QB Situation

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Oct 30, 2007
2,558
2,360
1,743
How?

The QB knowing when a receiver is going to make a cut isn't a relationship thing. It's knowing the playbook and reading the situation correctly. They practice repeatedly so that they know how to react in different situations and they have to be on the same page. It's all about the formula.

When Weeden and Blackmon talked about their "go" signals it wasn't chemistry... It was reading the situation that the defense put in front of them and adjusting accordingly.

Knowing the playbook and the adjustments is infinitely more important than "chemistry". It just is.
I remember hearing Brandon Weeden talking about the his chemistry with Justin Blackmon. He said at time in the redzone they would just look at each other and Blackmon wold know the fade to the corner of the endzone was coming. There were times when Weeden was like the OC on the field. That type of relationship is more than just reading a defense and making the right call based off alignment.

Tyreek Hill had legit 4.2 speed and Adarius Bowman had 4.7 speed. If you just throw a generic rout, you would overthrow one and underthrow the other. A QB has to know the speed, catch radius, vertical ability, and rout running dependability of every WR on the field.

It doesn't matter if you call it chemistry or familiarity, these things are vitally important to success through the air. That's why it's common place for our QB's to work with our WR's throughout the summer outside of scheduled football practices.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
24,233
30,711
1,743
Australia
Lol seriously stop. Why do you think NFL QB's have their own passing camps with their receivers to develop this non-existent chemistry you talk about?
Example: You tell James Washington and Marcell Ateman to both run fade routes. Its common sense you throw it up high to marcell since he's tall. However, if your QB doesn't know JW has tremendous ball skills and can go up and get it just like Marcell then how does it know how high to throw it to him since he's under 6ft? That's not something you can put in the playbook. Same thing if you tell them to run go routes. You should know the speed at which each guy runs and when they will be open, which is something you learn from practice and not the playbook.
Why does everyone take every argument to the extreme? Not to speak for him, but I think all @CTeamPoke meant was talent is going to win out over chemistry.

Obviously, if a QB and receiver had never even seen each other play at all at the point the pass was being thrown and had no idea about their abilities then that would be a huge deficit. On the other hand, "chemistry" claims like every QB/WR needs to be like McCoy/Shipley BFing each other since junior high are over the top too.

All you "chemistry is everything" people answer this:
You are setting up a football game and you have $10000 riding on the outcome. Your choice is McCoy/Shipley for QB/WR, as chemistry as it gets. Or, you can have Tom Brady and Antonio Brown, who have not played together. Game is in one month, you get one daily practice. Who do you pick?
 
Oct 30, 2007
2,558
2,360
1,743
Why does everyone take every argument to the extreme? Not to speak for him, but I think all @CTeamPoke meant was talent is going to win out over chemistry.

Obviously, if a QB and receiver had never even seen each other play at all at the point the pass was being thrown and had no idea about their abilities then that would be a huge deficit. On the other hand, "chemistry" claims like every QB/WR needs to be like McCoy/Shipley BFing each other since junior high are over the top too.

All you "chemistry is everything" people answer this:
You are setting up a football game and you have $10000 riding on the outcome. Your choice is McCoy/Shipley for QB/WR, as chemistry as it gets. Or, you can have Tom Brady and Antonio Brown, who have not played together. Game is in one month, you get one daily practice. Who do you pick?
I'm pretty sure we saw how talent without chemistry worked out under Travis Ford. But If we could recruit the best football players on the planet, I would care a lot less about chemistry.
 

jobob85

Alcoholistic Sage
A/V Subscriber
Mar 11, 2009
20,529
26,262
743
I'm pretty sure we saw how talent without chemistry worked out under Travis Ford. But If we could recruit the best football players on the planet, I would care a lot less about chemistry.
And as mentioned how talent worked out without chemistry in the Colorado game.
No, one size fits all situation.
Carry on, I will continue to blend two single malts I don’t like to make a very good blended 15 year old.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
24,233
30,711
1,743
Australia
I'm pretty sure we saw how talent without chemistry worked out under Travis Ford. But If we could recruit the best football players on the planet, I would care a lot less about chemistry.
Why did our talented players under Ford decide not to develop chemistry? Heck, Smart and Forte had been buds since high school. Can you really blame chemistry for our problems under Ford?

