Mobile QB - Requirement in CFB?

Mavric said:
Interesting point from Sean Callahan today on this subject.  He noted that finding quality tackles for a pro style system is very hard.  He noted that Osborne had a lot of success by running a system that played to his linemen's strengths.  Noted that even some of the best Pipeline tackles - mentioned Wiegert specifically - played guard in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Same w/ Alabama's big-time (at least they were considered big-time at draft time) left tackles. They seemed to have transitioned into pretty solid NFL guards or Right Tackles. S.C. has a very good point. It's probably just as hard to find a really good 'pro-style' LT as it is to find a really good 'pro-style' QB. Hate to say it, but for non-power recruiting programs, it may not even be worth trying to run a traditional pro-style offense.

 
If you are 6'7 big and agile...you are going to play Basketball or TE...Most guys really don't want to put on 100 pounds so they can live the dream of playing tackle.

 
When I think mobile, I don't necessarily think option QB or even a Vince Young type.

Aaron Rodgers is very mobile and can extend the pocket, but I don't think anybody would confuse him for a run first type guy.

 
Again, every team wants a mobile quarterback, especially in the NFL, but a mobile quarterback isn't necessarily a dual threat quarterback, and a pro-style quarterback isn't a "statue." 

Nebraska has pursued great athletes who got to be QB in high school because they were great athletes. Most college teams want to convert them to dbs, rbs or wrs, but Nebraska has the recruiting edge if we promise them a chance to play QB in an offense that doesn't put a high premium on passing.

The difference is, the great mobile quarterbacks we're talking about today were all pretty good passers, in offenses that still threw the ball 30+ times a game. 

It's cool to have a quarterback who knows how to stay cool in the pocket, and cool to have quarterback whose not afraid to run when needed. They shouldn't be two different quarterbacks. 

 
jessica0 said:
At Nebraska we have learned that a running QB is a better recipe for success. 
Click to expand...
I feel like we've learned the exact opposite every year with a running QB when our starter gets hurt.

Like @teachercd said above, we just need the guy to be a bit mobile. I prefer a passer with a touch of mobility like Berringer or Ganz.

 
 I think that there is still room for dual threat Qb's on any team and in any system.  Why recruit one dimensional Qb's.  Against most college defenses your QB can gain positive yards running the ball on broken plays.  My logic was always recruit athletes.  If they are not going to work out as a QB, they might work out as a WR, Cb, or Safety.  Too me we are missing athletes on this team that can do multiple things.

 
RedDenver said:
I feel like we've learned the exact opposite every year with a running QB when our starter gets hurt.

Like @teachercd said above, we just need the guy to be a bit mobile. I prefer a passer with a touch of mobility like Berringer or Ganz.
Click to expand...
And I like my WRs who can catch with just a touch of elusiveness. I also prefer RBs with power but just a hint of speed. Just enough speed to pick up a first down in certain situations.

Hopefully you catch the sarcasm

 
unlfan said:
Definitely not a requirement. Look at the QBs Alabama has won titles with. Cement footed statues.
Click to expand...
Alabama also gets the most talent in college football every year, and they have switched to a dual-threat QB when they could pretty much get any QB they want to.

 
unlfan said:
That's fine. The question was "is it a requirement". The answer is clearly no.
Click to expand...
To be fair, I understand it's not a "requirement", but unless you can recruit top linemen, top WR's, and top RB's, it's pretty much a requirement.  The margin for error at the other offensive positions with a statue QB is so slim.

 
This is what I liked about Tristan Gebbia in the spring game: he's a passing quarterback who can stand in the pocket and throw an accurate ball. But if you're foolish enough to leave him open field, he'll just run for the first down marker, get eleven yards, and go out of bounds untouched. 

At that point it's not about running and passing, it's about decision making and instinct. 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
This is what I liked about Tristan Gebbia in the spring game: he's a passing quarterback who can stand in the pocket and throw an accurate ball. But if you're foolish enough to leave him open field, he'll just run for the first down marker, get eleven yards, and go out of bounds untouched. 

At that point it's not about running and passing, it's about decision making and instinct. 
Click to expand...


He was playing against the Husker defense in the spring game. I mean, who doesn't look good against them?

 
unlfan said:
Definitely not a requirement. Look at the QBs Alabama has won titles with. Cement footed statues.
Click to expand...
Good point... maybe 'requirement' is too strong a word. But like others mentioned; It is VERY difficult to find a QB w/ great accuracy & decision making consistently AND consistently build lines that have the pass-blocking tools to run a NFL-type offense.

It's simply more efficient for the majority of teams to find a QB w/ 'good' accuracy (maybe even mediocre, if he is REALLY dangerous w/ his feet) but proper decision making abilities that has no problem using his feet (and is encouraged to use his feet to add stress to the D); then focus on building a big, strong line w/ a more simplistic power/man blocking scheme or even a quick spread attack, in which the line won't need to pass protect for extended periods of time.

He doesn't need to have Martinez, Kap, Denard Robinson, or RGIII speed, but the athletic ability of a Colt McCoy, Luck, Mayfield, Manziel, Russ Wilson, or that Flutie guy on the Dr. Pepper commercial.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top