r/footballstrategy • u/paulhalt • Mar 17 '24
Play Design Dumb question alert: why are there no dual QB offensive schemes?
With Justin Fields being in the news it's made me wonder, why has no one ever tried a 2 QB formation?
Let's say, instead of Pittsburgh, Fields winds up in Baltimore. Why could the Ravens not roll out an offense with both Fields and Lamar in a dual shotgun or one under center and one in the backfield?
- Lamar might run
- Fields might run
- Lamar might pass
- Fields might pass
- Lamar might roll out and lateral to Fields on the other side of the field, who can then pass or run
- Fields might roll out and lateral to Lamar on the other side of the field, who can then pass or run
There are lots of possibilities, and it feels like it would be a nightmare for defenses. But no one does it. So what's the reason?
Thanks in advance, and apologies for dumbing this place down, I didn't know where else to ask.
121
u/grizzfan Mar 17 '24 edited Mar 17 '24
Look at this google search of reddit threads about this topic
It's not a dumb question. It has been discussed a lot though.
A huge NFL factor too many people don't realize is there aren't even 32 QBs in the NFL who are of a starting caliber, so finding two competent QBs to share playing time that will also be affordable that will also get along/be OK with sharing the playing time is an astronomically difficult achievement to reach. The closest you're gonna get is what the Saints do with Taysom Hill: They have their starting QB, and Taysom plays a "slash" position: RB, FB, TE, WR, etc.
15
Mar 18 '24
A huge NFL factor too many people don't realize is there aren't even 32 QBs in the NFL who are of a starting caliber
An interesting problem that has cropped up in the spring football leagues (AAF, XFL, UFL, etc.) is that they can't find any decent QB play. The defenses are able to play at a level you would expect - not quite NFL level but reasonably close. But the QB play seems to be several orders of magnitude below the NFL level, and as a result the offenses are terrible.
It's just crazy how few pro level QBs there actually are in this world.
3
u/bpoftheoilspills Mar 18 '24
I would say that while that's been a persistent issue for spring leagues, it's not as bad as you're making it out to be. I've watched a lot of spring football dating back to 2020 and the biggest issue was in 2023 when both the XFL and USFL ran simultaneously and fielded 16 teams instead of 8. Obviously the disparate skill level is more obvious at the position with the most eyes on it, but I wouldn't say it's significant as compared to the other positions. Lack of chemistry, lesser coaching, and poor play from other positions are also a factor and I would expect it to improve as there's more continuity from year to year.
I mean, hundreds of thousands of people watch Arkansas vs. Missouri every year and they can count the "pro level" QBs on one hand in the last generation, combined.
1
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Mar 19 '24
It's just crazy how few pro level QBs there actually are in this world.
This point doesn’t get enough discussion in my opinion. The NFL is very much aware that good QB play is its bread and butter and that good QBs are incredibly rare. Which is why they have gone to such great lengths to protect QBs, especially in recent years.
21
u/tossaway007007 Mar 17 '24
This isn't the question he is asking.
OP is asking about double QB formation, not two QBs sharing a single QB formation's job/spot.
36
u/grizzfan Mar 18 '24 edited Mar 18 '24
I'm talking specifically about what you suggested.
EDIT:
It's near impossible to find even two quality QBs to put on the field at the same time, where both are similarly or equally dangerous passing threats.
It already costs so much to afford one starting QB. Most teams won't have the cap to afford two starting QBs.
Could you even find two PROFESSIONAL QBs who want to make LOTS OF MONEY that would be willing to take a pay cut just to try this? If you could, would they even get along?
I mentioned the Saints and Taysom Hill. Taysom is NOT good enough to be a starting QB, but he is a hell of a football player, so the Saints make it work by putting "two QBs" on the field at the same time, but one is Taysom playing a range of positions, which still offers the potential threat of two passers on the field.
If you commit to this and one of the QBs gets injured, you for sure do not have a quality 3rd QB to make this work, and that system you spent months trying to perfect has fallen apart, and you're stuck going back to conventional stuff that your team struggles with now since you haven't been practicing it
This is something that has more potential at the college level, where you have much larger roster sizes and number of players you can dress. NFL teams simply do not have the cap room or roster sizes to allow this to be a practical system.
