Crazy Offense Idea

[mankatobjr]

Watching Taysom Hill of the Saints yesterday had me wondering about an offense idea. All these Atheltic QBs coming out of college, Think Joe Webb, Tim Tebow, Hill, Braxton Miller, JT Barrett Type, even Marquise Grey type QBs.

Why hasn't a team used 3, 4,5, or even 6 of them on the field at once. Ones that can catch the ball, run with it, Throw. On any play any one of them could "take the snap" Defense would not know who is the WR, or who's the RB, or QB. You could have one who takes more snaps then others.. but I don't know if that is necessary. Get a Smart Center who is green dotted and calls the plays in the huddle.

Imagine having two next two each other in shot gun. Which one is getting the snap? You could motion guys in and out of the QB position.

Maybe it wouldn't work right away on the NFL level.. but if I was coaching a D2 or D3 college team, or a bad D1 school what would you have to lose? Say you are the Gophers... maybe a crazy offense like that would bring your program up.

But Maybe it could work on the NFL Level.

The guy on Fox said yesterday after a Hill ran a "wildcat" play. He ended up not throwing it and ran for the first down. He stated had a RB ran the play they may have thrown it anyways because they aren't experienced at QB enough. So why not take all these college QBs that aren't great "typical" QBs and use them in a unique way. You wouldn't need to spend 30 million on a QB.. You maybe wouldn't even need to spend 15 million on a WR or pro-bowl RB. You' could use cap space to have a great D and Oline. and then have 10 QB/WR/RB (Slash players for those who remember Kordell Stewart).

Either this is a brilliant idea... or people are going to think I am insane (PS- no I am not under the influence at all)

[JPM]

I've always thought take a 7 footer and use for goal line WR or short yardage situation. If you can have a guy who just kicks off why not a basketball 6'10" or above basketball player.

[mankatobjr]

I've always thought take a 7 footer and use for goal line WR or short yardage situation. If you can have a guy who just kicks off why not a basketball 6'10" or above basketball player.

You could use him to block FG too I'd assume.

[hategreenticemase]

I've always thought take a 7 footer and use for goal line WR or short yardage situation. If you can have a guy who just kicks off why not a basketball 6'10" or above basketball player.

Clark, by far my favorite part of your routines like this one - when you embarrass the little morons like this and they dont know you are doing it.

This may end up being one of my all time favorite threads. I will just make that prediction right now.

[B-Town]

Doesn't this just mean that there are going to be 5 guys that are subpar at 3 different positions (QB, WR, RB) on the field at the same time?

[mankatobjr]

Doesn't this just mean that there are going to be 5 guys that are subpar at 3 different positions (QB, WR, RB) on the field at the same time?

In the traditional sense of their position.. maybe. But that's where the motions and unknowns offset it. You don't run it like a normal offense. And you have 6 "skilled" players that can touch the ball on the field at once. 2 have to be on the line.

And you are using the best athletes.. the ones not being utilized because they don't fit into the "norm" of a particular position. They can throw.. but maybe not the pinpoint accuracy of Aaron Rodgers.. They can catch, but maybe not the route running of Diggs/Thielen. They have speed and can run with the ball, but maybe not like Gurely.

It wouldn't be run in a traditional sense of an offense is now. Would be different.

Would it work? At some levels I think. In the NFL? I don't know. At first it would.. but how long before defenses caught up?

[mankatobjr]

I've always thought take a 7 footer and use for goal line WR or short yardage situation. If you can have a guy who just kicks off why not a basketball 6'10" or above basketball player.

Clark, by far my favorite part of your routines like this one - when you embarrass the little morons like this and they dont know you are doing it.

This may end up being one of my all time favorite threads. I will just make that prediction right now.

Just because you can't think outside the box doesn't mean something doesn't work. Was Jerry Glanville and idiot when he ran the run and Shoot? Oh know, you can't play football all game with 4 WR and no full back or TE. Did it work? Yes.

Would it work? Who knows. Maybe not. Doesn't your life getting boring thinking the same thing over and over and over?

[boxter432]

Wild's new goalie

[hategreenticemase]

Wild's new goalie

[mankatobjr]

Wild's new goalie

Where did you get the pic of hategreenticemase?

[B-Town]

Doesn't this just mean that there are going to be 5 guys that are subpar at 3 different positions (QB, WR, RB) on the field at the same time?

In the traditional sense of their position.. maybe. But that's where the motions and unknowns offset it. You don't run it like a normal offense. And you have 6 "skilled" players that can touch the ball on the field at once. 2 have to be on the line.

