Will Trey Lance get significant snaps in 2023? Count me with those who think so

[blueblood70]

I don’t see Lance getting significant snaps this season unless Dak were to get injured and Cooper Rush doesn’t play well. If we just throw Lance in there to see what he can do it could completely destroy his confidence. He has to learn our system. Backup QBs don’t get much work during the regular season, so we’re going to have to be patient with him. Maybe the Cowboys could come up with a package to give him an opportunity to use his legs, possibly in the redzone. That would be one way to get him on the field this season.

Right it would be making the same mistake the 49ers did putting all that pressure on this kid who feels he owes the 49ers something for those three first round picks that traded up for him and then them trying to force him into the starting role it didn't work... The best case scenario is Prescott doesn't get hurt. The Cowboys are not the same team with any of those other quarterbacks on this team or really with any of the other 22 quarterbacks that are not better than him we are screwed if Prescott goes down for the entire year.. We know what that looks like anytime Tony Romo or Prescott's been out we've had a losing season like a bad one like 2020 that's what it looks like..

However if Prescott does get hurt and rush looks bad let's hope that it's past November and Lance has had a chance to pick up the offense and practice enough because I don't wanna see him until next training camp and let him battle and knock off whoever is the number two at the time which would be Cooper rush.. Now they wanna get him some confidence they can do that as a scout team quarterback and in practice..

 

[_sturt_]

Seems what's missing in so many posts in this thread is better consensus on what constitutes "significant snaps."

The OP holds that the "significant" standard is met by Trey Lance having an occasional short-yardage role... as a runner first.

But others appear to accept the premise that you only have "significant" snaps if the player is inserted to play QB... like, really play QB with the whole playbook possibly incorporated.

So let me be clear, I too do not imagine Lance will ever experience the latter... again, just a matter of how we define "significant."

 

[OmerV]

Agreed.

But argue with yourself a little more... (a) why are you subjecting QB1 to that over the course of 17 games... and especially when (b) you have another option that is not only as good, but who is an even better runner overall...?

This isn't that novel in the 2023 version of the NFL. We've just not been in a position to employ it. Now we theoretically will be. May take a few weeks, though, for McCarthy to get comfortable with Lance. Possibly months. But the opportunity is there.

With most short yardage situations the play call is to hand the ball off to a RB or throw a short quick pass, and even when there is a QB sneak the QB doesn't typically take a shot from the defense., the play just goes a short distance then stalls. I just don't see a significant amount of additional wear and tear from it.

I could see using Lance occasionally for a different wrinkle, but not enough where he would be getting a lot of snaps, or a lot of experience in the normal offense

 

[_sturt_]

when there is a QB sneak the QB doesn't typically take a shot from the defense

Um. We just disagree, and by quite a bit, on that premise. Sure, if your O-line is completely successful and they just push the opposition backward, that's wonderful. Doesn't always or even normally work out that way. Just as often, if not more, there's a linebacker coming over the top, d-linemen shooting gaps that can impact legs, and not to mention once the pile is a pile, the potential for some mischief of the cheap shot variety.

just don't see a significant amount of additional wear and tear from it

"Significant?"

I'll buy that, as long as you buy that you do see unnecessary amount of wear and tear from it.

Plus, you give yourself advantage for the occasional situation where the O-line actually opens up a lane, and your QB can actually get significantly more yardage. Lance may or may not prove to be in Lamar Jackson's league in that way, but he's certainly closer to that league than is QB1.

 

[OmerV]

"Significant?"

I'll buy that, as long as you buy that you do see unnecessary amount of wear and tear from it.

Plus, you give yourself advantage for the occasional situation where the O-line actually opens up a lane, and your QB can actually get significantly more yardage. Lance may or may not prove to be in Lamar Jackson's league in that way, but he's certainly closer to that league than is QB1.

When I say it's not significant, I am saying it's insignificant. Handing the ball off, throwing a short pass or even a rare QB sneak can't be treated as a harship for a starting QB.

Again, sure it might be worthwhile to throw him in occasionally as a different wrinkle, but far and away most of the time they need to function within the normal offense & personnel so the defense has to be ready for everything.

Ultimately, the team is unlikely to have 3 active QB's on game day anyway, and at least early on Rush will be the 2nd QB. Maybe even all year

 

[Reid1boys]

Speculation on my part, but seems to me we should look for Lance to get some short yardage duty with regularity.

And too, I think this probably makes certain that McKeon makes the team, and will line-up with some regularity as a backfield blocker.

hes gonna get zero snaps. We arent dressing 3 qbs... and he will be 3 all year.

 

[Jimbo123]

hes gonna get zero snaps. We arent dressing 3 qbs... and he will be 3 all year.

I would agree that that would be the case on most NFL teams but we all know that Lance is now Jerry's new toy. Jerry is going to insist that Lance get a chance to showcase how smart he is. It probably won't happen until mid-season or so but Lance will get snaps he doesn't deserve.

 

[_sturt_]

Ultimately, the team is unlikely to have 3 active QB's on game day anyway, and at least early on Rush will be the 2nd QB. Maybe even all year

We agree once again.

That's not the proposition.

The proposition is that by making Lance the #2 for game day, McCarthy gives himself an option for a highly-likely situation that he does not have if Rush is the #2.

Would expect that McCarthy needs to get comfortable with Lance before even thinking about making him the #2, of course, but if/when that happens several weeks into the season, makes sense to me that he would do that.

Rush, then, is the starter if Dak is out for more than just the last part of a game.

Lance, then, becomes a permanent game day #2 whether Dak starts or (*knocks on wood*) of course if Rush starts.

Also, added bonus... if we're rolling over the opponent, by having made Lance the #2, you're going to get him some legitimate but low-leverage snaps as QB in the 4th quarter.

When something make sense, it just makes sense.

 

[_sturt_]

We arent dressing 3 qbs

I think what you mean to say is that we're not making the 3rd QB part of the game day 48.

The #3 will always dress now that the new rule is there, and there's reason to do that.

But to your actual point, please read above, addressing the premise that you cite but that you and I (and the other poster) do not actually disagree on.

 

[G2]

Not this season and probably not next year either.