
cevans_40 said:

TXM Pride said:

I disagree wholeheartedly with Olin. Stidham could essentially be a 1 and done. Probably 2 years max. A&M very well could have signed both Jarrett and Kellen. It's usually in a QBs best interest to come in and redshirt a year to grow as a player and learn the system. Jarrett could have been the place holder like Trevor and given our young QBs even more time to grow. We will probably be starting an underclassmen again, which apparently is Sumlins signature move. I'm a Sumlin guy, but with how much this team/college football is quarterback driven I would have had to made a serious run at a guy who's shown he can do it at a P5 school already.

If Mond did sign with us in your scenario, Stidham is one and done, and Starkell leaves before this season. Sumlim played this one right. The only mistake in my mind was recruiting Murray at all (as he and his dad ran off Allen).


I disagree. Starkel is a redshirt freshman and Mond a true freshman. In my scenario Mond redshirts (unless an Ole Miss situation happens and you burn the shirt like they did with Shea Patterson) and Starkel is the back up. We then have the QB battle a year from now when one is a redshirt sophomore and the other a redshirt fish with almost 2 full years on campus. It's the job of the coach to get these guys to see the bigger picture. It's usually not best for the team to start a young guy at QB, not always but usually. Dude from UNC (can't think of his name right now) proved that you don't have to start for 3-4 years to get drafted high. I think almost all QBs except for the rare occasions should sit for 2 years before being QB1. Allow for growth physically and mentally, as well as mature as a person. Dealing with the stress of being a major college QB can't be easy.
Amazing Moves
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
Preparing for a future coach is not what he intended. Unfortunately, that's what's likely to happen. Unless they see this as a down year and let him eat another season of that contract in '18. He's still recruiting well.
Fightin Tex Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
AG
If history has proven anything its that we'd be lucky if 2 of those 4 players become consistent contributors. Maybe I don't have as big of a dog as Coach does, but I would have taken Stidham. I don't know how you pass on someone with that much on field success. I will be rooting for all four of them to prove me wrong.
jja79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
Middle of the pack in our division is recruiting well?
Amazing Moves
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
jja79 said:

Middle of the pack in our division is recruiting well?
Middle of the pack is not coaching and developing well. Recruiting is just fine.
Aggie95
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
there is ZERO chance we sign Mond if Statham came here.
jja79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
I disagree but it doesn't really matter does it? When they get here our guys don't often enough turn out to be football players.
cp09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V
AG
We don't know for sure who would've left if we got Stidham, maybe Mond stays.

But say Mond doesn't stay in this scenario. Then if Stidham left after this year that would assume him having one of the best years a qb has ever had at our school, and would be one of a handful of RS Soph in history to go into the draft.
So that in itself might make it worth it. And frankly would probably save Sumlin his job assuming a huge Stidham year would equate to wins.
p-wonk01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
It would have been a risk either way, but I think we should have taken Stidham. He hadn't played in a year, but does have experience and showed a high level of promise. Knowing he has to win now, I'm surprised Sumlin didn't take that route.

I'm going to make my crazy prediction for the year...Stidham will lead Auburn over Bama to claim the West this year (meanwhile dropping 50 on us). Hopefully I'm wrong.
jja79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
I don't think that prediction is that crazy. I think they at least contend for the west and agree they'll drop 50 on us.
La Bamba
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
Lot of Stidham love out here. Let's see how the season plays out.
Bob15
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
It's not as if he has handled the quarterback situation well during his tenure here. His handling of the situation has been a complete joke after Johnny (one can say he handled that not so well either, just letting JFF do whatever he wanted as long as he was not melting down on the field).

It has yet to be determined if he made the right move, but IMHO, Stidham is a take every day and twice on Sunday.

It's also silly to think Mond wouldn't have come here because of Stidham. He had committed to the cubbies when Stidham was there.
M.C. Swag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
cp09 said:

We don't know for sure who would've left if we got Stidham, maybe Mond stays.

But say Mond doesn't stay in this scenario. Then if Stidham left after this year that would assume him having one of the best years a qb has ever had at our school, and would be one of a handful of RS Soph in history to go into the draft.
So that in itself might make it worth it. And frankly would probably save Sumlin his job assuming a huge Stidham year would equate to wins.
And we'd still have Starkel, Blumrick, Fortin and Gunnell in the pipeline.
Emilio Fantastico
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
I like how three whole games qualifies Stidham as an experienced QB.

Yeah, he may turn out great for Auburn. But it's not like he had a ton of playing experience and he also hasn't played in two years.
merc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
Emilio Fantastico said:

I like how three whole games qualifies Stidham as an experienced QB.

Yeah, he may turn out great for Auburn. But it's not like he had a ton of playing experience and he also hasn't played in two years.
I could see it being a lot like Knight for us. He's going to give them some stability at the least. Perhaps more. Lot's of people really high on Auburn this year since Gus has backed off of the offense.
GoodOldAgs
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
Idiots
drevans956
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
Imagine what winning would have looked like in 2017!
FishingAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
H
Sumlin better pray stidham doesn't torch us. He's good. What's the difference in taking knight for a year or stidham for a year? None.

Give our young guns some clean-up work and let them mature one lousy year.

Personally I think it's going to bite him in the ass and may save malzahn while costing sumlin his job. I hope I'm dead wrong and we win while getting our kids experience.
jblaschke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
L
AG
Quote:

By denying Stidham, Sumlin looked out for A&M's long-term interests rather than looking out for himself.
So, winning football games would mean Sumlin looking out for himself?

Damn, I miss the laugh/cry icon.
Heisenberg01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
jblaschke said:

Quote:

By denying Stidham, Sumlin looked out for A&M's long-term interests rather than looking out for himself.
So, winning football games would mean Sumlin looking out for himself?

Damn, I miss the laugh/cry icon.


Exactly. The best thing for Sumlin and A&M long term is to win football games. They are not mutually exclusive. The only way you separate the 2 is if Sumlin is not the right guy for the job. Which at that point it could be better that we don't win just enough to keep him. All this what if's and could've's about which recruits stay and go, could also be chalked up to Sumlin's recruiting ability. Mond stated he was still open to coming even with Stidham. If Sumlin couldn't convince him to stay at that point, then it is on him.
ag_eet
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A
AG
Win and recruiting takes care of its self. We haven't had a mature QB since Sumlin arrived. No wonder we swoon in the latter part of the season.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
Verify your student status
See Membership Benefits >