System QBs

[Big151Orange]

Read an article on A to Z Sports with anonymous quotes from other coaches about Hooker. One coach said ”…he wasn’t very good at VT, but he’s very good at TN. Makes you wonder if it’s a system thing”.

I don’t understand why people want to make that out to be a bad thing, “a system QB”. That’s what coaches are supposed to do, find ways to make their players successful. The only part of his statement that I’m concerned about is what’s in bold above; he’s very good at TN. Dont really care if it’s because of the system, how good he will be in NFL, or anything else. Just be good at UT and get this ship headed back to prominence.

 

[Gandalf]

Eh, I mean a QBs play style has to match the overall offensive philosophy of the coach. If not, they are not going to perform as well. Period. Its all fine to say that great coaches can work with what they have but the reality is that most coaches seem to have a style and the best magic happens when they have a QB who has the talent but also fits that style. No deep secret revealed there I am sure but people act like its a surprise if a meals on wheels guy doesnt do well in an air raid offense and vs versa, etc. This is why coaches recruit for fit as well as potential talent IMO.

 

[Vol8188]

Read an article on A to Z Sports with anonymous quotes from other coaches about Hooker. One coach said ”…he wasn’t very good at VT, but he’s very good at TN. Makes you wonder if it’s a system thing”.

I don’t understand why people want to make that out to be a bad thing, “a system QB”. That’s what coaches are supposed to do, find ways to make their players successful. The only part of his statement that I’m concerned about is what’s in bold above; he’s very good at TN. Dont really care if it’s because of the system, how good he will be in NFL, or anything else. Just be good at UT and get this ship headed back to prominence.

They should be more concerned if their system doesn't allow their QB to excel.

 

[butchna]

Gotta be able to discern the Mahomes from the Kingsbury/Cumbies. If you're good you're good.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

There's probably some very good definition of "system quarterback" out there. But for me, I kind of just think of it this way: a system quarterback is a fella who shines in college, but then just goes on to a mediocre (or less) pro career; serviceable, at best, but no longer shiny and bright as he was at university.

It must have been the system.

And that becomes particularly valid if a series of quarterbacks go to the same university, all shine there, and then are all just adequate or worse in the NFL. I mean, think of John Parker Wilson...Greg McElroy...A.J. McCarron...Blake Sims...Jake Coker...and Blake Barnett, all at Bama, all did extremely well in Saban's system, not a single one of them made it in the NFL, I don't think. That's a system that produces "system QBs."

But here's the key point in all that: one can't tell who the "system quarterbacks" are until they go off to the NFL.

And not a single Heupel-led team has put a QB into the NFL yet. I think his two QBs at UCF are both playing college ball this year, albeit for different teams (Oklahoma and Florida State, I think).

In other words, the dude who theorized that Hendon Hooker could be benefitting as a "system quarterback" has absolutely no basis for the thought. It's just something he threw out there.

For myself, I can't imagine Hendon NOT tearing it up in the NFL. He's going to be exciting there, just like he is for us.

Really not worth wasting any more time talking about, honestly.

Go Vols!

 

[OrngeJuiceJones]

Read an article on A to Z Sports with anonymous quotes from other coaches about Hooker. One coach said ”…he wasn’t very good at VT, but he’s very good at TN. Makes you wonder if it’s a system thing”.

I don’t understand why people want to make that out to be a bad thing, “a system QB”. That’s what coaches are supposed to do, find ways to make their players successful. The only part of his statement that I’m concerned about is what’s in bold above; he’s very good at TN. Dont really care if it’s because of the system, how good he will be in NFL, or anything else. Just be good at UT and get this ship headed back to prominence.

He wasn't good at VT because VT sucks and so did Justin Fuente. No line, no playmakers and a bad coach.

 

[Vol8188]

I hate to be that guy, but I will give whoever made that claim this:

This offense does not have QBs go through a traditional progression. Rather they lock on to one Wr and attempt to throw him open by throwing to grass.

The lack of a traditional could be seen by some as not preparing a QB for the nfl.

 

[TNbuc2]

There's probably some very good definition of "system quarterback" out there. But for me, I kind of just think of it this way: a system quarterback is a fella who shines in college, but then just goes on to a mediocre (or less) pro career; serviceable, at best, but no longer shiny and bright as he was at university.

It must have been the system.

And that becomes particularly valid if a series of quarterbacks go to the same university, all shine there, and then are all just adequate or worse in the NFL. I mean, think of John Parker Wilson...Greg McElroy...A.J. McCarron...Blake Sims...Jake Coker...and Blake Barnett, all at Bama, all did extremely well in Saban's system, not a single one of them made it in the NFL, I don't think. That's a system that produces "system QBs."

But here's the key point in all that: one can't tell who the "system quarterbacks" are until they go off to the NFL.

