• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts, upgrade to remove ads and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your BigSkyFans.com experience today!

Two QB's

sunday

Active member
I'm not qualified nor do I want to stir the pot with the "two QB debate." But my thought is instead of giving them certain series, qtrs. or half's to play - how about you use them in "situational downs" like extra receivers, RB's or a special package? I think Vernon could have used his legs late in the game when Kyle was in to add aother dimension for SUU to defend. Adams seems like his arm is good enough for passing also....just a thought.
 
sunday said:
I'm not qualified nor do I want to stir the pot with the "two QB debate." But my thought is instead of giving them certain series, qtrs. or half's to play - how about you use them in "situational downs" like extra receivers, RB's or a special package? I think Vernon could have used his legs late in the game when Kyle was in to add aother dimension for SUU to defend. Adams seems like his arm is good enough for passing also....just a thought.

Two QBs*

I think situational QBs would make us awful predictable.
 
Our problem isn't the 2 QBs. Both played extremely well today. Adams had a rough go on the first couple of drives, but was pretty much flawless after that. Padron came in and lit it up. The only bad throw I remember him making was the first down throw right before halftime when he overthrew the slot receiver. It's hard to sit either right now, because both are bringing it.
 
LDopaPDX said:
Our problem isn't the 2 QBs. Both played extremely well today. Adams had a rough go on the first couple of drives, but was pretty much flawless after that. Padron came in and lit it up. The only bad throw I remember him making was the first down throw right before halftime when he overthrew the slot receiver. It's hard to sit either right now, because both are bringing it.

Agreed.

The only criticism you can level at the QB's was red zone efficiency. But you can't really blame them for giving up 30 points including a blocked punt for a TD. Great teams don't give up that many points.

Our defensive injuries are mounting....
 
I'm not one to second guess the coaches as they know a lot more about this than I and they see these kids in practice all week long, week in and out. I do have to wonder if either QB or receivers for that matter get "in rhythm" under this system?
 
kalm said:
LDopaPDX said:
Our problem isn't the 2 QBs. Both played extremely well today. Adams had a rough go on the first couple of drives, but was pretty much flawless after that. Padron came in and lit it up. The only bad throw I remember him making was the first down throw right before halftime when he overthrew the slot receiver. It's hard to sit either right now, because both are bringing it.

Agreed.

The only criticism you can level at the QB's was red zone efficiency. But you can't really blame them for giving up 30 points including a blocked punt for a TD. Great teams don't give up that many points.

Our defensive injuries are mounting....

Blocked punt for a TD, 2 lost fumbles (1 in the red zone), 3 critical passes not caught because the receiver either stopped or didn't see the ball in the sun. I don't think the problem is with the QBs either but I find it hard to lay it all off on the defense. This was a team loss.
 
Tough loss on the road and it is a game we should have won.
*************
THE GOOD

- We are 6-2 and easily could be 3-5 this year. We have found ways to win games we shouldn't (Griz) and games we didn't play well in (Weber/Sac/MSU). Some of those games could have gone either way, this one unfortunately didn't go our way.

- Our offense played a lot better today.

- Cal Poly lost, there is only one team ahead of us in the conference standings. If we win out, and Cal Poly beats NAU, i'm pretty sure we would win the conference due to tiebreakers...

- We still have an outside shot at a playoff seed despite not playing very well in a lot of games this year.

- When and If we play like we are capable of playing, we can beat any FCS team this year.

- We get back to back home games coming up and have the easiest conference schedule of the 4 contenders from here on in.
*************
THE BAD

- I hate the 2 QB situation. Both are good QB's, but we need to pick one! It killed us in the 4th quarter today. Adams had led us on 3 straight drives to end the 3rd and start the 4th, 2 td's, and then Bronson fumbles in the red zone when we were about to go up 14. We stop them and get the ball back and out comes Padron, he should have never come in right there, we had momentum and Adams was ripping their defense. It completely kills our momentum when we do this.

- We have looked like a mediocre team in a lot of our games.

- We don't have that killer instinct. We need to learn to put teams away, we can't let teams hang around, when we get leads we have to capitalize on that, we have never done that. We are very good at playing the underdog role and coming from behind, we are terrible at playing with the lead. When ranked #1 in the country the last 2 years, our record is 1-3, that is sick.

- Todays loss was a killer for our playoff seeding hopes. We can pretty much kiss a top 3 seed goodbye, and we have to win out to even be considered for a 4 or 5 seed and even then, it is still a long shot.
*************
We need to come out and slaughter Cal Poly next week. If we want to be considered a top team, we need to play like one. We need to have a couple games where we put an ass kicking to another team. We need to win both of these games at home and then give PSU a huge revenge style beat down.

I was disappointed with this loss, but it was a loss to a pretty good team on the road. It just might be the loss we needed to kick start a nice run to, and in, the playoffs. Winning out should at least get us a first round bye and probably a home game in the playoffs, but it all starts next week. Hopefully the guys come out ready to go!
 
sunday said:
I'm not qualified nor do I want to stir the pot with the "two QB debate." But my thought is instead of giving them certain series, qtrs. or half's to play - how about you use them in "situational downs" like extra receivers, RB's or a special package? I think Vernon could have used his legs late in the game when Kyle was in to add aother dimension for SUU to defend. Adams seems like his arm is good enough for passing also....just a thought.

Let me clarify my two QB's thought: Adams is a better at making his own lane and running the ball. We all agree with that. Padron has showed his ability to get up the field at times as well.

Let's say Padron is running the show: how come we can't put Adams in for 1 play where he can pass (like Padron) or run it (better than Padron)?

That's my point. Teams bring in the bruiser back to get that 1 yd first down or the extra tight end to run to a certain side.

I'm not real fond of 2 QB's for all the reasons others have mentioned; but if you're going to do it...do it better. 8-)
 
We didn't lose the game because of using 2 qbs. You'll recall that Adams had 3 series at the beginning of the game, punt, punt, int. then Padron comes in and leads them to 3 scores. If Baldwin stays with Adams the game could have got away from us early. Adams runs well, no doubt, however, he sometimes runs too early. Padron has shown that he can run as well. He may not be as nimble a runner, but he's a lot better at passing. With 3 All American receivers I would think you'd want them touching the ball more often. Adams and Padron should line up in the backfield together. Direct snap to whoever you want touching the ball. Think that would keep Def coords up at night. Certainly not every play, but a nice change of pace. Hopefully we make the other team score offensively to beat us. Turnovers and punt blocks have to stop. Won't work in the playoffs. Victories like the Mont St game won't happen often. Also, letting a team rush for 400 yards usually gets you beat.
 
Flyer said:
We didn't lose the game because of using 2 qbs. You'll recall that Adams had 3 series at the beginning of the game, punt, punt, int. then Padron comes in and leads them to 3 scores. If Baldwin stays with Adams the game could have got away from us early. Adams runs well, no doubt, however, he sometimes runs too early. Padron has shown that he can run as well. He may not be as nimble a runner, but he's a lot better at passing. With 3 All American receivers I would think you'd want them touching the ball more often. Adams and Padron should line up in the backfield together. Direct snap to whoever you want touching the ball. Think that would keep Def coords up at night. Certainly not every play, but a nice change of pace. Hopefully we make the other team score offensively to beat us. Turnovers and punt blocks have to stop. Won't work in the playoffs. Victories like the Mont St game won't happen often. Also, letting a team rush for 400 yards usually gets you beat.

Ditto! Could not have said it any better :thumb:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top