Started By
Message
Question about #2 and #3 quarterbacks
Posted on 7/21/17 at 9:59 am
Posted on 7/21/17 at 9:59 am
I'm admittedly no football coach, but I've always, always! wondered about what I see as a mistake in playing time for backup QBs.
Too many times, when the #1 goes down, teams trot out some skinny underclassman who has only 6 garbage-time snaps of experience under his belt.
In my amateur mind, I'd suggest that backups play at least 2 series in the second half (especially against teams such as Mo State and other "easy" teams)
I understand giving the #1 the glory and stats, but a good insurance policy seems to point toward more playing time for backup QBs.
That going in for a couple kneel-down snaps with 16 seconds remaining teaches them noting.
Your thoughts?
Too many times, when the #1 goes down, teams trot out some skinny underclassman who has only 6 garbage-time snaps of experience under his belt.
In my amateur mind, I'd suggest that backups play at least 2 series in the second half (especially against teams such as Mo State and other "easy" teams)
I understand giving the #1 the glory and stats, but a good insurance policy seems to point toward more playing time for backup QBs.
That going in for a couple kneel-down snaps with 16 seconds remaining teaches them noting.
Your thoughts?
This post was edited on 7/21/17 at 10:01 am
5
Posted on 7/21/17 at 10:06 am to Literalist
The Blaine Gabbert-James Franklin/James Franklin-Maty Mauk system is the best. Get the #2 a meaningful series in each half. Especially if you need to change the flow of the game.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 11:00 am to Literalist
We've been pretty good about getting our #2 some game action recently.
However, your main objective is to win games. There is a reason the #1 is the #1.
However, your main objective is to win games. There is a reason the #1 is the #1.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 1:20 pm to JesusQuintana
It has been better the last few seasons.
IMO, not having a #2 you could trust at all really hurt us in 2008 and 2009.
Just kept playing Daniel and Gabbert even though they were hurt and it, in part, cost us games.
IMO, not having a #2 you could trust at all really hurt us in 2008 and 2009.
Just kept playing Daniel and Gabbert even though they were hurt and it, in part, cost us games.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 1:35 pm to Literalist
When Brandon Allen went down for a couple of games a few years back our backup QB was AJ Derby. Who did make it to the NFL.
As a TE.
I've always thought that if you have a game well in hand trot your backup QB out there as soon as you can to get him some reps and protect your starter from some fluke injury.
As a TE.
I've always thought that if you have a game well in hand trot your backup QB out there as soon as you can to get him some reps and protect your starter from some fluke injury.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 6:38 pm to Literalist
I don't disagree, when the timing is right. Obviously, not with a game on the line. My biggest complaint in years past when they've put in a back up Gabbert, back up Franklin or back up Mauk, they go in to just hand the ball off 3 times and punt. Let them run the damn offense. Again, that presumes that we have a comfortable margin.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 6:39 pm to JesusQuintana
quote:
However, your main objective is to win games. There is a reason the #1 is the #1.
I don't think anyone is questioning that or who the #1 is this year. The point is if you're up 49-7 in the 4th, let the backup get meaningful reps, not just take a knee or hand the ball off 3 times and punt.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 7:24 pm to reedus23
I'm with that. I'm just not a huge proponent of scheduled series for the backup when the game is still in doubt. Unless your backup is really good.
That being said, I think Wilson is really good or he can be really good. From a physical talent standpoint he's as impressive as we have had.
That being said, I think Wilson is really good or he can be really good. From a physical talent standpoint he's as impressive as we have had.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 7:25 pm to reedus23
quote:
they go in to just hand the ball off 3 times and punt. Let them run the damn offense.
Bingo. Give em the reins for a few series.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 9:03 pm to JesusQuintana
quote:
I'm just not a huge proponent of scheduled series for the backup when the game is still in doubt.
I'm absolutely with ya there. Hell, I don't like "scheduled" series even if the backup is really good. That's like saying you're bringing in your reliever in the 9th before the game starts. Well, if your starter is throwing a no-no and is only at 97 pitches, maybe you should toss the "schedule". In other words, let the game dictate what you do instead of having a schedule.
Posted on 7/21/17 at 9:11 pm to reedus23
quote:
I'm just not a huge proponent of scheduled series for the backup when the game is still in doubt.
Obviously not in a tight game. And I agree with not liking scheduled series. But I've seen too many games (not necessarily at Mizzou) when the game is well in hand and the #2 goes only in for 3 handoffs with 45 seconds left. That doesn't teach a young QB shite or give him any meaningful leadership experience to call upon if #1 goes down.
Posted on 7/22/17 at 2:48 am to reedus23
I agree, but then someone complains about "running up the score" if the backups move the ball too much.
Posted on 7/22/17 at 2:50 am to JesusQuintana
I was surprised when Franklin came in for a series against Oklahoma in 2010 when the game was still in doubt. I think he scored on a QB draw on that series.
Posted on 7/22/17 at 6:24 am to CRDNLSCHMCPSN11
I guess I'm in the minority here. I loved the series a half philosophy.
A series a half, even with the game on the line, served several goals. It got the back-up ready to play in all situations, it made the opposition have to prepare for multiple QBs, the change of pace QB could change the momentum of the game. And last but not least, it could light a fire under the starter's arse to play better or eventually get replaced.
Of all the things Pinkel did I thought his method of getting his back-up QB significant PT was genius.
Posted on 7/22/17 at 10:26 am to Literalist
If you are going to give the BU reps vs the cupcakes it needs to be with the #1 skill group for it to have any value IMO. A couple of second half series with the #3 skill group vs a gassed, over matched defense results in windows that won't exist vs conference teams.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News