However, one being seems impervious to the call of evolution. The quarterback.
I feel like most people's argument about the quarterback by committee idea is this: "The quarterback is the leader of the offense! He's like the General leading his men to war! Okay, let me just say bullshit to this. Yes, the quarterback is the one calling the plays. But, in most cases, save for Peyton Manning and a couple of others, those plays are being relayed into him via helmet phone from the offensive coordinator. I'm not saying he's not the "General", but I am saying that it's not like someone else is incapable of being a substitute general.
Am I calling for an even 50/50 split? Absolutely not. Face facts, some quarterbacks are just head and shoulders above others in the world of identifying defenses, calling audibles, and making smart, on the fly, decisions. But, can you imagine how much bigger an asset a Michael Vick (pre-incarceration) or a Vince Young would be to a team if they had another quarterback who could actually pass the ball as well?
Now, you couldn't pull off a Duece McAllister/Reggie Bush type of timeshare at the quarterback position, either. You know when Bush comes in, 7 times out of 10 he's going to be thrown to rather than handed off to. The same goes for McAllister, you can almost rest assured that he's going to be busting through the line with a handoff. So, you can't just have Brian Griese handle 5 pass plays and bring in Jeff Garcia for the bootleg. I think defenses might key in on that pretty quickly. So, you would have to rely on Vince Young, or the like, actually throwing a few ducks.
This would do a couple of things for an offense:
1. The opposing defenses would have to prepare for an onslaught of not one but TWO different quarterbacks with completely different styles of play.
2. The quarterbacks would get extra breathers and have the ability to sit back and watch some plays develop from the sidelines. I can only imagine this would be a huge benefit for a QB stuck in a rut on the field, without the humiliation of being pulled for a full quarter, half or even the game to get fresh legs in the game.
Can you imagine the threat the Eagles would have if they could swap McNabb out with, say, a Tim Tebow in a few years. McNabb is a smart, great passer with reasonably good rushing skills. Tebow is a great rushing QB with reasonably good passing skills. They would consistently keep defenses on their toes.
McNabb is also a great example of a quarterback who seems to get stuck in ruts. He's a great QB, but once he throws an INT you can almost bet there will be another one waiting in the wings soon.
These are just examples. It's probably even a bad example since by the time Tebow comes into the NFL, McNabb will be entering his 11th season at the age of 33. But, you get the idea that I'm throwing out there.
The whole concept of playing a quarterback like a race horse, pushing him and pushing him and pushing him until he's completely spent and then punishing him by pulling him for an extended period of time is outdated. The running back by committee concept has not only been embraced by many coaches in the NFL, it's been adopted by many. It's time NFL coaches start looking at the quarterback by committee concept as a viable suggestion. It would extend careers, keep defenses on their toes, and make the game all the more exciting. If the only excuse is that the offense needs to only take orders from their "General", come on, we're talking about adult millionaires who listen for their names and spend the rest of their time thinking of how they can make themselves look better. You think Chad Johnson gives a shit who is telling him what play to run? He did just fine for Carson Palmer despite hating his guts.
Labels: Carson Palmer, Chad Johnson, Donovan McNabb, duece mcallister, football, Jeff Garcia, Matt Hasselbeck, Michael vick, nfl, Peyton Manning, quarterback, reggie bush, Tim Tebow, Vince Young
Read more...
