Game Managers QB's vs Vertical Offense QB's or are they really just System QB's

[ROYC75]

(This has a poll but before answering the question, read the OP and the ( GOOD ) old article within the OP..... OK, now read up and wait for the poll, I type slow. )

I am reminded of an old article from 2013 that brings up the question of, Aren't all QB's jusy system QB's. The philosophies used by the likes of Sid Gillman, Ron Erhardt, Ray Perkins, Don Coryell and Bill Walsh, there are three main offensive philosophies used by those coaches.
These schemes have been prevalent for most teams around the NFL and you can trace any NFL offense and coach back to one of these three systems. They are The Erhardt-Perkins, "Air" Coryell and the West Coast system. ( article to big to fit in the OP )
https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2013/...se-chiefs-2013

So I question this, aren't all QB's really just system QB's ? I say, yeah, why not? Very few QB's can fit into any coaches offensive philosophy or scheme.

Just think of Bill Belichik, with Tom Brady, many say he is the GOAT? I simply say, he is a system QB. Belichik had Drew Bledsoe, who was having a banner year until he got hurt got with Bill. Hell, even Matt Cassell and Jimmy Garoppolo has proved it was just NE's system that was making Brady look so good.

Every NFL team or coach will try to draft, sign a FA QB that best fits their system to simplify and run their offense. Alex Smith is known as a game manager but would he fit in the Air Coryell downfield attacking system as a game manager? You can easily answer, No. Peyton Manning first went to Denver and struggled in the system Fox wanted to run. It wasn't until several games they opened up the offense to run a scheme Manning was comfortable with in Indy. Can you see Manning running the West Coast offense? I do not think he would do too well with it.

Some OB's are called Game Managers. Yet aren't they all supposed to be a Game Manager? I say, Yes, they have to manage that game within their system. Oh My, if all QB's are Game Managers within the OC system, then wouldn't they be a System QB.

IMHO, being labeled a Game Manager, a System QB or whatever you want to label them is wrong. IMHO, I say each one has to be a game manager within the system of the OC game plan and be the best system QB he can be on that day.

So, What say you ?

[Sandy Vagina]

Smith was in Norv Turner's Coryell back in the day.. 2006.. FWTW.

I think all this game manager or system QB talk is just more eyeroll jibberjabber that the media and forum idiots jerk it to. Don't waste much thought of it.

It goes no further than that some QBs are more comfortable and inclined to just mindlessly "chuck it deep brah!" and pray for the 50/50 completions or DPIs... and perhaps less accurate and quick of mind to hit the quick, short precision passes. Throw in whether they are backyard baller, improvisational types.. sure.

Lots of QBs with lots of strengths and weaknesses to mix and match.

[Hammock Parties]

A vertical component is built into every offense.

Whether or not your QB can execute it is another thing entirely.

Steve Bono was a game manager who actually threw a pretty nice deep ball from time to time, and then you roll back the 95 playoff loss and he's chucking horrible shit on almost every attempt over 15 yards.

He wouldn't have succeeded as a long-term starter in any system.

Brady isn't a "system" QB because he's only gotten better as he's gotten older.

"Systems" are for limited QBs ala Alex Smith. He couldn't run the Coryell offense like Trent Green. He needs all those bubble screens, shovel passes, RPOs and shallow crossers as a base in order for him to mix in a goddamn 15-yard or 20-yard comeback from time to time.

[Chiefshrink]

The difference is the courage to go vertical when needed and make plays. System QB's rarely go there.

[Best22]

Bledsoe' "banner year" from 2001 pre-injury

40-66, 400 yards, 2 TD, 2 INT

Bledsoe had better years under Parcells


Also, it should be known that Brady wasn't molded to a system. Brady is the system.

[oldman]

Overpaid sissies. I hate QBs. When 1 guy is so important that your team rises or falls due to his performance, then we've gotten away from the game. While "fans" want to see more scoring, just remember the Romans wanted to see more people eaten by lions, too. Did I mention I hate QBs?

[kccrow]

My opinion is that they are all just QBs. You're basically trying to say that a good QB is defined by the system he plays in and that the system is what makes him good. I'd argue that a QB has a specific skill set and is either good, and therefore can run any system, or he's not. That is, a good QB is good on his own merit and makes any system function at a high level, a mediocre QB needs to fit a system to play at a decent level. while a bad QB is just bad. A QB is sought because his skill-set is either good enough to run anything, or he best fits the system being run. Certainly, different strengths and weaknesses match different systems better, but the fewer the weaknesses the better the QB.

