TwistNHook: Well, we only have like 8,000 more months before the season starts, so I think that'll be enough time to get it figured out. If nobody proved themselves head and shoulders better, then, why rush it? Let the competition push them to better themselves and better their game. Last time we had a situation like this that I can remember was 2008 with Riley and Longshore. Tedford didn't name Riley the starter until like the week before the first game (IIRC).
HydroTech: I see no reason to name a starter this early on. Let the kids battle it out through some or most of fall camp before naming a starter.
TheScientist019: Lemme play some devil's advocate. When Maynard was first named starter, I remember Tedford saying it was important to name him as starter early so he could take on the leadership position and it would be his team. Obviously, we've got a new coach and new philosophies, but couldn't this become an issue with postponing the decision, especially if two of the candidates are freshmen? They're such babies!
LEastCoastBears: It doesn't really matter. No one really stood out as the clear choice (or clearly behind) based solely on the Spring Game. Other than having the title to build up leadership, it is not like we are spreading out the reps so much that is hindering the other guys from being better. Don't think this is an omen of Dyke's indecisiveness or anything.
Unclesam22: I pretty much agree with what everyone has said previously. Coming into this offseason there was no heir apparent so we knew that it would be an actual open competition for the job. As it is, no one has seized control of it, so it makes sense to continue the competition into fall camp. The playbook is simple enough that a ton of reps aren't necessary to get a good command of it and I suspect that each guy will work hard over the summer to improve their areas of weakness and then come back ready for more. So in my eyes, I don't see any downside.
I could see how some Negabears would talk about how this shows either indecision on the part of Coach Dykes or a lack of leadership from a position where it is sorely needed, but I'd rather this open competition than the stubborn sticking with someone that clearly isn't getting it done simply for the sake of continuity. See what you've got, give everyone a fair chance, and then make the call after fall camp.
blueandgold15: Having no quarterback named is deeply unsettling for fans, but I don't have any reason to believe that they should have had a winner already. I've written some more on each QB in my post-spring thoughts, but in short - nobody has stood out enough to win the job outright. Any decision made right now would just be premature.
atomsareenough: I actually like the idea of keeping the competition going. There's absolutely no need or urgency to name a starter now; there aren't any more full practices until fall camp anyway, and it will push the 3 contenders to work extra hard this summer and continue to improve themselves. If one guy is named the top candidate at this point, then the other guys might feel like the they won't have a shot during fall camp. Frankly, based on the all the reports, it doesn't sound like any of them has really separated himself anyway, so what would be the basis for the decision?
So, I'm fine with letting things go until fall, and seeing who steps up in fall camp. I like the idea that the whole team is getting plenty of reps with each of these guys, so there's familiarity and confidence with all of them. In response to TS019's point, I'd say the flip side of that is that if you name a starter early and give him all the reps, then if something happens to him, the next guy might be completely ill-prepared to step in, as we saw with many of the back-ups during the Tedford era.
That said, if one guy starts to show he's the best QB for the job, then by all means, give him most of the reps and name him the starter. But that guy needs to really earn it and prove he's the guy before that happens, and to my mind, nobody has done that yet.
Berkelium97: I certainly don't mind that the competition will stretch into the summer. Like atoms said, this will continue to motivate all three to work hard over the next few months.
Having an ongoing competition isn't as big of a deal after having the "privilege" of open practices over the past month. It's clear that whoever wins the job will be a competent QB, as we say impressive performances from all three at different points during spring ball. I certainly feel much better than I would if access to practice had been blocked off, leaving us with little knowledge of how well prepared the QBs are to take over the offense.