QBS
Comments
-
-
This makes me happyNEsnake12 said:
-
Bridge Gadd is going to surprise some people. Browning won't hand the ball off straight to Sirmon.
-
AgreeCuntWaffle said:Bridge Gadd is going to surprise some people. Browning won't hand the ball off straight to Sirmon.
-
Remind me: He's speedy, right?
-
I think he runs a 4.9TurdBuffer said:Remind me: He's speedy, right?
-
I simply do not understand how Petersen, who is a true offensive tactician, hasn't embraced the simple mathematical advantage that having a QB that is a true threat in the running game gives an offense.
Clemson's passing offense is stunningly simple. They utilize relatively few concepts. But so much of it is based on RPOs and tags off of running plays, that even a defense like Bama's struggles with it. And the use of the QB in the running game helps to even the numbers up, or even give the offense a mathematical advantage (based on reading at least one defender, and often two) on basically every run.
I suspect the reason Petersen hasn't embraced it is because of the risk to the QB posed by carrying the ball a lot. I don't think that is a big enough concern not to take full advantage, but I guess he does.
Of course having really good receivers helps too. -
I doubt Petersen is against running QB's, but he's definitely not a huge proponent either. That said, running QB's that can't read defenses and throw get exploited. Even if they play for Alabama.AIRWOLF said:I simply do not understand how Petersen, who is a true offensive tactician, hasn't embraced the simple mathematical advantage that having a QB that is a true threat in the running game gives an offense.
Clemson's passing offense is stunningly simple. They utilize relatively few concepts. But so much of it is based on RPOs and tags off of running plays, that even a defense like Bama's struggles with it. And the use of the QB in the running game helps to even the numbers up, or even give the offense a mathematical advantage (based on reading at least one defender, and often two) on basically every run.
I suspect the reason Petersen hasn't embraced it is because of the risk to the QB posed by carrying the ball a lot. I don't think that is a big enough concern not to take full advantage, but I guess he does.
Of course having really good receivers helps too.
Petersen seems to be too ingrained to the Kellen Moore/ Browning fuck size and arm strength if they are cerebral QB's. It matters. Sirmon will hopefully break the mold. -
That was offense is great with deshaun Watson. Lots,of running qbs suck though too. See the Arizona schools or Utah.AIRWOLF said:I simply do not understand how Petersen, who is a true offensive tactician, hasn't embraced the simple mathematical advantage that having a QB that is a true threat in the running game gives an offense.
Clemson's passing offense is stunningly simple. They utilize relatively few concepts. But so much of it is based on RPOs and tags off of running plays, that even a defense like Bama's struggles with it. And the use of the QB in the running game helps to even the numbers up, or even give the offense a mathematical advantage (based on reading at least one defender, and often two) on basically every run.
I suspect the reason Petersen hasn't embraced it is because of the risk to the QB posed by carrying the ball a lot. I don't think that is a big enough concern not to take full advantage, but I guess he does.
Of course having really good receivers helps too.
I agree our offense should be simplified though whether or not the qb runs. -
For every Watson, there are a ton of shitty dual-threat quarterbacks. Just because the team who won the NC this year found an amazing dual-threat qb, doesnt mean that it's the best way to go. Petersen started off at UW with a 4-star All-American game MVP dual-threat QB. The guy was absolute shit.AIRWOLF said:I simply do not understand how Petersen, who is a true offensive tactician, hasn't embraced the simple mathematical advantage that having a QB that is a true threat in the running game gives an offense.
Clemson's passing offense is stunningly simple. They utilize relatively few concepts. But so much of it is based on RPOs and tags off of running plays, that even a defense like Bama's struggles with it. And the use of the QB in the running game helps to even the numbers up, or even give the offense a mathematical advantage (based on reading at least one defender, and often two) on basically every run.
I suspect the reason Petersen hasn't embraced it is because of the risk to the QB posed by carrying the ball a lot. I don't think that is a big enough concern not to take full advantage, but I guess he does.
Of course having really good receivers helps too.
I know we lost 2 games this year, which is a real bummer even if they are to the #2 and #3 teams in the country, but let's at least wait until one of Petersen's classes have gone through graduation before we start the "the coaches don't know what their doing" talk
