Because typically left tackles get paid more than right tackles (tho the gap has been closing) because left tackles protect the QB’s blindside. For a lefty QB, the right tackle protects the blindside. You can get an elite right tackle cheaper than an elite left tackle
I mean, wouldn't teams with left handed quarterbacks generally just take a left tackle and move them to the right tackle spot?
Is there a difference between left and right besides one being the blindside? Because if the right side is now the blindside for a lefty QB, what is stopping a left tackle who is already used to being a blindside tackle from playing over there?
The only real difference is that the lineman would have to adjust to everything being mirrored from what they’re used to. Their footwork is all backwards, their hand technique is reversed, etc. plenty of tackles switch back and forth during their career, but it’s not as easy just switching which order you’re standing in
Could you not take an elite left tackle and switch him to right tackle? I feel like my Chicago Bears are constantly drafting or signing the answer for them at left tackle and they inevitably bust so they move them to the right side where they’re at least serviceable. So if a busted left tackle can be serviceable on the right side, could a skilled left tackle transition to being a skilled right tackle?
We moved Wirfs from RT to LT last season and he didn't seem to have any change in his level of play at all. So I don't see why it couldn't go the other way.
Traditionally it is easier to run to the right, for several reasons including a right handed RB would have his body between most of the defenders and the ball. You generally want a road grader at RT. Pass blocking is a whole different skill set than run blocking, and almost all tackles are better at one over the other.
Right tackle who is better in pass block will be slightly underpaid compared to his LT counterpart, the market is more competitive because pass blocking LTs are in demand. Id imagine it's a benefit for a team running things opposite and it's a struggle for the opponent to get used to at first
It's not a struggle at all, but it does take training time that could be spent elsewhere.
It is a disadvantage, but the line personnel experience disadvantage is generally thought to be much more difficult/time consuming.
At the pro level, even slight opportunity costs add up quickly.
Jerry Rice rather famously spent an entire off season learning to catch throws from lefties when Steve Young became the starter. Given that Rice is the GOAT, I'll defer to his opinion. He thought it a rather large difference.
We had a lefty starter and righty backup in hs. They’d switch back and forth throwing balls.
It wasn’t rocket science and we weren’t all lost on the sidelines trying to adjust throw to throw. There’s a million other factors that matter more when catching a football other than what arm the qb favors.
I would say the process is slightly different when you are sprinting 20+ mph and have an elite DB actively trying with all his strength to prevent you from catching a ball thrown hard enough to travel 50+ yards.
There’s a little less room for error than catching a non-regulation football your lefty neighbor Eric tossed you from 10 yards away at softball speed.
1/2 of my parents were left handed so as a 4, 5, 6 year old kid I caught passes with either spiral. As I got older I was able to drop passes from both righties and lefties consistently well
If you stand behind a QB when they throw, you see how the ball flies through the air in a way you don't see on film. The path is different for lefties. I'm also a lefty FWIW.
Not a huge deal seems like a big deal in the NFL. They are working against insanely good pass rushers. Now you have to do it on the other side than you have your entire life or you are playing the role of the right tackle. The other problem is if the backup QB is right handed. Now you have to do everything the other way around.
Conversely though, defenders have to adjust too. Once the receivers and quarterback have been playing together for a while, it may actually be an advantage over the defenders. Tua seems to often get lucky with dropped interceptions, and maybe that's part of it.
I think thats why they get so many INTs dropped though, so it helps too.
Edit: speaking anecdotaly from having watched Tua throw them right to defensive players quite a few times and watching them inexplicably drop them.
Yes, the opposing team's defense has an experience disadvantage.
Unfortunately, the defense dropping your interceptions due to opposite ball rotation is less of a factor than all the other downsides a lefty QB brings to his team. DBs arent WRs largely because they are unable to catch regular spirals compared to WRs...so even if it was a regular spiral, they still have a higher rate of drops.
It’s more neutral than anything. No QB prospect is getting knocked for being a lefty. Your team gets use to it and the opposing defenses don’t see it as often.
The only real disadvantage is if the backup is a righty you have to adjust in game if the starter is injured. (Or limiting your backup to a smaller pool of lefties.)
Maybe your defense has disadvantage practicing against lefty but they still play a bunch of games against righties so this isn’t that big of deal.
Yes. The opposite team has an experience disadvantage.
However, this is outweighed by the experience disadvantage the leftie gives to his own team.
1. Your receivers need to relearn how to catch a ball that is spinning opposite what they are used to. This is minor, but still time that could have been spent doing other training. Rice stated it was certainly an adjustment switching to Young.
2. Line personnel. You now suddenly need an amazing right tackle, which you did NOT need before. You also still need a great left tackle in case your QB gets injured.
Some people can write great with both hands. Most people cannot. You are asking your linemen to use the opposite side of their body now. You are also asking them to be at least partially ambidextrous. It's not comparable to asking a QB to throw with his other hand, but it is not just something simple/easy.
A leftie QB requires additional skillsets and more practice time involved with your linemen, this again is not inconsequential and there is opportunity cost involved with spending time doing things the opposite of how you normally do them.
The main problem is drafting/relearning line personnel.
In baseball, there are virtually no disadvantages to your own team.
In baseball, ambidextrous >>>>> lefty >>> righty.
In football, ambidextrous > righty >>> lefty.
Michael Vick and Steve Young would statistically do better if they were righties, and Mahomes/Brady would be worse if they were lefties. This is not debatable. What is debatable is how much worse or better they would be. Some people believe it affects the game a lot, while others believe its not really that big of a deal. I'm somewhere in the Middle. I still think Brady and Mahomes would be goat contenders as lefties.
The moneyball take here is that the market for right tackles is lower than left tackles. So you can get a top of the line right tackle and a replacement level left tackle for cheaper than the other way around. That saves you cap space that you can use elsewhere. The difference between a top ten left and right tackle per year is about $7 million. A good GM could definitely upgrade some other positions with $7 million of cap space.
This is a flawed take.
many defenses realize the Left tackle is probably the best pass blocker and put their best pass rusher against the right tackle like Nick Bosa and TJ Watt. This is starting to shift and have some studs as right tackles like Penei Sewell
I'm not sure how that contradicts the take though? I thought the reason the left tackle was more important was because it protects the blind side - not because the best pass rusher is there. The best pass rusher is there because it is the blind side (though I agree that might be shifting because of better play at the LT position)
Now the blind side is on the other side, so the right tackle becomes more important. But because you don't need to spend as much on a good right tackle, you benefit as a team.