And not a single Heupel-led team has put a QB into the NFL yet. I think his two QBs at UCF are both playing college ball this year, albeit for different teams (Oklahoma and Florida State, I think).

In other words, the dude who theorized that Hendon Hooker could be benefitting as a "system quarterback" has absolutely no basis for the thought. It's just something he threw out there.

For myself, I can't imagine Hendon NOT tearing it up in the NFL. He's going to be exciting there, just like he is for us.

Really not worth wasting any more time talking about, honestly.

Go Vols!

Don't think Peyton would have been very good in the option attack. Scott Frost ran it well, don't think he did well in the pros. Everything has to be a fit. Kinda like the frog not bumping his butt if it had wings thing.

 

[VolForLife83]

Read an article on A to Z Sports with anonymous quotes from other coaches about Hooker. One coach said ”…he wasn’t very good at VT, but he’s very good at TN. Makes you wonder if it’s a system thing”.

I don’t understand why people want to make that out to be a bad thing, “a system QB”. That’s what coaches are supposed to do, find ways to make their players successful. The only part of his statement that I’m concerned about is what’s in bold above; he’s very good at TN. Dont really care if it’s because of the system, how good he will be in NFL, or anything else. Just be good at UT and get this ship headed back to prominence.

Recently read an article about him playing tight at VT. Heupel and staff was able to loosen him up and make the game fun

 

[PlanetVolunteer]

Read an article on A to Z Sports with anonymous quotes from other coaches about Hooker. One coach said ”…he wasn’t very good at VT, but he’s very good at TN. Makes you wonder if it’s a system thing”.

I don’t understand why people want to make that out to be a bad thing, “a system QB”. That’s what coaches are supposed to do, find ways to make their players successful. The only part of his statement that I’m concerned about is what’s in bold above; he’s very good at TN. Dont really care if it’s because of the system, how good he will be in NFL, or anything else. Just be good at UT and get this ship headed back to prominence.

There's this belief Hendon wasn't good at VT and it's just not true. He wasn't as good, but he wasn't bad at all.

 

[Rememberthelate90s]

Gotta be able to discern the Mahomes from the Kingsbury/Cumbies. If you're good you're good.

No one can do that. Only two qbs I said they will be good with no doubt, Peyton and Andrew Luck. Any other qb I've not been able to say for certain.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Don't think Peyton would have been very good in the option attack. Scott Frost ran it well, don't think he did well in the pros. Everything has to be a fit. Kinda like the frog not bumping his butt if it had wings thing.

You're right, but that's not really important to the discussion. Because NFL coaching staffs are only going to draft QBs who fit their system.

So if the guy shined in college, but then didn't in the pros--and especially if a long string of QBs at the same college did that--it wasn't because some NFL team tried to force a square peg into a round hole. It was because those QBs benefited from the system that made them look significantly better in college than they otherwise were.

Anyway, that's how I've always understood "system QB" to be defined.

 

[KnoxToTheBoro93]

I hate to be that guy, but I will give whoever made that claim this:

This offense does not have QBs go through a traditional progression. Rather they lock on to one Wr and attempt to throw him open by throwing to grass.

The lack of a traditional could be seen by some as not preparing a QB for the nfl.

They don’t lock in one 1 Wr… yes some plays are designed to one side of the field due to amount of plays we run but there are multiple progressions to go through on most plays and hooker has been working hard on manipulating defenses by going through his progressions…

 

[fossilfiction]

Oh well. If they have a system and recruited someone to run it this efficiently. Systems require good coaching by the staff and good execution by the players.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

They don’t lock in one 1 Wr… yes some plays are designed to one side of the field due to amount of plays we run but there are multiple progressions to go through on most plays and hooker has been working hard on manipulating defenses by going through his progressions…

I think that's right. Can't put my finger on a source, but something Golesh or Heupel said somewhere over the past year indicated that, often, there were two or more "hot" receivers who could be the target, depending on one or more reads.

We know sometimes the far side of the formation can "take the play off" and rest a bit, knowing the play isn't coming anywhere near them. We've seen them do it. But I suspect that the receivers on the active side, very often, at least two of them are potential targets.

Wish I could remember where and what I heard that convinced me of that. If I recall and can find it, I'll link.

 

[Vol8188]

They don’t lock in one 1 Wr… yes some plays are designed to one side of the field due to amount of plays we run but there are multiple progressions to go through on most plays and hooker has been working hard on manipulating defenses by going through his progressions…

Yeah, they lock on to one guy. It's a big basis of the entire passing game. It's a variation of the run n shoot and the biggest difference between the run n shoot and the west coast is that the run n shoot gives the WR options on how he gets open instead of giving the QB the option on where the ball is going. So the QB's job is to throw the ball to grass and the WR is supposed to run to grass (no safety, grass is deep; deep corner grass is underneath, etc). I'm giving you a simplified explanation of it for sure, but run n shoot teams do not go through typical QB progressions.