It appears to me you are mixing in coaching problems and calling that chemistry. If good coaching is what creates chemistry and poor coaching stops it, what are we even talking about as we are not talking about changing coaches?
 
Oct 30, 2007
2,558
2,360
1,743
And as mentioned how talent worked out without chemistry in the Colorado game.
No, one size fits all situation.
Carry on, I will continue to blend two single malts I don’t like to make a very good blended 15 year old.
Why did our talented players under Ford decide not to develop chemistry? Heck, Smart and Forte had been buds since high school. Can you really blame chemistry for our problems under Ford?

It appears to me you are mixing in coaching problems and calling that chemistry. If good coaching is what creates chemistry and poor coaching stops it, what are we even talking about as we are not talking about changing coaches?
The main reason I replied to this thread is because CTeamPoke said "chemistry with receivers means absolutely nothing" and I completely disagree with that statement. Talent will beat out chemistry most of the time, but talent and chemistry is a deadly combination. McCoy and Shipley got UT all the way to the national championship game and they might've won it if McCoy didn't get hurt on the first drive of the game.

The Travis Ford example probably wasn't the best. I was thinking most of Marcus Smart's last year were team chemistry went to pot and our season fell apart. I've always thought that a QB's chemistry or familiarity with his WR core is pretty important.

jobob85 You enjoy your beverages sir. :thumbup:
 
Last edited:

jobob85

Alcoholistic Sage
A/V Subscriber
Mar 11, 2009
20,529
26,262
743
The main reason I replied to this thread is because CTeamPoke said "chemistry with receivers means absolutely nothing" and I completely disagree with that statement. Talent will beat out chemistry most of the time, but talent and chemistry is a deadly combination. McCoy and Shipley got UT all the way to the national championship game and they might've won it if McCoy didn't get hurt on the first drive of the game.

The Travis Ford example probably wasn't the best. I was thinking most of Marcus Smart's last year were team chemistry went to pot and our season fell apart. I've always thought that a QB's chemistry or familiarity with his WR core is pretty important.

jobob85 You enjoy your weekend sir. :thumbup:
Thank you, I try to enjoy every day. You win some, you drink some.
 

wreck

Intrigued By Shiny Objects
A/V Subscriber
Jun 3, 2006
1,463
796
1,743
Dallas
Or as Norm said on “Cheers” : “Women, can’t live with them.................................... pass the beer nuts.”
 

CPTNQUIRK

I'm Your Captain!
A/V Subscriber
Nov 20, 2006
29,028
19,543
1,743
66
In the Boondocks in Creek County, Oklahoma
The main reason I replied to this thread is because CTeamPoke said "chemistry with receivers means absolutely nothing" and I completely disagree with that statement. Talent will beat out chemistry most of the time, but talent and chemistry is a deadly combination. McCoy and Shipley got UT all the way to the national championship game and they might've won it if McCoy didn't get hurt on the first drive of the game.

The Travis Ford example probably wasn't the best. I was thinking most of Marcus Smart's last year were team chemistry went to pot and our season fell apart. I've always thought that a QB's chemistry or familiarity with his WR core is pretty important.

jobob85 You enjoy your beverages sir. :thumbup:
Marcus Smart’s last year fell apart because Micheal Cobbins got hurt and we didn’t have an adequate big man to replace him.
 

OSUMIKE17

Property of The Oklahoman and NewsOk.com
A/V Subscriber
Apr 11, 2009
50,025
55,057
743
Tulsa
Oh, I agree the defense played a huge part in our disappointing season, but we blew some big opportunities on offense that could have changed the outcomes of games. Also - efficiency doesn't tell the whole story. So boiling it down to overall scoring or efficiency just isn't an indicator of play by play, game by game situations.
Everyone blows opportunities on offense. We blew many less than 99% of the other college football teams in the nation. This is where perspective comes in. Not every single offensive series is going to be perfect. This isn’t Madden set on Very Easy with all the cheat codes in.

You should look into their Efficiency formula. It’s much more detailed and complex than you are giving it credit for. And in any case, as said above, you’re trying to blame our bowl game destination on the part of the team that any program except OU would have absolutely killed for.
 

NYC Poke

The Veil of Ignorance
A/V Subscriber
Sep 24, 2007
37,631
45,163
1,743
“Chemistry” is merely a term of convenience sportscasters use metaphorically to make difficult concepts relatable to the average fan. Did MR and JW have chemistry? I guess so, they produced a lot of things yardage and TDS together.

