Two QB formation
First time poster here, so be gentle. No better way to start than this:
The spread-option offense seems to open the door to versatility and the element of surprise. With nearly every college team in America having some sort of spread package, it is somewhat surprising to me that I have not seen any two-QB formations. With two or more QBs that can run and throw, the possibilities seem to be endless.
One play comes to mind. Several years ago against Minnesota, Steve Breaston lined up behind three other receivers. Navarre threw Breaston the ball, only to have it thrown back to him. I can't remember if Navarre actually ran it for a TD, but it was pretty exciting watching him hustle down the field. Imagine if Navarre actually had wheels.
Not every play has to be that fancy, but you get the point. Suppose Tate (white Jesus) and Denard (black lightning) pan out to be superheroes. Why not start them both?
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:42 AM ^
It would be tricky but it could work. One would line up behind or to the side, but honestly it could probably be used in mostly trick play situations.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:43 AM ^
everyone needs to hold their blocks for twice as long while the ball goes from QB to QB2. Secondly, unless QB2 lines up as a RB every play you're going to need to make a backwards pass or some type of ball transfer 6-10 yards behind the line of scrimmage. Any time QB2 lines up anywhere but the backfield you're going to have to hold blocks for that much longer, and you're going to have to figure out a way to disguise your intentions/formations so that you don't get safeties and corners blitzing the holy hell out of your ball transfers.
So in effect the only way this can work consistently is to find someone with the running skills of a RB and the arm/brain of a QB. So you'd need Darren McFadden with a better arm to be QB2. And once you've got that guy on your team, why would you want to concoct some ridiculous offense to give him half as many touches as he might get as the alpha dog.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:47 AM ^
I'd be worried that Murphy and his law would apply, and take out both QBs. Then we are left with...
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
.. and the rapping CONER.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:17 PM ^
DEATH???
Sheridammit
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^
This is basically the idea of the single wing formation, although it sounds like you'd want a little more passing than the traditional single wing.
Also, Navarre did score a TD and that play is referred to as the Transcontinental.
That play got a workout on the playground after that one.
It was also attempted against Notre Dame and it was thrown way over Mallett's head.
Mallett tripping over himself with the grace of an albatross.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:26 AM ^
for this for years. Two capable (not necessarily great) hybrid QBs in one backfield would be a DC's nightmare. How do you defend a simple counter play that can be a) a run, b) a pass, c) a flea flicker, or d) a cross-field pass back to QB #1 which can then result in (a) or (b). Someone's protection is going to go bust while this play is developing. And remember you don't have to pass all that often, you just need to do it enough to keep the D honest. Can you imagine forcing a D to be honest to the pass 2-3 seconds into a run play when you've already got 5 in the box?
I know you have to block longer, but you don't have to block as well because you're not staying in the pocket. I think their confusion works to your advantage.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:56 AM ^
If you watch old games from the Red Grange era they did a lot of that. The guy who lined up at QB was not necessarily the guy with the most pass attempts at the end of the game. There was a lot of misdirection used in the backfield and it could be difficult to tell who the runner was or who the passer was...This was all pretty much before specialized passers came into being, though, and so you didn't necessarily lose much by having someone other than your QB throwing the ball...It's funny how things come round. Some of those old games make me think of RR's run-oriented spread at WVU.
with him. He could then pull up for a drag or flag route or even go back across the field (trickier when you run the opposite way). The issue is that you then need to take carries away from your RBs to make the fake effective since you could not throw every time from the formation.
My football vocabulary is limited (I need to play more Madden), but yeah, a sweep sounds even better as the base play, since it's faster and gives QB 2 some space.
I don't think you can integrate RBs too well into this play, but I bet it opens things up for when they do run.
This is what I have envisioned. I hope RR implements this one day, just for the hell of it. It seems like everyone on this board has a theory as to why it won't work. I don't give a damn. I hope we try it.
Remember, when the spread offense first appeared, there were plenty of critics.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
I thought the two QB system was basically the A-11, which is banned in college.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:42 AM ^
but from what I could understand the illegal parts of that offense were less about 2 QBs and more about using a kicking formation to disguise which players were eligible receivers/ball carriers.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:50 AM ^
I'd like to see a reverse where Tate hands off to Minor (or Brown, Smith, Grady, etc.) and he pitches it back to Denard and then Denard can run or throw. I don't know much about the actual logistics of plays though, but that sounds like fun to me.
edit: Something along the lines of a reverse option I suppose.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:05 PM ^
A-11 is banned because it is an illegal formation not 2 qb's.