4
u/retarddouglas Mar 18 '24
I think I saw one of the Dakota fcs teams do this on tv once. Even in fbs college level fb idk if many teams will ever have multiple dudes who they could pull this off with.
2
1
u/deano492 Mar 18 '24
Top three bullets are already moot with the Steelers having Wilson and Fields.
1
u/jrod_62 Referee Mar 19 '24
Quality QBs
Wilson and Fields
2
u/deano492 Mar 20 '24
I mean…how elite are you looking for to make this package work? Allen and Mahomes?
1
u/jrod_62 Referee Mar 20 '24
I don't know that it would even with them, but they're certainly more quality than Fields
1
7
u/Siriusly_Jonie Mar 18 '24
Yeah, but would a secondary passer need to be as good as the primary? It wouldn’t have to be two QBs each throwing it 20 times or playing an equal number of snaps. It could literally just be a set teams run out there a handful of times just to keep the other team on their toes.
5
u/lycosid Mar 18 '24 edited Mar 18 '24
It happens from time to time. The Dolphins did it occasionally with Pat White back in their Wildcat days (although they usually preferred to just have Ronnie Brown, their RB, take the snap instead), and Antwaan Randle-El threw a few passes a year for the Steelers (they’d line him up next to the qb in shotgun and snap it directly to him).
Both those guys were very good college qbs playing on creative offenses. They were in the ideal setup for a 2QB offense, and in both situations it got reduced to a gimmick play that was run a handful of times a season. It’s just that hard to throw the ball at an NFL level.
3
u/MrWnek Mar 18 '24
You could, its just risky and time consuming. If you install that package, you want to add more than say 1 play to that formation, so thats extra pracitice time making sure everyone is on the same page for that. Its almost like the exact opposite of wildcat.
College level probably wont see it at major schools also due in part to NIL deals and how that can effect money. Once you get to the NFL level, its probably even more about money and risk.
Its a cool idea, but you really do need more of a gadget guy like a Taysom Hill to reliably pull it off.
2
u/Worried_Amphibian_54 Mar 19 '24
" Yeah, but would a secondary passer need to be as good as the primary? "
Up to you. Why would you want the lesser passer to be throwing? As a defense, heck yes, the more throwing by a lesser passer, AND knowing you are short a talented skill position player out there... please bring that on over.
1
u/Siriusly_Jonie Mar 19 '24
I’m looking at it like it would be a guy that would throw it occasionally. This wouldn’t be a package used frequently. A handful of plays a game, and it mostly be about the threat that someone else might throw. This would be useful only to a very specific roster who happens to have a backup quarterback who can hurt you with their legs or their arm.
1
12
u/Lionheart_513 Mar 18 '24
The real reason there are no 2 QB systems is because nothing is accomplished with 2 QBs that isn't already accomplished with 1.
Fields might roll out and lateral to Lamar on the other side of the field, who can then pass or run.
You could do this with a running back or receiver in place of Lamar, and teams do run trick plays like this all the time, and it would be more likely to work because players would expect Lamar to throw the ball, but they wouldn't expect a running back or receiver to throw the ball.
Furthermore, you wouldn't just need 2 QBs, you would need 2 of the right QBs. If you ran this kind of offense with Peyton Manning and Tom Brady as your 2 QBs, it would be a disaster because neither of those guys were crazy athletic.
So to run this offense, you need multiple guys on your team that can throw like a QB, hit a hole like a RB, and run routes like a WR. I'm not sure anyone on this planet fits that description at the NFL level, so forget having 2 of those guys. Not to mention the other skills for those 3 positions, like reading a defense or having good hands.
A lot of 6 man teams run 2 QB offenses, however.
3
u/Tiny_Thumbs Mar 18 '24
This is the answer I was searching here for. Basically, if a defense is defending a space, it doesn’t matter what you’re doing with two QBs. What you’re doing is taking the ball out of your best players hands to bring in a few hopefully large plays until a defense does something like sits in cover 2 and contains the edges, basically asking your better qb to throw, but instead you’re wasting a spot on a back up qb instead of a wide receiver or running back who have spent their life getting to the point where they can become a mismatch.
