Who’s It Gonna Be?

Photo Attribution: US Presswire

I’ve begun slotting time on my Sunday night schedule to write lengthy prose about whatever it is that has unfolded in a given week regarding the Oklahoma State quarterback situation.

Last week I was fairly certain Lunt was still the guy and Chelf was the backup the rest of the season.

This week though…I feel like we have a QB derby again.

Here are the pros and cons of each guy being QB1 going forward:

Lunt

Pros: He has an arm you can dream on. His only poor performance thus far was the Kansas State game. He played good against Arizona, above average against TCU, and has barely played otherwise, so I’m still not sure you know what he’s made of. As we went over last week, the future is big for #11 and Monken and Gundy are gunning for 2014-2016 Big 12 titles. The development of Lunt was a big part of those plans.

Cons: He throws a lot of picks (like, a LOT). He might be injury-prone. He doesn’t strike me as this gregarious, effervescent leader which isn’t necessarily needed but is nice to have on a team like this[1. I don’t see Chelf scream and hollering but you can tell he has complete control of the team…not sure you can say the same about Lunt, but what can I tell from watching games on TV?].

Walsh

Pros: He’s a [fill in descriptive term for a white QB with a bad arm]. He brings a ton to the table and doesn’t take very much off. He’s proven himself to be an efficient, effective QB1 in legitimate Big 12 games (something Lunt has yet to do). He’s Johnny W. Football.

Cons: People seem to keep forgetting this but his offensive coordinator pretty much copped to only opening a sliver of the playbook in his first few games. That’s a long-term problem without a solution given Walsh’s arm. Sure it can be overridden to a point because he’s a terrific, aware scrambler, I just don’t think you’re winning the Big 12 with a fraction of the playbook. Plus, if there was a stat for almost-pick-sixes he would be leading the country by a lot. People also want to sweep these babies under the rug even though Iowa State’s defensive backs coach had to be medicated so he can sleep after watching how many touchdowns his corners and safeties dropped.

Chelf

Pros: I think this Choo! Choo! thing is a legitimate sticking point. He’s become somewhat of a mini-cult hero in these parts for his performances in the last two weeks and the support is definitely there. He’s almost like a third party political candidate in that people become so divisive on the first two guys that they just start saying “eff it, I’m going with this other guy even though I’m not totally sure he’s the best one just because he doesn’t cause strife amongst Americans (in this case OSU fans).” So there you go, your first (and last) Ross Perot/Clint Chelf QB1 endorsement.

Cons: He only has 16 games left in his college career. His arm isn’t as sexy as Lunt’s (yeah, I said that) and his wheels aren’t as tidy as Walsh’s. I really don’t know of another con.

Ultimately Monken and Gundy need to figure this out quickly, for no other reason than the fact that their team needs some direction and stability going forward. It’s been a while (like six months) since we had a legit, all-three-guys-are-healthy QB derby on our hands but the way Chelf played last weekend certainly elicits the conversation to be had.

To a man I think Gundy would tell you the depth chart in his head is Chelf-Walsh-Lunt and I think he honestly would have played Chelf to start the year if he knew Chelf was going to do Choo! Choo! things. Walsh is a phenomenal backup, everything you want from your second guy and more. Lunt, it seems like he’s either THE GUY or he’s nothing. He doesn’t strike me as a QB2, doesn’t seem like he has that mentality the same way Walsh does. I know that sounds weird but I think that’s where we’re at right now.

Until the NCAA legalizes cross-conference interscholastic trades anyway…