Give The Backup QB Meaningful Snaps In Most Games?

[Northeast Stinger]

Agree with much of this, but.....

Having a preset plan to play a guy for x amount of series then insert guy 2 is a slippery slope. What if guy 1 is hot as fire, do you yank him because of your plan? If you do, what does that say to your team? What if guy 2 sucks and you lose, what effect does that have on your team and qb's? If you don't, what does that say to guy 2 and what does that do to his psyche?

I think this happened to CPJ in one game when Tevin was quarterback. CPJ had promised to play Vad at such and such a time (3rd series first quarter or 1st series second quarter) and it did not happen. A reporter asked him about that after the game. He said, "Things happen."

 

[GT Man]

I personally think the back up QB gets his snaps late in a game when the outcome isn't in jeopardy one way or the other. You need to have continuaty with the QB/OL and RB's.

Partially agree, but on a crucial 4th and 1, do you want JT or TB running the play?

 

[danny daniel]

Agree with much of this, but.....

Having a preset plan to play a guy for x amount of series then insert guy 2 is a slippery slope. What if guy 1 is hot as fire, do you yank him because of your plan? If you do, what does that say to your team? What if guy 2 sucks and you lose, what effect does that have on your team and qb's? If you don't, what does that say to guy 2 and what does that do to his psyche?

I agree the coach must have the knowledge, experience, game awareness, and people skills to appropriately balance and adjust when playing two QBs. It is a lot easier on the coach to announce a starter and stick with it, even if it is not optimum for team performance. The "preset plan" obviously must have built-in flexibility and this puts a lot more decision-making on coach. I think the one QB mentality is often an easier route for the coach and exposes him to less criticism from fans and press.

Coach Dodd was a master of playing the right people at the right time in the right position, including using more than one QB. I specifically remember him bringing in Toppy Vann (replacing the starter Bridgeman) in goal line situations to roll down the line and fall into a hole for the score. For example: I can see Byerly in the red zone being more effective than JT and that being an understanding with coach and the two QBs based on game situation and earned performance. If you strictly want to run the clock I can see Byerly as the QB choice whereas if you need big plays JT is the choice.






















'preset plan"

 

[danny daniel]

I agree the coach must have the knowledge, experience, game awareness, and people skills to appropriately balance and adjust when playing two QBs. It is a lot easier on the coach to announce a starter and stick with it, even if it is not optimum for team performance. The "preset plan" obviously must have built-in flexibility and this puts a lot more decision-making on coach. I think the one QB mentality is often an easier route for the coach and exposes him to less criticism from fans and press.

Coach Dodd was a master of playing the right people at the right time in the right position, including using more than one QB. I specifically remember him bringing in Toppy Vann (replacing the starter Wade Mitchell) in goal line situations to roll down the line and fall into a hole for the score. For example: I can see Byerly in the red zone being more effective than JT and that being an understanding with coach and the two QBs based on game situation and earned performance. If you strictly want to run the clock I can see Byerly as the QB choice whereas if you need big plays JT is the choice.






















'preset plan"

 

[danny daniel]

Correction: Toppy Vann would come in in goal line to replace Wade Mitchell, the starter...temporary memory loss!















;

 

[thwgjacket]

I think that every year we can point to QB injuries or just plan body fatigue (see pro #4). Going into the fourth quarter TW would just be slower even though he wasn't injured enough to pull. Vad was the same way - his high point was the UNC game where he played an awful lot and was dog tired at the end. I thought he would take a knee in the huddle. The problem with Vad was that after that he got something it seems in his mind that limited him.

This isn't about sacrificing a win but improving overall performance. If the starter's psyche is too weak to handle the competition, then he'll probably be too weak psychologically late in the game. Just like it makes sense for a DL or OL to take a break to get him rested for a later series where he will then be more effective (accepted football coaching strategy), it seems to be the right thing for QBs. Especially if rotation is an announced strategy and not a punishment for "bad" performance.

Are we seeing more substituting of QBs in the NFL? (I don't watch a lot of variety of NFL games.)

For coaches on this forum, is this confidence thing more important for HS or younger kids? They would seem to need to be more carefully developed since they are developing more. So it probably does apply more to some D1 CFB QBs than others.

In your 1st Con you said it could lessen the chance of winning the game that day. To me that's sacrificing a chance to win. Going into the 4th everyone is tired. NFL teams do not sub QB's in a way that you are talking about. I would argue that our offense needs rhythm between the QB and the other offensive players even more than the passing game. Sticking a different QB in can mess with that rhythm and create more turnovers. I like your Steve Spurrier-esk idea but I just don't see us needing to do it. I think the Con's outweigh the positives on this one.

 

[wingsrlevel]

Partially agree, but on a crucial 4th and 1, do you want JT or TB running the play?

I want JT handing the ball to Laskey so we can pick up the 1st down.

 

[bat_082994]

Partially agree, but on a crucial 4th and 1, do you want JT or TB running the play?

