There's a lot of BS in his post, but also some accuracy. Part of Turk's problem is that his posts seem to be trying to agitate, instead of just conveying info. Thorson is the only one of these that did anything, and there was bitter complaining about him and/or the offense for most of his tenure, except for the Austin Carr year. Now, the QB is always the focal point, and in most cases the most important player on the field, and perhaps that is attributing too much of the success or failure to the QB. Nevertheless, even without any qualitative complaints, his QBR went down and INT's went up soph/junior/senior years. Was there any reason to expect a fifth year senior/four year starter to have an Akron debacle followed by an MSU blitzkrieg 2 weeks later? Isn't it reasonable to expect some consistency by then?
The other guys - a hypothesis. Blah Blah practice like you will play, but some of these guys would have been rusty because they rarely or never played. We played so many close games that the backup never got the opportunity to do much of anything. When Oliver and Alviti were pressed into service they were erratic, sometimes good, sometimes not, from play to play, and neither of them dominated when they came in. Regardless of the reason, they didn't perform as well as some other teams' notable backups that were pressed into service when the starter went down or graduated. We hear about next man up/be ready but these are 17-21 year old kids, it's hard to hold there attention for, say THREE YEARS. Any of you have the experience having to sit the bench? I had one year of it, as a freshman on the varsity baseball team in high school. It is agonizing. You do all the work and you don't play. Perhaps it is why the QB room wasn't "ready". Four years of spectator sport and then HJ arrives (which I fully support - it is successful nearly everywhere else except, of course, NU). Pretty easy to get into the habit of "looking at your phone" instead of making every rep count.
In short, McCall and or his/Fitz offense are not 'developing NFL QB's'. Instead, they have recruited guys with some NFL level skill, though apparently not lately, and we are hiding behind 'we've developed more pro QB's than any B1G team in the last decade' 'Siemian is the first NU QB to start an NFL game since Kerrigan' or whatever. Personally, although I love these kids and want them to have successful careers when they leave, I couldn't care less if it is in the NFL or in venture capital, other than the reflected notoriety if gives the program. I just want successful college QBs.
I may deserve to get flagged for a repetitive post here, but the worst boss I ever had once said: "if our team members are not meeting their goals, it is because we (as leaders) have failed them".
It is the responsibility of the millionaires in charge to ensure that they properly vet, select, develop and prepare the indentured servants that they recruit. If they perform poorly, there must be an action plan to fix it. Any failure, particularly a consistent failure or negative trend, falls squarely on the coaches Fire them? Probably not. Insist on a remediation plan? Surely. Any other millionaire in any other industry would be held to this standard.