And you are using the best athletes.. the ones not being utilized because they don't fit into the "norm" of a particular position. They can throw.. but maybe not the pinpoint accuracy of Aaron Rodgers.. They can catch, but maybe not the route running of Diggs/Thielen. They have speed and can run with the ball, but maybe not like Gurely.

It wouldn't be run in a traditional sense of an offense is now. Would be different.

Would it work? At some levels I think. In the NFL? I don't know. At first it would.. but how long before defenses caught up?

I mean, in the Madden sense, it works. But I think we're missing the bottom line, which is that, once all of the motion and gadgetry is done, there still is a QB taking the snap and doing something with the ball. There are still WRs running routes. If those guys aren't doing those things at an NFL level, then how does this offense succeed? Also, what happens if one of your QB/WR/RBs gets hurt? Install a completely different offense?

[mankatobjr]

Doesn't this just mean that there are going to be 5 guys that are subpar at 3 different positions (QB, WR, RB) on the field at the same time?

In the traditional sense of their position.. maybe. But that's where the motions and unknowns offset it. You don't run it like a normal offense. And you have 6 "skilled" players that can touch the ball on the field at once. 2 have to be on the line.

And you are using the best athletes.. the ones not being utilized because they don't fit into the "norm" of a particular position. They can throw.. but maybe not the pinpoint accuracy of Aaron Rodgers.. They can catch, but maybe not the route running of Diggs/Thielen. They have speed and can run with the ball, but maybe not like Gurely.

It wouldn't be run in a traditional sense of an offense is now. Would be different.

Would it work? At some levels I think. In the NFL? I don't know. At first it would.. but how long before defenses caught up?

I mean, in the Madden sense, it works. But I think we're missing the bottom line, which is that, once all of the motion and gadgetry is done, there still is a QB taking the snap and doing something with the ball. There are still WRs running routes. If those guys aren't doing those things at an NFL level, then how does this offense succeed? Also, what happens if one of your QB/WR/RBs gets hurt? Install a completely different offense?

They are NFL type players... The Likes of Tayson Hill.. and Braxton Miller, JT Barrett. Joe Webbs.. they aren't NFL Players? How many others who never got a chance? Your roster is filled with them.

Take Vikings active roster they have 2 qbs, 5 WR, 4 RBs, and 3 TE active a game thats 14 "skilled" position players. Say you keep one real QB type. One "real" RB and one TE. You have that available for needing to running out the clock/short yardage. So you still have 11 of these SLASH players on active roster. They could be switching out as needed.

Yes you still have someone taking the snap. But who? Changes. And running say a jet sweep into a pass. The two guys lined up in shot gun.. snapped to one the other is now either a WR or stays in to block. Could call confusion on D. Would be hard to run man to man against. So playing more zone.

You aren't stuck with the.. well he's my qb and i live and die with him (see Kirk cousins). you have 6 athletes on the field at once.. The QB position is already moving towards that with Watson, Mahomes, Trubisky, Jackson.. Now you are surrounding those types with others similar. You are playing 6 of those guys at once (obviously those guys are better "QBs" that what you'd have)

No one says all offense moving forward has to look the same.

[Dude]

I'm not saying it wouldn't work for a minute, but you can't build your entire offense around it and expect sustained success.

It smells like what the Dolphins were able to do when Sporano was the head coach there and they reintroduced the Wildcat formation. It flummoxed teams for a while but teams were able to figure it out.

[mankatobjr]

I'm not saying it wouldn't work for a minute, but you can't build your entire offense around it and expect sustained success.

It smells like what the Dolphins were able to do when Sporano was the head coach there and they reintroduced the Wildcat formation. It flummoxed teams for a while but teams were able to figure it out.

The Oilers of the late 80's early 90's built an offense with no TEs and just one RB.. at a time when all teams used 2 TEs and 2 RBs all the time.. 3 WR sets were rare and only when behind and need to move the ball.

Its not like these players are terrible. and maybe you have one that takes 50% of the snaps.. but teams run like wildcat now and drew brees or Joe Flacco just stand there. Get rid of the traditional roles and be unique.

[mankatobjr]

I'm not saying it wouldn't work for a minute, but you can't build your entire offense around it and expect sustained success.

It smells like what the Dolphins were able to do when Sporano was the head coach there and they reintroduced the Wildcat formation. It flummoxed teams for a while but teams were able to figure it out.

