Riley on What He's Looking for in QBs

[Mavric]

Q. You've stated that you plan to run the quarterback more than in your recent past. Is that temporary or something you envision becoming more permanent in your system?

A. "I would like it to be more permanent. It will always be tailored to who's quarterbacking. People would ask me that all the time at Oregon State, and I would say, 'Hey, I would run the quarterback, but this guy's not a runner.' Even though we didn't run the quarterback (in recent years), there also were times when we were more versatile. We ran more bootlegs, more sprint-outs with Lyle Moevao and Matt Moore. But not with Derek Anderson and not Sean Mannion. Sean Canfield, he was kind of in between.

"We would be more versatile year to year depending on who it was. Thing is, I like what we delved into here in the spring, because I think it adds one more dimension to what you have to defend. A quarterback as a runner is a nice threat to have. It becomes an advantage in numbers."

Q. At the end of the day, though, you are trying to recruit quarterbacks who, above all, are excellent passers, right?

A. "We want the whole enchilada if we can get it. If you were really to pin me down right now and say, 'OK, there's a great drop-back passer you can get, or there's also this good passer who's an excellent athlete,' I might take that (second) guy. I just might."

Q. So, you like versatility at the position?

A. "We have them here right now. Tommy Armstrong is versatile. AJ Bush is versatile. And I think Zack Darlington is a versatile guy. It's kind of fun. Now, the only issue goes back to my weakness. You have some versatile guys, but don't do too much with them. Make sure they know what they're doing."

Q. As for Armstrong, you've talked a lot about his strong intangibles — namely, confidence and leadership — but what are some tangible elements of his game that might allow him to flourish in your offense?

A. "I think his athleticism will help with what we're trying to do. And I like Tommy as a passer. He's a natural thrower. He looks good throwing the ball physically. And that's almost what I look at first. It's not necessarily about the intricacies of a quarterback's release. It's about this: Does it look like he throws the ball easily? Can he just pick it up and throw it? He does that well.

"And I always say there is no substitute for the experience of playing in games. He's been under the lights. He's played a lot of football. You can't duplicate that. That's why when you break in a new guy, you're hopefully growing as he grows. So, it's nice to have that experience. And I think we have to be very selective as to what we do with Tommy and make sure we utilize who he is.

"I think we really have to dive in this summer, and then during fall camp, to find ways to really make him confident with where he's going with the ball."

(The bottom line, Riley said, is the coaches have to help Armstrong with decision-making.)

"The definition of what we're doing in the passing game has to become really natural to him, so by the time we get to the games, he's going to know exactly what he's looking for."

LJS

 

[I AM FOOT FOOT]

the more I read on this staff the more I like the change. lets hope it means more wins. these qb s we have now have to be excited for some quality coaching by guys who know what they are doing.

 

[Warrior10]

Only mentioned Tommy, AJ and Darlington...interesting.

 

[Mavric]

Only mentioned Tommy, AJ and Darlington...interesting.

Yeah, they said from the start they want to find three guys to get the reps. Those are the three.

 

[I AM FOOT FOOT]

Stanton to LB would make sense if he wants playing time.

 

[teachercd]

So he would like a stud QB that can throw and run...hmmmm me too!

 

[True2tRA]

I had considered making a thread discussing this at some point.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised at the type of QB Riley and his staff appear to be seeking. I understand them altering the offensive system to suit the QB we have in the program now, but I was actually looking forward to moving more toward the type of offense that Oregon State had been running in recent history. Maybe a nice mix of both styles will be good, but I'm a bit disappointed. I want far less spread, far less outside zone, and a whole lot more running behind the guards and center and between the tackles. I am sick and tired of the zone read, personally.

Now maybe they move away from these things, but the type of QB they're recruting makes me think it will be a part of the offene for their tenure.

I wanted to see Nebraska move away from this mobile QB mentality. I want our offense to start resembling NFL offenses. I'd like to see the Huskers put a Quarterback into the NFL someday soon. We need a pass first type of guy. A guy that throws it great, and if he can run, that's good. To me, mobility is secondary and honestly not all that important at all. Not in my ideal offense anyway.

I've been on board with this staff and their vision, but this may be the first disappointment I have. I liked the offense we saw in the spring game for the most part, but I sure wish the passing game looked a hell of a lot better. I couldn't care less if the QB can run the damn ball or not. We have four or five RB's on the roster who can handle that part of it.

