Dedicated QB Coach

[EmeraldIngot]

Not sure if this deserves it's own topic, but I thought I'd share my personal thoughts on having a dedicated QB coach and how to fit that in with the two (?) other position coaches available under the Offensive Coordinator.

 

The very idea of a dedicated QB coach who does nothing but coach the QB is rediculous. It's a waste of a position that is limited by NCAA regulations. When you only have a few position coaches that can be part of your staff, you have to have position coaches that can coach multiple positions. In my opinion, this should apply to all positions, both offensively and defensively. I'll lay out how, in my opinion, it should be organized.

T

One assistant coach should be in charge of the QB's and WR's. This is because you can teach as much fundamentals as you like, but it won't help your passing game if the QB's and WR's are not in rhythm. You could have a perfect NFL legend as your quarterback, but if he hasn't gotten practice time to get in rhythm with the WR's, his chances of anticipating where that guy is going to be and how he beats his coverage is going to mean that the ball WILL NOT be placed where that WR needs it to be to not only make a catch, but to get at least a few yards downfield. The common term is "catch it in stride". Having an assistant coach who not only is teaching both the QB's a proper throwing mechanic, footwork, and how to read coverage, but also teaching the WR's to read the same coverage and make the same decisions to be on the same page as the QB as well as how to properly run the routes in the scheme as decided by the OC. This means a LOT of practice time, a lot of 'reps' between all strings of QB's with all strings of WR's. This means that the #2 QB will be nearly as familiar with the #1 WR's as the #1 QB is. And if several of your top WR's get injured, the #2's can step in without a significant loss of rhythm and timing. Or if the QB gets injured (like 2013...) the #2 and #3 QBs shouldn't lose too much rhythm because they also are familiar with the WR's they'll be throwing to. It's not about how much playing time the backups get, but how many reps they get in practice. This builds familiarity and comfort. If someone goes down, if you're almost as comfortable with his backup, you won't have so many 'miscommunications'.

 

This leaves a dedicated position coach for OL and TE's, teaching the blocking schemes and blitz pickups, as well as communication. Again, the same 'rotation' during practice to get the lower stringers playing with the upper stringers to build familiarity helps keep the quality of play high when the next man has to step up for whatever reason. Of course, TE's should have a little bit of time with the QB and WR coach to help polish route running and build familiarity with the QB in the pass game.

 

The last position coach should be RB and FB coach. This will allow him to dedicate time to teaching his runners how to cut back, how to find the open lane, to follow blockers, to read front seven coverages and so on. The RB's and FB's will need to spend a little time working with the OL and TE coach on how to pick up blitzes when they're in pass protection situations, and also a little time with the QB and WR coach for the passing game out of the backfield. All three of these coaches need to be in constant communication to make sure their players are synchronizing well with the other groups. That 'coordination' efford is the job of the OC, just like the name implies.

 

A very similar setup can and should be put in place for the Defense, but I won't go into detail here.

 

The head coach's job is to make sure that all positions are going well and that the OC and DC are keeping things together. The HC needs to spearhead the recruiting drive, and should probably also personally oversee the special teams efforts.

 

If everyone is doing their jobs and doing them well, the level of talent you have becomes much less relevant to the overall success of your team. A mediocre QB and a mediocre WR can fool a first round DB if they're in a better rhythm than the DB is with his teammates.

 

Please let me know what you think.

[NUpolo8]

I think having one makes a heapin' helpin' more sense than having a TE/big picture coach on staff. Especially when our OC calls tight ends obsolete.

[I AM FOOT FOOT]

so many words. ill just say yes. and no I haven't been fishing . did I win?

[sd'sker]

i get tired of people saying, "look at all these teams that do not have a dedicated qb coach." as if that is evidence of why we should not be innovative. i can just picture those same people claiming we did not need an s&c coach back in the early 90's.

[NebraskaHarry]

Agree. Need QB coach. Ganz no good. Beck no good.

[True2tRA]

When you hear about the fine details of this offense, the amount of communication, the reads the QB and WR's have to make constantly, the audibles, and the amount of plays we run, I think maybe a QB coach would fit our situation. Thou we've heard a lot about simplifying, not sure what I believe about that yet, Becks system is demanding in nature from everything I've heard. It relies a lot on the QB and WR's making the same reads, drawing the same conclusions, and more importantly having the same timing. I think most of the pass plays we run involve Tommy putting the ball in space before the receiver finishes his route. These types of things can result in multiple mistakes if the two are not on the same page. We've seen evidence of this in our history with turnovers. We've also seen ow much losing depth at WR hurts this offense. Simply ore evidence of the importance of the things i've said.

 

Personally, I'd love to simply see us 'actually' simplify more and take some pressure off Tommy. Not saying that we haven't done so at all, I think we have, but you can see when this team goes into panic mode and Beck goes away from those things sometimes. If we can't simplify more, then I'd be in favor of a QB coach. As said above, what exactly are we using a TE coaching position for? We don't use them. I could and have gone on and on about that though.