The dolphins did it with two RBs.. this would be with guys who have played QB through college with some success.

[Obi-Wan]

No one has the balls to implement something like that. Something like that would have to start in high school but then you run into the issue of having athletes that can run, catch, and throw.

[mlhouse]

Because you would have on the field simultaneously the worst QBs in the league and the worst wide receivers in the league.

Joe Webb was drafted by the Vikings to be a wide receiver. He had even played wide receiver at UAB and caught 30 passes as a sophomore. Childress decided in camp that he would be a quarterback although they occasionally tried him at wide receiver and he has 10 receptions in his NFL career. I'm not sure when Childress made the decision, but the fact is even with his size and speed Joe was a terrible receiver because he simply did not know how to catch the ball because his "ball skills" were really bad. At the level of football UAB plays, his size/speed was good enough to be an adequate receiver. In the NFL, it wasn't because the other skills simply were not there.

I thought they Vikes could have used Joe in more creative ways. He only had 2 kickoff returns in his 4 years in MN and he should have been in a position to receive kickoffs when they tried to kick around Harvin and Patterson. THey could have run some wild cat, some bubble screens, and other simple routes to try to get him the ball on the perimeter and develop him as a player. I think he could have contributed.

[Ash Ketchum]

Would maybe work once or twice per season, but not worth rostering players that you might not anyways. It works for the Saints because Hill is so versatile and useful far beyond these gimmicks.

Two “QBs” on one play where you actually utilize both are insanely risky because the first exchange between the QB who takes the snap and the second QB who will ultimately make the big throw has to be a lateral, and a mistake will likely result in a fumble. Right or not, most NFL coaches are terrified of giving up the ball on a trick play.

I don’t disagree with you that adding some element like this to your offense on a semi-occasional basis would be a cool wrinkle, but you can’t make it a staple of the offense because of the risk involved, not to mention that the element of surprise is deminished the more you try things like that.

IF you were going to try something like this, you’d NEED to have the right players to do it. You can’t just roster a player whose only value to the team would be to a “QB” in these gimmicky plays if that same player couldn’t actually play traditional QB if needed. If we added a guy like Hill who is legitimately valuable beyond this, then sure. I would applaud that.

People underestimate the importance of depth on the roster. Hopefully, the 5th LB never has to play a lot of snaps, but how many players are actually even on the roster who never play if you include special teams? Sacrificing depth and special teams play in favor of someone who can only see the field once or twice every few weeks wouldn’t be worth it.

[mankatobjr]

Because you would have on the field simultaneously the worst QBs in the league and the worst wide receivers in the league.

Joe Webb was drafted by the Vikings to be a wide receiver. He had even played wide receiver at UAB and caught 30 passes as a sophomore. Childress decided in camp that he would be a quarterback although they occasionally tried him at wide receiver and he has 10 receptions in his NFL career. I'm not sure when Childress made the decision, but the fact is even with his size and speed Joe was a terrible receiver because he simply did not know how to catch the ball because his "ball skills" were really bad. At the level of football UAB plays, his size/speed was good enough to be an adequate receiver. In the NFL, it wasn't because the other skills simply were not there.

I thought they Vikes could have used Joe in more creative ways. He only had 2 kickoff returns in his 4 years in MN and he should have been in a position to receive kickoffs when they tried to kick around Harvin and Patterson. THey could have run some wild cat, some bubble screens, and other simple routes to try to get him the ball on the perimeter and develop him as a player. I think he could have contributed.

Yes Joe Webb is still in the league 10 years later. You guys keep thinking in the sense of a regular offense that you see now. It would be run differently. Thats the point. Its not run like it is now. "Joe Webb guy" isn't going out catching balls from a traditional QB and offense. "Joe Webb guy" is playing with 5 other "Joe Webb guys" and running different sets, formations, plays. Anyone one of them is capable of throwing an adequate ball. Are they throwing 40 yard strikes in tight windows? No. But the offense isn't run like that.

[mankatobjr]

Would maybe work once or twice per season, but not worth rostering players that you might not anyways. It works for the Saints because Hill is so versatile and useful far beyond these gimmicks.

Two “QBs” on one play where you actually utilize both are insanely risky because the first exchange between the QB who takes the snap and the second QB who will ultimately make the big throw has to be a lateral, and a mistake will likely result in a fumble. Right or not, most NFL coaches are terrified of giving up the ball on a trick play.