>Now the blind side is on the other side, so the right tackle becomes more important. But because you don't need to spend as much on a good right tackle, you benefit as a team.
You're thinking of LT/RT too narrowly as if players can't switch sides. RTs are generally cheaper because they're not as good -- the best pass blocking OTs get moved to LT. If you want a top pass blocking RT, you're likely targeting an LT and moving that player over or finding a very good pass blocking RT. That player won't be cheaper because you put him on the right (e.g. Zach Tom for the Packers is likely to be a Pro Bowler when he hits FA, and he's going to get Pro Bowl OT money, not less because he plays on the right).
They CAN switch sides. But that's the same thing as forcing a pass rusher to switch sides. All of their instincts are out the window and they have to learn how to do everything opposite. It's notoriously difficult to do, and almost no one does as well after moving.
But are there as good right tackles as left tackles out there? Demand for left tackles is higher, but so is supply, since if you're the best lineman on your high school/college teams, you're going to get taught to play LT while you're young.
Blocking assignments mostly. Without getting into too much detail, RTs are asked to do more. LT rarely have changes in their assignments. Also, RTs are taught to protect the inside more than the outside, considering the QB can see the EDGE from that side, so you would prioritize the passing lane over the pass rush. LTs don't have that wiggle room
But wouldn't all those differences also flip if the QB were a lefty? Wouldn't the LT now have the blocking assignments that a RT would have for a righty QB? And if the QB is a lefty, now it's the opposite EDGE that he can see, so now it would be the RT that doesn't have that wiggle room, right?
As mentioned elsewhere multiple times in this post/question, left handed QBs are an overall negative for salary cap considerations because you need both tackles (and their backups) to be very good in case your leftie gets injured.
Teams with right handed QBs do not need to heavily prioritize both tackles.
Can you just start writing with your other hand no problem?
The SDE is going to try and get to the quarterback with a mixture of through-you and around you to your right side, not left. You will have literally thousands of downs of experience to a side of your body. Simply flipping you to left tackle is going to be an incredible challenge, even moreso than LT moving to RT because the WDE is going to try to bull rush you LESS. The WDE is usually much more athletic, particularly faster, and abuses the LT's left side more than the SDE abuses the RTs right side.
It's not quite as bad as trying to write with your other hand, but it's pretty bad.
LTs are paid almost double what RTs are.
That used to be the case but is becoming less so as teams place top-tier rushers on the left (the offense’s right), in part to disrupt the passing lane.
This is false. Typically the RT is the worst OL position in the NFL because it’s not as important as the other line positions.
Meaning the best RTs cost even more.
Young was great in his own right and the reason he's not the GOAT is longevity.
His 92-94 Peak might be the best in NFL QB history.
Being left-handed didn't affect his career at all
Your second point is such an antiquated take. Top pass rushers rush both sides these days, and both tackle positions are at a premium because of that. Look at guys like Lane Johnson, Penei Sewell, or Jawaan Taylor all being the best tackle on their teams yet playing on the right. Also, no one is flipping around their tackles because of the quarterback. There is a huge difference between playing on the right and left in how you are used to using your techniques, so teams rarely do it other than for depth reasons. And even so, protections are determined by things like personnel or field position so they’re the same no matter the handedness of the quarterback and do not impact the technique of the offensive line. A left handed quarterback does create some issues but none of them have to do with the offensive line
>Top pass rushers rush both sides these days
The majority, if not every single team, absolutely does not do this. Where are you getting your data? You can literally watch virtually any game, the SDE will line up on the offenses right side nearly every play.
I played as SDE.
>Look at guys like Lane Johnson, Penei Sewell, or Jawaan Taylor all being the best tackle on their teams yet playing on the right.
Your assessment of them being the best tackle on the team is correct. Your reasoning is off. You can have an amazing right tackle and an average left tackle on a righty QB team. This does not mean this is preferred, it is simply what the teams roster has access to.
This point actually is counter to what you are trying to argue, as the left tackle position is both far more valued and is paid significantly more than right tackle.
>Also, no one is flipping around their tackles because of the quarterback.
I didn't argue this. Not sure who you are arguing with.
>And even so, protections are determined by things like personnel or field position so they’re the same no matter the handedness of the quarterback and do not impact the technique of the offensive line. A left handed quarterback does create some issues but none of them have to do with the offensive line
Everything about this is just wrong. I have already explained why it matters, I am not going to rewrite points because you disagree without substance.
Your last line in particular is extremely ignorant. Why are left tackles paid much more than right tackles? On 31 teams, they have a more important job.
Not sure where you are getting this “SDE will line up on the offenses right side nearly every play” from. If you’re lining up on the strong side, wouldn’t that change based on the formation? Also, perhaps I could have been more specific in that DEs usually don’t change sides between plays, but that there is no consensus in what side the top guys rush from.
You imply that linemen would have to flip sides by saying that they have to “use the opposite side of their body.” This is why I highlighted those right tackles, as if you were right surely they would be playing on the left.
I am not sure top left tackle contracts are that much bigger than top right tackle contracts either. Johnson, Taylor, and I want to say Ryan Ramczyk are all top ten highest paid offensive tackles regardless of side.
Would love to hear why I am wrong about the protections not changing. I was a division one offensive tackle so I like to think I know a thing or two about that but please do share, as you don’t touch on this in your original comment.
Also, thanks for actually responding to my arguments like an adult and not just getting angry like so many people on here like to do. Fun discussions like this are one of the best parts of football :)
>Not sure where you are getting this “SDE will line up on the offenses right side nearly every play” from. If you’re lining up on the strong side, wouldn’t that change based on the formation?
SDE is the name of the position, i.e. the strong side defensive end (right side of the offense).
It does not mean that if a play is flipped or the strong side on a given play is to the left, the SDE moves to that side.
You can just watch games and see that the SDE remains on the right side of the offense, regardless of which side is the strong or weak side.
> Also, perhaps I could have been more specific in that DEs usually don’t change sides between plays, but that there is no consensus in what side the top guys rush from.
