How dangerous is Willis as a runner? What makes him special?

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, rayzor said:

wait.... the offense with Cam was built around running? are you talking about towards the end or the whole time?

i'll debate that other stuff later, just wanted to be clear about that one point because that opens up a whole other can of worms.

The offense under Shula, yeah. And as odd as it might feel, the Shula years up to 2015 were the most successful years we had.

There were entire articles dissecting the kind of run concepts and ideas that Shula was using to make the offense go. Unfortunately, Dan Quinn and Wade Phillips dissected them too. Once there was an answer out there, Shula wasn't good enough to respond.

Turner actually did a better job developing Newton, and I've always believed that if we'd have had someone like Turner from the beginning, things could have been different. 

[kungfoodude]

3 hours ago, Catsfan69 said:

No what these guys and unfortunately you old and wise one are missing is that there are running QBs and QBs who can run. They are two different things.

 

Calf, Hill , Vick, Cunningham, Stewart are running QBs that can't throw.

Cam Lamar Farve are QBs that can kinda throw.

Mahomes Staubach Young are QBs that can run.

No, I do understand that. The mobile QB's are much a spectrum than just "running QB" and "statue." 

Hence why I kept saying athletic or athlete. A guy like Mahomes or Russell Wilson are very good, very mobile QB's but their biggest weapons are their arms. 

And that is basically what I mean. In the NFL, it is way more difficult to find a home in the league if you aren't an athletic QB. The college game figures this out first and now the NFL is following suit. Doesn't mean you HAVE to be a great or good athlete to succeed but more often than not, the guys that stick around the league now are or were good athletes(with some decline due to age for some of them). 

Lamar is also a bad example of a guy who can throw because he not only has a good career completion percentage but a low Int Rate, as well. He's a very good thrower, but it gets overshadowed by what he does with his legs. 

[ForJimmy]

38 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The offense under Shula, yeah. And as odd as it might feel, the Shula years up to 2015 were the most successful years we had.

There were entire articles dissecting the kind of run concepts and ideas that Shula was using to make the offense go. Unfortunately, Dan Quinn and Wade Phillips dissected them too. Once there was an answer out there, Shula wasn't good enough to respond.

Turner actually did a better job developing Newton, and I've always believed that if we'd have had someone like Turner from the beginning, things could have been different. 

This just shows you its the coaches/OC that have them running so much.  Can Cam, Lamar, Vick etc throw well?  Of course they they can, they were successful NFL QBs, but their teams designed offenses around them running which you could argue hurt their development.  So the whole "running QBs can't win" is pointless.  It should be coaches need to expand their playbook/offense if they expect to win a championship in the NFL.  

[Mr. Scot]

15 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

This just shows you its the coaches/OC that have them running so much.  Can Cam, Lamar, Vick etc throw well?  Of course they they can, they were successful NFL QBs, but their teams designed offenses around them running which you could argue hurt their development.  So the whole "running QBs can't win" is pointless.  It should be coaches need to expand their playbook/offense if they expect to win a championship in the NFL.  

Newton could throw. Jackson can throw. But Vick? No.

Heck, I remember Falcon fans arguing for years that their receivers were terrible only to see them suddenly turn around and get a lot better after Vick left. And that was no accident.

(that on top of the whole "how many years does it take to learn the West Coast Offense" silliness)

Gearing the Atlanta offense around Vick's running was actually the better choice. It wasn't going to work, but it was still the smarter play given his abilities.

Rivera built around Newton using the same concepts Buddy Ryan did with Randall Cunningham. The idea was that if you had a quarterback who could make two or three big plays a game, the defense would handle the rest.

While Rivera did get closer to succeeding with that approach than Ryan ever did, it still ultimately failed and wasn't really built to last anyway.

What Newton could have done with better will always be a huge unanswered question.

It's also one of the big reasons why while I think Rivera the Man is worthy of respect, Rivera the Coach is somebody I just can't like.

Edited April 11, 2022 by Mr. Scot

[Martin]

If we draft Willis I will be excited and overly optimistic about his potential and high ceiling.

If we draft a LT I will be pumped we did the smart thing and now have a potentially really strong o-line and can go all in on drafting a QB next year.

Always glass half full!

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, Martin said:

If we draft Willis I will be excited and overly optimistic about his potential and high ceiling.

If we draft a LT I will be pumped we did the smart thing and now have a potentially really strong o-line and can go all in on drafting a QB next year.

Always glass half full!

If we have a winning season next year, I'm going to say "well that was fun".

I'm also going to say "sh-t, another year of Matt Rhule".

Glass always slightly off...

[ForJimmy]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Newton could throw. Jackson can throw. But Vick? No.

Heck, I remember Falcon fans arguing for years that their receivers were terrible only to see them suddenly turn around and get a lot better after Vick left. And that was no accident.

(that on top of the whole "how many years does it take to learn the West Coast Offense" silliness)

Gearing the Atlanta offense around Vick's running was actually the better choice. It wasn't going to work, but it was still the smarter play given his abilities.

Rivera built around Newton using the same concepts Buddy Ryan did with Randall Cunningham. The idea was that if you had a quarterback who could make two or three big plays a game, the defense would handle the rest.

While Rivera did get closer to succeeding with that approach than Ryan ever did, it still ultimately failed and wasn't really built to last anyway.

What Newton could have done with better will always be a huge unanswered question.

It's also one of the big reasons why while I think Rivera the Man is worthy of respect, Rivera the Coach is somebody I just can't like.

Take a look at what happened when Vick went to Andy Reid's Eagles.  That's when he starts breaking 3000 passing yards (not great but still solid) and broke 60% completion percentage with 21 TDs and 6 INTs in 2010 (his first full season in that offense).  Again these aren't crazy numbers but a huge jump from what he was doing at ATL.  He had a strong arm and was a capable thrower, just needed the right coach to develop him.  Had Reid drafted him we probably would be talking differently about him right now.  