But I doubt they were taking long walks and bubble baths together.
 

LakeCowboy

1945 National Champions
A/V Subscriber
May 14, 2009
6,759
4,710
743
Edmond, OK
“Chemistry” is merely a term of convenience sportscasters use metaphorically to make difficult concepts relatable to the average fan. Did MR and JW have chemistry? I guess so, they produced a lot of things yardage and TDS together.

But I doubt they were taking long walks and bubble baths together.
Don’t ruin my fantasy world with that nonsense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

CTeamPoke

Legendary Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Jun 18, 2008
41,588
45,242
1,743
Dallas, TX
Travis Ford's teams didn't lack chemistry. Those guys all still love each other AND Coach Ford. There was plenty of relationship there.

The scheme was just bad and didn't work in the Big 12 (or high major college basketball). Poor in game decisions and poor practice habits led to poor execution. Had nothing to do with chemistry.

The players couldn't stand Brad Underwood... But the scheme and practice put them in a position to succeed on the court. So... Yeah.
 

pokes16

Territorial Marshal
Oct 16, 2003
5,563
5,492
1,743
Tulsa
Travis Ford's teams didn't lack chemistry. Those guys all still love each other AND Coach Ford. There was plenty of relationship there.

The scheme was just bad and didn't work in the Big 12 (or high major college basketball). Poor in game decisions and poor practice habits led to poor execution. Had nothing to do with chemistry.

The players couldn't stand Brad Underwood... But the scheme and practice put them in a position to succeed on the court. So... Yeah.
Yes. After Captain Underpants listened to his assistants and changed defense, they started to win.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
10,877
6,405
1,743
Landlocked
Weeden was the third string QB and was reportedly not good at all in practice.... but that didn't stop him from looking great in that Thursday night game against CU. Will to venture he never took reps with Blackmon before that game.

Being a good QB is about knowing the routes and being a good WR is about knowing what to do on option routes. Nothing more, nothing less. It's a formula, and if both parties know the formula, then the relationship doesn't matter.
Doubling down, huh? Well, you're wrong. Sometimes great players can't mesh well, even though they're great at running routes or throwing passes. When you're playing at that high of a level, every minute detail makes a difference, and that includes intangible things like on-field chemistry. Sometimes you jump in with people and things click instantly. That can definitely happen. But it probably more often develops over many practice reps together.

Watch an NFL game where the starting QB gets injured. The backup will likely hit the 3rd - 5th string guys more often, because they've repped with them in practice more often and know exactly how they cut, stop, jump, and run.

To say that chemistry has zero impact is asinine, and makes me think you've never played a team sport.
 

RutherfordFan

Federal Marshal
Feb 5, 2008
14,997
3,549
1,743
Oklahoma City
I'm pretty sure we saw how talent without chemistry worked out under Travis Ford. But If we could recruit the best football players on the planet, I would care a lot less about chemistry.
Umm yeah we had no centers on the team under Ford. Cobbins, ok one and he got hurt and we were screwed. Also he's an average coach. Great guy it seems but still. Can't win in basketball without a big guy.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2004
17,819
8,072
1,743
Earth
It's Geography that is more important than Chemistry in the quarterback and wide receiver relationship... if Rudolph is in Austin and Washington is in New York its likely they aren't hooking up for any long gains. But put them both in Stillwater, and they are going to light up your defense.

You know why? They have great Geography, that's why.
 

jobob85

Alcoholistic Sage
A/V Subscriber
Mar 11, 2009
20,529
26,262
743
It's Geography that is more important than Chemistry in the quarterback and wide receiver relationship... if Rudolph is in Austin and Washington is in New York its likely they aren't hooking up for any long gains. But put them both in Stillwater, and they are going to light up your defense.

You know why? They have great Geography, that's why.
I thought it was geology because those guys were rock solid.
 

LakeCowboy

1945 National Champions
A/V Subscriber
May 14, 2009
6,759
4,710
743
Edmond, OK
It's Geography that is more important than Chemistry in the quarterback and wide receiver relationship... if Rudolph is in Austin and Washington is in New York its likely they aren't hooking up for any long gains. But put them both in Stillwater, and they are going to light up your defense.

You know why? They have great Geography, that's why.
I thought it was geology because those guys were rock solid.
I thought it was just because Washington studied Agriculture and knew his way around a field.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk