The Injury to the QB

[Reginald Rutledge]

In the DFW League, championships have been won and lost based on an injury to the starting quarterback. In the early years of Michael Robertson's development, one of the DFW finest champions and HOF inductees, we played a playoff game between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Denver Broncos. Michael's starting quarterback, John Elway, went down in the first quarter. With him going down to an injury, meaning all quarterbacks considered Elway whether it was the mobile, stationary, or TTQB, a devastating blow had been handed to the Broncos championship dreams.

As the game progress, I saw that Mike had no confidence in his second-string QB, which was Bubby Brister. He would put in the TTQB Brister on passing situations and either throw and incompletion or interception. I would began to stack 9 in the box to stop the run. Mike had no solution for this on that day. History tells us he recovered in years after to remain one of the dominate coaches in DFW history.

Today we are faced with various rule changes in the DFW. A twist to a rule up for debate involves the scramble rule. This is a landmark-type rule because it may alter the way the game is played. But the twist for me comes in the form of the severity of injury to the QB. Now, thanks to new member Mark Villanueva's foresight on increased severity to QBs on scrambles, this is a very interesting topic. We have debate on each side and it really involves trying to re-define whether you want the QB taking off and running.

The % are being worked out but the gist of the "twist" is that if a QB takes off and run, he should have a higher percentage chance of getting hurt. If he has that higher percentage of risk, the QB will think twice about letting him run the ball. Additionally, there is an argument about the % increasing against the defense if the QB runs out of bounds to escape injuries via personal fouls or something to that nature. That was introduced by Michael Robertson.

These are valid arguments and help improve the game. Do you think injuries should increase or penalties toward defenders should increase?

Reg

[ChetDakota]

So, you mean that if I have a TDQ (which I do), I have a have a separate TDQ for each QB on my roster in the CBSMF? And if my starting QB gets hurt, then I "lose" one of my TDQs, perhaps for the season? If so, I am not into that. I already have to build a new 4.0 team for the CBSMF and now I have to have a stock of $20 TDQ QBs in order to compete?

[Treks1]

Originally Posted by ChetDakota

So, you mean that if I have a TDQ (which I do), I have a have a separate TDQ for each QB on my roster in the CBSMF? And if my starting QB gets hurt, then I "lose" one of my TDQs, perhaps for the season? If so, I am not into that. I already have to build a new 4.0 team for the CBSMF and now I have to have a stock of $20 TDQ QBs in order to compete?

Yep, what he said.

[Reginald Rutledge]

ChetDakota,

I never said anything about the CBSMF. I was referencing the DFW League.

Reg

[artlax]

I did not realize that you had to designate a specific TTQB or TDQ to complement each QB you have on the roster. I assume that means they need to be numbered up as well? I guess I didn't see that in the rules and it was not mentioned at the BAM scrimmage last week.

RE: - The Scramble. I agree that the % for injury to QB should increase and the % of personal foul/late hit penalty for defense should also increase.

[RPD]

QB's get hurt very often after QB sacks, therefore we should also alter the injury factor(increase probability of injury on a sack), so lets also increase the injury probability after all sacks. I don't like this rule proposal, I think the shootout system is fine the way it is, why are we trying to complicate things more than they already are. The rule set we have in place now is good, therefore if anything we should come up with a system that increases QB injury after QB sacks. QB's get hurt more often IMO due to sacks than due to scrambling out of the pocket, I.E. blindside hits, etc etc. Come on guys it sounds to me like you want to penalize the teams that incorporate the scrambling QB into their offensive scheme. Lets increase QB injuries on sacks instead that would sound more reallistic to me. Enough with all these proposed rule changes at this time of the year, we have 3 now, and lets get ready to rumble.

[Geno H]

I often here the that many do not like the passing sticks because it is a prop or crutch...I view the "action box" to be the exact same type of apparatus. I would hate to be beating my opponent in every facet of the game and then the dumb luck of shaking the box end a great drive or as the example given above you lose your TDQ for the game or season. Although this may be a part of real football we are playing Electric football. I dont find the strong desire as some do to totaly emulate real football. I for one find the outright luck of the action box my least favorite part of the shootout rules. Anyone that has played me under those rules knows I never have anyone shake the box. It is hard enough to have all things come together to accomplish a score to have "luck" take it away.

Geno H

[mantaraydre]

ATT CHETDAKOTA



IN REGARDINGS TO QB'S GOING DOWN. jUST USE YOU TDQ AS A STARTING PRIMNARY QB. If he gets hurt, just have a few miggle white or yellow ttqb's as your backup. This works because during the course of a game i dont think the wear and tear on the miggle ttqb will start to show after 2 to three games. WHEN PRACTICING WITH THE TTQB, IT BREAKS DOWN FAST BECAUSE YOU ARE PASSING ALL OF THE TIME. During a game the ttqb gets a break when the defense is out there and when you are running the ball. You may just throw 15 to 20 passes per game.


IT SHOULD WORK OUT. "JUST BE AS DEADLY WITH THE TTQB AS YOU ARE WITH THE TDQ

PS/I HAVE 3 TDQ'S SO I HAVE A LITTLE CUSHION



MANTARAYDRE