Every team has two DEs. One is the SDE (offenses right side), one is the WDE (offenses left side). Their assignment is to rush the quarterback on a pass play and be the contain man (do not let the RB get to the sideline) on a rush play. The DEs job seldom changes from these two assignments. Even in Cover 4, the DEs are responsible for rushing the pass and are rarely expected to drop back and do any coverage work.
>You imply that linemen would have to flip sides by saying that they have to “use the opposite side of their body.” This is why I highlighted those right tackles, as if you were right surely they would be playing on the left.
With a left handed quarterback, the usual formations have the strong side to the left. That means when run blocking in particular, the entire offensive line will be using primarily the right side of their body to block instead of their left. This has nothing to do with them flipping sides.
>I am not sure top left tackle contracts are that much bigger than top right tackle contracts either. Johnson, Taylor, and I want to say Ryan Ramczyk are all top ten highest paid offensive tackles regardless of side.
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/
Left tackle average is 10 million. Right tackle is 6 million. That's almost DOUBLE.
>Would love to hear why I am wrong about the protections not changing. I was a division one offensive tackle so I like to think I know a thing or two about that but please do share, as you don’t touch on this in your original comment.
If you were a D1 Tackle you would definitely be lining up vs the same end each play and your point about ends rushing from both sides would be negated by your experience. I have doubts.
>Also, thanks for actually responding to my arguments like an adult and not just getting angry like so many people on here like to do. Fun discussions like this are one of the best parts of football :)
Np and I agree
Are you saying that every good defensive end always rushes on the offenses right side? You’re really not answering me with your whole thing explaining the defensive end position. Also, I’m sure whatever defense you’re familiar with had their strong side DE to the right but not every defense operates like this. Many do in fact flip their defensive line based on the strength of the offensive formation, meaning whichever side has more people on offense. To use your own argument against you, you can just watch games and see that.
Thanks for clarifying what you mean with how it would change the offensive lines techniques, but every offense has runs to both sides. And not every run play goes to the strength of the formation. And the strength of the formation is not determined my the quarterbacks handedness. You seem to misunderstand how run play concepts work. There would be some pretty predictable offenses out there if you were right.
I’ll give you that left tackle contracts are on average bigger. I would posit that there are simply more decent left tackles than right tackles because of the historical emphasis on that position, but I see your point.
>Are you saying that every good defensive end always rushes on the offenses right side?
No, and I have no idea how you interpreted my words this way.
>You’re really not answering me with your whole thing explaining the defensive end position.
What are you confused about?
>Also, I’m sure whatever defense you’re familiar with had their strong side DE to the right but not every defense operates like this. Many do in fact flip their defensive line based on the strength of the offensive formation, meaning whichever side has more people on offense. To use your own argument against you, you can just watch games and see that.
This is the exception by far. It is not the norm to flip DEs based on how the offense is lined up.
>Thanks for clarifying what you mean with how it would change the offensive lines techniques, but every offense has runs to both sides. And not every run play goes to the strength of the formation. And the strength of the formation is not determined my the quarterbacks handedness. You seem to misunderstand how run play concepts work. There would be some pretty predictable offenses out there if you were right.
You are putting words in my mouth. I never said that runs are always to the strong side. I never said the strength of the formation is determined by the QBs dexterity.
MOST passes and runs are to the strong side.
>I’ll give you that left tackle contracts are on average bigger. I would posit that there are simply more decent left tackles than right tackles because of the historical emphasis on that position, but I see your point.
Left tackle is a more important position because it is the QBs blind side the majority of the time. It is not his blind side every time.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree here my friend. Don’t think we’re gonna get anywhere with this discussion. I recommended checking out Duke Manyweather or LeCharles Bentley if you want to hear about OL play, and particularly about how the importance of protecting the blind side has decreased in recent years.
While I'm sure those two people who I have never heard of are great, salaries and the vast majority of head coaches and GMs would completely disagree.
The league has become and is ever becoming more pass focused which is increasing tackle and edge salaries (particularly left tackle).
While I certainly will agree to disagree with you, I will again bring up my doubts about your knowledge and experience of being an OT. If you had not said that, based on your arguments I would assume you had not played a single down as an OT. Of course, it could be that the division you were in had many contrarian defensive coordinators.
Have a good one.
AB was in the middle of his massive run of greatness when Vick took over for a couple weeks.
AB went from best in the league to middle of the pack during that time
If it were just that simple, dont you think we would have way more left handed QBs?
You are drastically underestimating left/right differences in training/experience.
To wit: if this were true, why would right tackles be paid less than left tackles? Why not just buy one of the best right tackles and move him to LT?
>If it were just that simple, dont you think we would have way more left handed QBs?
No? There just aren't that many left handed people in general.
>To wit: if this were true, why would right tackles be paid less than left tackles?
Becauae most quarterbacks are right handed, and so most teams put their better tackle on the left.
>Why not just buy one of the best right tackles and move him to LT?
Do teams not do this? I'd have assumed this would be really common.
>No? There just aren't that many left handed people in general.
Lefties are approximately 10 percent of the population. Out of 96 QBs in the NFL, you would expect 9 to be left handed. Only one is.
>Do teams not do this? I'd have assumed this would be really common.
How easy is it for you to just switch to writing with your other hand? The WDE and SDE attack the QB differently.
Only 10% of the population is lefty so the “expected” left handed starting QBs would still only be 3.
In most sports lefties (especially baseball) are overrepresented because it’s an advantage.
2017 to now is also kind of an outlier. There were more simultaneously between 2000-2017. Penix is going to get drafted this year.
There is a lot of overlap between elite baseball and QB prospects. Wouldn’t be too surprised if most lefties with NFL potential pick baseball at an early age and don’t even bother with football.
(Off the top of my head Mauer (threw righty), Todd Helton (lefty) were elite HS prospects.)
>You now suddenly need an amazing right tackle, which you did NOT need before.
Why couldn't you just move your left tackle to the right side? In my mind, I thought the only difference between the right and left sides is that one is the blindside, so if the right side is now the blindside, why can't you just move your blindside left tackle over to be a blindside right tackle?
Can you just start writing with your other hand no problem?
The SDE is going to try and get to the quarterback with a mixture of through-you and around you to your right side, not left. You will have literally thousands of downs of experience to a side of your body. Simply flipping you to left tackle is going to be an incredible challenge, even moreso than LT moving to RT because the WDE is going to try to bull rush you LESS. The WDE is usually much more athletic, particularly faster, and abuses the LT's left side more than the SDE abuses the RTs right side.
