QB Friendly?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Sleepy1711

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
618
I keep on hearing the phrase QB friendly offense, like Foles was in a QB friendly system and how Bradford is going to excel because of that..

Can someone please explain to me what a QB friendly system is compared to the other?

Much appreciated.
 
Spread and Gun. Quick Pace. Non - traditional offense that most defensive coordinators haven't figured out yet. Look up Oregon and Baylor College Football Offensive Film.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jorgeh0605
I keep on hearing the phrase QB friendly offense, like Foles was in a QB friendly system and how Bradford is going to excel because of that..

Can someone please explain to me what a QB friendly system is compared to the other?

Much appreciated.
A QB friendly offense is just an offense that is not hard for the QB to understand, and doesn't ask the QB to make as many decisions. These are generally run first schemes that don't have a ton of options in the WR's route tree. West Coast offenses are typically pretty QB friendly. It also implies a lot of high % passes and more 3 step drops instead of 5 step drops. Get the ball out quick sort of stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TxRamsFan
A QB friendly offense is just an offense that is not hard for the QB to understand, and doesn't ask the QB to make as many decisions. These are generally run first schemes that don't have a ton of options in the WR's route tree. West Coast offenses are typically pretty QB friendly. It also implies a lot of high % passes and more 3 step drops instead of 5 step drops. Get the ball out quick sort of stuff.

So.. correct me if I'm wrong, wouldn't Fisher's teams be a QB friendly offense, considering they run the ball alot?
 
Not the offense Schotty ran because what the WRs ran were mostly option routes meaning the WRs had to read the D and run a route based on what the Defense did at the snap.

So everyone had to make the same read, even if the D disguised their look and the QB then has to go through his adjusted reads, which he has to know on the fly and deliver the ball.

A QB friendly system tends to avoid option routes, and allows for run and pass audibles from the same formation if the QB sees an opportunity to take advantage of. It tends to have balanced play calling and doesn't require a WR corps of 1st rounders to complete passes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rhinobean
In the case of Bradford, a QB friendly offense is one that can keep him on the field and since his sophomore year in college, he hasn't found one!
 
So.. correct me if I'm wrong, wouldn't Fisher's teams be a QB friendly offense, considering they run the ball alot?
Its not just running the ball a lot though. And I don't remember how the Titan's were ran but Fisher's offense here was dictated by his OC not by him. Schotty's offense was not QB friendly even though it was supposed to be a run first offense. Again, that isn't the only requirement of a QB offense. Actually isn't a requirement at all, more of a correlation.

Bradford's rookie year he was in a more QB friendly offense. Actually, his rookie OC is the OC in Philly now if I'm not mistake.
 
The guys above me probably get it better than me, but I always ask for more when I hear this phrase or try to get better meaning from the speaker...I am certain the pro's have a specific meaning to it but when talking to freinds the meaning varies greatly:

examples of what people may mean when they say it:
1. a system that allows a QB to put up big stats (think martz)
2. a system that protects the QB/keeps him upright (think KC)
3. a system that is easy to learn and run

Like I say the guys like Jrry and coach may all be on the same page when they say it, but when talking with coworkers/friends this term goes all over the place....at least for me.