 

I just hope we keep winning. Really rooting for Beck to do well. Very, very well actually. Could see him being a HC somewhere else someday and that would be an excellent opportunity for him.

[lo country]

I think having one makes a heapin' helpin' more sense than having a TE/big picture coach on staff. Especially when our OC calls tight ends obsolete.

This. We don't use TE's. We use a QB. The OC says the TE is basically obsolete, but likes QB's who can throw. We need a QB coach way more than a TE coach.

[Kernal]

Do teams with primarily passing offenses need dedicated QB coaches to teach their QBs how to run the ball more effectively, like Armstrong does?

[sd'sker]

i agree with true. i think simplifying would be nice. just getting really, really good at less complicated schemes. but with how important the qb is to our offense, let alone in general anymore, it hardly makes sense not to have a dedicated qb coach.

[True2tRA]

i agree with true. i think simplifying would be nice. just getting really, really good at less complicated schemes. but with how important the qb is to our offense, let alone in general anymore, it hardly makes sense not to have a dedicated qb coach.

 

I just worry more and more the more I watch this team. Not because of the team but because if the coaches. I'm just trying not to get of wrapped up in it because the season has gone fine really.

 

Here's the issue though, and it ties into this whole simplifying theme.

 

It's about trust. It's about coaches trusting their players.

 

When you simplify and you try to become better at doing less, it takes the focus off the coaches and their mastermind scheming and designs, and it puts it on the players. It puts the players in a position that if they simply do their job and beat the man lined up across from them, then you don't have to be cute. You don't have to out scheme and you don't have to create.

 

Do we trust our guys to do that? Do our coaches trust Tommy? Do they trust any of them, offense or defense? I don't know that for sure. We get so wrapped up in trying to make the perfect call. We do all this scheming, moving guys around, trying to be cute. Why don't we just let the kids play the damn game sometime?

 

We get into games like MSU and you can see the lack of trust. The fear of putting guys in high pressure situations. Bend don't break philosophy, only it's both sides of the ball when you really look at it. It's a philosophy of fear. Playing scared. Scared to make the big mistake that changes the game whether it's offense or defense.

 

It's about trust.

 

Personally I'd like to see the players play, and these coaches cuteness and personal fears play less of a huge part in the outcome of games.

 

That's just me though, and this is a tangent.

 

GBR!

[Hunter94]

i have brought this topic up many times.....our qbs get to a point and don' seem to improve, they are not game managers, for the most part they are gun slingers......they need polish and coached up, show improvement and learn to go thru progressions and look off their targets.....raw talent is seldom enough to overcome fundamental flaws...we need a dedicated qb coach and Beck can't do it either.

[EmeraldIngot]

You guys are missing the point that I made. it's not about having a dedicated QB coach, it's about having a QB/WR coach that will not only improve all those players' fundamentals, but help to foster synchronicity between the two.

[Hunter94]

 

i agree with true. i think simplifying would be nice. just getting really, really good at less complicated schemes. but with how important the qb is to our offense, let alone in general anymore, it hardly makes sense not to have a dedicated qb coach.

I just worry more and more the more I watch this team. Not because of the team but because if the coaches. I'm just trying not to get of wrapped up in it because the season has gone fine really.

 

Here's the issue though, and it ties into this whole simplifying theme.

 

It's about trust. It's about coaches trusting their players.

 

When you simplify and you try to become better at doing less, it takes the focus off the coaches and their mastermind scheming and designs, and it puts it on the players. It puts the players in a position that if they simply do their job and beat the man lined up across from them, then you don't have to be cute. You don't have to out scheme and you don't have to create.

 

Do we trust our guys to do that? Do our coaches trust Tommy? Do they trust any of them, offense or defense? I don't know that for sure. We get so wrapped up in trying to make the perfect call. We do all this scheming, moving guys around, trying to be cute. Why don't we just let the kids play the damn game sometime?

 

We get into games like MSU and you can see the lack of trust. The fear of putting guys in high pressure situations. Bend don't break philosophy, only it's both sides of the ball when you really look at it. It's a philosophy of fear. Playing scared. Scared to make the big mistake that changes the game whether it's offense or defense.

 

It's about trust.

 

Personally I'd like to see the players play, and these coaches cuteness and personal fears play less of a huge part in the outcome of games.

 

That's just me though, and this is a tangent.

 

GBR!

 

i agree, our coaches are still learning.......

[Hunter94]

You guys are missing the point that I made. it's not about having a dedicated QB coach, it's about having a QB/WR coach that will not only improve all those players' fundamentals, but help to foster synchronicity between the two.

you could say that about a lot of positions.....its all related.........but the sum of the parts needs to be greater than the whole......we need damn good position coaches, especially the trigger man.

[True2tRA]

You guys are missing the point that I made. it's not about having a dedicated QB coach, it's about having a QB/WR coach that will not only improve all those players' fundamentals, but help to foster synchronicity between the two.

 

Oh, sorry man.

 

You're spot on.