Beckman open to 2 QB system

Dan · Jul 27, 2012, 09:15 AM

Quote:

"Nathan runs the football," Beckman said. "Reilly is a little bit more of a thrower. There's no question about it. It's still about the success of the team and success of the offense. We're going to be able to play whichever one is the most consistent and can move our offense down the field as we go through the season and throughout the preseason."

Beckman said the team's fall camp would be the determining factor in the quarterback competition.

"It's competition," Beckman said. "Move the offense, be successful on third down, do the things that can help us be a football team who can score in the red zone. Those are things they're challenged with every day and they'll be competing one another about."

Scott Powers

GilThorpe · Jul 27, 2012, 10:51 AM

I am NOT a fan of this. it sledom ever works well for the team

this is normally done simply to placate the players and give them PT. I wish we would never have burned ROT's redshirt last year and this 2 qb talk wouldnt exist, as this would be ROT's year to get in only in blowouts or to give NS a breather.

I do not want to see qb's shuffled in on plays or series. stick with the hot hand. changing qb's leads to oline & rb confusion and difficulty.

Thacher_H_Guild · Jul 27, 2012, 11:06 AM

We know from last year that most fans are not thrilled with this setup.

IMHO, the reason two quarterback systems do not seem to work well is that it is an indication that neither has taken over and shown himself to be excellent. If both QBs are pretty good, however, it can work just fine. If they do rotate a bit, I hope ROT plays a LOT better (and seems free to run more of the offense) than last year...

This should not be a big surprise because Beckman has done this before (just like it shouldn't have been a surprise last year because Petrino had done it before).

RHITIllini · Jul 27, 2012, 11:08 AM

The 2 QB system works when you have guys like Chris Leak and Tim Tebow... Unless you have two exceptional college QB's, it's basically saying you perceive that each has a weakness and putting one of the other in the game makes you a lot more predictable.

CaliIllini · Jul 27, 2012, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GilThorpe

I am NOT a fan of this. it sledom ever works well for the team

this is normally done simply to placate the players and give them PT. I wish we would never have burned ROT's redshirt last year and this 2 qb talk wouldnt exist, as this would be ROT's year to get in only in blowouts or to give NS a breather.

I do not want to see qb's shuffled in on plays or series. stick with the hot hand. changing qb's leads to oline & rb confusion and difficulty.

I think it is great what Beckman is doing as long as it doesn't lead to what you are describing. I think we can all agree that the idea of saying Nate will play series 1 and that they would switch back and forth after that was idiotic.

Camp, though, is where you want to push your starters and the best way to do that is through competition. After camp ends, pick a starter and only switch it up if it is obvious that the back-up will be more succesful than the current starter.

Beckman seems to be of the opinion that nothing is guaranteed and every minute of PT must be earned. I like it

Ransom Stoddard · Jul 27, 2012, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thacher_H_Guild

We know from last year that most fans are not thrilled with this setup.

IMHO, the reason two quarterback systems do not seem to work well is that it is an indication that neither has taken over and shown himself to be excellent. If both QBs are pretty good, however, it can work just fine. If they do rotate a bit, I hope ROT plays a LOT better (and seems free to run more of the offense) than last year...

This should not be a big surprise because Beckman has done this before (just like it shouldn't have been a surprise last year because Petrino had done it before).

My own impression of dual quarterback systems is the way that Zook (mis)handled Juice/McGee and Nate/McGee, which will forever leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding dual quarterbacks at Illinois.

Thacher_H_Guild · Jul 27, 2012, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ransom Stoddard

My own impression of dual quarterback systems is the way that Zook (mis)handled Juice/McGee and Nate/McGee, which will forever leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding dual quarterbacks at Illinois.

Let's give Beckman a chance to show it can be done in a competent way. Saying that left a bad taste is sort of like saying "special teams under Zook left a bad taste in my mouth so I hope we never see anybody try special teams again at Illinois."

BigStan97 · Jul 27, 2012, 12:32 PM

I dn if Beckmans two qb system is the same as Zooks....

Zooks was subbing Nate out for a series for ROT every once in awhile...