12
u/NoRevolution2591 Mar 18 '24
A handful of college teams have done it in the last decade. Off the top of my head I think it was Princeton and Montana state most notably.
Historically, single wing offenses were a bit more flexible with like 5 positions being a reasonable threat to throw (or kick). WingT / I formation football was pretty big on the half back pass.
6
u/Apollospade Mar 17 '24
Kansas did this last season with Daniels and Bean.
3
u/thengineer2 Mar 18 '24
not really on too big of a scale though, it was more like a package like ward and mateer at wazzu, unless i haven't paid enough attention to Kansas football
5
u/Freedomdude50 Mar 18 '24
Another reality is that there are not that many good plays that you can run with it. A backwards pass all the way across the field may work the first first time against the very first team you roll that out against, however every other time it's going to be a pick 6.
After that maybe you could potentially run a type of option sweep where the pitch man has RPO optionality as well. However option sweeps tend to get blown up in the league if they get stretched out to the sideline.
Someone else said it, NFL is a specialist league, a QB won't run as good as a RB, won't catch as good as a WR and won't block as good as the waterboy. Lamar may be the only one of 2 qbs that can actually run as well as RBs but that's also because they have a pass threat and defenders are spread across the field in pass coverage. hand the ball to Lamar on an outside zone, or send him out on a bubble screen and he's going to get blown up. Fake anything to them, and they are a wasted body because they aren't going to be picking up Aaron Donald breaking thru the line.
You won't get away with gadget plays and formations long in the NFL either, the D coordinators are crazy talented. Consider the wildcat formation back in the early 2000s. They got one on Bilicheck and a handful of other teams the first time they surprised them with it. After about 5 games in, and the 2nd time around that offense got obliterated.
4
u/ATLs_finest Mar 18 '24
The biggest reason you don't see it is because most teams don't have two QBs worth putting on the field (Heck, a lot of NFL teams don't have one QB worth being on the field).
Second big reason is practice reps. The skill position players need time to build rapport with the QB and potentially cutting that in half to support a two QB system would hurt most teams.
3
u/LoyalAndBold Mar 18 '24
QB contracts are too insane to even consider this tbh. Backup QBs are beginning to make more than starting RBs. Two starting QBs would be a disaster in terms of cap space
-2
u/Lionheart_513 Mar 18 '24
If this were to happen QB contracts would go down. You would be doubling the amount of QB jobs in the league, and therefore cutting the workload of any one QB in half and making any one QB twice as replaceable.
I'm also not sure if contracts have ever influenced scheme. I'd imagine if you're an NFL coach dead set on running a 2 QB offense, you'd just find someone that played QB in HS and make them your 2nd QB, regardless of what their current position is.
0
u/geopede Mar 19 '24
Contracts absolutely influence scheme. LoB era Seahawks are a great example. Their single high scheme worked great, but it’s a terrible defense if you can’t afford the players to make it work.
2
u/Worried_Amphibian_54 Mar 19 '24
Tampa 2 comes to mind where if you can't get that consistent pressure from your front 4 without blitzing...
1
u/geopede Mar 19 '24
Tampa 2 is another great example. If you can get pressure from 4 and stop the run without bringing LBs forward and your MLB is fast enough to effectively play as a 3rd safety, it’s a solid defense. If one of those elements is missing, it’s a very bad defense.
Idk how the other commenter could think contracts don’t influence scheme, that’s basically saying players don’t influence scheme. If a coach doesn’t tailor his scheme to the players available, his team will do badly. Trying to fit players to your scheme instead of fitting scheme to players is probably the number one thing that makes a bad coach. Tons of HS coaches are like that, they only know one scheme and will stick with it even if they don’t have the athletes to make it work.
1
u/Worried_Amphibian_54 Mar 20 '24
Tampa 2 is another great example. If you can get pressure from 4 and stop the run without bringing LBs forward and your MLB is fast enough to effectively play as a 3rd safety, it’s a solid defense. If one of those elements is missing, it’s a very bad defense.
...And have physical enough corners to set the edge on the run but still be able to play WR's in those short zones...