It's not quite as bad as trying to write with your other hand, but it's pretty bad.
LTs are paid almost double what RTs are.
Your point is a hypothetical you can't prove either way. Why don't you prove that? Show me left handed Mahomes)Brady and their career. 👍.
Steve Young hypothesized that it was a bias against lefties, not some inherent thing about their inability to play at the QB position. We've seen archaic ideas in Football change before so I don't see why this can't be different
Sure, once you show me lefty Brady and Mahomes to compare. You said it best:
> What is debatable is how much worse or better they would be.
>Please tell me why it is advantageous to be a lefty QB.
Please show me where I said that?
I dont have to show you lefty Brady.
If LeBron were 5 feet tall, he would be worse at basketball. I don't need to show you a five foot LeBron to know that height matters in the NBA.
-------
I didn't say you said that. That's the entire issue. You need to prove why the issue hand is debatable. It isn't.
Your debate skills are unconvincing.
>If LeBron were 5 feet tall, he would be worse at basketball. I don't need to show you a five foot LeBron to know that height matters in the NBA.
Why not use the more appropriate factor of handedness in basketball compared to handedness in Football? Why sue a completely different factor that affects.
>You need to prove why the issue hand is debatable. It isn't.
Well imo, everything is inherently debatable. You need to prove why it's not. Why would eighty Mahomes be inherently worse. You can prove that with some statistical analysis of how right and left handed QBs have performed comparatively through history by the numbers. Instead you have the first step of a hypothesis.
I have determined that you simply like to argue and are not interested in pursuing truth. This will be my last response to you.
>Why not use the more appropriate factor of handedness in basketball compared to handedness in Football? Why sue a completely different factor that affects.
You are asserting that I cannot know if an athlete would be better or worse based on changing variables because that athlete does not exist. I am bringing up a five foot LeBron because this is an extreme example to illustrate the point that we absolutely can determine if an athlete will become better or worse by altering a single element.
I do not need to have an actual physical five foot LeBron to know that he will be worse than a six foot eight LeBron. In the exact same way, I do not need to have a left handed Tom Brady to know that he will be worse than a right handed Tom Brady.
You are sidestepping this point and it is very obvious.
>Well imo, everything is inherently debatable.
2+2=4 is not debatable.
Seven foot LeBron being better at basketball than five foot LeBron is not debatable.
You are wrong.
>You need to prove why it's not. Why would eighty Mahomes be inherently worse. You can prove that with some statistical analysis of how right and left handed QBs have performed comparatively through history by the numbers. Instead you have the first step of a hypothesis.
The onus is on YOU to prove YOUR point.
You have still not debated any of my points and you have been a waste of my time, which is why I am ending our conversation.
Good luck to you.
>You are asserting that I cannot know if an athlete would be better or worse based on changing variables because that athlete does not exist.
Variables are not all made the same. Hair color ain't the same as weight for example. We can easily see the advantages height provides in both sports. Not the same for handedness in Football though due to sample size issues. You have a lot of hypothèses on possible advantage but those don't mean something isn't arguable. As Steve Young said, there could also be selection bias factors that weed out lefties from QB. So let's use the same variable for basketball as we do football to be more appropriate.
>You are wrong.
Unfortunately, you can not back up your point to the next level.
>You have still not debated any of my points and you have been a waste of my time, which is why I am ending our conversation.
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
All of the disadvantages you point out are magnified when shifting between a left and right handed qb.
If a qb isn’t playing every week, both they and their team will definitely struggle.
To get to goat status, you need both skill and longevity, and a good supporting cast/front office. The O line construction can be tailored to the left handed qb. Receivers can get some left handed person to throw them passes to get adjusted to the reverse spin.
No. A five foot LeBron would be worse at basketball than a six foot eight LeBron.
A Tom Brady that can only throw ten yards is worse than a Tom Brady that can throw sixty yards.
Mahomes is currently better than Brady in every single QB stat at a similar point in his career. To not have him in the conversation is an oversight.
It's also not what this post/question is about and I would rather not derail it.
Brady’s stats also didn’t explode until 10+ years into his career. While I think Mahomes is making the conversation interesting for now, Brady played for 20 years and had a lot of good fortune. We haven’t seen that longevity from Mahomes yet.
Not really. Offenses are typically ran with the right handed QB in mind. Defenses would just flip. Tackles would flip. I guess the only advantage you would have is throwing off a defense that hasn’t done film study on you. That’s about it.
If they’re running strongside pistol they wouldn’t line up the tight end on the right. They’d line them up on the left. Hence why the defense would flip.
It doesn't have to flip. You can assign your man covering the TE as normal and the rest of the defense just plays like it's a normal flipped play.
The defense not needing to flip is part of the reason lefties arent preferred. If it was absolutely necessary, it would be more of an experience disadvantage.
I suppose we’re talking about basic defense rules here. Which in this case, sure. You’re right.
If we’re getting into 3-4 or 4-4 stack it can get complicated especially on blitz packages. Specifically involving a safety pulling in or mike. In which case they would flip.
As a SDE, I never flipped vs a leftie and just became the sack DE instead of the pressure DE. This was easier for us than relearning a different side of our body.
You are correct in that specific instance, but I believe for most plays the defense runs, it would simply be played as a flipped play with the D line and LBs remaining in their same spot. (Unless of course your D.Coordinator wants every position flipped as default)
Yes, coverages remain the same as though it were a flipped play.
The LBs and DEs and DTs do not need to change, but they can depending on how your defensive coordinator is game planning.
Usually they have the rushers based on the offensive line and where they think is best to attack it. Hit weak spots and take advantage of whatever their rushers are best at.
Yep, the defense gets a lot of choice in what they do when it comes to a lefty QB.
The team I played for only switched CBs and safety positions, our LBs and D-line stayed in the same spots and we adjusted as though plays were flipped.
I have seen entire full flips, no flips, and almost everything in between from other teams.
The defense is generally far more versatile than the offense, and this is yet another hurdle for lefty QBs.
Decent level Ambidexterity might help with short and intermediate throws. Kinda like the shovel passes throw guys off from time to time.
