When has benching starting QB led to failure?

[Tidewater]

We have all taken part in discussions about QB play and how one QB ought to be pulled for the back-up.
We all remember the decision to pull Jalen for Tua. It worked.
My personal opinion is that coaches (and especially Coach Saban) are reluctant to bench a QB because of the damage that decision will do to a young man's confidence. The guy may never get that confidence back, so a coach rides the QB he's got through any rough spot and hopes for better play.

What I want to discuss is any team in which the starter has been pulled and it did not solve the problem. A QB change shattered the starter's confidence and nobody in the QB room could step up. So, anybody remember a team where this happened? Could be Alabama or some other team, college or pro. I suspect the example of a team/QB room falling apart because of the benching of a QB might be illustrative.

Any takers?

 

[81usaf92]

Saban was reluctant to do it largely because of the 1999 Michigan- MSU game where Carr pulled Tom Brady for Drew Henson and it ultimately ended up costing Michigan a national championship opportunity. The situation with Tua in the national championship he was literally forced by his offensive staff at halftime to make that decision it wasn’t a decision he made on his own.

I guess for your question you could probably look at Oklahoma 2024 and a few of the last Auburn teams. They usually come in with a hyped quarterback and a great recruit backing them up and things went south in a hurry. I guess some Spurrier teams would qualify as well because he was notorious for benching quarterbacks to the extent that some started hating football.

 

[dtgreg]

Saban was reluctant to do it largely because of the 1999 Michigan- MSU game where Carr pulled Tom Brady for Drew Henson and it ultimately ended up costing Michigan a national championship opportunity. The situation with Tua in the national championship he was literally forced by his offensive staff at halftime to make that decision it wasn’t a decision he made on his own.

I guess for your question you could probably look at Oklahoma 2024 and a few of the last Auburn teams. They usually come in with a hyped quarterback and a great recruit backing them up and things went south in a hurry. I guess some Spurrier teams would qualify as well because he was notorious for benching quarterbacks to the extent that some started hating football.

Terry Dean

 

[tusks_n_raider]

Terry Dean

This one is a funny case and it could be debated either way.

Wuerffel and Dean got yanked a lot for each other in both ‘93 and ‘94 but their statistics are near identical for both seasons though Dean actually just slightly had a better QBR both seasons.

I don’t remember well enough though if the QB switching cost them a chance at a NC or not though and they still went 23-4-1 with 2 Straight SEC Championships.

Of course Wuerffel went on to win the Heisman 2 years later but Dean was probably good enough to play at that level too in Spurrier’s offense if he got all the touches in 93-94…though that probably delays Wuerffel’s growth so maybe they don’t win the NC in ‘96

A more curious case could be Johnson vs Palmer in the late 90’s but I can’t really remember who was the better of those two and they were both worse than Wuerffel and Dean so it probably didn’t matter.

It’s honestly difficult to remember when a QB switch doesn’t work because the HC usually goes back to the previous starter at some point or it becomes a constant back and forth and neither guy excels.

 

[mlh]

Zow and Watts in 2000

 

[tusks_n_raider]

Zow and Watts in 2000

I dunno about this one.

That team was horrid.

There’s not an Alabama QB in our entire history that could have led that bunch to winning record.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that team was headed towards failure no matter what and it wasn’t either Zow or Watts fault.

 

[CaliforniaTide]

My impression of CNS' reluctance was more due to which QB won the team. Maybe it's not the only reason, but that's a criteria he always spoke about publicly. He also wanted to reward patience in Hurts' growth, but he also seemed to ignore Tua's quick rise. He clearly struggled w/balancing what was best for the team at that time.

From a broader view, any HC (except for Spurrier in my memory) that chooses a starting QB doesn't want to be viewed w/making a wrong choice. This is normal or rational; any of us in a position to make such a choice in our lives don't make decisions to be wrong. When data or circumstances change, I believe it shows maturity and accountability when one changes their decision.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

I just remembered a situation which might apply.