I don’t disagree with you that adding some element like this to your offense on a semi-occasional basis would be a cool wrinkle, but you can’t make it a staple of the offense because of the risk involved, not to mention that the element of surprise is deminished the more you try things like that.

IF you were going to try something like this, you’d NEED to have the right players to do it. You can’t just roster a player whose only value to the team would be to a “QB” in these gimmicky plays if that same player couldn’t actually play traditional QB if needed. If we added a guy like Hill who is legitimately valuable beyond this, then sure. I would applaud that.

People underestimate the importance of depth on the roster. Hopefully, the 5th LB never has to play a lot of snaps, but how many players are actually even on the roster who never play if you include special teams? Sacrificing depth and special teams play in favor of someone who can only see the field once or twice every few weeks wouldn’t be worth it.

These would be Tayson hill type players.. who can play special teams because they are athletes. You aren't always having the same QB take a snap and getting it 2 second player. lets say you have player A, B, C, D, E, F (thats 6 skilled players on snap). Any one of those players could line up to take the snap. The defense wouldn't know until play started. Would make harder for teams to substitute based on personal. Say "A" is a little better arm and "C" runs better routes. and "B" is a little better runner. Until the play starts not sure who lines up at QB. so defense can't match up. They play the guys they have out there. No your whole offense is different because you have 6 (add 2 more regular subs) so 8 different persons. The team has to be prepared for anyone one of them getting the ball, throwing etc. Each play would be different because of who is where. So Defense could not pick up on tendencies.

[mankatobjr]

No one has the balls to implement something like that. Something like that would have to start in high school but then you run into the issue of having athletes that can run, catch, and throw.

You could do it at the college level. Maybe not a top "power 5" school to start. And getting athletes is not hard. at the college level they don't all need to be great because the D isn't going to be great. How many QBs in college rot on the bench? Look at Ohio State a few years ago. They had 3 QBs on roster that would fit this bill. Jones, Miller, Barrett. And thats 3 we knew of. How many others did they have that didn't play? Plus you are recruiting differently.

[Ash Ketchum]

Would maybe work once or twice per season, but not worth rostering players that you might not anyways. It works for the Saints because Hill is so versatile and useful far beyond these gimmicks.

Two “QBs” on one play where you actually utilize both are insanely risky because the first exchange between the QB who takes the snap and the second QB who will ultimately make the big throw has to be a lateral, and a mistake will likely result in a fumble. Right or not, most NFL coaches are terrified of giving up the ball on a trick play.

I don’t disagree with you that adding some element like this to your offense on a semi-occasional basis would be a cool wrinkle, but you can’t make it a staple of the offense because of the risk involved, not to mention that the element of surprise is deminished the more you try things like that.

IF you were going to try something like this, you’d NEED to have the right players to do it. You can’t just roster a player whose only value to the team would be to a “QB” in these gimmicky plays if that same player couldn’t actually play traditional QB if needed. If we added a guy like Hill who is legitimately valuable beyond this, then sure. I would applaud that.

People underestimate the importance of depth on the roster. Hopefully, the 5th LB never has to play a lot of snaps, but how many players are actually even on the roster who never play if you include special teams? Sacrificing depth and special teams play in favor of someone who can only see the field once or twice every few weeks wouldn’t be worth it.

These would be Tayson hill type players.. who can play special teams because they are athletes. You aren't always having the same QB take a snap and getting it 2 second player. lets say you have player A, B, C, D, E, F (thats 6 skilled players on snap). Any one of those players could line up to take the snap. The defense wouldn't know until play started. Would make harder for teams to substitute based on personal. Say "A" is a little better arm and "C" runs better routes. and "B" is a little better runner. Until the play starts not sure who lines up at QB. so defense can't match up. They play the guys they have out there. No your whole offense is different because you have 6 (add 2 more regular subs) so 8 different persons. The team has to be prepared for anyone one of them getting the ball, throwing etc. Each play would be different because of who is where. So Defense could not pick up on tendencies.

In theory, sure, sounds awesome.

But you ABSOLUTELY could not install this type of offense unless you somehow already were fortunate enough to have these types of players on your roster.

How often would you run this trickery?

You will need to run some traditional passing plays a good amount of the time, and at that point you’re saying there are several players on the field who aren’t really WRs?

Who are these magical players who can play QB and WR or RB and can switch between positions on the fly at an NFL level?

[mankatobjr]

Would maybe work once or twice per season, but not worth rostering players that you might not anyways. It works for the Saints because Hill is so versatile and useful far beyond these gimmicks.