[micnificent28]

2 minutes ago, Martin said:

If we draft Willis I will be excited and overly optimistic about his potential and high ceiling.

If we draft a LT I will be pumped we did the smart thing and now have a potentially really strong o-line and can go all in on drafting a QB next year.

Always glass half full!

I'm good with either of those exact 2. The only thing I would be upset about is if they drafted Pickett over Willis and a LT. If you took Hamilton I would be like eh...OK..even kayvon....elite upside. Don't draft a almost finished product with limited room for improvement. Like he pro ready but he's as ready as he will get.

[ForJimmy]

3 minutes ago, Martin said:

If we draft Willis I will be excited and overly optimistic about his potential and high ceiling.

If we draft a LT I will be pumped we did the smart thing and now have a potentially really strong o-line and can go all in on drafting a QB next year.

Always glass half full!

What if we draft a defensive player?

[micnificent28]

Just now, ForJimmy said:

Take a look at what happened when Vick went to Andy Reid's Eagles.  That's when he starts breaking 3000 passing yards (not great but still solid) and broke 60% completion percentage with 21 TDs and 6 INTs in 2010 (his first full season in that offense).  Again these aren't crazy numbers but a huge jump from what he was doing at ATL.  He had a strong arm and was a capable thrower, just needed the right coach to develop him.  Had Reid drafted him we probably would be talking differently about him right now.  

This. The Vick can't throw perspective is Crap. People want to look at percentages and but he never turned the ball over more than he scored. Scoring is what a qb does. You add in his rushing totals with his arm totals and I would take vick. Vick into today's RPO system would be incredible. When Vick was drafted we hadn't seen a guy like him before.

You can say Staubach, Fran or whoever but none of those guys ran a 4.3 or were even close to the threat Vick was. Vick was run away from DBs fast. None of those qbs before the early 90s were that. Those guys at best were about as mobile as Mahomes. Like yeah he might move the chains but, they weren't run away from you or 70s to the house fast so the level of respect for vicks legs were different.

I think comparing his level mobility, Cam and also Lamar jackson to those guys is a joke.

[Mr. Scot]

9 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Take a look at what happened when Vick went to Andy Reid's Eagles.  That's when he starts breaking 3000 passing yards (not great but still solid) and broke 60% completion percentage with 21 TDs and 6 INTs in 2010 (his first full season in that offense).  Again these aren't crazy numbers but a huge jump from what he was doing at ATL.  He had a strong arm and was a capable thrower, just needed the right coach to develop him.  Had Reid drafted him we probably would be talking differently about him right now.  

Yet still didn't succeed, even with arguably the best quarterback coach in the game helping him.

Improved stats aren't the same as winning.

[micnificent28]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yet still didn't succeed, even with arguably the best quarterback coach in the game helping him.

Improved stats aren't the same as winning.

The whole winning only with pocket passers myth is going to die a very quick death in the near future. With Brady Retirement imminent, and I guess we calling Stafford a pocket passer and he's at the end of the road. Who do you think is going to win super bowls? Because the rest of the league has some type of athleticism.

The game as much as it doesn't seem isn't changing is. Remember when there was 1-2 guys who could move the chains with there legs? That trend has reversed. Almost every qb is capable of atleast running for a first down if the defense plays man.

[ForJimmy]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yet still didn't succeed, even with arguably the best quarterback coach in the game helping him.

Improved stats aren't the same as winning.

10-6 and got them in the playoffs in his first full season.  Keep in mind he was out of the league from his dog fighting crimes for a couple years.  Imagine Vick with Reid throughout his career.  Now you are switching it up though.  You said he couldn't pass so I showed you how he could with the right coach, then you bring it to winning (10-6 isn't terrible), but I assume you mean playoffs wins?  So no he didn't get a playoff win immediately with Reid after being out of the league for several years.  I'm not sure how that proves he couldn't pass the ball?

[Mr. Scot]

12 minutes ago, micnificent28 said:

The whole winning only with pocket passers myth is going to die a very quick death in the near future. With Brady Retirement imminent, and I guess we calling Stafford a pocket passer and he's at the end of the road. Who do you think is going to win super bowls? Because the rest of the league has some type of athleticism.

The game as much as it doesn't seem isn't changing is. Remember when there was 1-2 guys who could move the chains with there legs? That trend has reversed. Almost every qb is capable of atleast running for a first down if the defense plays man.

Two things...

Yes, lots of quarterbacks are capable of occasionally running for a first down if something opens up. Considering them "dual threat" quarterbacks or even mobile quarterbacks strictly based on that criteria is a huge stretch. By that definition, you could put Jake Delhomme in one of those categories.

Second, and probably more important, you're arguing against a viewpoint that doesn't exist (at least not with me, but I can only speak for myself).

It's not that you have to be a pocket passer to win. It's that you have to be a capable passer to win, regardless of what you can or can't do as a runner.

The notion that you have to be able to run just isn't true, never has been. If you're capable of running, great. That adds value to your quarterback skill set.

But it's the best that you can do is run for an occasional first down when something breaks open, that's okay too.

Also to be clear, very little of what I've been talking about is any direct discussion of Malik Willis. I'm not a big Willis fan, but for most of the topic here I've been talking about general concepts more so than Willis himself.

But focusing on him directly, this is how I'd summarize it.

If he can develop into a solid passer, then yes he will succeed in the NFL.

If he can't, it doesn't matter if he's more athletic than Vick, Newton and Jackson combined. He's going to wash out as a quarterback.