aussiedude
Pac-12 After Dark 2014-2023
- Feb 7, 2010
- 42,940
- 38,414
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Green Bay Packers, Stanford
- Moderator
- #451
Will this game be better or worse than SNF from lastweek?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Will this game be better or worse than SNF from lastweek?
99.9th percentile
The only reason the QB position is "evolving" is because offensive philosophy has dictated defensive philosophy and smart coaches are attacking the weaknesses of the new defenses. It's a fad that will only succeed as long as a majority of the offenses aren't doing the same thing. Up through the early '90s, most teams had a base offense with 2 WRs, 1 TE, a HB and a FB. Defenses had bigger DEs that weren't as easy to push around vs the run and LBs that were full-sized, intelligent and great tacklers. Then came the passing fancy era where FBs were all but phased out of the game and replaced with an extra WR. TEs were asked to be pass catchers more than blockers. If you had a HB that wasn't particularly competent as a receiver, then you brought in a 3rd down back. Defenses had to start getting smaller, faster players. Coverage ability was coveted over tackling ability. LBs became edge rushers and Safeties became LBs. Now the average option QB (which has always been big in college FB) can come into the NFL and if put in a system exploiting today's defenses can look very good. Once half (or more) of the NFL turns to this fad, defenses will go back to what worked before. I mean, option QBs were always a dime a dozen and never worked in the NFL vs old-school defenses. It works currently because today's dumb, athletic edge rushers lack discipline and lose contain and the undersized hybrid LBs can't shed blocks or make tackles.
It seems like traditional QBs are being phased out, but in reality, coaches are just exploiting the latest defensive fad.
random internet person.