Multiple QBs

[nycscooby]

I'm reading that HCBD intends to use multiple QBs in games and while having multiple QBs challenges the opposition's game planning and I get that each of these QBs has different skill sets, but personally I would have preferred a set starter get all the snaps. I can't shake the show that multiple QBs was under the prior regime.

 

[Palatine]

The difference is that Diaco is playing multiple QB to develop depth.

P. played multiple QB with different skill sets and different plays for each.

 

[freescooter]

The difference is that Diaco is playing multiple QB to develop depth.

P. played multiple QB with different skill sets and different plays for each.

They are both bad ideas, and my guess is he drops the multiple quarterbacks thing before the season gets too old. It has the "advantage" of causing a bit of difficulty for the d since they need to game plan for 2 different guys, and it might give someone a little experience, but the downside is that it disrupts your own rhythm, it can lead to internal and external controversy and it causes a host of other problems. There is a reason that very few teams do it. And there is a reason that the saying "If you have 2 quarterbacks you have no quarterbacks" developed. It causes more problems than it solves.

 

[CTMike]

He's going to name a starter and may use other QBs for specific plays based on their specific talents. How about we let things play out before judging.

 

[kemba]

He's going to name a starter and may use other QBs for specific plays based on their specific talents. How about we let things play out before judging.

I'm not going to panic until I see how it plays out, but I'm very skeptical based on how it's played out in the past, both here, and other programs.

 

[nycscooby]

He's going to name a starter and may use other QBs for specific plays based on their specific talents. How about we let things play out before judging.

Wow, Mike. I'm not judging anything I'm sharing my opinion that multiple QBs (even for a few plays/game) doesn't seem like a great idea. Did you listen to HCBD's answer on the subject? It seemed pretty convincing that he was leaning towards doing this - - of course we'll have to see what happens. But, isn't the point of a message board to share opinions? I have high hopes for this coach and his staff but you have to admit, watching what happened under HCPP with this was tough to watch.

 

[Palatine]

They are both bad ideas, and my guess is he drops the multiple quarterbacks thing before the season gets too old. It has the "advantage" of causing a bit of difficulty for the d since they need to game plan for 2 different guys, and it might give someone a little experience, but the downside is that it disrupts your own rhythm, it can lead to internal and external controversy and it causes a host of other problems. There is a reason that very few teams do it. And there is a reason that the saying "If you have 2 quarterbacks you have no quarterbacks" developed. It causes more problems than it solves.

Not in college. Getting a back up a few snaps a game is not unusual especially without an establish stater. Notre Dame did it last year. So you disagree with Brian Kelly and a bunch of other very good coaches.

 

[ZooCougar]

It's never a good idea. It works on Playstation or on paper but I can't think of onw example where a team used multiple QBs and didn't look foolish.

I don't consider giving the back up an offensive series the same thing. What I am talking about is using a different QB for tactical situations.

 

[ZooCougar]

He's going to name a starter and may use other QBs for specific plays based on their specific talents. How about we let things play out before judging.

If true, that's kind disheartening. I was hoping it was just part of an extended tryout or QB competition.

 

[CTMike]

Wow, Mike. I'm not judging anything I'm sharing my opinion that multiple QBs (even for a few plays/game) doesn't seem like a great idea. Did you listen to HCBD's answer on the subject? It seemed pretty convincing that he was leaning towards doing this - - of course we'll have to see what happens. But, isn't the point of a message board to share opinions? I have high hopes for this coach and his staff but you have to admit, watching what happened under HCPP with this was tough to watch.

Certainly wasn't meaning to come across harshly. Just noting that we haven't seen his approach yet. I understand the apprehension - to me that's more a factor of P being awful, so that's why I'm willing to give Diaco a shot.

Keep sharing those opinions.

 

[DoctorWho85]

I think Diaco is using some gamemanship. I think he's saying that so the BYU is forced to prepare for all three instead of focusing in one.

 

[Palatine]

Urban Meyer won a national championship playing multiple QBs.

Once again, I think folks are confusing college football with the NFL. It a terrible idea in the NFL to use multiple QBs. It almost never worked at that level. College is different.

 

[BNich]

The first loss of the season really proved two QB's was such a bad idea. Can all chill out about whos playing what, where, when and why?! They haven't even started fall camp yet, havent even put pads on, nor have they suited up against BYU. Relax people!!! Let's give it time before judgement is made. Teams have had plenty of success when multiple QB's are played. With a new offense, it may work. If we had the same offense as the final few games of last season, Cochran would and should certainly get the nod. New coach and a new team. Let's see how it plays out and how things go before we freak out. It can't get any worse people. Can we all just think positively for a brief period. Maybe just a day? A week? A month? A full game?1?!

 

[ZooCougar]

Urban Meyer won a national championship playing multiple QBs.

Once again, I think folks are confusing college football with the NFL. It a terrible idea in the NFL to use multiple QBs. It almost never worked at that level. College is different.

Tim Tebow basically ran one play for them that year.

 

[freescooter]

Not in college. Getting a back up a few snaps a game is not unusual especially without an establish stater. Notre Dame did it last year. So you disagree with Brian Kelly and a bunch of other very good coaches.

