You can't help but admire some of the offenses that feature mobile QBs:
- A&M (obviously)
- Redskins
- Seahawks
- Louisville (Bridgewater is the next big thing, IMO)
Will OU do this with Bell, Knight, Thompson and Thomas? Can they?
|
|
Is OU's Future with a Running QB?
You can't help but admire some of the offenses that feature mobile QBs:
- A&M (obviously)
- Redskins
- Seahawks
- Louisville (Bridgewater is the next big thing, IMO)
Will OU do this with Bell, Knight, Thompson and Thomas? Can they?
Well if they don't then we can add everyone of our current QB's to the biggest waste of talent thread.
it puts alot of pressure on the defense...
i hope landry is our last pure passer
2 users like 87sooner's post: SoonerBounce, StatGeek
I think they better because it would help mask our lack of running the ball and open some things up. Right now we are so one dimensional it is silly.
I think it is rather clear:
Blake Bell
Trevor Knight
Kendall Thompson
Cody Thomas
None of those dudes are statues.
Jason White or Sam Bradford wouldn't have been either without a defense.Originally Posted by zcaa0g
A running QB can be the future here. I would like to see anything that can help refresh the staleness of the program today. In order for that to happen, we first need a Offensive Coordinator that is capable of calling and creating those type of plays for that player/offense. Heupel's play calling (To me) has not been Oklahoma quality. Everybody knows what cards we have, and when we pull them. What worked in 2000/2001 does not translate well into 2013 College Ball.
The Belldozer package: When it works it looks great. However, you saw what happened at the goal line at the Cotton Bowl. Why we can't just run straight ahead instead of leaping right and letting the slowest play in the playbook TRY to develop at the 1 yard line is beyond me. Especially when we have one of the best, but most under-utilized Fullback/RB hybrids (Millard) out there.
What Tulsa football has implemented as of late is very similar to what i would love to see in Norman. Maybe some of us appreciate what TU did and can see how a similar system might work at OU.
Done ranting on the offense for now, don't have enough patience to write about the D. Who does? White flag has been raised....Flame on.
yes but how much will Stoops allow them to run? I think that is really the issue, he hasn't let anyone run since White
it's Bob's call and although we have recruited differently, that doesn't mean much will change
I just don't see how we can transition to a QB run type of offense with Josh as OC. My guess is we run the same type of offense we are now with Blake keeping the ball and running instead of handing it off on obvious run downs. So, not much different than what we have been seeing the last two years. What little faith I had last off season has dwindled to nothing this upcoming off season.
Hope so. Sure looks like it.
...And I don't think that's what he meant.
I didn't see Tulsa play this year. Can you expand on this?
I have to agree since that response confused me. heh
We better if we want to compete for championships.
A running QB can be a nightmare even against the best defenses. They defend the p**** or run. It's very difficult to account for both.
What makes you think Josh can't transition us to a QB run offense?
Clever.
Do you guys seriously want 2 years of the Belldozer? It was cute when nobody could stop it, but since the K State game it has been the biggest headache on offense. I would say OU could run some sort of zone read, but is Bell too big for that? It might be nice to find some balance in a zone read and up tempo p**** attack.
I think most people are wanting more of a Tebow style attack.
i think heupel's biggest problem was he was trying to stick a square peg in a round hole...
landry was not suited for this offense...
put a mobile qb in this offense and i think it will be exponentially more effective...
problem is....do we have a mobile qb....who can throw accurately.....and most importantly ....make good decisions...
What makes you think he can? He's never done it before. Why not bring in someone who has a track record of running that style of offense rather than letting Josh continue to learn on the job? That is if Bob truly wants to change our offense to that style. Like I said above, I don't think they do. They will just run a few more QB draws a game.
I don't know that he can, but the last 2 years on the job doesn't make me lose faith in his ability to. The Bell-dozer package was put in under Josh--it's been extremely effective. Chip Kelly couldn't have made Landry effective in a qb run game, so killing Josh and saying he can't run a qb running attack isn't fair, especially looking at the effectiveness of Bell's time on the field.
I'm not sure Josh himself wasn't the square peg. It's tough to say. I can't help but think Josh coached Landry never to run. Landry was never truly mobile, but there were so many times that the first down was there for the taking and Landry would try to force a ball into a receiver rather than run ten feet for the first down.
I don't give a rat's **** about being fair. I want OU to win football games.
The Belldozer up to this point is one formation with two or three plays in that formation. OU isn't going to run "The Belldozer" the next two seasons. Good grief.
3 users like zcaa0g's post: El Jefe, soonerbornsoonerbret, Yungpoisna
in high school Landry was pretty mobile
Shanahan went in and completely revamped their offense around RGIII's unique skillset and it worked great for them. Sure, there was a little adjustment period needed, but that's what all great coaches should be able to do. They have to tailor their plays to get the most out of their players.
During the Seahawks-Skins game they were talking about how Pete Carroll liked what they were doing with RGIII in Washington and decided to try and implement it with Wilson in Seattle. It's worked great for them too. If our coaching staff can't, or won't, adjust to the dual-threat skillset of our quarterbacks then they will never be competitive again.
