Harris wins QB Job??

[The Jackal]

Back on topic
Article on Roberts was in this morning's USA Today - front page sport section. Playing QB against the school you go to is a good story.

I'm sure there aren't a ton, but this is definitely one of the benefits of the local paper having a direct link to a national publication. That story now has some legs in papers/websites all over the country instead of just the one in Greenville.

I imagine that Manie Robinson, a sportswriter for the Greenville news covering Clemson who is also a Furman grad, will have a few stories out in the next few weeks.

[sluggo]

QB situation reminds me of Charpia and Lamb in the '80s
Both played and it worked great.

The "one QB thing" seems to be more about the media wanting to fixate on a single player.
Every other position on the field is rotated without a word spoken.
So rotating QB's is way over hyped as something negative when its probably an advantage.

[The Jackal]

QB situation reminds me of Charpia and Lamb in the '80s
Both played and it worked great.

The "one QB thing" seems to be more about the media wanting to fixate on a single player.
Every other position on the field is rotated without a word spoken.
So rotating QB's is way over hyped as something negative when its probably an advantage.

Furman's offensive staff tends to think outside the box. They rotate linemen, backs, receivers, shift guys around, play guys out of position, etc. Maybe they can find a matchup efficiency in a two QB look.

[furman88]

I think using two QB's with diffrent skill sets adds to the problems of a defense figuring out what you are doing. Got to keep em guessing. Cant lock in on tendencies. Gives our O more options of diffrent looks.

[The Jackal]

I think using two QB's with diffrent skill sets adds to the problems of a defense figuring out what you are doing. Got to keep em guessing. Cant lock in on tendencies. Gives our O more options of diffrent looks.

It's possible. This offense throws a lot of different looks at defenses and can be tailored to fit the QB's skill set. You can adjust the passing game or option game as the situation warrants.

I felt completely the opposite under our last administration. They insisted on both playing one QB with an offense designed around the skill set of the other.

[apaladin]

I completely disagree. There is only one QB position and he is the only one that interacts with the whole offense. There are multiple running backs, receivers, o-linemen etc, but only one QB. You need consistency from this position more than any other, from simple things like handing off and the type of spiral he puts on the ball. When you start running in different QB's you lose consistency and are asking for trouble. Like I said, simple things like handing off can become a problem. IF it is a good thing why do hardly any pro or college teams use a 2 QB system?

[Paul C]

The “Alabama” case study from last years Nat Champ game is an interesting one. Now granted, that wasn’t really rotating, it was replacing. But the issues are still the same. And it worked. While I agree with some of your logic around rhythm and timing, I’m not against it.

[The Jackal]

I completely disagree. There is only one QB position and he is the only one that interacts with the whole offense. There are multiple running backs, receivers, o-linemen etc, but only one QB. You need consistency from this position more than any other, from simple things like handing off and the type of spiral he puts on the ball. When you start running in different QB's you lose consistency and are asking for trouble. Like I said, simple things like handing off can become a problem. IF it is a good thing why do hardly any pro or college teams use a 2 QB system?

Most college and pro teams don't stick WRs at RB and RBs at WR. We do. We are different.

I'm for whatever configuration scores the most points. If its two QBs, then so be it. If it isn't, go with that.

In 2006 the Panthers and Falcons played a late season game in Atlanta. Carolina won, but played most of the game out of the single wing ("wildcat") with a RB at QB. The Falcons struggled to stop it. So, even at the professional levels teams do whatever needs doing and should not feel constrained to do things the way everyone else does them.

[FUBeAR]

If 2 QB’s are the right kind of guys...AND both of their Mama’s are the right kind of Mama’s (trust me...that matters with QB’s today), AND both of them are able to both Move AND Throw (albeit with varying degrees of competency); then 2 QB’s with differing skill sets can, most definitely, be utilized to enhance an Offense.

If ANY of those things are less than solid, using 2 QB’s can tank a season. It’s a risky proposition, but, if we see it at Furman, I’m confident the Coach Quarles & Coach Hendrix will have determined those variables are properly aligned...and we will see the benefits.