2011 LSU

Jarrett Lee is the Starting QB for the 1st 2 months of the season but during/after the regular season game with us that they won 9-6 ole Les makes the switch to Jordan Jefferson.

Jefferson passed for 85 yards combined in their final 2 games vs UGA and the Rematch with us for the NC

Did that cost them the NC?

I’m not sure but considering they couldn’t even cross the 50 yard line with Jefferson they surely would have played a bit better with Lee who finished 2011 with better stats across the board than Jefferson.

The Switch absolutely did not end in Success.

 

[mlh]

I dunno about this one.

That team was horrid.

There’s not an Alabama QB in our entire history that could have led that bunch to winning record.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that team was headed towards failure no matter what and it wasn’t either Zow or Watts fault.

I agree. But I do believe that the way DuBose handled them negatively affected their confidence.

 

[Tidewater]

Here is an example from the NFL: the 2010 Carolina Panthers.
The coach yanked starting QB Jimmy Clausen, put in Matt Moore, then Brian St. Pierre and the offense fell apart. Worst offense in the league and they finished 2-14.

 

[CrimsonTitles]

Well technically benching Milroe for Tyler Buchner would be an example, but only because they benched Milroe for the wrong guy that game. I'm not sure Milroe ever starts again if Ty starts that game, though. He came in after USF decided to bring house every play because they figured out they didn't have to respect Bucner's arm, and they sure as heck weren't gonna change that strategy for a guy who had never seen any meaningful game action. If he starts that game, then he probably doesn't have the defense in his face from the getgo, and it's likely not even that close of a game.

 

[graydogg85]

Not exactly answering the OP’s question, but I remember hearing that when Franchione was hired and was meeting with individual players, he told Zow that he was a turnover liability and that he wouldn’t play in his offense. Ironically, Watts got hurt in 2001 and Zow had to start the last 3-4 games IIRC.

Watts’ skill set was much better suited to Fran’s offense, to be fair. I always felt bad for Zow because he was jerked around by two different coaching staffs. In a lot of ways, Zow was Freddie Kitchens 2.0. He could be really, really good at times - and then really, really bad at others. Given Dubose’s manic offensive tendencies and the subsequent coaching turnover, Zow was probably asked to run 3-4 different offensive schemes during his time at UA.

Sort of tangent to the OP’s question: in 2002, the offense seemed to really take a step back when Brodie Croyle relieved Watts IIRC. Brodie was not a good fit at all for Fran’s scheme.

 

[graydogg85]

Well technically benching Milroe for Tyler Buchner would be an example, but only because they benched Milroe for the wrong guy that game. I'm not sure Milroe ever starts again if Ty starts that game, though.

I think the staff 100% intended for Buchner to be the starter in 2023 and it just didn’t materialize for whatever reason. He had started 3 games at Notre Dame the prior season and had more or less followed Tommy Rees to Tuscaloosa. He looked awful that day against USF but I remember hearing that he was very solid in fall camp that season.

Someone on this board once reported that Saban went to both Ty and Milroe after spring practice in 2023 and encouraged them to transfer because they were going a different direction with a portal QB. Not sure if that’s true.

Ty was terrific this past season and I’m so glad everything worked out for him, but I remember consistently hearing practice reports from 2022 - 2024 and there was a lot of doubt as to whether he could get the job done. Way too much “hero ball” in practice. If that’s true, he certainly course-corrected in 2025.

 

[Tidewater]

Well technically benching Milroe for Tyler Buchner would be an example, but only because they benched Milroe for the wrong guy that game. I'm not sure Milroe ever starts again if Ty starts that game, though. He came in after USF decided to bring house every play because they figured out they didn't have to respect Bucner's arm, and they sure as heck weren't gonna change that strategy for a guy who had never seen any meaningful game action. If he starts that game, then he probably doesn't have the defense in his face from the getgo, and it's likely not even that close of a game.

That is probably a good example. Milroe went back in the next game as Coach Saban managed the damage done to team psychology, if memory serves.

 

[JDCrimson]

That is probably a good example. Milroe went back in the next game as Coach Saban managed the damage done to team psychology, if memory serves.

