|
Post by blb on Apr 2, 2010 9:13:02 GMT -6
The only guys I really want playing only one-way are the offensive linemen. Communicating with them between series is important for me.
Besides, if they were athletic, they'd be playing defense. Offensive line = last stop before the bus stop.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Apr 2, 2010 9:28:23 GMT -6
OK, blb, the gloves are off! What a crock!
|
|
|
Post by cc on Apr 2, 2010 9:39:48 GMT -6
Wow several good points.
1) True about the tailback, should he be going both ways if he is your money man on O? 2) Try to have O.Line only be O.Line, but often that's not realistic. We try to rotate guys so they are not Iron Men, more like 1.5ers.
QB on D? 1) As long as he is not the only guy that can really play QB unless 2) We REALLY need him on D
I know for some QBs playing on D allows them to use more of their aggressive side that QB does not allow. The kid we have now is a STUD at Free Safety. He is a ball hawk. And if the throws a pick he always seems to come back with the ball a few plays later. Injuries is a worry for sure. But also, at the next level, he is much more likely to be a DB or WR.
The other problem with having the QB on D is that you don't get to talk to him between series. Same problem with O.Line playing both ways. But if you have low numbers you have to do it sometimes...
|
|
|
Post by blb on Apr 2, 2010 9:40:01 GMT -6
OK, blb, the gloves are off! What a crock! Well, john, I coached OL for three years in CFB. That's who they sent me - the kids not good enough to play defense. So, I told 'em, "This is the last stop before the bus stop!"
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Apr 2, 2010 11:13:57 GMT -6
I played center in CFB and my coach always said, "Knight you are to smart to waste on defense!" I guess he was just afraid to call me a poor athlete to my face!
|
|
|
Post by blb on Apr 2, 2010 11:44:44 GMT -6
I played center in CFB and my coach always said, "Knight you are to smart to waste on defense!" I guess he was just afraid to call me a poor athlete to my face! Well, you know how it is - some guys try to put a "smiley face" spin on everything, and some guys "tell it like it is."
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Apr 2, 2010 11:53:27 GMT -6
If you knew Larry Blackstone you would know he never candy coated anything. If he said it, he meant it.
|
|
|
Post by struceri on Apr 2, 2010 13:12:06 GMT -6
our qb plays safety, punts, returns punts and will probably return kicks this upcoming season. He is also our biggest hitter and best tackler on defense. We wouldn't be near the team we are without him playing where he does. I have to laugh because our biggest rivals have a pretty good qb and he got hurt last year(not laughing at his injury of course) but all he does is play qb and never takes hits. he slides, runs out of bounds, etc. and they did nothing but complain about their situation when he went down. Needless to say they get no sympathy from us when ours is all over the field laying the lumber to guys.
|
|
|
Post by mitch on Apr 2, 2010 13:53:56 GMT -6
I personally witnessed a team lose a important district game because their QB was their SS and he was a hitter. However, he come in for a tackle, got knocked out, and THEY got knocked out of the playoffs. Their coach didn't look like such a smart guy after that. They might not have been in a situation to make the playoffs if that kid hadn't been playing D all year, though. I don't know that, I'm just sayin.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Apr 2, 2010 14:01:38 GMT -6
In 2007 our starting QB was also our FS, his backup was RC.
Had school's first-ever undefeated season and undisputed conference championship.
Wouldn't have happened without those two in secondary.
|
|
|
Post by coachcathey on Apr 2, 2010 16:00:30 GMT -6
It really depends on the size of the school, does it not? If you have 30 kids vs 100 kids, on the 30 team roster, he is going to have to play most of the time. On the team of 100, you can find someone to fill the role, he vacates on defense.
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Apr 2, 2010 19:37:31 GMT -6
Superpower, I done different things over the years. With larger squads and programs I tried not to have the TB have to start on defense. We tried to have kids go 1-way if possible.
But I think it has to do with the kid. In the last 2 years my TB went both ways because he was the best athlete on the team. He was actually a Strong Safety playing TB.