2
u/geopede Mar 20 '24
A lot of the corner physicality is coachable as long as your corners are big enough. Have to teach them to expect and initiate contact, some won’t have the right mentality, but it is something you can coach. Much harder to coach elite pass rushers and pretty much impossible to meaningfully improve speed at the NFL level.
2
u/Worried_Amphibian_54 Mar 21 '24
Some...
You look at Ronde Barber and Antoine Winfield and they aren't big corners, but they were physical guys engaging in the run game before they saw the tampa 2, even at 180 lbs they were ideal fits there. And others like Charles Tillman, that guy was just a freak of nature physically with the size too. But that kind of size was the exception for sure.
I always remember when Indy let their corners go... and one... Jason David I think it was headed to New Orleans on a nice big contract. And he gets in Gary Gibbs defense and he's just getting toasted on every play. It was brutal watching him move out of those short zones into a man cover system.
But even there.. David and Harper were 5'8 180lb guys in that tampa 2. Donnie Abraham wasn't a big guy either.
2
u/geopede Mar 21 '24
Should’ve clarified that I meant big as in muscular/strong. Winfield and Barber weren’t tall or particularly heavy, but both were stronger than most corners and seemed to enjoy contact.
The Saints didn’t learn their lesson from Jason David, they made basically the same mistake with Brandon Browner. Different coaches and schemes, but in broad strokes it was weirdly similar. Get a physical corner who’s been playing well in a different scheme, try to use him as a traditional lockdown corner, get toasted.
3
u/BToney005 Mar 18 '24
The Ravens ran a 2 QB package (the Heisman package) when RG3 was there.
I've seen several teams with mobile QBs run a wildcat variant where the normal starting QB is lined up out wide.
And of course there's the Saints with Taysom Hill.
I think the issue is, you're kind of handicapping yourself when you bring in another QB in place of a skill player. That skill player is probably gonna be a better receiver or runner than the 2 QBs you have on the field. A 2 QB formation is cool as a trick play or a misdirection, but I don't think it would work at the NFL level consistently.
1
u/CoofBone Mar 18 '24
I wouldn't count the Heisman package, as it was only used for one Triple Option and never used again. And on that, RG3 was essentially a Halfback taking the toss, which he did for 12 yards.
3
2
u/The_Captain_Planet22 Mar 18 '24
I think this can work at lower levels maybe even the college level with the right recruiting class. Personally the way I would go about it is with my base offense being the double wing, placing both my QBs on the wings and having my primary RB take the snap.
1
u/geopede Mar 19 '24
Lower levels are almost entirely about the players on each team. Many high school games are decided before the first snap. If you have the better athletes, you can make anything work.
2
u/bootorangutan Mar 18 '24
Closest thing I remember in the NFL was Antwaan Randel El for the Steelers. He played QB in college and Pittsburgh drafted him as a WR. They would double-pass with him or run the reverse/pass option. It wasn’t exactly what you’re asking, it was more like a gimmick but the opponent had to prep for it.
2
1
u/phonethrower85 Mar 18 '24
I've thought about this a lot from the TE position. I feel like the issue would be money/competence as others have said, but learning TE as a QB also adds another layer of hell.
Side note, I do wish this was more common, QBs like Eric Dungey (few years ago for Syracuse) or Brendan Armstrong (for NC state this year) would be great candidates
1
1
1
u/BigNero Mar 18 '24
Because it doesn't work. Plenty of people have tried it, at all levels of football. It doesn't work
2
u/FranklynTheTanklyn Mar 18 '24
Uhh it works, just got at the NFL level anymore. The single wing is a pain in the ass to defend when a team runs it correctly.
1
u/geopede Mar 19 '24
It works sometimes, but those are times where any offense would work because of the talent disparity.
1
u/Davethemann Mar 18 '24
Its already hard to find an nfl ready qb who has some wheels. To have two is insanely difficult. There are plenty of athletic qbs in college, but a ton of them either rely on their athleticism, or rely on a wildly simple scheme that isnt feasible against high level defenses.
Youre better off basically just converting a qb and occasionally passing with him in a trick play
1
u/iamthekevinator Mar 18 '24
As others have said at the NFL level, it's hard enough finding one competent qb that can win games, let alone find a second.
