QB Substitution % Change Proposals and Vote

[James-Eagles]

I can't hear the PODCAST on my PC's. It is too low so I don't have the basis of the discussion, but it is a fallacy that QB2's are used in the NFL, run or pass. The NFL can't even find 32 competent starters. The QB% was set after testing to have INT's be closer to the NFL stats. Why would we change without a stated goal. James always says there are other repercussions to changes. This would seem to possibly be one


These seem to be changes looking for problem rather than a solution to one. Kinda change for change sake.

I think using QB in runs will turn out to be for EN only.

I also say that any rule change should be reviewed after 3-5 seasons. There have been a few rule changes that have done nothing or not what they were meant to do and we still keep them.

[Shawn-Giants]

Not needed. The juice not worth the squeeze. We actually need to conduct a rule purge and remove useless rules, not add more.

[Justin-Chicago]

The QB% was set after testing to have INT's be closer to the NFL stats.

Interesting, I don’t remember this specifically.

I recall IN and DI being nerfed for the reason Jerry mentioned.

I thought QB sub percentage was purely for the aesthetics of one QB handling the lion’s share of the snaps across the board.

[James-Eagles]

The QB% was set after testing to have INT's be closer to the NFL stats.

Interesting, I don’t remember this specifically.

I recall IN and DI being nerfed for the reason Jerry mentioned.

I thought QB sub percentage was purely for the aesthetics of one QB handling the lion’s share of the snaps across the board.

Actually Sub percent wasn't changed for INT. I remember this change. It was done after I ran a high sub percentage on QB early on in my return to the league. It was changed to be more NFL like.

I think Justin and me have caused more on the spot changes than anyone else. Always looking for the competitive edge.

[Barney - Vikings]

Not needed. The juice not worth the squeeze. We actually need to conduct a rule purge and remove useless rules, not add more.

Agree! All we ever do is add rules, it’s getting like the Tax Code.

[Charlie-49ers]

We are NOT going to change the current rule!

1) It was out-voted; and
2) In looking through the NFL stats from this past weekend I did not see one backup QB in a game for a play except for the holder of a place-kicker.

[Shawn-Giants]

Correct Charlie, QB,K,P are the only positions not spelled due to exhaustion. I've seen some get dinged go into the tent and come back, or go into the locker room and not return.

But not run off the field pointing to be subbed due to tiredness like a RB, or WR would.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I can't hear the PODCAST on my PC's. It is too low so I don't have the basis of the discussion, but it is a fallacy that QB2's are used in the NFL, run or pass. The NFL can't even find 32 competent starters. The QB% was set after testing to have INT's be closer to the NFL stats. Why would we change without a stated goal. James always says there are other repercussions to changes. This would seem to possibly be one


These seem to be changes looking for problem rather than a solution to one. Kinda change for change sake.

I think using QB in runs will turn out to be for EN only.

Swayed my vote to NO CHANGE

You might occasionally see someone like we did with Kordell "Slash" Stewart where they have a few plays designated for someone that isn't QB1; however, I tend to agree with the fact that we may be trying to fit a round peg in a square hole here. There are some things the game just isn't designed to do and these wildcat type plays would push the envelope. Sure you might be able to hex edit a play to get it to work, but I doubt it'd be worth it or pass inspection when submitted.

[Shawn-Giants]

I can't hear the PODCAST on my PC's. It is too low so I don't have the basis of the discussion, but it is a fallacy that QB2's are used in the NFL, run or pass. The NFL can't even find 32 competent starters. The QB% was set after testing to have INT's be closer to the NFL stats. Why would we change without a stated goal. James always says there are other repercussions to changes. This would seem to possibly be one


These seem to be changes looking for problem rather than a solution to one. Kinda change for change sake.

I think using QB in runs will turn out to be for EN only.

I tried this maybe 10 seasons ago when I was Denver's Head Coach I created 12 series RM plays with the backup QB one of them was DB12RM was a design run for the QB2 Charlie may have changed it back to QB1 but this whole concept is something I approached many moons ago.