Also, our attack made a difference too. I don't run pure I-formation TB dominant offenses either. Being a Rocket-sweep Wing-t based offense, the ball is shared by a number of players.
So, I guess my answer is-it depends. Sorry.
OJW
|
|
jgdawgs
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by jgdawgs on Apr 2, 2010 19:58:50 GMT -6
As a former QB and two way starter for sure play the kid both ways. The best players need to play. Kids get hurt all the time as pointed out earlier might as well get everything out of them when you have them.
|
|
smu92
Junior Member
Posts: 415
|
Post by smu92 on Apr 2, 2010 22:41:45 GMT -6
This year our starting QB was our Starting Corner, Punter (no one ever rushed a punt because he'd just take off running if they did), Punt Returner, & Kick Returner. We played him at receiver a few snaps a game just to jack with people. We were very lucky to coach a kid like that. Threw for a thousand & ran for a thousand. He will be playing corner at Oklahoma State next year.
Having said all of that, we are a 4A school in Texas. If we lost him, our season would have ended up seriously different. However, we had to have him on both sides of the ball. Our corners play man nearly 100% of the time, so we needed him to lock down the best receiver on the field all of the time. We felt a lot better playing him at corner than we would have had he played Free Safety.
Injuries happen. It's part of it. Play your kids where you need them.
|
|
|
Post by coachbdud on Apr 3, 2010 0:16:36 GMT -6
our QB had to this year out of necessity. He had decent speed but he was very lanky and his height made it hard for him to cut and run otherwise he would have started at corner. He was fast enough and went up for the ball well just couldnt flip his hips well.
he played a little LB for us though when we had some injuries. he also started on our Kick off team, i know you probably think it is crazy having your starting QB on kick off but he actually made at least 1 tackle a game on kick off
|
|
|
Post by jml on Apr 3, 2010 11:30:33 GMT -6
Our starting QB will probably also be our starting middle linebacker this year. If he get hurt we are screwed, but if he stays health we could be GOOD....
|
|
|
Post by blb on Apr 3, 2010 11:35:27 GMT -6
Our starting QB will probably also be our starting middle linebacker this year. If he get hurt we are screwed, but if he stays health we could be GOOD.... Now THAT is an unusual combination!
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Apr 3, 2010 12:24:19 GMT -6
Last year our starting QB was 6', 205 and we needed a DE. He was more than happy to play there. Unfortunately, he broke his leg in practice going into Week 7 while playing QB.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 3, 2010 13:58:58 GMT -6
My question.... when/why did the QB become such a vastly more important position than others in H.S football??
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Apr 3, 2010 14:42:52 GMT -6
5085, that was my point with the I formation TB above.
|
|
|
Post by buck42 on Apr 3, 2010 15:23:32 GMT -6
It depends on a couple of things...what are you doing on offense? How much responsbility does the QB have? How good is the back up? How far is the drop off on defense between him and the next guy on D?
This coming year, we have 4 QB's (all rising seniors, dont ask) and 2 of them can not play D, but the other 2 are athletic enough to play another position so we are analyzing how good the QBs are and how they could help in other places on the team...Because of these "extras" we think we have settled on our QB.
Those that were saying to get a backup ready to throw a hitch and a fade, hand the ball off and run option, I think were saying that to get them threw the game and give them a chance to figure things out the following week. We would all love to have a backup QB that could step right in, but the #2 is #2 for a reason...he isnt as good....
We run the ball 75% of the time so its not that big a deal for us in the passing game....this year the QB that finished the season started the season as a SS...next year...pray for us!!!
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Apr 3, 2010 16:14:43 GMT -6
1-We have no control over injuries. Stuff happens. I've literally sprained my ankle on nothing at all. 2-We're afraid of injuries. Rightfully so, because they can affect our livelihood, as well as our family life. 3-We're afraid of something we have no control over. 4-We limit our program's potential because of that fear.