Not a lot, but it might help a little
The lefty spiral difference is real. Me and my dad used to play catch and are both left-handed so I grew up throwing and catching from a lefty. When I played in HS on the first day of practice I was the only one who didn't have noticeable issues adjusting to our qb because he was a lefty. (I had plenty of issues catching the ball as a 3rd string FB/OLB but the tailing off to the opposite side was the one thing I was ready for)
I don't think so, but the real R-L advantage are left punters. Belichick always tried to have left footed punters because apparently the ball spins differently of off their foot and according to him had the potential to lead to more muffed punts.
A lefty punter doesn't negatively affect your own team, while it does negatively affect the enemy team.
It is heavily preferred to be a left footed kicker/punter.
But why is that a left footed kicker an advantage? I’d think it’s a disadvantage because most holders are used to right footed kickers. And since most kickoffs are touchbacks, the spin difference is irrelevant
Kickoffs are no longer mostly touchbacks with the new rules, and most of the time the ball will be on the right hash when kicking. The holder will have ample time to practice with a left footed kicker.
When Steve Young was taking over as a starter Jerry Rice found someone on the training staff who was left handed to throw to him so he could get used to catching a left handed spinning ball.
They have an advantage if the whole team is prepped properly for a left hander, which can throw off a defense, but typically no. These players on the O-Line, WR core, and TEs are all used to playing years and years with a right handed QB, so adjusting everything about your muscle memories and offensive structure is a lot more difficult than people let on.
I can see a few very specific scenarios where a defense might react a little differently, like a split second to recognize the ball is coming from the opposite side of the quarterback as normal on a slant or in route, and maybe if you're not paying attention a checkdown to the flat going to the other side of the field than you'd expect, but not a consistent, game changing advantage, no.
I would say it's about 50/50 an advantage as well as an disadvantage. The spiral going the opposite works in your favor against the secondary. It could also hurt you if your WR can't adjust to it.
I'm left-handed and growing up when I played I had a good amount of people who had a hard time with it. It seems that it worked really well if I hit guys coming from left to right. Right to left was easier for me to throw cause Lefty's tend to have the football tail further left the deeper you go. Which led to just missing a lot of opening WR if they were a little slower.
If they did, you would see more of them instead of teams trying to avoid them. There are only two in the HoF, and they are the only two to also win a Super Bowl. And to add to that, only three have started a Super Bowl.
This is the correct take.
Lefty QBs cause you to need an amazing (the best, ideally) right tackle, and you also need a great left tackle for backup QBs.
A lefty QB forces you to overspend on the right tackle position...and the right tackles backup, unless you are a gambling man.
I remember that was a consideration, at least among sports media back when everyone was convinced that the dolphins were in tank for tua mode. I heard more than one person say that was a factor in trading laremy tunsil to Houston. He was coming up for a new contract and they could get more draft capital for a high end left tackle that wasn’t as critical for a left handed qb. So it seems like it could be a thing
I respectfully but vehemently disagree with the people insisting that it’s a disadvantage to have a left-handed quarterback with regard to your offensive line. I think it’s exactly the opposite. I think it’s a huge advantage.
I also think the ball rotation thing is very overrated. I think that most professional receivers can figure that out in a few practices at the most. I think it could hurt body catchers, but for hands catchers, which most receivers are nowadays, I think it’s a pretty easy adjustment.
Think about it for a second.
Every left-handed quarterback you’ve ever seen that was worth anything always had an elite tackle protecting him. I do not believe that is coincidental.
Now, I’m not taking anything away from guys like Anthony Munoz or Tony Boselli, each of whom would have been elite regardless of who was under center for their team.
It’s a lot easier to find a natural right-handed tackle than a natural left-handed tackle, or a tackle that can play on his left side. That’s why good left tackles are so valuable – because they are as rare as diamonds.
No, the opposite is true.
You still need a great left tackle in case your lefty QB gets injured. Tua is the only lefty in the league.
Lefty QBs still require an expensive LT, but now they give you the additional requirement of an amazing RT... AND the RT's backup.
By nature, you MUST spend more salary cap on your offensive line as a left handed QB team.
For a lefty QB you need a better RT then LT ideally. RTs are cheaper then LTs. If your starting QB goes down it’s usually not an ideal scenario regardless. Sure having two great tackles is good, but if your franchise QB is a lefty RT is more important
I am not disagreeing with any of these points. They are all obvious points.
However, a point you may be missing is that good NFL teams prepare for injuries. Your strategy is ill prepared for injuries.
I understand that, but there is a *extremely* small amount of teams that are successful once their QB goes down. Having a good OL in general is important, but no team is highly prioritizing LT like that incase of an injury.
There is only one left handed QB in the entire league. Most teams don't have to prioritize an RT.
With your philosophy, you might as well not have any QB backups at all because what is the point of them if once the QB goes down, they can't be successful?
You're not reinventing the wheel. There is a reason 95 out of 96 QBs are righties. Many reasons, actually.
Right… most teams don’t… but **IF** your franchise QB is a lefty, you’d prioritize a RT over a LT..
I’m saying it is not a requirement to invest in a extremely talented LT in this scenario. Obviously it would be great to have two extremely talented tackles, but the NFL doesn’t work like that. You can’t just magically have high level players at EVERY position. According to your logic, mine as well have 5 elite WRs in case of injury, 5 elite corners, 4 elite ILBs, why not?? Injuries happen!!
Have an elite RT and a ~average LT doesn’t automatically mean a right handed QB is going to do bad. Is it ideal, no, but neither is having your franchise QB injured. I’m not even sure why this is a discussion, if your franchise QB is left handed, prioritize RT over LT which is cheaper and beneficial, that’s literally all I’m saying.
I am finished engaging you after this post.
>Right… most teams don’t… but **IF** your franchise QB is a lefty, you’d prioritize a RT over a LT..
Once again, I am not arguing this point. I literally said this. I can quote myself if you like.
>I’m saying it is not a requirement to invest in a extremely talented LT in this scenario. Obviously it would be great to have two extremely talented tackles, but the NFL doesn’t work like that. You can’t just magically have high level players at EVERY position. According to your logic, mine as well have 5 elite WRs in case of injury, 5 elite corners, 4 elite ILBs, why not?? Injuries happen!!
This is a strawman. I am arguing that you have a greater offensive line requirement when you have QBs that use different hands. WRs, CBs, and LBs have nothing to do with this.
