Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: TerpsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

So Maryland Coach Friedgen could play three quarterbacks Saturday

Here is what to look for in Saturday's showdown with Morgan State at Byrd Stadium:

Quarterback Jamarr Robinson will play for the Terps.

Backup Danny O'Brien is expected to play some, as well.

Third-stringer C.J. Brown could play, too.

Here is what Friedgen said about quarterbacks on today's ACC teleconference: "I think we'll play both. I wouldn't be surprised if we wind up playing C.J. Brown."

What does everyone make of the three-headed quarterback situation we may see Saturday?

And what's up with all the negative reaction toward new AD Kevin Anderson? I've been flooded with negative -- and at times angry -- e-mails about the hire. Okay, they didn't get your man Jeff Hathaway. But what's wrong with Anderson??

By Eric Prisbell  |  September 8, 2010; 1:41 PM ET
Categories:  Football  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Why Gary Williams will like Kevin Anderson
Next: Friedgen sends defense to the showers


Well, I don't think we'll see Brown at QB unless the game is well in hand or Robinson and O'Brien both get injured.

As for anger at Anderson, it's pretty simple, the University of Maryland hired him. It doesn't matter that Hathaway didn't get the job, there would have been all kinds of complaining about him too. A good number of my fellow Maryland fans have become some of the most unhappiest people on the planet and I don't think there's anything that will ever make them happy.

Posted by: CapsNut | September 8, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

anderson is a great hire. md fans are some of the dumbest people on the planet.

Posted by: slim4 | September 8, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Here's what I think:

I think MD should've beat Navy by more than 3. Hartfield should've fell on that fumble (which later turned into Navy's TD) and J. Robinson's tossed an interception during a promising drive that should've produced points. For all of you saying we were lucky, I counter with these two plays. Keep playing hypotheticals all you like. Or as I like to call them Poopy-theticals (for being overly pessimistic) and Barno-theticals (for being overly optimistic).

I think the new AD will be just fine and think that anyone critical of him already needs a hobby to keep them busy.

I think there is no reason UMD can't be 5-0 heading down to Clemson.

I think most teams won't be able to run as effectively against us as Navy did; however, I'm not overly optimistic about our secondary so I'm petrified of a capable passing team.

I think Torrey Smith should be QB.

Posted by: fushezzi | September 8, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

What in the world was Ralph thinking by putting in a rookie QB late in the Navt game - at that point in the game and given that field position, the last thing you want is a mistake due to lack of experience by the QB, RB and center with the required timing of the play!!!

Posted by: rrlyon131 | September 8, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

You forgot to mention that Navy fumbled a punt that they recovered and Chism should've had an INT. For those that say UMd was lucky to not have lost by three TD's, Navy was just as lucky to not lose by 3 TD's.

Posted by: aviscardo | September 8, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

And all that really matters at the end of the day is:

Maryland 1-0
Navy 0-1

All other information is moot.

Posted by: fushezzi | September 8, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

People saying the Terps were lucky to win are demonstrating a lack of football knowledge. The Terps defense bent, and bent and bent, but did not break. Its something they actually did multiple times last year as well. Its just that last year they could only face so many goal line stands and come out on top.

Against Navy, as others have posted here, the Midshipmen were lucky the Terps didnt score a couple more TDs. Its true the announcers said Navy COULD have scored several additional TDs, but thats a lot different than saying they SHOULD have scored more TDs. The bottom line is the Terp defense was STOUT when it counted! Navy mistakes??? How about overwhelming Terp D?! Again, they did it over and over last year too!

Posted by: TerpInTime | September 8, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

As for the Terps possibly playing two or even three QBs this weekend...BAD idea! Stick with Robinson and get with the program. In all the years watching Ralph coach, that play where he put the backup guy in for one nightmare play was the worst coaching decision I think he's ever made. Dont make the QB situation worse by using multiple guys all season.

Posted by: TerpInTime | September 8, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

On the flip side, Navy shoulda had a field goal at the end of the first half (Jim Zorn school of clock management) and another at the end of the second to tie. Oh yeah, and they missed a FG. The game was full of mistakes on both sides but MD won (thus RF outcoached the Navy guy whose daughter is on the Lax team).

In terms of MD fans complaining....OF COURSE MD FANS COMPLAIN - its the state school of NJ moreso than Rutgers. A lot of us spent as much on parking tickets as we did tuition. I think we wanted a bigger name. As long as GW approves of him, I'm ok.