 

[Scratchtown]

I had considered making a thread discussing this at some point.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised at the type of QB Riley and his staff appear to be seeking. I understand them altering the offensive system to suit the QB we have in the program now, but I was actually looking forward to moving more toward the type of offense that Oregon State had been running in recent history. Maybe a nice mix of both styles will be good, but I'm a bit disappointed. I want far less spread, far less outside zone, and a whole lot more running behind the guards and center and between the tackles. I am sick and tired of the zone read, personally.

Now maybe they move away from these things, but the type of QB they're recruting makes me think it will be a part of the offene for their tenure.

I wanted to see Nebraska move away from this mobile QB mentality. I want our offense to start resembling NFL offenses. I'd like to see the Huskers put a Quarterback into the NFL someday soon. We need a pass first type of guy. A guy that throws it great, and if he can run, that's good. To me, mobility is secondary and honestly not all that important at all. Not in my ideal offense anyway.

I've been on board with this staff and their vision, but this may be the first disappointment I have. I liked the offense we saw in the spring game for the most part, but I sure wish the passing game looked a hell of a lot better. I couldn't care less if the QB can run the damn ball or not. We have four or five RB's on the roster who can handle that part of it.

Gross. I hate the typical NFL offense. True, me and you could never be friends after reading that.

I LOVE the zone read, you can run it so many different ways. Understanding that is when the spread/zone read gets fun. For me anyway.

Second bolded (edit): It's not about having RB's to tote the job. Having a QB being able to run the ball gives you a numbers advantage when a play is executed perfectly. Most plays are designed to give the ball carrier a one on one with an unblocked corner/safety. When using the QB as the ball carrier, for example, on QB Iso, the tailback becomes the lead blocker etc...

I could talk scheme for days but I won't bore you with that.

 

[True2tRA]

I had considered making a thread discussing this at some point.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised at the type of QB Riley and his staff appear to be seeking. I understand them altering the offensive system to suit the QB we have in the program now, but I was actually looking forward to moving more toward the type of offense that Oregon State had been running in recent history. Maybe a nice mix of both styles will be good, but I'm a bit disappointed. I want far less spread, far less outside zone, and a whole lot more running behind the guards and center and between the tackles. I am sick and tired of the zone read, personally.

Now maybe they move away from these things, but the type of QB they're recruting makes me think it will be a part of the offene for their tenure.I wanted to see Nebraska move away from this mobile QB mentality. I want our offense to start resembling NFL offenses. I'd like to see the Huskers put a Quarterback into the NFL someday soon. We need a pass first type of guy. A guy that throws it great, and if he can run, that's good. To me, mobility is secondary and honestly not all that important at all. Not in my ideal offense anyway.

I've been on board with this staff and their vision, but this may be the first disappointment I have. I liked the offense we saw in the spring game for the most part, but I sure wish the passing game looked a hell of a lot better. I couldn't care less if the QB can run the damn ball or not. We have four or five RB's on the roster who can handle that part of it.

Gross. I hate the typical NFL offense. True, me and you could never be friends after reading that.
I LOVE the zone read, you can run it so many different ways. Understanding that is when the spread/zone read gets fun. For me anyway.

Second bolded (edit): It's not about having RB's to tote the job. Having a QB being able to run the ball gives you a numbers advantage when a play is executed perfectly. Most plays are designed to give the ball carrier a one on one with an unblocked corner/safety. When using the QB as the ball carrier, for example, on QB Iso, the tailback becomes the lead blocker etc...

I could talk scheme for days but I won't bore you with that.

Fullbacks make great lead blockers. I formation all day long.

 

[bale]

I had considered making a thread discussing this at some point.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised at the type of QB Riley and his staff appear to be seeking. I understand them altering the offensive system to suit the QB we have in the program now, but I was actually looking forward to moving more toward the type of offense that Oregon State had been running in recent history. Maybe a nice mix of both styles will be good, but I'm a bit disappointed. I want far less spread, far less outside zone, and a whole lot more running behind the guards and center and between the tackles. I am sick and tired of the zone read, personally.

Now maybe they move away from these things, but the type of QB they're recruting makes me think it will be a part of the offene for their tenure.I wanted to see Nebraska move away from this mobile QB mentality. I want our offense to start resembling NFL offenses. I'd like to see the Huskers put a Quarterback into the NFL someday soon. We need a pass first type of guy. A guy that throws it great, and if he can run, that's good. To me, mobility is secondary and honestly not all that important at all. Not in my ideal offense anyway.