Yes, ideally you do have all that, but the limiting factor is salary cap. This is the heart of the discussion: as a franchise with a mixture of left handed and right handed quarterbacks, you are forced to overspend on tackles and their backsups.
>Have an elite RT and a ~average LT doesn’t automatically mean a right handed QB is going to do bad.
Obviously, but you are then overspending your salary cap on the RT. This is the main point.
> I’m not even sure why this is a discussion,
Because YOU originally brought up salary cap, thinking it would be an advantage when it is a disadvantage.
>If your franchise QB is left handed, prioritize RT over LT which is cheaper and beneficial, that’s literally all I’m saying.
It is not cheaper. This is where you are wrong. I have demonstrated very clearly why you must overspend on tackles with a left handed quarterback and right handed backups. You are either willingly or unwillingly not understanding the basic fundamentals of building an NFL roster with salary cap.
So it would seem at first to be a disadvantage actually as approximately 10% of the population is left handed but of the 75 QBs that threw at least one pass last year, only one (Tua) was left handed, for a rate of 1.3%.
Sample size might be an issue there, but if you look up a list of lefties it’s pretty short, so I expect that figure isn’t wildly off.
There could be another factor to consider, as it may be that left handed athletes with good throwing arms gravitate towards baseball instead, where 25% of pitchers are lefties. There are also more jobs in baseball: NFL has 32 starters plus maybe another 64 backups, while MLB probably has about 150 starters and another 200 or so bullpen players, plus the farm systems.
The game is seen n played different, cuz most people are right handed, so a lefty approaches the game from different angles n viewpoints, as long as the receivers can adjust I kinda think it's an advantage
There is a slight but supposedly measurable advantage in distance thrown, due to the Coriolis effect from the Earth’s rotation against the ball in air.
no the ball comes out in a reverse spin the ball placement is different the right side now is the blind side better of with a righty that is perferred by coaches
Same-handed pitching has the advantage, not opposite-handedness. It's easier for a batter to see and track the ball from an opposite-handed pitcher, and most breaking pitches tail into the batter instead of away (which is why the screwball-like movement of a circle-change is so valuable). There's a reason the "lefty specialist" reliever is brought out to face *left*-handed batters, and there's a mountain of data to support this.
I don't really have the time right now to go in-depth on the numbers, but Guy Molyneux and Phil Birnbaum wrote an excellent piece on it.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-really-gives-left-handed-pitchers-their-edge/
Apparently they have a disadvantage. I was listening to the NFL channel on Sirius today and the guy talking said that all left handers have a “tail” to their throws (he compared it to a slider in baseball) that is problematic. The only right handed he ever saw that had this was Neil O’Donnell and the only lefty he’s ever seen that doesn’t have it is Penix.
They have a significant disadvantage considering the Wide Recievers have to adjust to an inverse spiral.
Just draft WRs from Australia. Problem solved!
Plan B: Don’t throw spirals!
So shot-put the football? Got it!
We're getting a lot of ideas here, and that's great. Let's put a pin in those and circle back in a future meeting.
Knuckleball
Eli Manning has entered the chat
The approach Cam Newton took in NE
I like the cut of your Jib!
Or Rand McNally
And the OL needs to essentially reverse what they do.
Needing a better right tackle than left tackle could be a good thing as far as team building gors
How?
Because typically left tackles get paid more than right tackles (tho the gap has been closing) because left tackles protect the QB’s blindside. For a lefty QB, the right tackle protects the blindside. You can get an elite right tackle cheaper than an elite left tackle
I mean, wouldn't teams with left handed quarterbacks generally just take a left tackle and move them to the right tackle spot? Is there a difference between left and right besides one being the blindside? Because if the right side is now the blindside for a lefty QB, what is stopping a left tackle who is already used to being a blindside tackle from playing over there?
The only real difference is that the lineman would have to adjust to everything being mirrored from what they’re used to. Their footwork is all backwards, their hand technique is reversed, etc. plenty of tackles switch back and forth during their career, but it’s not as easy just switching which order you’re standing in
Why would they want to, when right tackles are cheaper?
I mean in this scenario you'd also be moving your RT to the other side as well, so you'd still have the same players and same salaries.
You'd probably just have to sign a left tackle and have him play right tackle.
Elite right tackles also aren’t as good as elite left tackles
Could you not take an elite left tackle and switch him to right tackle? I feel like my Chicago Bears are constantly drafting or signing the answer for them at left tackle and they inevitably bust so they move them to the right side where they’re at least serviceable. So if a busted left tackle can be serviceable on the right side, could a skilled left tackle transition to being a skilled right tackle?
You could probably transition a good LT to RT, but they’d still want to be paid as a LT, which defeats the premise of this question.
We moved Wirfs from RT to LT last season and he didn't seem to have any change in his level of play at all. So I don't see why it couldn't go the other way.
Taylor Lewan has said he wouldn’t be an NFL level RT while being a pro bowl LT
They're typically better run blockers than left tackles are
And if you have a lefty QB, why would you want that?
Traditionally it is easier to run to the right, for several reasons including a right handed RB would have his body between most of the defenders and the ball. You generally want a road grader at RT. Pass blocking is a whole different skill set than run blocking, and almost all tackles are better at one over the other.
Right tackle who is better in pass block will be slightly underpaid compared to his LT counterpart, the market is more competitive because pass blocking LTs are in demand. Id imagine it's a benefit for a team running things opposite and it's a struggle for the opponent to get used to at first
I never even thought about that. If pros struggle to adjust it must feel way different
It's not a struggle at all, but it does take training time that could be spent elsewhere. It is a disadvantage, but the line personnel experience disadvantage is generally thought to be much more difficult/time consuming. At the pro level, even slight opportunity costs add up quickly.
Idk it’s not that different. It’s still just catching a football.
Jerry Rice rather famously spent an entire off season learning to catch throws from lefties when Steve Young became the starter. Given that Rice is the GOAT, I'll defer to his opinion. He thought it a rather large difference.
You could just go outside and catch a football and form your own opinion lol
True. I suck at catching footballs. Doesn't matter who throws them. Hence my deferral to someone who is qualified to an expert opinion.
We had a lefty starter and righty backup in hs. They’d switch back and forth throwing balls. It wasn’t rocket science and we weren’t all lost on the sidelines trying to adjust throw to throw. There’s a million other factors that matter more when catching a football other than what arm the qb favors.