Kinda silly, no? Makes more sense to embrace the 'horror' and start making sure #2 gets as good as possible ASAP. However you choose to do that is your call, but I think it's the most prudent approach.
|
|
newhc
Sophomore Member
Posts: 209
|
Post by newhc on Apr 3, 2010 18:44:09 GMT -6
I have had my best football player play QB, but often he is the best kid we have period. So I have let mine play. I have left play Free Safety, so it is not as much tackling, but one kid really made the difference in our D. I would also spell him as much as I could, and I keep him conditioned, he made for two seasons, and he was All-State at QB. So in my opinion play him. Best 11 at all times.
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 3, 2010 19:35:23 GMT -6
My question.... when/why did the QB become such a vastly more important position than others in H.S football?? Really? I don't know how many of you have put your hands under another man's rump, with 11 guys hungering for a taste of your blood? But the type of smarts, or even the stupidity, to be able to handle that type of pressure, while still performing, fully knowing every offensive execution or misexecution will resonate from your leadership... Yeah... its a little different than being the running back or the right tackle... Here's the rule! 1. Play your best 11 on defense. 2. Don't play your QB on defense. 3. If your QB happens to be one of your best 11, see rule #1!
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Apr 3, 2010 20:35:45 GMT -6
I like what was stated above. Best 11 play D. If the QB is one of those then play him.
In our offense the QB is probably going to be one of our best athletes so we need him on D. If we can survive without him on D then he will play one way.
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Apr 4, 2010 5:46:40 GMT -6
If you believe in the old adage that "Defense wins championships," then you would probably play the QB on defense if (as others have stated) he is one of the best 11 on your team.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Apr 4, 2010 6:12:33 GMT -6
If your offense is based on throwing the ball, 35-50 times a game, you really need the Qb to be able to talk to his coach and the OC. He needs to be able to discuss what he sees and be told what they see. We have run a pass dominated offense for years and the QB reads and checks are too important to our offense to let go until timeout or half time.
|
|
|
Post by jlenwood on Apr 4, 2010 7:03:58 GMT -6
It should come down to a risk/reward examination. If your O revolves around the QB, what is the risk if he gets hurt.
Some schools have the luxury of having several capable backups, but at the small school level, where the theme here seems to be be play your best 11 on D, chances are you probably don't have the same caliber backup as you would at the larger schools. So IMO if the QB gets hurt, your screwed.
We have had it happen before. QB playing safety gets his throwing hand between helmets on a tackle and is no longer able to throw the ball. Now if you have a backup who can step in without a problem and run the same offense, no issue. If you don't, it is a real issue.
|
|
|
Post by garys on Apr 4, 2010 12:56:32 GMT -6
I was in a tough position with my QB last year. He was very good on defense and would have really helped us. The problem was that we had absolutely NOTHING behind him at QB. So ultimately the question for us was is the risk of losing him on offense greater and more costly than not having him on defense...for us it was a big YES. As the season was getting tighter at the end of the year he played more and more on defense. I agree to previous posts that stated you have to put your best 11 on the field, but I would add before you do put him out there make sure you have at least a have serviceable backup.
|
|
|
Post by hamerhead on Apr 5, 2010 0:03:06 GMT -6
I don't understand this debate in the slightest. It's a purely Xs and Os decsion. If you're an offense predicated on throwing the football with complex route concepts and you face complicated defenses that disguise coverage than
1) Your QB is inherently more valuable than every other position because his skill set is so dramatically different than the other positions.
2)Having him on the sideline in between series is much more valuable to the team than it would be in a different style of offense. (Though not neccessarily as valuable as having him on defense, it weighs into the decsion.)
3) If you're this type of offense than your QBs skill set is less likely to translate to defense, thus making him unlikely to be one of your best eleven defensive players anyway.
However, if you're an offense in which your all your QB does is turn and hand the ball off (first, get a new offense, but anyway...) than I say play him on defense, surely you can coach up somebody else to be an adequate backup.
If you're offense is one in which your QB is an "athlete" and is used to carry the ball a lot (option based for example) than it gets trickier, but my general offense would be to treat him as you would your stud TB or stud MLB for that matter. At this point, it's general coaching philosophy regarding "platoon or not-to-platoon" and not just a QB debate. In this case, I would say do what makes you a better team overall. That is after all, our job.
|
|