Two “QBs” on one play where you actually utilize both are insanely risky because the first exchange between the QB who takes the snap and the second QB who will ultimately make the big throw has to be a lateral, and a mistake will likely result in a fumble. Right or not, most NFL coaches are terrified of giving up the ball on a trick play.

I don’t disagree with you that adding some element like this to your offense on a semi-occasional basis would be a cool wrinkle, but you can’t make it a staple of the offense because of the risk involved, not to mention that the element of surprise is deminished the more you try things like that.

IF you were going to try something like this, you’d NEED to have the right players to do it. You can’t just roster a player whose only value to the team would be to a “QB” in these gimmicky plays if that same player couldn’t actually play traditional QB if needed. If we added a guy like Hill who is legitimately valuable beyond this, then sure. I would applaud that.

People underestimate the importance of depth on the roster. Hopefully, the 5th LB never has to play a lot of snaps, but how many players are actually even on the roster who never play if you include special teams? Sacrificing depth and special teams play in favor of someone who can only see the field once or twice every few weeks wouldn’t be worth it.

These would be Tayson hill type players.. who can play special teams because they are athletes. You aren't always having the same QB take a snap and getting it 2 second player. lets say you have player A, B, C, D, E, F (thats 6 skilled players on snap). Any one of those players could line up to take the snap. The defense wouldn't know until play started. Would make harder for teams to substitute based on personal. Say "A" is a little better arm and "C" runs better routes. and "B" is a little better runner. Until the play starts not sure who lines up at QB. so defense can't match up. They play the guys they have out there. No your whole offense is different because you have 6 (add 2 more regular subs) so 8 different persons. The team has to be prepared for anyone one of them getting the ball, throwing etc. Each play would be different because of who is where. So Defense could not pick up on tendencies.

In theory, sure, sounds awesome.

But you ABSOLUTELY could not install this type of offense unless you somehow already were fortunate enough to have these types of players on your roster.

How often would you run this trickery?

You will need to run some traditional passing plays a good amount of the time, and at that point you’re saying there are several players on the field who aren’t really WRs?

Who are these magical players who can play QB and WR or RB and can switch between positions on the fly at an NFL level?

Why do you have to run a traditional Offense?

Start with say Baltimore. They have Jackson. Now roster 10 other guys. You aren't running it like an offense is no.

I get would be hard to do because would take a season on the NFL level to get the players.. unless you targeted players with the idea knowing the first year wouldn't work.

The team would need a good defense. Which Baltimore has. Who do they have at WR and RB? No one to write home about. Add some Athletes and run with it. Now give it another offseason and get the players in place. Your GM and owner would need to be on board and give you the 2 years you needed. But its not like they are winning the Superbowl next year with their roster.

[boxter432]

Saints won with Brees passing to Thomas, the plays they ran with hill were a mess.

[mankatobjr]

Saints won with Brees passing to Thomas, the plays they ran with hill were a mess.

Yup and every team has a Hall of Fame QB and All-Pro WR. Also they scored 20 points. only 20.

The Vikings didn't win throwing it to Diggs and Thielen.

What would a team like Baltimore have to loose? They don't have a great QB. They Don't have Great WR.. they have an alright RB.

And the Hill plays were a mess? yup the 3 or 4 plays. But they didn't run the plays like I am saying they play.

Look I get it. The concept of doing something different may be way over most of your heads. The first team to start throwing the ball more vs running it with 3 rbs too was probably laughed at.

[mlhouse]

Because you would have on the field simultaneously the worst QBs in the league and the worst wide receivers in the league.

Joe Webb was drafted by the Vikings to be a wide receiver. He had even played wide receiver at UAB and caught 30 passes as a sophomore. Childress decided in camp that he would be a quarterback although they occasionally tried him at wide receiver and he has 10 receptions in his NFL career. I'm not sure when Childress made the decision, but the fact is even with his size and speed Joe was a terrible receiver because he simply did not know how to catch the ball because his "ball skills" were really bad. At the level of football UAB plays, his size/speed was good enough to be an adequate receiver. In the NFL, it wasn't because the other skills simply were not there.

I thought they Vikes could have used Joe in more creative ways. He only had 2 kickoff returns in his 4 years in MN and he should have been in a position to receive kickoffs when they tried to kick around Harvin and Patterson. THey could have run some wild cat, some bubble screens, and other simple routes to try to get him the ball on the perimeter and develop him as a player. I think he could have contributed.

