why is the place kicker an OR? I just always thought Medley was there despite some issues because of the experience and National stage....has the other outperformed in camp? I just don't remember seeing anything...do you think its real that it wont be Medley Monday night?
Are you intentionally being obtuse or did I give you more credit that you deserve?
WHY... if it is a DESIRABLE THING... do coaches avoid using 2 QB's? You keep pointing to exceptions as proof that it works. If it worked as a way of doing things then someone would do it.
You do this as if you are supporting that it be used now. Is it not your bias that motivates you to support this idea?
Pointing to the exceptions does NOTHING to support the notion that both of UT's QB's should play. One should be the starter. One should be the back up. I'm fine with either guy. It would be foolish to play two guys with similar games if one guy has won the job.
Been talked about for a few weeks now that it's a legit battle between Medley and Cimaglia.....and that's a very good thing imo. Medley either needs to get much better this year or replaced.
With great respect, you didn't answer that question. You only go back into "well it has worked" on a few occasions.Already answered that question. You can't refuse to acknowledge the answer given, then claim I never answered. Doesn't work that way, SJT.
But thanks for calling me obtuse.
OK. If that's your answer... you're just wrong. LOTS of coaches every year choose between two guys who are neck and neck and have done enough to start. If coaches used a 2 qb system every time there was no clear winner of the competition then you'd see it a lot more than you do. I haven't seen any suggestion that UT's competition is that close. Maybe it is something contrary to the tendencies of the bits and pieces we've gotten... but the signs point toward Dormady and not by a coin flip.Here's the answer again:
Coaches generally use one QB because that's the best QB on the team. A clear advantage. When there is no advantage to choosing one, but there is an advantage to naming two, coaches do that.
What is your successful example of that? It isn't UF under Spurrier. He didn't have a planned system for playing 2 guys... he just yanked guys who made mistakes. Benching guys isn't a 2 QB "system".Look, coaches tend to use 2 QBs under two conditions: (1) when the two are very closely matched in skill level and it would be disadvantageous to the team to name just one as starter ... or
If they're willing to bench one of them then it is indecision and a competition... not a "system".(2) when the two QBs bring different skill sets to the position. In the first case, coaches typically keep alternating the QBs until one establishes himself in game conditions as the better. In the second case, the coaches may keep running with both all season long.
In the second case it has worked... rarely.In either case, the 2-QB system can work, and work well.
Then what is your purpose? In honesty, are you pulling for one guy or the other? I'm sincerely not. May the best man win.... but let the winner be the winner. Make a decision!You keep trying to paint me into a corner as if I think 2-QB systems are the bomb and should be used all the time. I've never said that. I don't believe that. But you're creating a straw man to argue against, which I would think is beneath you, SJT.
End of the world? No. A huge mistake? Yes.It's not the end of the world if Butch goes with it this season, whether for a game or three until he sees separation, or all season long if he's alternating them situationally for their differing talents.
Now, your turn. Tell us the "less than 20" cases of 2-QB offenses that you remember, and how they did. Still waiting.
I have seen two QB's used at ECU. UF has done it other than Tebow/Leak but I can't remember the names. IIRC, Fulmer played Stewart and Manning both for a couple of games. Iowa used Beatherd and that other kid.
I'm just having a hard time remembering them all but most of the time it was a running QB complimenting a passing QB when it actually worked. Often it was really big kids who gave the O a short yardage package with at least a threat to throw.
I said less than 20 because I didn't count them....
Nope. Later than that. I think it was also during Meyer's tenure.Okay, we're making progress.
The other Florida example you're probably remembering is Wuerffel and Dean in '93 and '94.
So you seem to remember about 5-6 cases:
And we can add '04 Ainge-Schaeffer to that, of course -- 7-1 as long as the 2-QB system lasted (Schaeffer broke his collarbone the middle of the 8th game).
- ECU -- remember how they did?
- Florida, Tebow/Leak '06 -- went 13-1, national champs
- Florida, Wuerffel/Dean '93 -- went 11-2, SEC champs
- Florida, Wuerffel/Dean '94 -- went 10-2-1, SEC champs
- Tennessee, Stewart/Manning -- don't remember Peyton sharing QB position with anyone after his freshman year taking over from Helton-->Colquitt. If that's the year you mean, I wouldn't call that a 2-QB system. I'd call it a series of injuries, playing whoever was left, heh.
- Iowa, Beatherd/?? -- Just looked this up for you, think you're probably talking about the '14 season, Beatherd/Rudock. The year we played them in the TaxSlayer Bowl. They went 7-6 that year.
So between us, we remember 6 cases of a dual QB system being used (not counting Manning/Stewart unless you insist). 4 of those were very successful (FL '93, FL '94, TN '04, FL '06), one was a winning season but not particularly good (Iowa), and the last we don't know about (ECU).
Right?
So in both our memories, the 2-QB system has generally worked well when used.
You seeing that, too?
Shaeffer was actually the starter ahead of Ainge. When Ainge had that great second half against Florida, Fulmer quickly named him the starter for game 3 and he looked lost.
Still in my mind, one of the great mistakes in Fulmer's career that carried over into 2005