Will not matter if OU had a scrambling QB>If your OL can't block a 3 man DL it will not matter.
Folks should be worried about getting a top 10 defense in here!!
Last edited by SyN; 01-07-2013 at 10:44 AM. Reason: Don't worry about it!
i disagree....
we were more than competitive this year with landry....
if we would have had a top 5 defense....we might have been playing tonite...
The following users like this post: SyN
We could only score 13 points against A&M and 19 against KSU. While I totally agree that our D should be our biggest concern, I don't think we should lose sight that our O let us down too.
The following users like this post: oucub23
Okay. It's not about fairness. It's about being rational. Saying Josh can't when he's had Landry for 2 years, and in that 2 years, with Landry and all his accolades, we implement the Dozer, isn't rational. Landry couldn't run. You're frustrated? Me too. I'd be lighting torches and gathering pitchforks though if Josh had tried to run a qb running attack offense with Landry there.
Yes, but, Landry is gone. That's not what we're discussing.
This is my point: now that the next starting OU quarterback will likely be a dual-threat guy, if we simply stick him into a pocket-passer offense, we're not using their full abilities. If our starting QB is not mobile, don't over do it (i.e. Bradford, Landry, etc). But, if a guy comes in who can run and p**** then you better use both talents effectively!
Completely agree here. The D didn't let us down against A&M. They did just about what I expected them to.
13 against ND as well...we have attrocious line play on both sides of the ball and against decent competition we get exposed...offensively we can't run, defensively we can't stop the run
ND controlled the LOS against us, A&M did the same, KSU did to some extent...hell for several years now we've failed miserably running inside the 10 trying to score and this year our run D might have been the worst in the Stoops er****
Blake was very mobile in HS before he added 35 lbs or so
Someone mentioned the Redskins? who scores the most in NFL each year? Tom I'm slower than my lineman Brady
To me it's more rational, if you do want to overhaul the offense, to bring in someone who already knows how. It's irrational to roll the dice with an unknown if you don't have to.
I like a running QB as a part of the offense. Unfortunately they eventually get blasted into an injury. Look at RGIII now.
I can see a little QB run game get mixed in. I don't see a lot of it coming though. Even with a healthy White, Bomar/Thompson we didn't run a lot of QB run plays.
Next year we will still be a shotgun, spread 'em out and fling the ball offense that will occasionally try to run; only to get stuffed by a 3-3 defense
I don't think anyone said non-mobile QBs are gone forever. Anyone with half a brain could figure out guys like Brees, Mannings, Brandy, etc. are elite. But when you have a little bit of athleticism -- coupled with the right offensive scheme -- you don't need have a HOF caller under center to be successful.
Collegiate football players aren't as big, fast, or as well coached as NFL players. They also don't play as many games.
yup..
it's more about the offensive line than the TYPE of qb.....
i know what we're discussing....
sure ...let's utilize our qb's abilities completely.....that's obvious
but you still have to have an o-line or his mobility will be utilized running for his life every play....
the offense did let us down....but it's not a foregone conclusion that a dual threat qb would have made a difference..
While that is true to some extent, at least those guys ran it 2 or 3 times more than Bradford or Jones did, which is just significant enough to make a positive difference. Heupel actually ran it quite a bit in 2000 by that style of offense's standards that OU was running at the time. He even ended up with positive rushing yardage that season.
Of course not, not with our OL and the coaches coaching them. I seriously doubt it would have made a huge difference.
I love Josh Heupel, one of my favorite OU quarterbacks of all time. I'm not sold on Josh Heupel, OU offensive coordinator. I think he was moved up too fast and I don't know how long we can let the growing pains continue. His play calling lacks rhythm and creativity. I expected more Mike Leach and less Chuck Long. I hope he can turn it around, because I really want to like him as OC.
And as far as OP's original question. Yes, we will use the qb run game for at least the next four to five years of future.
Its all about the LINE PLAY, you can have a statue back there, if he can throw the ball in 3 seconds.
Good luck with Mobile QBs, whomever mentioned the Skins, your QB got hurt, again.
If that happens, I am done with this staff.My guess is we run the same type of offense we are now with Blake keeping the ball and running instead of handing it off on obvious run downs. So, not much different than what we have been seeing the last two years.
his post is very likely the situation we will see next year, this staff is a sinking ship and it's taking the program down with it
prediction: after three games next year we will have about 10 total Qb run attempts. Half the people will be calling for joshs head, and the other half will be claiming that we are saving it for the rrs
The following users like this post: oupunk
This is where I'm at too. If it's Bell, then he is going to look a lot like a Colin Klein impression. I'm not optimistic that we can emulate K-State on either offense OR defense. I guess if we run the QB and they get injured, we have some depth of QB's that have shown some running ability in High School.
What is it called when you are less than 'cautiously optimistic' about next year? I guess I'm in the 'don't believe the hype' crowd. I sadly expect us to wilt in big games and bowl games.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