Here's an article that breaks it down well and here's a screen shot from the article that summarizes the entire passing philosophy and why it can be easier on QBs

Baylor’s Vertical Passing Game

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

There's this belief Hendon wasn't good at VT and it's just not true. He wasn't as good, but he wasn't bad at all.

Got me curious and you're right.

2894 yards, 22 TDs, 7ints in 18 games.

 

[Vol8188]

I think that's right. Can't put my finger on a source, but something Golesh or Heupel said somewhere over the past year indicated that, often, there were two or more "hot" receivers who could be the target, depending on one or more reads.

We know sometimes the far side of the formation can "take the play off" and rest a bit, knowing the play isn't coming anywhere near them. We've seen them do it. But I suspect that the receivers on the active side, very often, at least two of them are live.

Wish I could remember where and what I heard that convinced me of that. If I recall and can find it, I'll link.

Pre-snap reads are far different than true progressions.

 

[Vol865]

Maybe VTs system sucked

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Pre-snap reads are far different than true progressions.

I don't know that the reads were always pre-snap. And I'm not arguing a case of "true progression." Just saying that more than one receiver might be the target as the play progresses. Again, wish I could recall and find the source.

p.s. I've seen the source you just linked above. It's a good source. But remember, Heupel's not sticking entirely to Briles' system. He's been adding his own wrinkles along the way.

 

[butchna]

No one can do that. Only two qbs I said they will be good with no doubt, Peyton and Andrew Luck. Any other qb I've not been able to say for certain.

There's a long history of sure fire QBs identified in college. Neither of your examples were considered because of the "system" they ran in college.

 

[Vol8188]

I don't know that the reads were always pre-snap. And I'm not arguing a case of "true progression." Just saying that more than one receiver might be the target as the play progresses. Again, wish I could recall and find the source.

It may be something they’re doing for Hooker. I know Mumme told me when he had a qb with nfl upside he’d run some different things for them for the scouts. At the time he specifically mentioned playing under center because the nfl game was much different at that time.

Plus if they are going to try moving the pocket more this year to help with offensive line, I’d expect a lot of variations of flood and smash. Idk of anyway to run those plays without progressions.

 

[37620VOL]

Maybe VT has a crappy system. Every Bama QB could be considered a system QB. How could a decent QB suck when surrounded by so much offensive skill?

 

[Remy]

This actually could have been written by Heupel himself prior to 2Hs proving his initial assessment wrong about him and Milton both. IMO this is about the ego of the coaching fraternity than it is about any one player. The OP posted where a coach mentions the young man and his deficiencies suggesting he still has them and found a system where those could be hidden.

Note there is ZERO consideration the young man could have worked on his weaknesses and improved them OR the coaches and/or system at VT sucked at getting the best out of this talented player.

 

[nomads-11]

There's probably some very good definition of "system quarterback" out there. But for me, I kind of just think of it this way: a system quarterback is a fella who shines in college, but then just goes on to a mediocre (or less) pro career; serviceable, at best, but no longer shiny and bright as he was at university.

It must have been the system.

And that becomes particularly valid if a series of quarterbacks go to the same university, all shine there, and then are all just adequate or worse in the NFL. I mean, think of John Parker Wilson...Greg McElroy...A.J. McCarron...Blake Sims...Jake Coker...and Blake Barnett, all at Bama, all did extremely well in Saban's system, not a single one of them made it in the NFL, I don't think. That's a system that produces "system QBs."

But here's the key point in all that: one can't tell who the "system quarterbacks" are until they go off to the NFL.

And not a single Heupel-led team has put a QB into the NFL yet. I think his two QBs at UCF are both playing college ball this year, albeit for different teams (Oklahoma and Florida State, I think).

In other words, the dude who theorized that Hendon Hooker could be benefitting as a "system quarterback" has absolutely no basis for the thought. It's just something he threw out there.

For myself, I can't imagine Hendon NOT tearing it up in the NFL. He's going to be exciting there, just like he is for us.

Really not worth wasting any more time talking about, honestly.

Go Vols!

As a QB I'd be leery of going to Alabama or Georgia pretty much for the reasons you state. They do not have a good history of putting QBs in the NFL and having them stick. Mac Jones and Tua are giving it a go - and might pan out, we'll have to see this year (my opinion historically it no, neither pan out to be anything great). I do believe programs such as these may put different emphasis on the QB position - and are maybe less reliant/tolerant of taking risks until it become necessary. This is largely because they can rely on a habitually strong defense, at least compared to the majority of opposing teams. Why risk it if you can limit an opponent to under 17 ppg., plus you're a coach - you're paid to win.

And throw in Stetson Bennett, you'll find him on some network within a handful of years. He just strikes me as being cut from the exact same McElory/McCarron cloth.

Anyway, it'd come down to the coach and style of play vice what the W and Ls are going to look like. Provided I had the talent - which I don't.