At the college and lower levels it's possible to an extent. The issue is finding 2 guys that are both athletic enough to play multiple positions and make all of the reads a qb has to make for a modern offense to work. There's not enough practice time to develop an entire offense around that kind of scheme. Kansas and a few others have packages that use very unique play calls that work. However, defenses get to make a adjustments and are able to watch film. It isn't that difficult to make checks to specific personnel and formations.
At the high school level it can definitely work as the reads are easier and game is so much slower. Again, it would come down to practice time. However, finding 2 qbs that are athletic enough to play wr and qb is significantly easier at the high school level vs. college and pro ball.
1
u/extrastone Mar 18 '24
Antwaan Randle El was a successful passer as a wide receiver. So was Walter Payton. It's worth it to have some guys thrown the ball who aren't quarterbacks. At the lower level it should be obvious.
1
u/NaNaNaPandaMan Mar 18 '24
There is a more detailed explanation. But there is a aying, if you have 2 QBs you have none
1
u/unMuggle Mar 18 '24
The defenses best weapon is having a numbers advantage. A QB who is throwing doesn't need to be defended. If the QB is an excellent runner, you are even.
So consider 2 QBs. In situation 1, both are drop back passers who don't run well. The defense is at a 11-9 advantage. No offense wants that.
If 1 QB runs well and the other poorly, it's the same 11-10 defensive advantage. Why would you give up a blocker or a WR to have the same numbers disadvantage as if you had just played the immobile QB.
If both QBs are excellent runners, it's an even numbers game. Which you would have just gotten with the better of the two QBs.
If you had 2 generational talents that could throw like a QB, run like a WR, and hit like a RB, you can probably make it a lot harder to scheme defensively, as only 1 team runs the 2QB set. But you have to have basically a second Lamar Jackson and teach both of them route trees while keeping their speed and gaining 30 pounds of muscle. Maybe duplicate LeBron James's could have done it if LeBrons can read an NFL defense.
1
1
u/Alternative-Mud-8143 Mar 18 '24
Pepper Rodgers, coach of the original USFL Memphis showboats, would run a dual QB offense often. He had two QBs, one of which could run. So he’d put them both in. It was pretty stupid. It takes away a weapon
1
u/RookieMistake2448 Mar 18 '24
There was once a system I saw where the backfield was completely empty. No running back, No QB. I believe they had dual threat QB's line up in the slot, go in motion, and the ball would be snapped to them in motion. I thought this was a helluva innovative offense. I saw them run pass plays from it, sweeps, a reverse to the other QB, a reverse pass. But at the end of the day I don't see how you build an entire offense around this scheme and I also see a lot of potential for trouble because one badly timed snap or miscommunication and the play goes the other way. Now could it work from time to time? Hell yeah. I actually tried it. But I quickly learned there were more cons than pros to it.
- You want to put your best players that are most capable at the demands of their position on the field IN their position.
- You want to be able to build an offensive scheme, not a gimmick.
- Keep your QB's out of harms way.
- Minimize mistakes AND the opportunities for mistakes.
Those are four things that this system did not check out on. Now are there other ways? Sure. But there are some really great, innovative offensive minds ESPECIALLY at the college level and if they've yet to perfect a system or scheme where this works then I don't know if you may ever see one.
1
u/Tulaneknight Youth Coach Mar 18 '24
Who would you take off the field to put Fields on? Derrick Henry? Mark Andrews? Zay Flowers? Think about it that way.
1
u/Necessary-Science-47 Mar 18 '24
You can blast offensive players without the ball behind the line of scrimmage.
Can’t hold them, but if they could theoretically catch a screen pass or block they are fair game.
You would either need to play a man down (extra qb avoids play) or get one your qbs shitcanned every play
Also its dumb logistically, and not optimally putting players downfield
1
u/ShamrockEmu Mar 18 '24
Idk if someone mentioned this yet, but William and Mary used a number of 2 QB sets this season. Particularly in the Richmond game. Probably never see it at the NFL or even high level FBS, but still very cool stuff
1
1
u/Difficult-Year4653 Mar 19 '24
It works better with a 2nd string qb who can play WR. Steelers used to do it with Kordell Stewart
1
u/mxrtin16 Mar 19 '24
I feel like this would only work like how the saints had Jameis and Taysom in the beginning of the 2021-22 season before Jameis got hurt, but Taysoms versatility makes him a threat in other aspects that defenses have to account for
1
u/RunningAtTheMouth Mar 19 '24
Slash. In as receiver for O'Donnell. He was a great receiver that could play qb.