I've been on board with this staff and their vision, but this may be the first disappointment I have. I liked the offense we saw in the spring game for the most part, but I sure wish the passing game looked a hell of a lot better. I couldn't care less if the QB can run the damn ball or not. We have four or five RB's on the roster who can handle that part of it.

Gross. I hate the typical NFL offense. True, me and you could never be friends after reading that.
I LOVE the zone read, you can run it so many different ways. Understanding that is when the spread/zone read gets fun. For me anyway.

Second bolded (edit): It's not about having RB's to tote the job. Having a QB being able to run the ball gives you a numbers advantage when a play is executed perfectly. Most plays are designed to give the ball carrier a one on one with an unblocked corner/safety. When using the QB as the ball carrier, for example, on QB Iso, the tailback becomes the lead blocker etc...

I could talk scheme for days but I won't bore you with that.

Fullbacks make great lead blockers. I formation all day long.

Are you just purposely not understanding what he's saying? In a typical I formation when the FB is the lead blocker for the RB, there is an inherent numbers disadvantage for the offense because the QB does nothing besides hand the ball off. In the zone read, the QB acts as the RB, allowing for more overall blockers and an easier way to get a numbers advantage.

 

[True2tRA]

I had considered making a thread discussing this at some point.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised at the type of QB Riley and his staff appear to be seeking. I understand them altering the offensive system to suit the QB we have in the program now, but I was actually looking forward to moving more toward the type of offense that Oregon State had been running in recent history. Maybe a nice mix of both styles will be good, but I'm a bit disappointed. I want far less spread, far less outside zone, and a whole lot more running behind the guards and center and between the tackles. I am sick and tired of the zone read, personally.

Now maybe they move away from these things, but the type of QB they're recruting makes me think it will be a part of the offene for their tenure.I wanted to see Nebraska move away from this mobile QB mentality. I want our offense to start resembling NFL offenses. I'd like to see the Huskers put a Quarterback into the NFL someday soon. We need a pass first type of guy. A guy that throws it great, and if he can run, that's good. To me, mobility is secondary and honestly not all that important at all. Not in my ideal offense anyway.

I've been on board with this staff and their vision, but this may be the first disappointment I have. I liked the offense we saw in the spring game for the most part, but I sure wish the passing game looked a hell of a lot better. I couldn't care less if the QB can run the damn ball or not. We have four or five RB's on the roster who can handle that part of it.

Gross. I hate the typical NFL offense. True, me and you could never be friends after reading that.
I LOVE the zone read, you can run it so many different ways. Understanding that is when the spread/zone read gets fun. For me anyway.

Second bolded (edit): It's not about having RB's to tote the job. Having a QB being able to run the ball gives you a numbers advantage when a play is executed perfectly. Most plays are designed to give the ball carrier a one on one with an unblocked corner/safety. When using the QB as the ball carrier, for example, on QB Iso, the tailback becomes the lead blocker etc...

I could talk scheme for days but I won't bore you with that.

Fullbacks make great lead blockers. I formation all day long.

Are you just purposely not understanding what he's saying? In a typical I formation when the FB is the lead blocker for the RB, there is an inherent numbers disadvantage for the offense because the QB does nothing besides hand the ball off. In the zone read, the QB acts as the RB, allowing for more overall blockers and an easier way to get a numbers advantage.

No. I get what he's saying. Its not a complicating theory.

f#*k, when I come to this place anymore, all I wanna do is punch somebody in their f'ing mouth.

 

[ZRod]

 

[Blackshirt96]

I had considered making a thread discussing this at some point.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised at the type of QB Riley and his staff appear to be seeking. I understand them altering the offensive system to suit the QB we have in the program now, but I was actually looking forward to moving more toward the type of offense that Oregon State had been running in recent history. Maybe a nice mix of both styles will be good, but I'm a bit disappointed. I want far less spread, far less outside zone, and a whole lot more running behind the guards and center and between the tackles. I am sick and tired of the zone read, personally.

