We should use a 2 QB system the rest of the way [Archive]

engineer24

10/13/2013, 02:24 PM

It is our best chance to win.

Blake Bell cant throw medium to deep. Blake Bell cant run zone read (too slow)

Trevor Knight cant do QB iso runs.

We need to combine the threat of speed to the edge that Knight has with the power QB run game that Bell has.

I dont trust either one of them to pass the ball but Knight is at least capable of throwing a couple of deep bombs off play action down the sideline. The receiver probably wont catch them, but it is a low chance of a pick and it will at least get the CB to think about it.

If I'm designing the offense, this is what I do:

1. Run/pass mix, 70:30
2. Run balance: 70:30 split between zone read with Knight and QB iso runs with Bell
3. Pass balance: 90 percent play action reads off zone read, 10 percent "other" passing

Piware

10/13/2013, 02:53 PM

Now all we need is a 1st and 2nd QB. I don't think either of them are a whole package. Can only hope there is another Sam Bradford or Jason White somewhere out there.

fadada1

10/13/2013, 03:21 PM

you want to send that to the remaining defensive coordinators we play? pretty easy to dissect - TK in - zone read... run at all times; BB in - power runs and throwing.

we may never score again.

dennis580

10/13/2013, 04:28 PM

Bell easily gives us the best chance to win. I am shocked that anybody wants to go back to Knight.

Compare how Bell played against Tulsa, Notre Dame, TCU, and Texas to how Knight played against Lousiana Monroe, and West Virginia. The difference is absolutely HUGE.

What we do need to do though is give Bell 20 carries a game, and let him pound, and wear out defenses.

SoonerorLater

10/13/2013, 04:33 PM

I wouldn't use a two QB system per se but I would be for a limited platoon system that employed read option (not just run). I think it would create a game planning problem for opponents and we could get some value out of the talents of otherwise unused players. More like an expanded version of the theory of the Belldozer package. It wouldn't be that hard to implement since it looks like it was the direction we were heading before TK did a belly flop. Maybe he would be effective in a more limited capacity.

okiewaker

10/13/2013, 04:56 PM

We need a 2 QB system like I need treatment for hemis. Just need to settle on Bell,,,Put in an offense he can run and let him fly!

cburgsooner

10/13/2013, 04:59 PM

How does Bell give us the best chance to Win, He cant throw more than five yards. If the first receiver is not open he cant read to go to the next one.He can not run the zone read right. When he runs he can only run straight ahead. IMHO he didn't play that good against ND or TCU
He holds on to the ball to long in the pocket and watch him he is looking for a place to go down, takes his eyes from down field to looking at the ground. i'm tired of hearing about this 70% completion rate. He hasn't completed 4 passes longer than 15 yards unless it been run after catch.

I'm not a TK or KT guy but they can't do any worse. Ok im done with mu rant I'll go back to just reading and shaking my head on the stuff in read in here.

badger

10/13/2013, 05:14 PM

Why stop at 2? Let's use an 11 quarterback system where everybody on offense gets to be quarterback!

okiewaker

10/13/2013, 05:14 PM

I Am Right

10/13/2013, 05:16 PM

Maybe we could use a 2 OC system, wait a minute, never mind!

SoonerorLater

10/13/2013, 05:26 PM

I'm not a big fan or a two QB system but let me ask everybody this, why not? We use multiple DLs, OLs and every other position so what is sacrosanct about multiple QBs? IMO it's more of a mindset that says "this isn't the way football is supposed to be played". It's like when you use multiple QBs people feel like you are admitting defeat and inferiority instead of perhaps employing a resource that helps you win games. Bud Wilkinson did it and most people that know football would say he knew what he was doing.

Obviously if you have a QB that provides for a complete offensive package there wouldn't be a reason for a duel QB system but does anybody think we are in that position right now? Why not try a few different wrinkles? If it doesn't work then move on.

BoulderSooner79

10/13/2013, 07:32 PM

No coach wants to use 2 QBs, but they do it for a reason when they have to. I'd like Stoops to use the Spurrier method and give the QB the hook if he is not getting it done and give the next guy a chance. Sure it's ideal if this all gets settled in camp and the winner goes out and plays up to expectation. But it's not always an ideal world out there. And there are teams rotating QBs as part of the offense. KSU use it pretty effectively against Baylor and Ole Miss almost took out aTm using it. It's not ideal, but it's not some sort of religious heresy either.

8timechamps

10/13/2013, 07:46 PM

BoulderSooner79

10/13/2013, 07:59 PM

Bell had a bad day.

Bell threw all of the passes he "can't throw" against Tulsa.

OU lost to Texas in a year they weren't "supposed" to lose to Texas.

Everyone's upset.

2 QB systems suck, they never work.

Bell is the QB for OU in 2013.

OU will be fine.

Bell has had 2 bad days in a row.