I can tell you right now CPJ would decide that based on how the game had gone thus far. If the OL to that point hasn't been spectacular, you have two or three options: Byerly Midline, Laskey up the gut, or rocket toss and hope/pray you get good blocking on the perimeter. If the OL to that point has been playing well, it opens it up a little more

 

[GTech63]

My 2 cents: Fatigue is likely a greater issue for running qbs. Being able to give the starter a breather now and again make sense when you have a reliable backup.

I agree our QB takes a mental and physical pounding in the TO offense. I hope Tim's play today will give CPJ more confidence in giving JT5 a break to see from the sideline what is going on especially when JT 5 is struggling or hurt. Seems he must have been hurt in the latter part of 2nd quarter. There are times you can see Justin is really having to suck it up later in the half and end of game.

JT5 is a gamer and tried to put it on his back again today. I hope our team has more fight than so many "fans" seems to have.

 

[Cheesehead Jacket]

I've been a long time proponent of playing two QBs during the course of a game and not just mop up duty. Now CPJ is putting a lot of praise on both. Here are some pros and cons I did a few months ago after Vad announced he was leaving and I was fuming about JT not being developed more last year. #3 and #6 under the pros below are probably why I like playing two QBs the most. Any other thoughts?

"Ok, here are what I can think of as the pros and cons of the following concept. When you have two QBs who are close in talent, it should be the practice to play the starter for the first two or three series and then have the backup play for a couple of series. Then stay with the QB doing the best.

Cons

1. Could mean less likelihood of winning the game that day. The increased amount of risk of losing that day would depend on the talent difference between QBs. The backup needs to have clear starting potential. Between JN and Jaybo, I’d never try to develop Jaybo. But for Vad versus TW or JT versus Vad, I would definitely play the backup more. This year, JT versus Byerly will be very close again if JT doesn’t start passing a lot better.

2. Lessens the continuity for the offense to get into a rhythm.

3. Would mean less practice time for the starter.

4. It’s not conventional wisdom. Losses would be blamed on non-conventional practices to help preserve the conventional wisdom. CPJ dabbled in this area this year, but didn’t fully commit. With Vad bolting, it has to be a regret that he didn’t develop JT more. But hind sight is 20/20.

Pros

1. Competition between players is good – makes both players better.

2. Develops the backup more for the likely injuries (or quitting) by the starter. Improves depth and robustness of the team for future games.

3. QBs play better against some teams than others. QBs have good days and bad days. This helps find the right QB for that day.

4. In our rushing offense there are many more hits on our QB. While this doesn’t often end in injury which prevents play, it does result in degradation of play and decision making by the QB. Alternating QBs results in the damage being spread out more.

5. Most other positions have a substitution, especially more physical contact ones like linemen and running backs.

6. The D has to prepare for more looks.

7. Allows the QB not playing to watch from the sideline and see what the D is doing better (CPJ has used this as a reason).

8. It gives us something to talk about."
http://gtswarm.com/community/threads/sewak.1825/page-5#post-33869

I have been a proponent of this plan for this offense for a long time. Especially if you have a talented " backup " as we apparently do. Also , the physical toll it takes on the main guy, not only in the game but as the season goes along. Everyone gets beat up along the way. Maybe CPJ will give it a try.........NOT .

 

[Eric]

@Cheesehead Jacket

What games and situations would you have liked to seen TB come in for JT?

 

[DCSS]

Coaching is probably not as easy as NCAA 20xx makes it seem.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

@Cheesehead Jacket

What games and situations would you have liked to seen TB come in for JT?

This really isn't fair after the fact. I'll be glad to tell you during the game in chat though I wasn't doing chat during our game watching much since I was about two plays ahead of most people for the Duke game. When I do ESPN3 I'm about 3 plays behind. ....... But in yesterday's game, I would have put Byerly in after Butker missed the FG because JT seemed to be dragging a bit. Next drive ended up with the poor pass for int..... but that is hind sight.

CPJ saying JT had a sprained ankle when asked why Byerly went in was factually correct but irrelevant. JT had his ankle sprained in the first half and had a good run in the second. CPJ is incompetent if he waited 6 or so drives to pull a hurting player (and CPJ isn't). JT was pulled for being a gunslinger and not taking care of the football on the second int. BTW I would have pulled him too.

I wouldn't have pulled JT in the Miami game since JT didn't run that much and there weren't many plays. I would have pulled him in the VT game and we may have lost because of the great plays that JT did make,; but Byerly could have made some of those plays late in the fourth against VT like he did yesterday. Like I said, hindsight.

Now we are in the position I expected, JT is nicked up and less than 100%. We can run him into the ground or give him intelligent breaks. Coaching orthodoxy is to run the QB into the ground and then the coach isn't second guessed. Just run him till he can't run no mo.

 

[Cheesehead Jacket]

This really isn't fair after the fact. I'll be glad to tell you during the game in chat though I wasn't doing chat during our game watching much since I was about two plays ahead of most people for the Duke game. When I do ESPN3 I'm about 3 plays behind. ....... But in yesterday's game, I would have put Byerly in after Butker missed the FG because JT seemed to be dragging a bit. Next drive ended up with the poor pass for int..... but that is hind sight.