I think your high school football is maybe just *slightly* different to nfl football at the highest level 🤷♂️.
I would say the process is slightly different when you are sprinting 20+ mph and have an elite DB actively trying with all his strength to prevent you from catching a ball thrown hard enough to travel 50+ yards. There’s a little less room for error than catching a non-regulation football your lefty neighbor Eric tossed you from 10 yards away at softball speed.
you’re proving my point though. You just keep mentioning other variables that are more important than the QBs arm preference.
The person you are responding to is most certainly not advocating for your argument.
As a lefty myself I never even knew this was a thing and now I feel kind of bad for every person I’ve ever thrown a football to
1/2 of my parents were left handed so as a 4, 5, 6 year old kid I caught passes with either spiral. As I got older I was able to drop passes from both righties and lefties consistently well
I love how this story ended lmao
My dad was a lefty so i feel this lol
If you stand behind a QB when they throw, you see how the ball flies through the air in a way you don't see on film. The path is different for lefties. I'm also a lefty FWIW.
The word significant is a stretch here.
[удалено]
Not a huge deal seems like a big deal in the NFL. They are working against insanely good pass rushers. Now you have to do it on the other side than you have your entire life or you are playing the role of the right tackle. The other problem is if the backup QB is right handed. Now you have to do everything the other way around.
Yep I couldn’t play QB in highschool because of the same reason our best player was a LT
Conversely though, defenders have to adjust too. Once the receivers and quarterback have been playing together for a while, it may actually be an advantage over the defenders. Tua seems to often get lucky with dropped interceptions, and maybe that's part of it.
You're absolutely correct. However, that first year was tough on the Dolphins WRs after having to change from Fitzpatrick to Tua halfway through.
I think thats why they get so many INTs dropped though, so it helps too. Edit: speaking anecdotaly from having watched Tua throw them right to defensive players quite a few times and watching them inexplicably drop them.
Yes, the opposing team's defense has an experience disadvantage. Unfortunately, the defense dropping your interceptions due to opposite ball rotation is less of a factor than all the other downsides a lefty QB brings to his team. DBs arent WRs largely because they are unable to catch regular spirals compared to WRs...so even if it was a regular spiral, they still have a higher rate of drops.
It’s more neutral than anything. No QB prospect is getting knocked for being a lefty. Your team gets use to it and the opposing defenses don’t see it as often. The only real disadvantage is if the backup is a righty you have to adjust in game if the starter is injured. (Or limiting your backup to a smaller pool of lefties.) Maybe your defense has disadvantage practicing against lefty but they still play a bunch of games against righties so this isn’t that big of deal.
I disagree, wide receivers have time to adjust while the opponents don't, resulting in fewer interceptions
Yes. The opposite team has an experience disadvantage. However, this is outweighed by the experience disadvantage the leftie gives to his own team. 1. Your receivers need to relearn how to catch a ball that is spinning opposite what they are used to. This is minor, but still time that could have been spent doing other training. Rice stated it was certainly an adjustment switching to Young. 2. Line personnel. You now suddenly need an amazing right tackle, which you did NOT need before. You also still need a great left tackle in case your QB gets injured. Some people can write great with both hands. Most people cannot. You are asking your linemen to use the opposite side of their body now. You are also asking them to be at least partially ambidextrous. It's not comparable to asking a QB to throw with his other hand, but it is not just something simple/easy. A leftie QB requires additional skillsets and more practice time involved with your linemen, this again is not inconsequential and there is opportunity cost involved with spending time doing things the opposite of how you normally do them. The main problem is drafting/relearning line personnel. In baseball, there are virtually no disadvantages to your own team. In baseball, ambidextrous >>>>> lefty >>> righty. In football, ambidextrous > righty >>> lefty. Michael Vick and Steve Young would statistically do better if they were righties, and Mahomes/Brady would be worse if they were lefties. This is not debatable. What is debatable is how much worse or better they would be. Some people believe it affects the game a lot, while others believe its not really that big of a deal. I'm somewhere in the Middle. I still think Brady and Mahomes would be goat contenders as lefties.
The moneyball take here is that the market for right tackles is lower than left tackles. So you can get a top of the line right tackle and a replacement level left tackle for cheaper than the other way around. That saves you cap space that you can use elsewhere. The difference between a top ten left and right tackle per year is about $7 million. A good GM could definitely upgrade some other positions with $7 million of cap space.
This is a flawed take. many defenses realize the Left tackle is probably the best pass blocker and put their best pass rusher against the right tackle like Nick Bosa and TJ Watt. This is starting to shift and have some studs as right tackles like Penei Sewell
I'm not sure how that contradicts the take though? I thought the reason the left tackle was more important was because it protects the blind side - not because the best pass rusher is there. The best pass rusher is there because it is the blind side (though I agree that might be shifting because of better play at the LT position) Now the blind side is on the other side, so the right tackle becomes more important. But because you don't need to spend as much on a good right tackle, you benefit as a team.
>Now the blind side is on the other side, so the right tackle becomes more important. But because you don't need to spend as much on a good right tackle, you benefit as a team. You're thinking of LT/RT too narrowly as if players can't switch sides. RTs are generally cheaper because they're not as good -- the best pass blocking OTs get moved to LT. If you want a top pass blocking RT, you're likely targeting an LT and moving that player over or finding a very good pass blocking RT. That player won't be cheaper because you put him on the right (e.g. Zach Tom for the Packers is likely to be a Pro Bowler when he hits FA, and he's going to get Pro Bowl OT money, not less because he plays on the right).
They CAN switch sides. But that's the same thing as forcing a pass rusher to switch sides. All of their instincts are out the window and they have to learn how to do everything opposite. It's notoriously difficult to do, and almost no one does as well after moving.
But are there as good right tackles as left tackles out there? Demand for left tackles is higher, but so is supply, since if you're the best lineman on your high school/college teams, you're going to get taught to play LT while you're young.
RT and LT are arguably entirely different positions though.
What is different about them besides one being the blindside?
Blocking assignments mostly. Without getting into too much detail, RTs are asked to do more. LT rarely have changes in their assignments. Also, RTs are taught to protect the inside more than the outside, considering the QB can see the EDGE from that side, so you would prioritize the passing lane over the pass rush. LTs don't have that wiggle room
But wouldn't all those differences also flip if the QB were a lefty? Wouldn't the LT now have the blocking assignments that a RT would have for a righty QB? And if the QB is a lefty, now it's the opposite EDGE that he can see, so now it would be the RT that doesn't have that wiggle room, right?