On a related note....I’m going to project we may see multiple QB ‘systems’ from several SoCon Teams this season - perhaps from Furman (as discussed), Wofford (Newman & Mosley), WCU (Adams & Jones), Chatt (Tiano & James), ETSU (Herink & Marchi (Temple Transfer)), VMI (Udinski & Coulling), and even from Mercer (Riley & Riddle).

Heck, since there is now a “Hatcher” on the Samford roster with the letters “QB” beside his name, we may even see it from Samford. Remember what I said about those QBs’ Mama’s. That doesn’t even account for a situation where the Head Coach is married to that Mama!

Really, only El Cid (ok...and maybe Samford) is, IMO, 100% ‘set’ at QB this year...and with the bellhops running ‘hard-core’ triple option, their QB’s continuity must always be in question.

[Jasper]

The “Alabama” case study from last years Nat Champ game is an interesting one. Now granted, that wasn’t really rotating, it was replacing. But the issues are still the same. And it worked. While I agree with some of your logic around rhythm and timing, I’m not against it.

I like the idea of replacing more than rotating - although I am not opposed to that either. We all have bad days, I don't see anything wrong with replacing any player who is in the midst of one and the Alabama case you cite is a perfect example of that. It should not mean that the player being replaced loses his spot permanently and, once again, in the Alabama situation it does not appear that the QB who was replaced in that game is losing his starting job. But, Saban felt he needed to do something on that particular night at QB and he did...brilliantly. Guess that is why he is Nick Saban. We see QB changes in practice all the time without any drastic problems with handoffs, snaps, etc. I have faith in this staff to do what is best for the team.

[DeepPurple]

I would hate to have the responsibility to DEFEND our offense. It ought to be fun this year.

[gofurman]

If 2 QB’s are the right kind of guys...AND both of their Mama’s are the right kind of Mama’s (trust me...that matters with QB’s today), AND both of them are able to both Move AND Throw (albeit with varying degrees of competency); then 2 QB’s with differing skill sets can, most definitely, be utilized to enhance an Offense.

If ANY of those things are less than solid, using 2 QB’s can tank a season. It’s a risky proposition, but, if we see it at Furman, I’m confident the Coach Quarles & Coach Hendrix will have determined those variables are properly aligned...and we will see the benefits.

On a related note....I’m going to project we may see multiple QB ‘systems’ from several SoCon Teams this season - perhaps from Furman (as discussed), Wofford (Newman & Mosley), WCU (Adams & Jones), Chatt (Tiano & James), ETSU (Herink & Marchi (Temple Transfer)), VMI (Udinski & Coulling), and even from Mercer (Riley & Riddle).

Heck, since there is now a “Hatcher” on the Samford roster with the letters “QB” beside his name, we may even see it from Samford. Remember what I said about those QBs’ Mama’s. That doesn’t even account for a situation where the Head Coach is married to that Mama!

Really, only El Cid (ok...and maybe Samford) is, IMO, 100% ‘set’ at QB this year...and with the bellhops running ‘hard-core’ triple option, their QB’s continuity must always be in question.

Agree - I have definitely seen 2 QBs work.. and I have seen it be the worst thing possible. Good coaches will sometimes say "if you have 2 QBs, you don't have a QB" or something like that. I could see 2 QBs leading to confusion for an opposing defense (great!) but also for our OL - snap count mistakes etc. Some FBS team I was watching years ago rotated 2 Qbs for the first few games and couldn't hardly snap the ball without a false start on each series... once they went to one QB the false starts declined greatly and they won more.

The argument that other positions rotate (WR, RB) and QB should too is a little strange to me. I mean the Patriots are great in the NFL and they rotate RBs and WRs and you better believe Brady stays in the game. As w most NFL teams. I guess where I am going is QB is such a timing position on the throw and snap count / hand off and everything - it matters so much. You can switch a RB for a better blocking RB on a passing play and that helps give the QB more time. At other positions the changes don't necessarily matter quite as much (such as the RB changing for one play due to situation)

[The Jackal]

I would hate to have the responsibility to DEFEND our offense. It ought to be fun this year.