Regards -


Posted by: HughGRection | September 8, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: bethesdaguy | September 8, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

I think playing two QBs on Saturday is a good idea, but playing 3 just makes a mess of the situation. O'Brien needs to get some work, and is most likely the QB that will lead this team in the future. Robinson is decent, but probably should be used as a wildcat option only. Throwing Brown in the mix is just going to stir controversy. If O'Brien was the #2 coming out of both spring and fall practice, he should have to do something pretty terrible to lose that spot, and I could the fumbled handoff against Navy a mulligan.

As far as the hiring of Anderson, I think a lot of the anger directed towards the selection is that he does not have experience running a "big-time" program. Army's a decent program, but it's just not competitive with the big boys in the important sports. The other issue, and I think this is big, is that this decision came so quickly. Most were expecting this search to take well into the semester, and possibly until the end of the year, yet this guy is hired the first week of the semester, and less than two weeks after Loh was hired as president. For a department that said they were gonig to be thorough and meticulous, they sure were able to do so in record time.

It's hard to tell how Anderson is going to affect the department coming from a much lower profile/lower pressure situation, but I know one thing for sure that no one out there can complain about---he's not Debbie Yow.

Posted by: Russtinator | September 8, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Bot hcoaches needed to have their butts kicked. Ralph for calling a pass after 13 straight rushes produced 134 yds with the current drive being no different. Why would you pass while running the ball down the defenses throat and take a chance on the momentum changing turnover? Worst case if you keep running, barring a fumble you are kicking a fg, and second the obvious idiotic QB substitution. Not even Jim Zorn would have substituted QB with the game in the balance and a golden opportunity to extend your lead. Friedgen D- and it would be an F but the defense bailed him out.

And Navy's coach for the obvious stupid pump up your chest plays that should have been 3 points each. He gets an F because he lost a game that was easily winable.

For those that say woulda coulda shoulda, thats why they make them actually play the game, however you are right. When you get in the red zone you have to at least get a field goal 2/3 of the time and if both teams had done that Navy wins. They probably beat us 7 out of 10, but i guess we will have to wait for the next 9 to find out. And whoever said there is no reason to not be 5-0 when heading to Clemson. There is one small reason. We suck bad. And one big fat tub of goo reason, and I think we all know who that is....

Posted by: dbrine1261 | September 8, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Could the negativity towards the new AD, could the color of his skin have anything to with people being upset?

Nah that would never be a factor.

Posted by: dcinmd1 | September 8, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

I have an idea on why the new AD might have engendered some negative comments. Take me as a typical Maryland fan who follows the school's major programs but doesn't follow college athletics across the country. I mean, I know who is a good team and all but I couldn't tell you who are the top AD's. When I heard the radio report I thought, "Great! Is he coming from a highly regarded athletic program?". Then I heard the announcer say he was coming over from Army and I thought, "Huh? That's not exactly the hotbed of major college sports..." It felt more like he was coming from some backwater athletic program so I was disappointed. It has nothing to do with race as I didn't even know he was black until dcinmd1 mentioned it and I don't mean to disparage Army as it is a great school and graduates some fine young people. It's just not the biggest athletic program around and Maryland is, I believe, in the big leagues of college athletics. It made me question whether he could run a big program like Maryland. For all I know he may end up to be a great hire. It sounds like he is very well respected so chances are that he will be successful. But that is why I felt disappointed initially with the hire and maybe that is why others were unhappy. I do like what I have read so far. He seems to have some good ideas on how to maybe change college athletics for the better so, to Mr Anderson, you have my benefit of the doubt and I hope you do a great job for the university and it's fans.

Posted by: LaureninGlenBurnie | September 8, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Within six months the new AD will have had plenty of experience running a major athletic program. Not worried about his past experience being a factor.

I agree with russ on his 3-QB statements. Treating Morgan State as a pre-season game could be really ugly if the score is close. However I will go out on a limb and state that MD will win this game. Definitely. Book it. And may this post be thrown in my face if they lose.

Regards -


Posted by: HughGRection | September 8, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

I live up here in CT with an inside view into the athletic department at UConn. They can't wait to pawn Hathaway on some unsuspecting fools. You want to hire a guy whose number one revenue stream (Men's B-Ball) is under investigation while under his watch?

Posted by: anthonycarreras | September 8, 2010 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Who is upset about Ken Anderson?

He has a great relationship with Navy and will hopefully turn the game into an annual event. Combine that with the return of the WVU game, and possibly breaking the ice with Penn State and Maryland might have a sexy schedule in 2 or 3 years. Also, Gary already endorsed him for uniting the athletic departments.

Lastly, we won't have to look at that bowl cut wearing, Ellen Degeneres wannabe AD anymore. This is one alumnus who is thrilled that Yow is gone. She hamstrung the major sports to help field hockey and soccer. Only basketball and football matter, the rest is just window dressing.