Yes, but he had to put Ty in to save win. Ty did enough in that USF game to earn a start imo.

The fact Ty didnt start is evidence that LANK was already entrenched and Saban knew it.

 

[CrimsonTitles]

Yes, but he had to put Ty in to save win. Ty did enough in that USF game to earn a start imo.

The fact Ty didnt start is evidence that LANK was already entrenched and Saban knew it.

Yeah that was my main point. I guess the example sort of works either way, but I think if Fy started that game, the result is very different. It's a completely different animal entering a game when the defense has already decided to bring pressure on every single play, especially when you've never had any significant game time before. If he comes in with time to throw, then it's probably not even a debate, bc he did make the plays when it mattered, even with all the blitzing. They didn't start doing all that until after the first few drives.

 

[Tidewater]

Yes, but he had to put Ty in to save win. Ty did enough in that USF game to earn a start imo.

The fact Ty didnt start is evidence that LANK was already entrenched and Saban knew it.

Agreed. I think that the team falling apart once Milroe was benched was what kept Milroe in the starting job. That is kind of the reason I posed the original question. When has benching the underperforming starting QB caused the team to collapse? Whatever cases there are, I suspect that was in the back of Coach Saban's mind when pondering whether to replace Milroe as the starter.
That and I take Coach Saban at his word. He says one QB will "win the team" or "win the locker room," and Coach Saban will make him the starter.
I suspect, generically, that benching a starting QB will play havoc with that guy's confidence and a QB has to have self-confidence to play well. Benching the starter does not necessarily mean #2 is ready (he was #2 for a reason), but it will likely cost you your starter's ability to return to play later. The cumulative QB Room's ability may paradoxically become worse after benching the starting QB.

 

[Padreruf]

Agreed. I think that the team falling apart once Milroe was benched was what kept Milroe in the starting job. That is kind of the reason I posed the original question. When has benching the underperforming starting QB caused the team to collapse? Whatever cases there are, I suspect that was in the back of Coach Saban's mind when pondering whether to replace Milroe as the starter.
That and I take Coach Saban at his word. He says one QB will "win the team" or "win the locker room," and Coach Saban will make him the starter.
I suspect, generically, that benching a starting QB will play havoc with that guy's confidence and a QB has to have self-confidence to play well. Benching the starter does not necessarily mean #2 is ready (he was #2 for a reason), but it will likely cost you your starter's ability to return to play later. The cumulative QB Room's ability may paradoxically become worse after benching the starting QB.

Totally agree...but note that Ty was a 1st round pick and JM much later. I did an AI request on JM's future -- it basically said that if he cannot improve his midrange and short passing skills as well as ability to read the defense, then he will become a 3rd option somewhere who can run gadget plays only.

I defended him @ UA, but obviously he had serious limitations and CNS & the coaching staff had really "lost" the offensive "locker room." When the inmates run the asylum then you've lost control.

I am sure glad we don't have that controversy...Personally I believe that this situation as much as anything else led to CNS' retirement.

 

[Tidewater]

Probably the best example is Steve Spurrier at Florida. That guy changed QBs fairly regularly it seemed and his teams tended to play pretty well.

 

[LSUgrad2BamaDad]

I just remembered a situation which might apply.

2011 LSU

Jarrett Lee is the Starting QB for the 1st 2 months of the season but during/after the regular season game with us that they won 9-6 ole Les makes the switch to Jordan Jefferson.

Jefferson passed for 85 yards combined in their final 2 games vs UGA and the Rematch with us for the NC

Did that cost them the NC?

I’m not sure but considering they couldn’t even cross the 50 yard line with Jefferson they surely would have played a bit better with Lee who finished 2011 with better stats across the board than Jefferson.

The Switch absolutely did not end in Success.

100% thought of this as I was reading the thread. The problem with this scenario though, is no way LSU wins that game in BDS with Jarret Lee at QB. I don’t think we would have been given a rematch opportunity in the NC game with one loss, even if was on the road. I think you would have played Ok State in the NC.