2 QB systems sometimes do work. Sometimes there do not. Sometimes they don't produce wins, but a real starter emerges and seizes the job for good, so in that way "it worked".

cburgsooner

10/13/2013, 08:03 PM

Bell's passing numbers on third down first two quarters plus one drive 7-9-277 2TDs.Last 6 quarters 1-10-12 . 2 ints

8timechamps

10/13/2013, 08:08 PM

Bell has had 2 bad days in a row.

2 QB systems sometimes do work. Sometimes there do not. Sometimes they don't produce wins, but a real starter emerges and seizes the job for good, so in that way "it worked".

I didn't consider the TCU game a "bad" game for Bell. It wasn't like his debut against Tulsa, but he did an excellent job managing the game, remaining composed and limiting mistakes. He also gained the tough yards when we needed it. He didn't have a Landry Jones or Sam Bradford day against TCU, but he had a game most teams would gladly take from their QB.

Saturday, he was never in rhythm. Never looked comfortable. Forced some bad throws. He had a truly bad day.

I've never seen a 2 QB system that really "worked". Sure, there have been situations like the Landry Jones/Belldozer system that worked, but not the QB A plays this series, then QB B plays the next. The old saying is correct "If you have 2 QBs, you have none".

If Blake is the future (this year and next) of the program, then you have to trust in him, even when things are not going good. If he's not the future, then he should be on an extremely short leash. It appears that Stoops thinks he is, so he's sticking with his guy. I can't argue with that, because history tells me he knows what he's doing.

I will add that I think there is a place for a Knight or Thompson package in this offense. Just as the Belldozer complemented last year's team, I think a Knight or Thompson package could do the same for this team.

SoonerorLater

10/13/2013, 08:17 PM

I didn't consider the TCU game a "bad" game for Bell. It wasn't like his debut against Tulsa, but he did an excellent job managing the game, remaining composed and limiting mistakes. He also gained the tough yards when we needed it. He didn't have a Landry Jones or Sam Bradford day against TCU, but he had a game most teams would gladly take from their QB.

Saturday, he was never in rhythm. Never looked comfortable. Forced some bad throws. He had a truly bad day.

I've never seen a 2 QB system that really "worked". Sure, there have been situations like the Landry Jones/Belldozer system that worked, but not the QB A plays this series, then QB B plays the next. The old saying is correct "If you have 2 QBs, you have none".

If Blake is the future (this year and next) of the program, then you have to trust in him, even when things are not going good. If he's not the future, then he should be on an extremely short leash. It appears that Stoops thinks he is, so he's sticking with his guy. I can't argue with that, because history tells me he knows what he's doing.

I will add that I think there is a place for a Knight or Thompson package in this offense. Just as the Belldozer complemented last year's team, I think a Knight or Thompson package could do the same for this team.

Tim Tebow and Chris Leak won the 2006 BCS Championship at Florida

8timechamps

10/13/2013, 08:57 PM

Tim Tebow and Chris Leak won the 2006 BCS Championship at Florida

That's why I said this

I've never seen a 2 QB system that really "worked". Sure, there have been situations like the Landry Jones/Belldozer system that worked, but not the QB A plays this series, then QB B plays the next. The old saying is correct "If you have 2 QBs, you have none".

fadada1

10/13/2013, 09:00 PM

i can't remember the last time i saw a 2 QB system work.

perhaps because it never has.

SoonerMarkVA

10/13/2013, 09:01 PM

Maybe the coaches should take a long, hard look at the UF offense under Tebow, because the way I see it Bell is a stronger runner and better passer than Tebow, and Meyer sure made it work.

SoonerorLater

10/13/2013, 09:02 PM

i can't remember the last time i saw a 2 QB system work.

perhaps because it never has.

See above post

JLEW1818

10/13/2013, 10:59 PM

Two QB's = No Qb's, which is exactly what we have.

jkjsooner

10/14/2013, 10:19 AM

I'm not a big fan or a two QB system but let me ask everybody this, why not? We use multiple DLs, OLs and every other position so what is sacrosanct about multiple QBs?

A QB has to get and stay in a rhythm much more than other players.

That being said, I'm not totally against a two QB system if it is really needed.

jkjsooner

10/14/2013, 10:23 AM

See above post

That was not a two QB system in the sense we're talking about here. As I understand it Tebow only came in in redzone and maybe short yardage situations.

PrideMom

10/14/2013, 10:25 AM

We did it last year with Landry and Blake. The best was the OSU game... Not every QB can take a team 2 touchdowns down and tie the game to go into overtime. People bashed Landry, but if he did not have the skill to move the ball down the field, Blake got the touch downs, but Landry got him down there. Bell is really a fullback playing QB.

jkjsooner

10/14/2013, 10:55 AM

We did it last year with Landry and Blake.

Again, that's not what we're talking about. That's using a QB in a specialty role. I don't believe the OP was about doing that.