Coach made that note in his comments about our inside linebackers - they have to defend a pretty complicated offense every day. If Furman doesn't throw it at you in practice, it probably isn't a thing.

[The Jackal]

If 2 QB’s are the right kind of guys...AND both of their Mama’s are the right kind of Mama’s (trust me...that matters with QB’s today), AND both of them are able to both Move AND Throw (albeit with varying degrees of competency); then 2 QB’s with differing skill sets can, most definitely, be utilized to enhance an Offense.

If ANY of those things are less than solid, using 2 QB’s can tank a season. It’s a risky proposition, but, if we see it at Furman, I’m confident the Coach Quarles & Coach Hendrix will have determined those variables are properly aligned...and we will see the benefits.

On a related note....I’m going to project we may see multiple QB ‘systems’ from several SoCon Teams this season - perhaps from Furman (as discussed), Wofford (Newman & Mosley), WCU (Adams & Jones), Chatt (Tiano & James), ETSU (Herink & Marchi (Temple Transfer)), VMI (Udinski & Coulling), and even from Mercer (Riley & Riddle).

Heck, since there is now a “Hatcher” on the Samford roster with the letters “QB” beside his name, we may even see it from Samford. Remember what I said about those QBs’ Mama’s. That doesn’t even account for a situation where the Head Coach is married to that Mama!

Really, only El Cid (ok...and maybe Samford) is, IMO, 100% ‘set’ at QB this year...and with the bellhops running ‘hard-core’ triple option, their QB’s continuity must always be in question.

Agree - I have definitely seen 2 QBs work.. and I have seen it be the worst thing possible. Good coaches will sometimes say "if you have 2 QBs, you don't have a QB" or something like that. I could see 2 QBs leading to confusion for an opposing defense (great!) but also for our OL - snap count mistakes etc. Some FBS team I was watching years ago rotated 2 Qbs for the first few games and couldn't hardly snap the ball without a false start on each series... once they went to one QB the false starts declined greatly and they won more.

The argument that other positions rotate (WR, RB) and QB should too is a little strange to me. I mean the Patriots are great in the NFL and they rotate RBs and WRs and you better believe Brady stays in the game. As w most NFL teams. I guess where I am going is QB is such a timing position on the throw and snap count / hand off and everything - it matters so much. You can switch a RB for a better blocking RB on a passing play and that helps give the QB more time. At other positions the changes don't necessarily matter quite as much (such as the RB changing for one play due to situation)

I don't think it much matters to the OL. Those guys block the play based on the formation and the defensive set up. They aren't focused on where the receivers lineup or who is in the backfield.

[FUBeAR]

I don't think it much matters to the OL. Those guys block the play based on the formation and the defensive set up. They aren't focused on where the receivers lineup or who is in the backfield.

Mostly correct, but gf is correct about variations in snap count...BUT...that’s why they have Coaches & you can be certain that the OLmen will very quickly ‘Coach up’ a young QB, who is throwing things off with his snap count. FatBoys will not accept anything that keeps them from getting off the ball in a ‘timely’ & ‘efficient’ manner.

Also, OL may very be concerned with alignment of Retrievers & RB’s, especially in PassPro. Knowing where you might have help or not...or if your help is going to do his job, actually...or even which way to ‘slide’ can be determined by WR’s sets...especially if you have a TE in the game or one of those WingThings FU uses.

Finally, as an OLineman, in PassPro, you like to know about where your QB is going to set up & you can ‘escort’ your opponent away accordingly. Put a guy like Johnny Manziel back there...and if he ain’t making amazing plays with all of that whoop...whooop....whooooop, 3 Stooges running around BS...he may find those OLmen start turning their guys a-loose at the beginning of the play. May be part of the on-field struggles he had in the NFL.