Brian Kelly did it last year because he didn't have a decent quarterback when Golson was out. Look, that's fine when you don't have a decent quarterback, but it is what it is. The Florida situation was pretty unique and I would argue it isn't generally applicable. Urban Meyer essentially used Tebow as the "wildcat" qb on the goal line and in short yardage situations. He had: #1 Tebow, and #2 the best team in the country. Also note that once Chris Leak graduated, Urban Meyer STOPPED using 2 quarterbacks. It isn't like he took out Whitmer to play Tim Boyle. He used a guy with a unique set of skills in special situations.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

Crap....I find myself agreeing with Palatine for the second time this week. This is concerning...

Spurrier is another coach who likes to situationally change QBs...and he does know a thing or two about this.

I agree that it is tricky to be successful...but since Diaco is a defensive guy...maybe he sees it as a wrinkle that can give the team an advantage.I would also guess that he feels he doesn't have a QB who is the whole package...so he is leveraging each QBs talents.

I am going to hold judegement until I see it in action, but I think the blanket statement that 2 QBs can't work is false.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I could be way off base here but my take is that he (Diaco) doesn't see Whitmer (who can still transfer to a lower level and play once the season begins) as the starter but doesn't want to lose him in case we reach the point where the #2 QB becomes necessary.

 

[Jimdish255]

I thought he was pretty clear he intends to roll with one starter but that the others would have an opportunity to contribute in some way. That was a little more ambiguous. He was drawing a line that we wouldn't be seeing a repeat of previous seasons and seemed pretty familiar with what that meant.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

I could be way off base here but my take is that he (Diaco) doesn't see Whitmer (who can still transfer to a lower level and play once the season begins) as the starter but doesn't want to lose him in case we reach the point where the #2 QB becomes necessary.

That seems hard to believe. that would mean that either (a) he is lying and he plans to play Casey full time or (b) he is changing the whole offensive philosophy to retain Whitmer.

I will say that if Whitmer left, the team would have serious QB depth issues this year.

 

[BlueDogs]

I'm reading that HCBD intends to use multiple QBs in games and while having multiple QBs challenges the opposition's game planning and I get that each of these QBs has different skill sets, but personally I would have preferred a set starter get all the snaps. I can't shake the show that multiple QBs was under the prior regime.

Agree 1000% percent.

 

[Palatine]

Brian Kelly did it last year because he didn't have a decent quarterback when Golson was out. Look, that's fine when you don't have a decent quarterback, but it is what it is. The Florida situation was pretty unique and I would argue it isn't generally applicable. Urban Meyer essentially used Tebow as the "wildcat" qb on the goal line and in short yardage situations. He had: #1 Tebow, and #2 the best team in the country. Also note that once Chris Leak graduated, Urban Meyer STOPPED using 2 quarterbacks. It isn't like he took out Whitmer to play Tim Boyle. He used a guy with a unique set of skills in special situations.

Good point, Brian Kelley used multiple QBs last year. Lots of good college coaches do, like Meyer. It would seem to make sense for Diaco as he tries to improve the team. Just as Meyer did.

SOMETIMES IT MAKES SENSE.

Your concept that it never makes sense is contradicted by your own post.

I think in trying to develop QB depth, Diaco may play a second QB for one or two series. Or he may be looking for the hot hand. I would be overjoyed that when a guy isn't producing, Diaco switches rather than just leaves him in.

 

[metsfan2323]

Without McCummings and the wildcat we only win 3 games in 2011

 

[FfldCntyFan]

That seems hard to believe. that would mean that either (a) he is lying and he plans to play Casey full time or (b) he is changing the whole offensive philosophy to retain Whitmer.

I will say that if Whitmer left, the team would have serious QB depth issues this year.

Not necessarily. I believe it is more that he wants to give everyone advance notice to all (especially a guy who may consider leaving if his last possible year of eligibility looks like it would be from the bench) that there will be opportunities even if you aren't named the starter on opening day.

 

[Hoophound]

I'd be shocked if Casey isn't the QB 95% of the time. He doesn't throw picks, he has a great attitude and he's lost 26lbs. Coach has to like him and you know he's watched film of all the guys whether he admits it or not. I'm also sure that Foley has told him how good Casey was. Foley has got to love the pressure Casey took off his line by staying composed and getting rid of the ball quickly.

On another note, down 26lbs, we might find Casey is a bit more of dual threat than anyone ever knew. That is serious weight for a guy his size.

 

[tduconn]

I'll give the coach some slack, but based on use of multiple QB's in different situations in past UConn offensive schemes ....it was a disaster. No fooling defensive coordinators on other teams.

If McCummings was in, pass options were basically negated......almost 100% of the time he ran.

The other QB was mostly hand=off or pass. He couldn't scramble.

Saying we have different QB's with "different skiil sets" is the same thing all over. It sounds like we do not have one QB that is sufficiently competetent in all offensive play aspects.

The use of multiple QB's in the past certainly did not challenge opposing defensive coordinator schemes.