All these plays are fun in theory and could work very well as long as
1. Your base plays work well enough.
2. You execute them.
If your offense can't execute it's base plays the defense will not be fooled and it will be a disaster. So once you get your base offense humming you can use these "trick" plays to counter the defense overplaying your base. To execute your base O you need talent and experience, because your practice time is limited this only happens once your program is established and they don't have to waste endless time on the base plays so everyone understands. Much like last year I don't expect much trickeration due to our deficiencies in these areas, but next year expect the playbook to open up and some of these plays may be implemented.
welcome to posting, and unlike a couple of other recent first posters, you didn't suck. Secondly, I've often thought the same thing. And to add onto the others, I've wondered before if it would be possible to actually have 2 QB's line up next to each other, and the defense not know who will receive the snap? QB2 has a proscribed route (swing pass, etc) to run while the QB! who received the ball either throws or runs an option play? Drawbacks?
This is called the "single wing" or "spinner" offense. This has already been created, although no BCS schools use it as a base offense these days.
Did that feature two guys who were equally likely to pass? I was under the impression it was more of a run offense featuring much misdirection, in a weird way kinda like the wishbone
It depends on what kind of offense you want to run. Some teams use it almost exclusively to run. Some teams use it to run and pass. We played a team this year who used both "quarterbacks" to pass the ball about equally.
I think, to agree with baorao, that you might get the secondary jumping your routes/running lanes. Maybe a D could be kept honest with the occasional run right up the gut from the otherwise trick (2QB) formation. Catch the D overprotecting the perimeter. Also, I don't think you could use this type of formation more than 4 or 5 times a game. And the first 2 or 3 would be to set up the "suprise" on the 4th or 5th. I do like the 2 QB idea, just in moderation.
It could be to CFB what the wildcat formation was to the NFL last year. A gimmicky scheme that catches a few unsuspecting teams on their heels and accounts for a few upsets, but can be neutralized when the DC knows it's coming. Is that bad? No. Is two free wins in football tantamount to the difference between a 12/30 bowl game and a 1/1 bowl game? I believe it is.
If you watched Tulsa at all last year they had one of their WR's (a former HS QB) line up in the backfield with the QB, but they used it primarily to run.
in Indiana (valpo HS) went undefeated(?) and won the state championship in 1976 using the single wing with one speedster runner who could throw okay (marcus a?) and good passer who could also carry the ball okay(chuck o?). Neither went on to have success in college but it was awesome as a teen fan and super fun to watch am that year. They beat PENN, an indy powerhouse school with a QB named Mark Herrman. When Coach Stokes retired soon after, the system was replaced so that the QBs would have a chance to play at better colleges.
I have been hoping RR sees how Tate and Denard could complement each other and have a package to feature their talents. The potential is there, the risk is poor execution and bad turn overs, possibly injuries.
GOod post, Thanks.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:19 PM ^
Herrmann went to Carmel HS in INdy and that is the team Valpo beat in the 1975-1976? final (saw it listed both ways).
Valpo HS has been runner-up twice since in 1985 and 2005 I think both with Coach Hoffman who replaced my Driver's Ed Teacher/Single Wing Guru Mr. Stokes.
The days of the CarBONG.
Also, Gallon intrigues me in a single wing set OR direct snap back either now or in the future as per HS video seen here.
The throwback play to Navarre, called the "Transcontinental," was one of Carr's favorite trick plays. Other times we ran it successfully:
1997 Wisconsin: Woodson completed one to Griese, who made it to the one-yard line before being pushed out. Woodson came thisclose to having a throwing, rushing, receiving and returning TD that year.
1999 PSU: Brady faked an injury and the faster Henson came in. (Aaron Shea reportedly told Brady, "Just run normally. They won't know the difference.") DiAllo Johnson hit him for a good gain.
2001 Illinois: Jermaine Gonzales subbed for Navarre at QB. At the time, our offense was struggling and it looked like it might be a routine QB change. Marquise Walker (IIRC) hit him for about a 50-yard gain that set up our TD (also on a trick play - Walter Cross threw a TD pass), and we won in a blowout.