Basically, you're looking at 3 tiers of QBs:

A good QB can run any system. These QBs have the requisite arm strength and mental fortitude to run Gillman-Coryell and the accuracy to run West Coast. These are your guys like Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Brees, Manning, and so on. These are the guys that are going to tear you apart whether they are operating out of spread to go deep (e.g. Coryell), or 11 personnel to go short (e.g. West Coast), or are lining up in 21 personnel in the EP system and running off of play action. No matter what, you can do alot more with your offense with a good QB than you can with the rest.

A mediocre QB is better in one system than another. These QBs might lack the arm strength coupled with the mental fortitude to run Coryell, but have the accuracy and decision making to run West Coast (like an Alex Smith). They might struggle with short accuracy and making decisions in clutter underneath, but can throw it long and function well off of play-action (like a Joe Flacco). For these QBs, system largely dictates success. I wouldn't have ever expected Chad Pennington to be successful running a Coryell system, but you put him in WC or EP and he's going to be okay for you.

The rest are sub par or just bad. These are the guys that really don't have anything to hang their hat on. They aren't a great deep ball thrower and they struggle with accuracy underneath. Decision-making is always suspect. No amount of play-action really increases their ability to be a better QB. These are guys like Blake Bortles.

I believe your question doesn't probe as much into all QBs as it does the mediocre class of QBs. Let's be honest here, today's NFL offenses use tidbits from all of the "Big 3" offenses of the past. An offense may be tilted towards one of the three, but they certainly aren't an all-or-none. You watch the Patriots, or the Chiefs, or the Packers, or whoever you want to say runs West Coast, and you're going to see an awful lot of plays with routes that take receivers deep down the seams and that is Coryell.

[mdchiefsfan]

Originally Posted by oldman

Overpaid sissies. I hate QBs. When 1 guy is so important that your team rises or falls due to his performance, then we've gotten away from the game. While "fans" want to see more scoring, just remember the Romans wanted to see more people eaten by lions, too. Did I mention I hate QBs?

Your avatar makes me frequently feel I’ve been hacked lol

[RippedmyFlesh]

To be polite I think OP is misguided.
If you watch and you can't tell the difference between a qb who can
improv like rodgers,wilson and an adverse to risk game manager like smith
you are either trolling or clueless.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by mdchiefsfan

Your avatar makes me frequently feel I’ve been hacked lol

Second greatest ILB ever to play for the Chiefs.

[Amnorix]

I love this "system QB" nonsense. The entire term and concept is pretty silly/stupid.

EVERY offense is a system. EVERY QB operates within a system. Whether a QB is great, good or bad depends FAR more on whether he is a good fit within his system than anything else. You think Brady is going to do really well in a run/pass option offense? How about Cam Newton in the accuracy-dependent West Coast offense?

So some QBs may be more flexible, in that they can succeed in MORE systems, but despite that flexibility, their ceiling may not be as high in ANY system, as one guy might have in ONE particular system.

So who the **** cares about the system? The greatness of a QB is all about his performance within the system that he has. Many times that is the QB being in the right system for him. And GOOD COACHING is literally adapting the system to emphasize the strengths, and minimize the weaknesses, of the quarterback. From that point of view, over a long enough period of time, the system is literally designed AROUND the quarterback, so they are indistinguishable. See Patriots/Brady for a key example of that. Over the 18 years he has started the Patriots have expanded their playbook and shaped it somewhat to emphasize what he does well, and de-emphasize what he doesn't do as well.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by kccrow

My opinion is that they are all just QBs. You're basically trying to say that a good QB is defined by the system he plays in and that the system is what makes him good.

I agree with this.

I'd argue that a QB has a specific skill set and is either good, and therefore can run any system, or he's not.

STRONGLY disagree. Cam Newton's strengths and Tom Brady's strengths are not remotely the same, but you can win with either IF YOU PUT THEM IN THE RIGHT SYSTEM FOR THEM.



Note also this applies to many other positions on the field. 2 gap versus 1 gap defenses, etc.

[RippedmyFlesh]

Originally Posted by oldman

Second greatest ILB ever to play for the Chiefs.

In the old days mlb was almost as high profile as qb. Id always argue Lanier was just as good or better than butkus and others at the time. MLBs called the plays and were the identity of a defense back then.

[Chiefnj2]

Every QB is a system QB. Each head coach has a system they want to run. They look for players to run it and fit the model. They tweak their system to the strengths of their players - QB in particular.

[RippedmyFlesh]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Every QB is a system QB. Each head coach has a system they want to run. They look for players to run it and fit the model. They tweak their system to the strengths of their players - QB in particular.

Semantics
To me a system qb makes the system brady,brees,rodgers watch the fall off from ne no gb when those 3 are gone.
Game managers NEED a system to hide their flaws. smith,pennington.