Bringing a quarterback in mid-game

[dolphins4life]

Here are some examples of our team doing this and it working out:

2003:  Jay Fiedler replaced Brian Griese and immediately led a touchdown drive, and then led a come from behind victory against Washington.

2007:  Cleo Lemon replaced John Beck and immediately led the Dolphins to a score.  Granted, he couldn't keep it up for the rest of the game.

2017:   Matt Moore twice came off the bench for Jay Cutler and sparked the offense.  Once to a victory against the Jets, and again against the Buccaneers, when he forced a tie, only to have the defense give the lead right back up.

2020:   Ryan Fitzpatrick came off the bench and sparked the offense against Denver, and then sparked a comeback against Oakland.

I know I need a larger sample size, but it does give me a question.  Does changing quarterbacks confuse the opposing team, as they had been game-planning for the first quarterback? 

[ArtieChokePhin]

Here are some examples of our team doing this and it working out:

2003:  Jay Fiedler replaced Brian Griese and immediately led a touchdown drive, and then led a come from behind victory against Washington.

2007:  Cleo Lemon replaced John Beck and immediately led the Dolphins to a score.  Granted, he couldn't keep it up for the rest of the game.

2017:   Matt Moore twice came off the bench for Jay Cutler and sparked the offense.  Once to a victory against the Jets, and again against the Buccaneers, when he forced a tie, only to have the defense give the lead right back up.

2020:   Ryan Fitzpatrick came off the bench and sparked the offense against Denver, and then sparked a comeback against Oakland.

I know I need a larger sample size, but it does give me a question.  Does changing quarterbacks confuse the opposing team, as they had been game-planning for the first quarterback? 

For once you've made a valid point.  And you're right, it can confuse the other team.

[dolphins4life]

For once you've made a valid point.  And you're right, it can confuse the other team.

Is there a way to use this our advantage?  I mean, we had WoodStrock in the 1980s. 

Also, this is why I had no problem with Flores' quarterback decision making.

[dolphins4life]

Dave had an interesting take on this in 2017, after Matt Moore's performance against TB

"The times you are seeing Moore play well, teams have not prepared for him and he's coming in fresh after everyone else is tired.  When teams can prepare for Moore, he's a bum."

Well, again, isn't this something a team could use to their advantage?

[EDGECRUSHER]

It can be effective to a degree but nothing is more effective than having a good QB play the whole game.

[Sunstroke]

It can be effective to a degree but nothing is more effective than having a good QB play the whole game.

Not only that, but I could see that type of maneuver being detrimental to the starting QB's leadership position, not to mention undermining his confidence level.

Spending a nickel to make a penny...

[masterfins]

Not only that, but I could see that type of maneuver being detrimental to the starting QB's leadership position, not to mention undermining his confidence level.

Spending a nickel to make a penny...

Agreed.  Other teams have tried this in the past and it doesn't work well in the long term.  You want your QB to get into a rhythm during a game, and swapping QB's in/out negates that.  I also noticed this year that certain receivers had better chemistry with Tua, and other receivers had better chemistry and timing with Fitz.

[EDGECRUSHER]

Agreed.  Other teams have tried this in the past and it doesn't work well in the long term.  You want your QB to get into a rhythm during a game, and swapping QB's in/out negates that.  I also noticed this year that certain receivers had better chemistry with Tua, and other receivers had better chemistry and timing with Fitz.

QBs throw a different ball from one another in terms of speed and angle. Probably even more so with Tua because he is left handed. Takes some time getting used toif you are a receiver.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Only a good idea if both QBs have roughly  equal skill set.  Benching a tier one QB to surprise the defense with an inexperienced backup is moronic.  However, if your backup QB is of equal skill set as your starter then it is fine.

However, if you have two elite QB’s (very rare) you are likely to piss off the starter who is going to demand a trade and create a locker room issue. 

If you have two crappy QBs there isn’t much of an issue in doing this, but you aren’t winning many games anyhow.

[ArtieChokePhin]

There's an old saying that "if you have two QB's, you don't have any".  While there is a point to this, there are always exceptions.

In the early 80's Shula had Woodstrock, and ended up going to a Super Bowl.  Unfortunately, they couldn't move the ball well enough.  The Dolphins defense played lights out, but they were on the field almost the entire third quarter and by the fourth, they were gassed. 

This year, Flores had Tagovitzpatrick, which ended up getting ten wins.  This team would've lost at least three of those wins for sure had Tua stayed in the entire time.

[dolphins4life]

There's an old saying that "if you have two QB's, you don't have any".  While there is a point to this, there are always exceptions.

In the early 80's Shula had Woodstrock, and ended up going to a Super Bowl.  Unfortunately, they couldn't move the ball well enough.  The Dolphins defense played lights out, but they were on the field almost the entire third quarter and by the fourth, they were gassed. 

This year, Flores had Tagovitzpatrick, which ended up getting ten wins.  This team would've lost at least three of those wins for sure had Tua stayed in the entire time.

Wait, it was just one game I thought.  That was the Oakland game.

[Dave Gray]

There's a bigger picture issue here, which is this idea that you're trying to band-aid a bad team by bringing in a worse player to get a temporary spark -- maybe at the expense of the progression of the better player.

But a team that needs to do this isn't contending, so it's a strategy that you shouldn't employ with any regularity.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

There's a bigger picture issue here, which is this idea that you're trying to band-aid a bad team by bringing in a worse player to get a temporary spark -- maybe at the expense of the progression of the better player.

But a team that needs to do this isn't contending, so it's a strategy that you shouldn't employ with any regularity.

The only justification would be if you have two QBs with distinctive strengths and weaknesses.  Let’s say you have a primary QB with a really strong arm laser like accuracy 40 yards down field who does a phenomenal job at using open space to move the ball down the field quickly.  However, he has a horrible red zone percentage and any time he has ever attempted a QB sneak he has lost yards.  Your second QB is big, strong and quick.  He is extremely accurate passing 20 yards or less, but his deep ball needs serious work.  He is a serious threat with his legs and can plow thru a dline for 5 yards almost at will.  The guy could be a RB or TE but insists on playing QB.  In this case I could see starting QB 1, and rotating in the backup any time you are in the red zone or short and 3rd.  Much like how power RBs are rotated in.  This would not be done to create a spark and would be done regardless of how well the first QB was playing, the decision would be based on down and distance.

[Dave Gray]

^ I agree with that.

Bringing in a QB to run a wildcat is fine.
Bringing in Bishop to throw a situational bomb because Brady doesn't have the arm-strength is fine.

[EDGECRUSHER]

Our situation this year was very unique because we benched the better QB for the worse one because we were focused on the future. However, we didn't stop winning so we tried to balance the future and winning now and it ended up being a bit of a mess.