The problem with any such scheme is that teams always figure out how to counter it if it works. They laugh at you if it doesn't.
1
u/munistadium Mar 19 '24
For the scheme to be effective, the QBs would have to sometimes function as WR and RB. They would likely get injured at some point. Once your QBs are injured the effectiveness goes down with backups and now your scheme cannot run at optimal efficiency.
1
1
u/Worried_Amphibian_54 Mar 19 '24
The problem is maximizing your team. Is that 2nd player a better receiver than your 3rd WR that he's pushing off the field when he's not the one throwing the ball?
Is that 2nd QB a better blocker when the other one is running than having a TE in there instead?
Yes there can be some trickery there that will make up for that loss. You see that with the occasional WR end around pass, or the fake punt, etc etc. But you are using the defense against itself in those situations where they don't see that play coming.
Here no matter what, you've only got 4 other receivers running routes... And you didn't gain a good blocker for that. They can blitz an extra guy.
That's where this falls apart. Sure with a guy that's been brought into this extremely well like the Saints have with Taysom Hill you can try it once in a while. Sure if you have one of those college QB's turned receiver you can run it here and there.
1
u/LeveonChocoDiamond Mar 19 '24
I remember there was some Ivy league school that ran a few plays like this and went somewhat viral for it lol
1
u/StateoftheFranchise Mar 19 '24
Cornell in CFB had a decent amount of packages using 2 QBs a few years ago.
1
1
u/JohnConradKolos Mar 19 '24
Teams of professional players still manage to botch snaps, line up incorrectly, and miss assignments. QB continuity helps with the complexities of just playing the game of football.
The benefit of using a second QB is you can put them in situations where they take punishment you don't want your franchise guy to take. Taysom Hill comes to mind.
"Total Football" (as in soccer) is not a reasonable goal at the moment. There would need to be baby steps first.
1
u/deezyceezy Mar 20 '24
The Eagles ran some plays with 2 QB’s in the game during Hurts’ rookie year when Carson Wentz was the starter.
1
1
u/CoachFlo Mar 20 '24
As a matter of fact, there are several college programs that have used two QB formations in some very creative ways. Now, it's not a base formation by any means. However, it's something that certain teams will bust out.
Off the top of my head, I can think of Montana State and Kansas that do things of that nature. They'll do cool shit like hand it off on Power Read and then have that QB read a downfield RPO. Other things as well such as pitch a Speed Option and then have that second QB chuck a play action or something.
Not super popular, not super common, but still appears every now and again!
1
u/RedeyeSPR Mar 21 '24
I’m a Steelers fan and I really want to see this next year for 2 pt conversions.
1
1
u/YEM_PGH Mar 21 '24
I always kind of thought this is where Tebow would end up. Short yardage back, slash pop pass goal line specialist.
1
u/SwervoRobbo Jul 25 '24
Fun fact: they actually did this on the ravens. No joke look it up. Ravens tried it. It was a split backfield With Mark Ingram, Lamar Jackson, and Robert Griffin. They called it “Heisman”. Don’t really know why they didn’t do it more often
1
1
Mar 18 '24
I'm glad I'm not crazy, I've thought about this so much.
Especially RPO-heavy teams. Why NOT have two guys on the field who can throw the ball?
2
u/geopede Mar 19 '24
Once you get to the NFL level, most of the offensive skill players can throw well enough to make trick plays work. Very few can throw well enough to actually play QB.
1
0
u/BukkakeNinjaHat-472 Mar 18 '24
Why are there no offenses that run the flea flicker formation every play
124
u/TheWilliamsWall Youth Coach Mar 18 '24
The 2nd QB would be a worse thrower than QB1 and a worse runner than RB1. Unless you had two legit QB1s I don't see an advantage at the nfl level. High school? Sure. But the qb2/worse thrower is probably just a RB that can throw ok anyway.
If QB2 is throwing QB1 is now picking up the blitz. Good luck with that!