Will our QB actually keep it sometimes and run this year?

#1

NEO

Eat at Joe's
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
18,387
Likes
13,147
#1
I was watching a film from another thread (Peterman pre/post injury) on here just now and remember how last year we kept lining up like the QB might keep it and run but he never did.

I think 99% of the time we lined up where the QB could possibly keep it he never actually did. If it wasn't for Dobbs, it may have been 99.9%

My question is does anyone think our QB will actually keep it more this year...say 25% of the time. just enough to keep them honest.

Because in the video I mentioned Peterman never kept it once and the D never even acted like his running was an option.

Your thoughts?
 
#2
#2
I was watching a film from another thread (Peterman pre/post injury) on here just now and remember how last year we kept lining up like the QB might keep it and run but he never did.

I think 99% of the time we lined up where the QB could possibly keep it he never actually did. If it wasn't for Dobbs, it may have been 99.9%

My question is does anyone think our QB will actually keep it more this year...say 25% of the time. just enough to keep them honest.

Because in the video I mentioned Peterman never kept it once and the D never even acted like his running was an option.

Your thoughts?

25% is not "keeping them honest"...it's more carries than Scott will get...you know?...the running back?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3
#3
25% is not "keeping them honest"...it's more carries than Scott will get...you know?...the running back?

If the QB won't hold the ball for at least 1 out 4 read option plays, then what is the point in running them? Defenses swarmed the running back every time last year because they had no reason to respect the QB. It was ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#4
#4
I think we're hoping for somewhere around 10-15%, you don't want your qb taking an extreme amount of hits. Just enough to keep the opposing defense honest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6
#6
I think we're hoping for somewhere around 10-15%, you don't want your qb taking an extreme amount of hits. Just enough to keep the opposing defense honest.

I'm in the 5-10% range. More than 10% would be too many carries. We aren't that deep at QB to run the ball from that position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
Yes, the QB will keep it. Which ever one starts, they will get the start based on their command of the offense. That means they can make the reads on the run plays and when the read calls for it, they'll keep it like they should.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
Instead of hoping for a certain percentage, I just hope our qbs keep the ball and run when they see that is going to be a successful play for them to run. I feel if Worley could have averaged 1.. JUST ONE... big run per game it would have opened up more room for the running backs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9
#9
Couldn't possibly care less if we have a single QB keeper/run/carry this year. Make smart, quick decisions, limits turnovers, make the correct reads, make accurate throws to our playmakers and let them do the work. 95% of our zone read runs are automatic gives to the RBs anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#10
#10
The problem is, probably more than half of those run plays that look like a read are direct handoffs rather than being an actual read play. Then, of the remaining run plays that actually turn out being a read, the QB only keeps 10%. With that play calling philosophy, the defense has almost no reason to respect the QB keeper. If the QB keeps, he might get a nice chunk of yards, but it is still well worth it for the defense to sell out on the handoff every time because that qb keeper is likely to only happen once per game.
 
#11
#11
Maybe with another year in the system, the QB's will feel more comfortable running the read option. I think it still depends on who the QB is that's starting. Worley isn't much of a runner, but Peterman/Dobbs are a little more athletic. I'm not saying Worley isn't a good fit for the offense, just that the other two are a better with their feet
 
#12
#12
It's not about keeping it a certain percentage. The QB needs to "read" it on designed read options. Sometimes in our offense, it is a straight give, but you are right. They need to read it and when the option is there to keep it, do it. Hopefully a year under their belt will make them better at this.
 
#13
#13
It's like someone said above, most of our "read-option" plays are not "read" at all--they are simply designed handoffs out of a read look. We will need to have a consistent short passing game if we want to consistently move the ball, IMO.
 
#14
#14
Peterman has enough foot speed to hold it several times a game. He made a few good runs in the O&W game and seems to be more physical than the other QB's..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
Is it possible that CBJ, knowing our insufficiencies at QB last year, designed them to look like zone read but they were really planned hand offs just about every time? I think that is likely. He probably wanted to keep Worley healthy after P'man's injury so that he wouldn't have to burn any redshirts. Then after Worley is injured we were extremely thin at the position. So the risk may have outweighed the reward all year.

I think this year, with a #1 and #2 that apparently are much closer in ability, maybe CBJ gives the QB the green light to actually make a read instead of having it always be a direct hand off
 
Last edited:
#17
#17
One thing not being mentioned... in a zone read run play, the running back is going perpendicular to the line and thus can only run in one direction and towards half of the field at best while also not gaining forward momentum until well after the handoff. If the QB doesn't keep enough times or run WR reverse (perpendicular running again!) then the D knows which 1/3 of the field the run will be on PRE-SNAP! Last year's read option plays should never see the light of day again..
 
#19
#19
Is it possible that CBJ, knowing our insufficiencies at QB last year, designed them to look like zone read but they were really planned hand offs just about every time? I think that is likely. He probably wanted to keep Worley healthy after P'man's injury so that he wouldn't have to burn any redshirts. Then after Worley is injured we were extremely thin at the position. So the risk may have outweighed the reward all year.

I think this year, with a #1 and #2 that apparently are much closer in ability, maybe CBJ gives the QB the green light to actually make a read instead of having it always be a direct hand off

You kidding us? If read option is the package, then the QB needs to read and call the correct play, keeping it when the D allows for such. CBJ thinking he is running a read option offense and telling his QB not to read for the run is silly. The QB's last year, Worley mostly, when running the read option just never decided to keep for what ever reasons. No way in hell CBJ was game planning that the UT QB's running the read option would not actually read the play and ever keep, that would be counter productive obviously to the scheme being played. The QB's just never wanted to keep or could not "read" when it was the time to keep. That has to change or else the O needs a new scheme, because if you are running the read option, your QB better be ready to keep and read when appropriate,else it is a wasted system.
 
#20
#20
Worley ran it well against Ga and South Car and kept scoring drives going. He didn't before he was benched. Qb needs to get a couple of first downs per game with his feet. Maybe 5-7 carries or scrambles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
It's a balancing act, WR's get open because the defense has to respect the run . Just watching CBJ and listening to him talk about attention to detail leads me to believe we will gain yards on the ground to set up the pass attack . Our Rb's will only get better and demand attention from the defenses
 
#22
#22
One thing not being mentioned... in a zone read run play, the running back is going perpendicular to the line and thus can only run in one direction and towards half of the field at best while also not gaining forward momentum until well after the handoff. If the QB doesn't keep enough times or run WR reverse (perpendicular running again!) then the D knows which 1/3 of the field the run will be on PRE-SNAP! Last year's read option plays should never see the light of day again..

What exactly is the quarterback "reading" on that play? Whether the tackle blocks his guy toward middle, or toward outside?
 
#23
#23
I'm no expert but I imagine it would be the DE, MLB and OLB. If they all crash towards the RB then you go away from their side. And pre-snap reads are beyond my pay grade and apparently beyond our QBs last year too
 
#24
#24
I'm no expert but I imagine it would be the DE, MLB and OLB. If they all crash towards the RB then you go away from their side. And pre-snap reads are beyond my pay grade and apparently beyond our QBs last year too

UT QB's never really ran the read option last year, simply because they never chose to keep on the read option. Think on that. The read option offense is predicated on the QB reading the D and keeping when appropriate, yet UT QB's rarely if ever chose the keep. Baffling.
 
#25
#25
Just as a reminder that the Alabama game and after, we couldn't take the chance of a QB getting smacked around down field.

When you're down to the last one, you have to protect them at all costs. And the run option isn't the easiest way of doing that.
 

VN Store



Back
Top