Yes Joe Webb is still in the league 10 years later. You guys keep thinking in the sense of a regular offense that you see now. It would be run differently. Thats the point. Its not run like it is now. "Joe Webb guy" isn't going out catching balls from a traditional QB and offense. "Joe Webb guy" is playing with 5 other "Joe Webb guys" and running different sets, formations, plays. Anyone one of them is capable of throwing an adequate ball. Are they throwing 40 yard strikes in tight windows? No. But the offense isn't run like that.

Again, you would have the worst group of quarterbacks and receivers on the field in the NFL. There ain't no "non-traditional" offense that can overcome that.

[bubu dubu.]

Brison alert.

[mankatobjr]

Brison alert.

I ain't no brison. Just bored. And like to get these idiots. with the.. "But thats not how we did it before, you can't do something new, no way it would work because I watch football and you need a QB because thats how its always been". Well guess what. there are like 6 QBs that can win the Superbowl. Legitimately be the reason you will win. And if you don't got one of them (and the Vikings don't.. they can win one in spite of him but not because of him) then why not do something drastically different.

[Angry Waters]

Watching Taysom Hill of the Saints yesterday had me wondering about an offense idea. All these Atheltic QBs coming out of college, Think Joe Webb, Tim Tebow, Hill, Braxton Miller, JT Barrett Type, even Marquise Grey type QBs.

Why hasn't a team used 3, 4,5, or even 6 of them on the field at once. Ones that can catch the ball, run with it, Throw. On any play any one of them could "take the snap" Defense would not know who is the WR, or who's the RB, or QB. You could have one who takes more snaps then others.. but I don't know if that is necessary. Get a Smart Center who is green dotted and calls the plays in the huddle.

Imagine having two next two each other in shot gun. Which one is getting the snap? You could motion guys in and out of the QB position.

Maybe it wouldn't work right away on the NFL level.. but if I was coaching a D2 or D3 college team, or a bad D1 school what would you have to lose? Say you are the Gophers... maybe a crazy offense like that would bring your program up.

But Maybe it could work on the NFL Level.

The guy on Fox said yesterday after a Hill ran a "wildcat" play. He ended up not throwing it and ran for the first down. He stated had a RB ran the play they may have thrown it anyways because they aren't experienced at QB enough. So why not take all these college QBs that aren't great "typical" QBs and use them in a unique way. You wouldn't need to spend 30 million on a QB.. You maybe wouldn't even need to spend 15 million on a WR or pro-bowl RB. You' could use cap space to have a great D and Oline. and then have 10 QB/WR/RB (Slash players for those who remember Kordell Stewart).

Either this is a brilliant idea... or people are going to think I am insane (PS- no I am not under the influence at all)

You are clearly capable of thinking outside the box. WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY outside the box LOL!

[mankatobjr]

Watching Taysom Hill of the Saints yesterday had me wondering about an offense idea. All these Atheltic QBs coming out of college, Think Joe Webb, Tim Tebow, Hill, Braxton Miller, JT Barrett Type, even Marquise Grey type QBs.

Why hasn't a team used 3, 4,5, or even 6 of them on the field at once. Ones that can catch the ball, run with it, Throw. On any play any one of them could "take the snap" Defense would not know who is the WR, or who's the RB, or QB. You could have one who takes more snaps then others.. but I don't know if that is necessary. Get a Smart Center who is green dotted and calls the plays in the huddle.

Imagine having two next two each other in shot gun. Which one is getting the snap? You could motion guys in and out of the QB position.

Maybe it wouldn't work right away on the NFL level.. but if I was coaching a D2 or D3 college team, or a bad D1 school what would you have to lose? Say you are the Gophers... maybe a crazy offense like that would bring your program up.

But Maybe it could work on the NFL Level.

The guy on Fox said yesterday after a Hill ran a "wildcat" play. He ended up not throwing it and ran for the first down. He stated had a RB ran the play they may have thrown it anyways because they aren't experienced at QB enough. So why not take all these college QBs that aren't great "typical" QBs and use them in a unique way. You wouldn't need to spend 30 million on a QB.. You maybe wouldn't even need to spend 15 million on a WR or pro-bowl RB. You' could use cap space to have a great D and Oline. and then have 10 QB/WR/RB (Slash players for those who remember Kordell Stewart).

Either this is a brilliant idea... or people are going to think I am insane (PS- no I am not under the influence at all)

You are clearly capable of thinking outside the box. WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY outside the box LOL!

Isn't it more interesting than talking about the same shit these people do on here? Have the same arguments?