curtpenn said:blackie said:
The problem with the QB position is that everyone (coaches, players, fans) have been engrained with the rock solid belief that some type of alternation of QBs is strictly verboten. Football is the only major sport, and possibly all team sports that I can think of right now where there is a position that is put on that pedestal. Grant alternated QBs very successfully with Carlson and Muecke. But I can't think of any others, Baylor or not.
Now, that has seemingly worked fine for years, at all levels, although there might be some true alternating at the high school ranks in some places. Now, the last decade or so, or possibly longer, the "wildcat" came into being, but that was more for run plays than having a real question as to whether the one receiving the snap was going to run or pass. And I understand the arguments about the perceived needing the same QB because of cadence, transfer of the ball, and differences in how two QBs might throw the ball. But are the others on the field really incapable of working with two?
But now, the transfer portal, exacerbated by NIL money that has become more pay to play.....or really pay to recruit, is introducing massive problems for teams at the QB position. For good QBs, or at least ones that think they are good QBs, outside of a possible redshirt season, they don't want to sit. A team obviously must have more than one viable QB because of injury dangers. But if you adhere to no alternating of QBs in some manner, how do you ever keep a QB2 or heaven forbid a QB3 happy enough to stick around and wait their turn.......and then risk that someone else will be brought in from the portal to take the place they have been waiting for for years. And if the one taken from the portal is not good enough to take that place, why would they transfer in to sit on the bench. Fair or not, lack of the portal kept players on teams longer and in many cases kept the player from making a transfer mistake that might result in them never being a QB1 at a decent program because they wouldn't wait long enough.
It seems the portal is putting real stress on the model for only one QB1 per season as long as no injury occurs. Will coaches look to try to keep two QBs "happy" or stick to the same old, same old? I suspect the latter, but the real risk takers might look to the former. But whatever, the portal on team stability and team depth seems to be hitting the QB position far more than any other position on the field.
One thing that I find puzzling in these days of the portal is the relatively unchanged number of FBS programs (which I think is about 125) and how QB2s think they are going to somehow transfer their way to the top. Portal or not, there's still about the same number of high school QBs graduating in a given year competing for the same number of slots. It's just easier to shuffle the deck so to speak, but the deck size is unchanged.
I was thinking this same thing
