re: Fields wants to play in Sugar Bowl while exploring transfer

quote:

---

That can be said for every position. Offense or defense.

The QB position is no different.

---

Except different positions have different levels of relative importance. It's kind of like saying having a guy who is struggling to know what's going on in the air traffic control tower has the same impact as a guy who's struggling to grasp what's going on at the Cinnabon on Concourse C.

quote:

---

If another QB makes Fromm worse... wouldn't he get worse when the opposing offense and opposing QB is on the field?

---

If Fromm wasn't able to use that time to talk with the guys and coaches because they were having to devote that time to Fields, then yes, or at least potentially yes. If not, then no, because he could still be using that time advantageously.

quote:

---

That can be said for every position. Offense or defense.

The QB position is no different.

---

Not true. There's a reason why so much attention is given to the QB. They are responsible for a lot more than a WR, RB, TE, or OL is. They work hard throwing to their receivers to work on their timing, because if timing isn't perfect, it can be the difference between a touchdown and a pick-six. Consistency is very helpful to the entire offense and stability at the QB position is very, very helpful with that.

quote:

---

If another QB makes Fromm worse... wouldn't he get worse when the opposing offense and opposing QB is on the field?

The point is overblown.

---

It's not simply about making a QB "worse", but throwing off timing, momentum, and the feel for what's going on on the field. When the other team is on offense, the QB is on the sideline talking to one of the coaches or the other players to review the previous drive and/or prepare for the next one. They are operating under the mindset that they have to go in at any moment to play again. That's not going to happen when you don't know if you're going to take the field from one possession to the next or from one play to the next. I would think it's even worse when you're subbed out mid-series for a play or two waiting to see what the other guy does and wondering what you'll need to do to "clean up" after the other QB, if you have to.

quote:

---

The reason is because 1 QB is definitely better than the other. And you play your best players.

---

Generally speaking, you're right, but it's not necessarily true that that's the situation. Tua held a clipboard for almost all of his freshman season even though he was better than Hurts. Fromm did the same thing for a few series before Eason got injured. Other teams have situations like we do where the backup is very talented and offers a different skill set than the QB1 and so he gets some situational action but isn't quite good enough to beat out the starter for the full-time job.

You rarely see a situation where the starter is taken out in seemingly random plays and series throughout a game to give playing time to the backup. The reason for that is that they do play the best player and let him run the offense without the distraction of having someone else take snaps in the middle of crunch time, potentially getting in the head of the QB1 and damaging his rhythm, timing, and confidence.

quote:

---

And in the NFL where cap space limits personnel, 1 QB is often infinitely better than the other.

---

That's a completely different ball of wax, but even so, the principle still applies. An NFL team will often times trade for a filler QB and draft their future and then let one or the other be the guy behind center during game time. You don't often see teams switching QBs in and out of the game because it isn't good for the offensive cohesion and continuity that teams spend countless hours trying to achieve.

I thought it was "Gil-yerd" or "Gal-yerd"