Posted by: superyoda41 | September 8, 2010 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Ralph Friedgen is KILLING this program. Anyone who thinks James Franklin is calling the plays is not in touch. Ralph is controlling EVERYTHING with the offense and deciding what plays will be run. He is also controlling these young men to the point of creating fragile psyches within them. This program will not move forward until Ralph is gone. i just am so glad Anderson is here and will see Ralph for what he is. Nice man, but someone who is arrogant and took credit for things Locksley (poor coach, best recruiter in America), Taafe, and Blackney created at MD. Ralph is a person who hogs credit and is a poor leader

Posted by: leed1911 | September 8, 2010 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Good point, dcinmd1. Any time anyone disapproves of anything involving an African American, it must be because of racism.

On the other hand, maybe it's because some people aren't impressed by the achievements of the athletic program that he previously led.

Nah that would never be a factor.

Posted by: SmittyATL | September 8, 2010 10:03 PM | Report abuse

I know this is against the grain, but I am less than impressed with Ken Andersen's credentials. He hasn't led a public college program with some many athletic departments to glory. The Army really didn't rise to prominence during his tenure.

Personally, I wanted Maryland to get a HIGH PROFILE AD. Someone who can bring positive attention to our program, and help in recruiting Top 10 prospects in all sports.

Oh, well!

Our football program needs to be overhauled. Coach Friedgen did a wonderful job in collaboration with Charlie Taffey. However, not much with James Franklin.

Posted by: mi6-007 | September 8, 2010 10:08 PM | Report abuse

Just another side comment, and sincerely don't want to ruffle any feathers ...

Race has nothing to do with why some folks don't like the selection of Ken Anderson as Maryland's AD.

I am sure a lot of folks would prefer someone who has deep roots with Maryland to be the next AD. And, if they have been an AD in a prominent/successful progam ... that much more better.

Posted by: mi6-007 | September 9, 2010 12:03 AM | Report abuse

Ralph Friedgen is an awful leader. Why start a controversy now? You won a tough game with crap coaching and decisions and now you're talking about playing 3 QBs? This guy is lost and I hope they get rid of his self absorbed self very soon..

Posted by: leed1911 | September 9, 2010 1:16 AM | Report abuse

Friedgen may go with 3 quaterbacks because he can't figure out a way to work Jordon Steffy back into the mix!

For a coach that "knows" quaterbacks he has some of the worse qb decisions.

Posted by: DCFanCouncil | September 9, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

"Fiscal responsibility" is one of the phrases Anderson has uttered several times. If the FB team does not deliver revenues (which requires wins), RF is probably a goner. Wonder what that means for the competitive cheerleaders.

Regards -


Posted by: HughGRection | September 9, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Oh the race card! It has been perpetrated by the left on anyone who has issues with the President's policies and now it applies to the Maryland AD.

The fact that he doesn't come from a major college that has been consistently competing for national titles in football and basketball cannot be a legitimate reason. That his biggest successes have been budget-related cannot be a legitimate reason.

Being critical of the hire and the qualifications cannot be a legitimate issue to raise.

I wish him great success, but I guess I am a racist because I have questions about his qualifications.

Posted by: petecard | September 9, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

People are looking at the AD position the wrong way. There is no recruit who chooses a school based on the AD. No one roots for a team or buys tickets because of the AD. In this day, the AD is a CEO of a decent sized business. He has to hire the right people, run the business efficiently and cost effectively and generate enough revenue to support the entire operation. the skills required for that don't come automatically from running a big-time program. They don't come automatically from having been at a program that has won a bunch of NCAA championships.

By all accounts, Anderson has been a skillful manager and an effective one, as well. Army used to operate at a deficit. Now it runs at a profit. Its teams were generally uncompetitive and now they are much more competitive in sports such as football, women's BBall, lacrosse, ice hockey. To judge Anderson based on the number of championships Army won at the NCAA level is unrealistic. Ask this: did the teams at Army get better? Yes! Did the program operate in a fiscally prudent way? Yes. Did he foster a good environment for fans? Yes! What else can you want for someone just as a new hire?

In 2-3 years, we'll be able to judge what he has done more fully. But now, the credentials are right. Good hire!

Posted by: inwp29 | September 9, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

You just don't get it inwp29. The AD sets the tone for what the program will be. I don't want our teams to be better, I want them to be at the top. Use Texas and Florida as examples. Throw in Oklahoma and Ohio State. Anderson's experience just doesn't show that he can do this. Talk to me about how he has grown revenue in his previous positions. I don't care that he can control cost.

Posted by: petecard | September 9, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company