SoonerorLater

10/14/2013, 11:03 AM

That was not a two QB system in the sense we're talking about here. As I understand it Tebow only came in in redzone and maybe short yardage situations.

Urban Meyer switched them pretty much as he saw fit not just fixed special situations.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2006-10-01/sports/UFSIDE01_1_tebow-leak-meyer

Soonerwake

10/14/2013, 11:03 AM

Two QB's = No Qb's, which is exactly what we have.

Agree.. I knew every time we lined up with 4 WRs on Saturday that we had zero chance of moving the ball. We don't have a QB, like Landry, who can line up with a bunch of receivers, find the open guy, and deliver it to him downfield.

So, what do we do from here?

8timechamps

10/14/2013, 03:40 PM

Urban Meyer switched them pretty much as he saw fit not just fixed special situations.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2006-10-01/sports/UFSIDE01_1_tebow-leak-meyer

That was not a "true" 2 QB system.

2 QB systems don't work. If they did, you'd see it everywhere, all the time.

SoonerorLater

10/14/2013, 06:41 PM

That was not a "true" 2 QB system.

2 QB systems don't work. If they did, you'd see it everywhere, all the time.

I guess we have a different view of what a two QB system is. If Meyer changed his QB with out regard to down / distance / time of the game etc. then it seems like if would be considered a two QB system.

SoonerForLife92

10/14/2013, 06:47 PM

Maybe the coaches should take a long, hard look at the UF offense under Tebow, because the way I see it Bell is a stronger runner and better passer than Tebow, and Meyer sure made it work.

This.

Position Limit

10/14/2013, 07:01 PM

This is retarded. No we don't need to run 2 qbs. Somebody needs to pour a big cup of beer over josh heupels head a la gibbs. Run this loser out of town. We have a perfectly good run game but do we use it? Hell no. But yes, what could possibly go wrong with using 2 qbs in josh heupels brilliant offense? They would look like retards on rollerskates. That's what could go wrong.

Wishboned

10/14/2013, 07:02 PM

you want to send that to the remaining defensive coordinators we play? pretty easy to dissect - TK in - zone read... run at all times; BB in - power runs and throwing.

we may never score again.

No. Put them both in the backfield! That way the opposing D never figures it out. And even if the center hikes the ball to Bell and the D reacts to that he can just hand it off to Knight. And vice versa.

It's genius!!!!!

SoonerorLater

10/14/2013, 07:17 PM

No. Put them both in the backfield! That way the opposing D never figures it out. And even if the center hikes the ball to Bell and the D reacts to that he can just hand it off to Knight. And vice versa.

It's genius!!!!!

Absolutely. Thought about this as a package for a while now. College Football has such a herd mentality that creativity just goes by the wayside. Things that have been said and accepted as truth are being proved not to be true. Remember the NFL pundents that said a running QB wouldn't work or that an option offense was unworkable. At one time people were saying this about the forward pass. Need to lose the group think.

ashley

10/14/2013, 07:42 PM

Knight, in one qb system.

8timechamps

10/14/2013, 09:27 PM

Knight, in one qb system.

We tried that, remember?

SanJoaquinSooner

10/14/2013, 09:33 PM

With a 2 QB system, we'd be guaranteed to win at least as many bowl games as Sam Bradford and Jason White won combined.

cburgsooner

10/14/2013, 09:35 PM

IMHO it was better than what we are rolling out there now. He won the job and got hurt, and Bell came in and hasn't cut it in the last two games, Go back to the Starter and Run the offense that you wanted to run at the start of the season.

OU_Sooners75

10/15/2013, 01:45 AM

Smh.

I think it is safe to say that Trevor Knight has a bigger upside than Bell.

Why not allow him to start once again and if need be bring Bell off the bench.

BoulderSooner79

10/15/2013, 08:15 AM

Smh.

I think it is safe to say that Trevor Knight has a bigger upside than Bell.

Why not allow him to start once again and if need be bring Bell off the bench.

Seems reasonable since he did win the job and he's healthy now (as far as we know). It wouldn't take long to figure out if he's gotten over his nervousness or if it's a longer term issue.

dennis580

10/15/2013, 11:02 AM

I am just in shock that anybody would want to go back to Knight. That is just insane.

BoulderSooner79

10/15/2013, 11:57 AM

I am just in shock that anybody would want to go back to Knight. That is just insane.

I've seen the situation more than once where a young guy settles down after sitting a few games, and comes back playing well. No way to know if that's the case here, but it wouldn't take long to find out. Bell issues look more like inherent limits versus nerves. I don't think anyone wants to go back to what Knight showed in the first 2 games.

ashley

10/15/2013, 01:39 PM

I am just in shock that anybody would want to go back to Knight. That is just insane.

Knight is much faster, more elusive and can escape much better. Because his first college game was bad you want him gone. There is a reason the staff chose him to start the year. They knew things about Bell that just came out. He is slow on the run, slow to get away from the rush and and drops his eyes to the to the rush.