I feel like Beckmans 2 qb style is whoever wins the job at camp will have the reigns until proven otherwise...

I don't expect to see Nate and ROT splitting time throughout a game like Zook and Petrino did

maybe its just me but i could see less splitting time throughout the game but more of if nate wins it he starts throughout the season is Nate can't get the offense going and moving the ball like he wants.....he might throw a start to ROT to see if he does any better

BigStan97 · Jul 27, 2012, 12:34 PM

I don't feel like Beckman is dumb enough to swap QBs in and out and not letting either one of our QBs to get in a rhythm...

I hated when Zook/Petrino would sub in ROT and he do well throwing the ball then next series put Nate back in...

Hated that a lot....If Nates having a bad game and we have ROT who coaches Believe that he can run the offense....if ROT does well then KEEP HIM IN THE DAMN GAME and not pull him the next series for Nate....thats just dumb

Makes coaches look like they have no idea what they are doing and make our team look bad

mattcoldagelli · Jul 27, 2012, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thacher_H_Guild

Let's give Beckman a chance to show it can be done in a competent way. Saying that left a bad taste is sort of like saying "special teams under Zook left a bad taste in my mouth so I hope we never see anybody try special teams again at Illinois."

Well put.

It's been done effectively elsewhere, and I think Nate and ROT are different enough where it could be a legitimate option for us. No reason to think last year's haphazard approach was the only way.

illynifan34 · Jul 27, 2012, 12:39 PM

I don't care if we play 11 QBs as long as we win games.

lstewart53x3 · Jul 27, 2012, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RHITIllini

The 2 QB system works when you have guys like Chris Leak and Tim Tebow... Unless you have two exceptional college QB's, it's basically saying you perceive that each has a weakness and putting one of the other in the game makes you a lot more predictable.

My concern is this. It's obvious that Nate is a runner and RT is a passer. So when Nate is in, it's a running down. When RT is in, it's a passing down. That kind of predictability can kill an offense.

Groundhogday · Jul 27, 2012, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lstewart53x3

My concern is this. It's obvious that Nate is a runner and RT is a passer. So when Nate is in, it's a running down. When RT is in, it's a passing down. That kind of predictability can kill an offense.

No. We would pass a bit more, and probably pass downfield a bit more with ROT, but there would be both running and passing plays no matter who was playing QB.

lstewart53x3 · Jul 27, 2012, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Groundhogday

No. We would pass a bit more, and probably pass downfield a bit more with ROT, but there would be both running and passing plays no matter who was playing QB.

Yeah I agree that both can run and both can pass, but they clearly both have strengths and weaknesses. However, I'm hoping the Nate we saw the last 6 games of the season isn't the real NS though.

GilThorpe · Jul 27, 2012, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lstewart53x3

My concern is this. It's obvious that Nate is a runner and RT is a passer. So when Nate is in, it's a running down. When RT is in, it's a passing down. That kind of predictability can kill an offense.

this kind of telegraphing of intentions will kill you , and coaches know it . The trouble is they have a hard time controlling themselves in a game and they quickly revert to calling plays that play off the strength of the qb in at the time. I dont think they think they are telegraphing, but 90% of the fans think otherwise.

There is no problem with two guys getting real action. But shuffling them in and out, seldom if ever works.

Now, if they want to leave NS in as a wildcat when ROT comes in, then you might have a situation where other teams are really guessing. You cant run that stuff all the time though.

My preference is for one QB to get 80-90% of the snaps. Mop up time , if the game is out of hand either way, thats time to give #2 guy some snaps.

Thacher_H_Guild · Jul 27, 2012, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lstewart53x3

My concern is this. It's obvious that Nate is a runner and RT is a passer. So when Nate is in, it's a running down. When RT is in, it's a passing down. That kind of predictability can kill an offense.

I think this played a role in ROT looking so bad last year. It seemed like they had about 5 plays for him so it was easy to defend them, and then he pressed.

It doesn't have to be that way just because it was last year.

Kramer116 · Jul 27, 2012, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thacher_H_Guild

I think this played a role in ROT looking so bad last year. It seemed like they had about 5 plays for him so it was easy to defend them, and then he pressed.