CPJ saying JT had a sprained ankle when asked why Byerly went in was factually correct but irrelevant. JT had his ankle sprained in the first half and had a good run in the second. CPJ is incompetent if he waited 6 or so drives to pull a hurting player (and CPJ isn't). JT was pulled for being a gunslinger and not taking care of the football on the second int. BTW I would have pulled him too.

I wouldn't have pulled JT in the Miami game since JT didn't run that much and there weren't many plays. I would have pulled him in the VT game and we may have lost because of the great plays that JT did make,; but Byerly could have made some of those plays late in the fourth against VT like he did yesterday. Like I said, hindsight.

Now we are in the position I expected, JT is nicked up and less than 100%. We can run him into the ground or give him intelligent breaks. Coaching orthodoxy is to run the QB into the ground and then the coach isn't second guessed. Just run him till he can't run no mo.

I agree with you Nuke. I would like to have seen coach go to Byerly sooner in this game, starting the 3rd quarter. IMO we were playing sloppy and flat and that would have sent a signal to the whole team that he was not happy with the performance at that time. You explain it during halftime to the whole team and make other changes too : Devine in for Braun ( who did not have a good game ) , Days in for Laskey , etc. it's just to shake up the team and maybe the opponent a little bit, not to punish anyone.

 

[wingsrlevel]

This really isn't fair after the fact. I'll be glad to tell you during the game in chat though I wasn't doing chat during our game watching much since I was about two plays ahead of most people for the Duke game. When I do ESPN3 I'm about 3 plays behind. ....... But in yesterday's game, I would have put Byerly in after Butker missed the FG because JT seemed to be dragging a bit. Next drive ended up with the poor pass for int..... but that is hind sight.

CPJ saying JT had a sprained ankle when asked why Byerly went in was factually correct but irrelevant. JT had his ankle sprained in the first half and had a good run in the second. CPJ is incompetent if he waited 6 or so drives to pull a hurting player (and CPJ isn't). JT was pulled for being a gunslinger and not taking care of the football on the second int. BTW I would have pulled him too.

I wouldn't have pulled JT in the Miami game since JT didn't run that much and there weren't many plays. I would have pulled him in the VT game and we may have lost because of the great plays that JT did make,; but Byerly could have made some of those plays late in the fourth against VT like he did yesterday. Like I said, hindsight.

Now we are in the position I expected, JT is nicked up and less than 100%. We can run him into the ground or give him intelligent breaks. Coaching orthodoxy is to run the QB into the ground and then the coach isn't second guessed. Just run him till he can't run no mo.

We haven't really seen TB play during stressful conditions. How would he play? Can he make a pitch? IDK because all I've seen him do is throw it or run it himself. We ran quite a bit of plays in the Miami game. We may find out in the near future how he does but for now JT is the starter. The sky isn't falling because of 1 loss.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I agree with you Nuke. I would like to have seen coach go to Byerly sooner in this game, starting the 3rd quarter. IMO we were playing sloppy and flat and that would have sent a signal to the whole team that he was not happy with the performance at that time. You explain it during halftime to the whole team and make other changes too : Devine in for Braun ( who did not have a good game ) , Days in for Laskey , etc. it's just to shake up the team and maybe the opponent a little bit, not to punish anyone.

This makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Boomergump]

The only part of this idea I like is that it can give the starter a blow that could be a difference maker at the end of games. Against UM, I doubt JT needed a break. He was point guard all day and rarely took off for much yardage. Conversely, against VT, JT ran wild and had a bunch of roll outs to boot. He was exhausted at the end, as would be expected. I can remember JN looking like he had emphysema at the end of some contests. He could barely get air. This offense can tire a QB flat out. The Duke game was a tough physical game once again for JT. There were a lot of carries, yards, hits, illegal ankle twists, and scrambles etc.

 

[wingsrlevel]

Heat and humidity are not our friends either. I thought we looked flat out exhausted against Duke. If the starters are rested a series per half it could make a big difference in the game when we are trying to run clock or need a drive to win the game. It's tough playing every down as a QB. I think we all saw what TB's fresh legs were able to do to Duke.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Not playing TB much in the first 3 games didn't seem to hurt him when he came in vs Duke. I guess those practic reps arent completely worthless. I don't think much has changed with either player to affect my thought on the issue. I feel TB is very capable and will not worry any time he is in the game. JT is elite though and you don't put elite on the sideline unless he is physically unable to perform at a high level or gets off track like he did a bit vs. Duke.
When JT is obviously hobbled, like vs Duke, I am a proponent of pulling him for a series (or several plays at least) and letting the trainers work on him some. I think that helps get him right physically and mentally to get back in the game. Only times I would have pulled him vs Duke were right after the two ankle wrench plays...he got up very slow and hobbled both times, and after that last pick.

 

[GTRX7]

There is also something to be said for letting a young QB work through some of his struggles. I agreed with when coach finally pulled JT out, but also agreed it was the right thing to do to leave him in that long. We all talk about experience shaping players. Well, JT may be our QB for three years. Although there were a lot of negatives last game, there were also a lot of very valuable learning experiences he gained that may help him be a better QB in the long run.