Now maybe they move away from these things, but the type of QB they're recruting makes me think it will be a part of the offene for their tenure.I wanted to see Nebraska move away from this mobile QB mentality. I want our offense to start resembling NFL offenses. I'd like to see the Huskers put a Quarterback into the NFL someday soon. We need a pass first type of guy. A guy that throws it great, and if he can run, that's good. To me, mobility is secondary and honestly not all that important at all. Not in my ideal offense anyway.

I've been on board with this staff and their vision, but this may be the first disappointment I have. I liked the offense we saw in the spring game for the most part, but I sure wish the passing game looked a hell of a lot better. I couldn't care less if the QB can run the damn ball or not. We have four or five RB's on the roster who can handle that part of it.

Gross. I hate the typical NFL offense. True, me and you could never be friends after reading that.
I LOVE the zone read, you can run it so many different ways. Understanding that is when the spread/zone read gets fun. For me anyway.

Second bolded (edit): It's not about having RB's to tote the job. Having a QB being able to run the ball gives you a numbers advantage when a play is executed perfectly. Most plays are designed to give the ball carrier a one on one with an unblocked corner/safety. When using the QB as the ball carrier, for example, on QB Iso, the tailback becomes the lead blocker etc...

I could talk scheme for days but I won't bore you with that.

Fullbacks make great lead blockers. I formation all day long.

Are you just purposely not understanding what he's saying? In a typical I formation when the FB is the lead blocker for the RB, there is an inherent numbers disadvantage for the offense because the QB does nothing besides hand the ball off. In the zone read, the QB acts as the RB, allowing for more overall blockers and an easier way to get a numbers advantage.

No. I get what he's saying. Its not a complicating theory.

f#*k, when I come to this place anymore, all I wanna do is punch somebody in their f'ing mouth.

I completly agree. Everytime I saw the QB in a shotgun set in the redzone. I wanted to beat Pelini & Becks head into a wall. Why not let your RB run down hill with a lead blocker. A team that can control the clock & the run game will win a lot of football games.

 

[teachercd]

I had considered making a thread discussing this at some point.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised at the type of QB Riley and his staff appear to be seeking. I understand them altering the offensive system to suit the QB we have in the program now, but I was actually looking forward to moving more toward the type of offense that Oregon State had been running in recent history. Maybe a nice mix of both styles will be good, but I'm a bit disappointed. I want far less spread, far less outside zone, and a whole lot more running behind the guards and center and between the tackles. I am sick and tired of the zone read, personally.

Now maybe they move away from these things, but the type of QB they're recruting makes me think it will be a part of the offene for their tenure.I wanted to see Nebraska move away from this mobile QB mentality. I want our offense to start resembling NFL offenses. I'd like to see the Huskers put a Quarterback into the NFL someday soon. We need a pass first type of guy. A guy that throws it great, and if he can run, that's good. To me, mobility is secondary and honestly not all that important at all. Not in my ideal offense anyway.

I've been on board with this staff and their vision, but this may be the first disappointment I have. I liked the offense we saw in the spring game for the most part, but I sure wish the passing game looked a hell of a lot better. I couldn't care less if the QB can run the damn ball or not. We have four or five RB's on the roster who can handle that part of it.

Gross. I hate the typical NFL offense. True, me and you could never be friends after reading that.
I LOVE the zone read, you can run it so many different ways. Understanding that is when the spread/zone read gets fun. For me anyway.

Second bolded (edit): It's not about having RB's to tote the job. Having a QB being able to run the ball gives you a numbers advantage when a play is executed perfectly. Most plays are designed to give the ball carrier a one on one with an unblocked corner/safety. When using the QB as the ball carrier, for example, on QB Iso, the tailback becomes the lead blocker etc...

I could talk scheme for days but I won't bore you with that.

Fullbacks make great lead blockers. I formation all day long.

Are you just purposely not understanding what he's saying? In a typical I formation when the FB is the lead blocker for the RB, there is an inherent numbers disadvantage for the offense because the QB does nothing besides hand the ball off. In the zone read, the QB acts as the RB, allowing for more overall blockers and an easier way to get a numbers advantage.

No. I get what he's saying. Its not a complicating theory.

f#*k, when I come to this place anymore, all I wanna do is punch somebody in their f'ing mouth.

I completly agree. Everytime I saw the QB in a shotgun set in the redzone. I wanted to beat Pelini & Becks head into a wall. Why not let your RB run down hill with a lead blocker. A team that can control the clock & the run game will win a lot of football games.

I know what you mean but didn't NU have pretty solid rushing stats for the season?