It doesn't have to be that way just because it was last year.

They ran a play action bootleg pass to the TE, EVERY SINGLE TIME when O'Toole first came into games last season.

GilThorpe · Jul 27, 2012, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kramer116

They ran a play action bootleg pass to the TE, EVERY SINGLE TIME when O'Toole first came into games last season.

so what you are saying is even Bret Beilema knew what was gonna be called.

Geez, thanks for reminding me how much I absolutely HATED our play calling last year.

Thanks Paul. Hows that job working for your brother working out ?

Indicchief · Jul 27, 2012, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by illynifan34

I don't care if we play 11 QBs as long as we win games.

BeckTalk I would say.

We seem to be focusing on the wrong set of words. This, that or this-that, as long as we march down the field, score, convert third downs.

Forget QBacks.

GilThorpe · Jul 27, 2012, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indicchief

BeckTalk I would say.

We seem to be focusing on the wrong set of words. This, that or this-that, as long as we march down the field, score, convert third downs.

Forget QBacks.

there is no question that a QB's success is about 90% related to the O-Line. If the front 5 or 6 got it going, even Mark Hoekstra can make it happen

OlivetNaz · Jul 28, 2012, 12:19 AM

Beckman's dual QB system at Toledo seemed to be more of a "hot hand" than anything else. Several Toledo games I've watched the past couple years have had the QB's rotating every 3-4 series unless one either gets really hot (stays in the game) or is atrociously bad (gets pulled from the game) - and I've seen it both ways for them. The one that started seemed to depend on behind-the-scenes factors (game plan, who practiced better, etc).

Since Illinois QB's should be a significant upgrade over Toledo QB's, it'll be interesting to see how Beckman tweaks it to work - or if one of the two can separate himself enough to be the full-time starter. At Toledo, one of his QB's was a dynamic athlete, but the other was a better passer and more of a leader-type (able to calm down the offense, get the ball moving).

BigStan97 · Jul 28, 2012, 07:11 AM

Toledo had the upperclassman Dantin who was an average athlete and a average thrower

then they have Owens who's taller way more athletic and had a more powerful arm but needed time learning and reading defenses

Dantin started for awhile while Owens learned and played some here and there then towards the middle to end of season Owens took 95% of snaps cause he progressed into the better QB

Thacher_H_Guild · Jul 28, 2012, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kramer116

They ran a play action bootleg pass to the TE, EVERY SINGLE TIME when O'Toole first came into games last season.

Indeed.

IllinoisTed · Jul 28, 2012, 08:36 AM

The OL may dictate who plays. If they are letting DL and LB run free then we might see much more of NS.

Ander1345 · Jul 28, 2012, 01:23 PM

I would like to see more of the offense period before I formulate an opinion on a 2QB system.

If you run a super high tempo offense like Oregon, you can make it work as long as it doesn't interrupt your tempo. There's a little bit less of a leadership burden on the QB when plays are scripted or dictated from the sideline as opposed to based on what the QB sees. That allows for a bit of plug and play. That being said, it's not quite as predictable as ROT = Pass NS = Run. There's still draws, counters, etc that don't require ROT to run that will still keep the D honest. It really just comes down to executing the plays.

In a perfect world you can use 1QB, but we might have to resort to the change-up.

Jul 27, 2012, 12:39 PM	#11
illynifan34 That's a winner!! Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 7,635	I don't care if we play 11 QBs as long as we win games. __________________ www.afsp.org In Mike I Trust Aggressive

Jul 28, 2012, 12:19 AM	#21
OlivetNaz Location: East Central IL Posts: 4,088	Beckman's dual QB system at Toledo seemed to be more of a "hot hand" than anything else. Several Toledo games I've watched the past couple years have had the QB's rotating every 3-4 series unless one either gets really hot (stays in the game) or is atrociously bad (gets pulled from the game) - and I've seen it both ways for them. The one that started seemed to depend on behind-the-scenes factors (game plan, who practiced better, etc). Since Illinois QB's should be a significant upgrade over Toledo QB's, it'll be interesting to see how Beckman tweaks it to work - or if one of the two can separate himself enough to be the full-time starter. At Toledo, one of his QB's was a dynamic athlete, but the other was a better passer and more of a leader-type (able to calm down the offense, get the ball moving). __________________ "If life were logical, men would ride side-saddle."

Jul 27, 2012, 10:51 AM	#2
GilThorpe Location: Hinsdale Posts: 857	I am NOT a fan of this. it sledom ever works well for the team this is normally done simply to placate the players and give them PT. I wish we would never have burned ROT's redshirt last year and this 2 qb talk wouldnt exist, as this would be ROT's year to get in only in blowouts or to give NS a breather. I do not want to see qb's shuffled in on plays or series. stick with the hot hand. changing qb's leads to oline & rb confusion and difficulty.

Jul 27, 2012, 11:06 AM	#3
Thacher_H_Guild Location: Champaign Posts: 2,270	We know from last year that most fans are not thrilled with this setup. IMHO, the reason two quarterback systems do not seem to work well is that it is an indication that neither has taken over and shown himself to be excellent. If both QBs are pretty good, however, it can work just fine. If they do rotate a bit, I hope ROT plays a LOT better (and seems free to run more of the offense) than last year... This should not be a big surprise because Beckman has done this before (just like it shouldn't have been a surprise last year because Petrino had done it before).

Jul 27, 2012, 11:08 AM	#4
RHITIllini Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 1,751	The 2 QB system works when you have guys like Chris Leak and Tim Tebow... Unless you have two exceptional college QB's, it's basically saying you perceive that each has a weakness and putting one of the other in the game makes you a lot more predictable.

Jul 27, 2012, 12:32 PM	#8
BigStan97 Location: Toledo, OH Posts: 1,049	I dn if Beckmans two qb system is the same as Zooks.... Zooks was subbing Nate out for a series for ROT every once in awhile... I feel like Beckmans 2 qb style is whoever wins the job at camp will have the reigns until proven otherwise... I don't expect to see Nate and ROT splitting time throughout a game like Zook and Petrino did maybe its just me but i could see less splitting time throughout the game but more of if nate wins it he starts throughout the season is Nate can't get the offense going and moving the ball like he wants.....he might throw a start to ROT to see if he does any better

Jul 27, 2012, 12:34 PM	#9
BigStan97 Location: Toledo, OH Posts: 1,049	I don't feel like Beckman is dumb enough to swap QBs in and out and not letting either one of our QBs to get in a rhythm... I hated when Zook/Petrino would sub in ROT and he do well throwing the ball then next series put Nate back in... Hated that a lot....If Nates having a bad game and we have ROT who coaches Believe that he can run the offense....if ROT does well then KEEP HIM IN THE DAMN GAME and not pull him the next series for Nate....thats just dumb Makes coaches look like they have no idea what they are doing and make our team look bad

Jul 28, 2012, 07:11 AM	#22
BigStan97 Location: Toledo, OH Posts: 1,049	Toledo had the upperclassman Dantin who was an average athlete and a average thrower then they have Owens who's taller way more athletic and had a more powerful arm but needed time learning and reading defenses Dantin started for awhile while Owens learned and played some here and there then towards the middle to end of season Owens took 95% of snaps cause he progressed into the better QB

Jul 28, 2012, 08:36 AM	#24
IllinoisTed Posts: 27	The OL may dictate who plays. If they are letting DL and LB run free then we might see much more of NS.

Jul 28, 2012, 01:23 PM	#25
Ander1345 Posts: 290	I would like to see more of the offense period before I formulate an opinion on a 2QB system. If you run a super high tempo offense like Oregon, you can make it work as long as it doesn't interrupt your tempo. There's a little bit less of a leadership burden on the QB when plays are scripted or dictated from the sideline as opposed to based on what the QB sees. That allows for a bit of plug and play. That being said, it's not quite as predictable as ROT = Pass NS = Run. There's still draws, counters, etc that don't require ROT to run that will still keep the D honest. It really just comes down to executing the plays. In a perfect world you can use 1QB, but we might have to resort to the change-up.