Double QBs

[itsmejed]

Just read the 3-2-1 article and the 2 QB's on the field at once thought is blowing my mind. Our running game is worthless anyway except as a mild distraction from pass defense. When you run a new QB onto the field, the defense has a chance to match up.

Direct snaps are an obvious option, but what about RPO after a hand-off...with the offense is going up tempo? That would be a lot for any defense to process. A double pass would certainly be on order as well. My main concern would be pass protection on a normal pass play. What is the learning curve on picking up a blitzer?

 

[Level 42]

Personally I think it's a great twist to mitigate our issues on the offensive line and the running game. The defense will always be guessing and not know how to line up.

 

[PUQBMan.]

Just read the 3-2-1 article and the 2 QB's on the field at once thought is blowing my mind. Our running game is worthless anyway except as a mild distraction from pass defense. When you run a new QB onto the field, the defense has a chance to match up.

Direct snaps are an obvious option, but what about RPO after a hand-off...with the offense is going up tempo? That would be a lot for any defense to process. A double pass would certainly be on order as well. My main concern would be pass protection on a normal pass play. What is the learning curve on picking up a blitzer?

I think your last point is the biggest concern with having 2 on the field at the same time. Are we going to risk the health of one of the QBs by having them try to block a blitzing LB? If it gets to that point, it would seem to be no different than when a player comes to college as a QB and switches positions. You may still have the player listed as a QB on the roster, but he is effectively a running back at that point. The benefit of running a wildcat is having one extra blocker and using the QB as the RB. If you have 2 QBs in the backfield, it effectively removes a blocker.

 

[BCfanatic2020]

Just read the 3-2-1 article and the 2 QB's on the field at once thought is blowing my mind. Our running game is worthless anyway except as a mild distraction from pass defense. When you run a new QB onto the field, the defense has a chance to match up.

Direct snaps are an obvious option, but what about RPO after a hand-off...with the offense is going up tempo? That would be a lot for any defense to process. A double pass would certainly be on order as well. My main concern would be pass protection on a normal pass play. What is the learning curve on picking up a blitzer?

The handoff wouldn’t be a threat to begin with .. defenses would just hang back on the RPO and not worry about Burton gaining 3 yards

This reminds me of when Wayne Laravee was super fascinated with southeast Missouri state having a wide receiver who was 6’6” names Chante Ahamefule.. which to me is pronounced meh fuel .. but to him was ahhhaaaaaa merfula.. he sounded worse than Beth mowens.

 

[itsmejed]

I think your last point is the biggest concern with having 2 on the field at the same time. Are we going to risk the health of one of the QBs by having them try to block a blitzing LB? If it gets to that point, it would seem to be no different than when a player comes to college as a QB and switches positions. You may still have the player listed as a QB on the roster, but he is effectively a running back at that point. The benefit of running a wildcat is having one extra blocker and using the QB as the RB. If you have 2 QBs in the backfield, it effectively removes a blocker.

Good point about the wildcat, but what about lining up O'Connell at wide receiver? Would think that would draw a defender to at least defend against the double pass. Sounds weird to say, but Purdue can afford an injury at QB more than a running back.

 

[itsmejed]

The handoff wouldn’t be a threat to begin with .. defenses would just hang back on the RPO and not worry about Burton gaining 3 yards

This reminds me of when Wayne Laravee was super fascinated with southeast Missouri state having a wide receiver who was 6’6” names Chante Ahamefule.. which to me is pronounced meh fuel .. but to him was ahhhaaaaaa merfula.. he sounded worse than Beth mowens.

True, if Burton can't get more than 3 yards against a defense in coverage, there is no point. I don't know how Burton is as runner, just been hearing that he is "mobile" since his transfer.

 

[BCfanatic2020]

True, if Burton can't get more than 3 yards against a defense in coverage, there is no point. I don't know how Burton is as runner, just been hearing that he is "mobile" since his transfer.

It’s different from the standpoint of getting a handoff that brings you toward the line with your momentum .. much harder to pass than if you are taking the snap.

it’s like asking the question.. how good would Burton be as a runner taking the shot gun snap if the defense knew it was 100% run

 

[PaBoiler78]

It’s different from the standpoint of getting a handoff that brings you toward the line with your momentum .. much harder to pass than if you are taking the snap.

it’s like asking the question.. how good would Burton be as a runner taking the shot gun snap if the defense knew it was 100% run

I'm still waiting for a QB boot call down inside the 10 and also a philly special, seen other pro teams running it this year

 

[PUQBMan.]

Good point about the wildcat, but what about lining up O'Connell at wide receiver? Would think that would draw a defender to at least defend against the double pass. Sounds weird to say, but Purdue can afford an injury at QB more than a running back.

I think it would still be sacrificing more than you would gain. If he lines up at WR, you know he’s not running a route or a real threat to catch a pass. And if they do run a double pass, it would be a lot more obvious and take away the surprise factor that plays a big role in a play like that being successful. At that point you’re losing a threat of a pass catcher for a minimal gain in one specific trick play that would be a bit telegraphed if ever ran.
If the point is just to draw a defender, you can do that much better by placing a WR out there instead of AOC.

 

[BCfanatic2020]

I think it would still be sacrificing more than you would gain. If he lines up at WR, you know he’s not running a route or a real threat to catch a pass. And if they do run a double pass, it would be a lot more obvious and take away the surprise factor that plays a big role in a play like that being successful. At that point you’re losing a threat of a pass catcher for a minimal gain in one specific trick play that would be a bit telegraphed if ever ran.
If the point is just to draw a defender, you can do that much better by placing a WR out there instead of AOC.

If we keep winning will it bring out more “neat” ideas? 🙄