2 QB system thoughts...

clonedude · 08-29-2008, 11:30 AM

First off, let me say that both Arnaud and Bates played decent games last night and I think either one could play QB for us.

Having said that, however, this coaching staff is in a really tough spot. I think Chizik really would like to have just one QB... it just allows the team to build much better rhythym and flow.

And after witnessing what I saw last night... I think that Arnaud is clearly the better prototypical QB. If Bates wasn't such a great, exciting athlete with wonderful feet... we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Arnaud's TD pass to Darks was a clear example of just how good he is. I think Darks was probably the 3rd or 4th option on that play, but Arnaud had the poise and patience to find him.

HOWEVER.... there's no way that Chizik can possibly allow Bates to sit on the sideline all night with what he can bring to the game. He has the chance to take it the distance on every play IMO. So he HAS to play. And at WR... he just doesn't get the chance to run it enough. And he's not a RB either. He's a QB.

So I think we will continue to see this rotation all year long and the team will have to be comfortable with both guys leading the team. If we get down by 2 TDs or more in a game though, I think we will see a lot more of Arnaud because I think he can throw us back into the game. Bates will be great at running the option plays and using up the clock when we are ahead IMO.

Thoughts?

Wx4Cy · 08-29-2008, 11:32 AM

The thing I noticed wasn't what happened on the field. AA stood out to me with the things that happened off of the field. Meeting players/kickers as they came off, motivating on the sidelines, etc.

clintr · 08-29-2008, 11:33 AM

From an opposing team's defensive stand-point, I'm thinking it's harder to prepare for two quarterbacks. Both will have different tendencies and the defense cannot just review film on one guy, they have to split which has to help.

... but what do I know.

cmoneyr · 08-29-2008, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by clintr

From an opposing team's defensive stand-point, I'm thinking it's harder to prepare for two quarterbacks. Both will have different tendencies and the defense cannot just review film on one guy, they have to split which has to help.

... but what do I know.

That's probably true, but it's only to our advantage if our guys are also capable of preparing for our 2 quarterbacks. Learning one quarterback's tendencies takes a lot of time in itself.

Aclone · 08-29-2008, 11:36 AM

I think you're going to get folded into the other thread, is what I think.

anticyclonic · 08-29-2008, 11:37 AM

Sean Keiler wants Bates mothballed so he doesn't tear up the hawks for 3 tds. Man he scary athletically.

BryceC · 08-29-2008, 11:37 AM

Somebody is going to be the starter, and it seems like Arnaud is going to be it. They probably have another game to decide before they need to name a starter at this point and that's fine. Good luck to both of them, we'll need them both at some point in their careers.

cmoneyr · 08-29-2008, 11:39 AM

I guess what it comes down to is Arnaud and Bates have basically the same experience..little to none. Bates hasn't done anything to show me he's not ready to handle it, besides 1 fumble on his first drive which he didn't do again. Bates has the possibility to make huge plays with his feet, and the deep balls he through showed a lot of promise.

I don't think you can make a wrong choice with either of them honestly. I just think that our team, coming off a bad season, needs the opportunity to make big plays and I think Bates may be able to do that better.

snowcraig2.0 · 08-29-2008, 11:40 AM

I would be willing to bet anyone here that what we saw last night will be what we see all season long, as far as the QB rotation goes. I definitely agree that the playbook was kept closed for both guys.

Aclone · 08-29-2008, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by clintr

From an opposing team's defensive stand-point, I'm thinking it's harder to prepare for two quarterbacks. Both will have different tendencies and the defense cannot just review film on one guy, they have to split which has to help.

... but what do I know.

Having one starter also allows for more practice reps for one player, and better familiarity not only with the offense, but getting into a rhythm with is receivers. For a pair of sophomores, both of them have a lot to learn.

Originally Posted by anticyclonic

Sean Keiler wants Bates mothballed so he doesn't tear up the hawks for 3 tds. Man he scary athletically.

And of course, Arnaud would never tear up the Hawks for four passing td's.

cycloneace55 · 08-29-2008, 11:42 AM

After Watching the game I thought that Arnaud was the better QB, and Bates was the better athlete. To me the position of QB and its success is based on how well the player operates in the system and how he utilizes the weapons around him. That being said I don't think we saw enough to say definativly who should start and if we should stop the rotation. Until one of the guys really outplays the other they should both play. Besides, I trust Chizik and his staff as they are paid alot more then I am to make decisions just like this. As long as both Arnaud and Bates both play well I have no problem with a 2 QB system.

Aclone · 08-29-2008, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by snowcraig2.0

I would be willing to bet anyone here that what we saw last night will be what we see all season long, as far as the QB rotation goes. I definitely agree that the playbook was kept closed for both guys.

CyBookie? I'd bet that the rotation ends up being at least 3:1 in favor of one quarterback.

cmoneyr · 08-29-2008, 11:44 AM

Also, that pass that Sed Johnson caught in the endzone was thrown by Bates and it was a beautiful touch pass.

cmoneyr · 08-29-2008, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Aclone

CyBookie? I'd bet that the rotation ends up being at least 3:1 in favor of one quarterback.

I'd agree with that.

timjans · 08-29-2008, 11:49 AM

I think they both have better arms than Meyer did. Im looking forward to see them open up the playbook in the coming weeks.