Sorry for this long post, but it seems that Broyld is at the center of two separate but interrelated issues being discussed in this thread, along with several others. The first is how to utilize a system to best take advantage of the available talent. The second is the role that Broyld should have for this team.
Actually, it's both. Though the zone read is just a single play (actually, a play concept since a seemingly unlimited number of plays can be designed using it), it can serve as the foundation for an entire system. Chip Kelly's offense is obviously a good example of this:
http://fishduck.com/2012/04/coach-chip-kelly-explains-the-oregon-spread-offense/
http://fishduck.com/the-chip-kelly-...nse/first-fish-tutorial-the-inside-zone-read/
Likewise, much of SU's offense last year revolved around a small set of "package plays." The foundation (in other words, the first option) of those plays, interestingly, was usually a zone read:
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-t...-plays-and-the-newest-form-of-option-football
An important point is that zone-read philosophies are built on simplicity. When discussing the inside zone, the "money play" in his zone-read system, Chip Kelly says, "If the offensive line can count to six, you have a shot to run this play." I would add that the QB must be able to read his key (the 6th man in the box according to Kelly) and make the correct decision. In essence, this "system" reduces what players have to learn to be successful.
According to Chris Brown's article, the same is true with the package plays SU ran last season. Marrone and Hackett reduced the number of complicated, NFL-styled passing routes and verbiage by "combining multiple concepts into a single play
and then letting Nassib figure out on the fly whether to, say, throw a quick pass, throw a screen, hand off, or keep the ball himself — all on the same play." This allowed SU's players to have (far) fewer plays and play calls to learn, which resulted in a record-setting, no-huddle, up-tempo system--the KISS method in action.
Brown goes on to say, "Good offense has always been about deceptive simplicity." Ultimately, systems are only as good as the players in them. Kelly and Brown both acknowledge this. That said, if the objective on offense is to score points in the most effective way, what's more simple than keeping the ball in the best playmakers' hands as often as possible? The consensus on this board seems to be that Jerome, PTG, Morris, and Broyld are those offensive playmakers on this year's squad. The logic follows that offense should simply be designed to get them the ball as often as possible.
Yet, our fan base seems to be concerned (and rightfully so) that the play calling did not get Jerome or Broyld enough touches the other day. It was only one game, and the first for many of our key personnel (coaches and players) in their new roles, but it didn't appear that the new offense was "simple"--in communication or design--on Saturday. That might be why we seemed "out of sync" much of the game. It remains to be seen if the offense is simple enough to correct over the next few weeks. Let's hope so.
In terms of Broyld's role, he may not be effective as a QB in the system we are running right now, which looked to be "pro-styled" (QB in the pocket, receivers running "option routes" based on reading coverages, etc.) on Saturday. Assuming what we saw Saturday will be the offense moving forward, Broyld's probably in the correct role. As such, the coaches need to find ways to get him the ball more consistently in space.
However, that doesn't mean Broyld couldn't be a QB in any system. By extension, it doesn't mean that the team is necessarily running the best offense for its players, though one game is too small a sample size to make any definite conclusions.
A QB must be able to read the defense, regardless of the system. However, zone-read philosophies simplify this process--the QB only reads one or two players instead of trying to identify entire coverages. While some of this is done pre-snap in terms of counting the players in the box, most reads really occur once the play starts, reducing how effective pre-snap disguised coverages and blitzes are.
That said, when evaluating a QB for a zone-read system, the first question to ask seems to be whether or not he could properly read his keys--the number of players in the box pre-snap and his backside read (usually the backside DE) once the play starts--to get the ball into the proper situations. Despite not being the speediest runner, Nassib often gained positive yardage with his legs last year based almost entirely on his accurate reads. Broyld definitely has the athletic gifts to thrive in the inside zone and outside zone plays of Kelly's system if he could make such reads. Hence, if the answer to the first question is "yes," one could argue that a zone-read system might be a better way to utilize Broyld's skills than the current system.
Moreover, in that case, our talented running backs and our offensive line would definitely benefit from defenses having to honestly play Broyld (or Allen or Hunt) as a threat to run. Remember that the QB is essentially an extra blocker in these zone-read systems. If the unblocked sixth defender in the box stays at home to defend the QB keeper, the offense gains an extra blocker on the play side. On the other hand, the lack of an effective QB running threat eliminates this numbers advantage, allowing the defense to play 11-on-10.
However, for a zone-read offense to be fully successful, the QB still needs to be able to make the reads and throws necessary for the counters--bubble screens, play-action passes, etc. Based on the idea that a defender can't take away two things at once, Nassib was able to hurt defenses last year by making good reads and (mostly) good throws. Can Broyld make these reads? Can he make these throws? Possibly, if his high-school highlight reel films are any indication.
Truthfully, those of us who have never watched him practice, especially at this level, can't really answer these questions either way. Hopefully, the coaches can.