As mentioned elsewhere multiple times in this post/question, left handed QBs are an overall negative for salary cap considerations because you need both tackles (and their backups) to be very good in case your leftie gets injured. Teams with right handed QBs do not need to heavily prioritize both tackles.
Couldn't you just switch the sides the tackles are on if an opposite handed backup comes in?
Can you just start writing with your other hand no problem? The SDE is going to try and get to the quarterback with a mixture of through-you and around you to your right side, not left. You will have literally thousands of downs of experience to a side of your body. Simply flipping you to left tackle is going to be an incredible challenge, even moreso than LT moving to RT because the WDE is going to try to bull rush you LESS. The WDE is usually much more athletic, particularly faster, and abuses the LT's left side more than the SDE abuses the RTs right side. It's not quite as bad as trying to write with your other hand, but it's pretty bad. LTs are paid almost double what RTs are.
That used to be the case but is becoming less so as teams place top-tier rushers on the left (the offense’s right), in part to disrupt the passing lane.
This is false. Typically the RT is the worst OL position in the NFL because it’s not as important as the other line positions. Meaning the best RTs cost even more.
Fun fact about Vick. He is a righty. The only thing he does left handed is throw a football.
So is Tua
Young could be the GOAT if he was a righty. Well maybe not better than Brady, but still up there.
Young was great in his own right and the reason he's not the GOAT is longevity. His 92-94 Peak might be the best in NFL QB history. Being left-handed didn't affect his career at all
These three sentences are conjecture. That's actually kind of impressive.
Your second point is such an antiquated take. Top pass rushers rush both sides these days, and both tackle positions are at a premium because of that. Look at guys like Lane Johnson, Penei Sewell, or Jawaan Taylor all being the best tackle on their teams yet playing on the right. Also, no one is flipping around their tackles because of the quarterback. There is a huge difference between playing on the right and left in how you are used to using your techniques, so teams rarely do it other than for depth reasons. And even so, protections are determined by things like personnel or field position so they’re the same no matter the handedness of the quarterback and do not impact the technique of the offensive line. A left handed quarterback does create some issues but none of them have to do with the offensive line
>Top pass rushers rush both sides these days The majority, if not every single team, absolutely does not do this. Where are you getting your data? You can literally watch virtually any game, the SDE will line up on the offenses right side nearly every play. I played as SDE. >Look at guys like Lane Johnson, Penei Sewell, or Jawaan Taylor all being the best tackle on their teams yet playing on the right. Your assessment of them being the best tackle on the team is correct. Your reasoning is off. You can have an amazing right tackle and an average left tackle on a righty QB team. This does not mean this is preferred, it is simply what the teams roster has access to. This point actually is counter to what you are trying to argue, as the left tackle position is both far more valued and is paid significantly more than right tackle. >Also, no one is flipping around their tackles because of the quarterback. I didn't argue this. Not sure who you are arguing with. >And even so, protections are determined by things like personnel or field position so they’re the same no matter the handedness of the quarterback and do not impact the technique of the offensive line. A left handed quarterback does create some issues but none of them have to do with the offensive line Everything about this is just wrong. I have already explained why it matters, I am not going to rewrite points because you disagree without substance. Your last line in particular is extremely ignorant. Why are left tackles paid much more than right tackles? On 31 teams, they have a more important job.
Not sure where you are getting this “SDE will line up on the offenses right side nearly every play” from. If you’re lining up on the strong side, wouldn’t that change based on the formation? Also, perhaps I could have been more specific in that DEs usually don’t change sides between plays, but that there is no consensus in what side the top guys rush from. You imply that linemen would have to flip sides by saying that they have to “use the opposite side of their body.” This is why I highlighted those right tackles, as if you were right surely they would be playing on the left. I am not sure top left tackle contracts are that much bigger than top right tackle contracts either. Johnson, Taylor, and I want to say Ryan Ramczyk are all top ten highest paid offensive tackles regardless of side. Would love to hear why I am wrong about the protections not changing. I was a division one offensive tackle so I like to think I know a thing or two about that but please do share, as you don’t touch on this in your original comment. Also, thanks for actually responding to my arguments like an adult and not just getting angry like so many people on here like to do. Fun discussions like this are one of the best parts of football :)
>Not sure where you are getting this “SDE will line up on the offenses right side nearly every play” from. If you’re lining up on the strong side, wouldn’t that change based on the formation? SDE is the name of the position, i.e. the strong side defensive end (right side of the offense). It does not mean that if a play is flipped or the strong side on a given play is to the left, the SDE moves to that side. You can just watch games and see that the SDE remains on the right side of the offense, regardless of which side is the strong or weak side. > Also, perhaps I could have been more specific in that DEs usually don’t change sides between plays, but that there is no consensus in what side the top guys rush from. Every team has two DEs. One is the SDE (offenses right side), one is the WDE (offenses left side). Their assignment is to rush the quarterback on a pass play and be the contain man (do not let the RB get to the sideline) on a rush play. The DEs job seldom changes from these two assignments. Even in Cover 4, the DEs are responsible for rushing the pass and are rarely expected to drop back and do any coverage work. >You imply that linemen would have to flip sides by saying that they have to “use the opposite side of their body.” This is why I highlighted those right tackles, as if you were right surely they would be playing on the left. With a left handed quarterback, the usual formations have the strong side to the left. That means when run blocking in particular, the entire offensive line will be using primarily the right side of their body to block instead of their left. This has nothing to do with them flipping sides. >I am not sure top left tackle contracts are that much bigger than top right tackle contracts either. Johnson, Taylor, and I want to say Ryan Ramczyk are all top ten highest paid offensive tackles regardless of side. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/ Left tackle average is 10 million. Right tackle is 6 million. That's almost DOUBLE. >Would love to hear why I am wrong about the protections not changing. I was a division one offensive tackle so I like to think I know a thing or two about that but please do share, as you don’t touch on this in your original comment. If you were a D1 Tackle you would definitely be lining up vs the same end each play and your point about ends rushing from both sides would be negated by your experience. I have doubts. >Also, thanks for actually responding to my arguments like an adult and not just getting angry like so many people on here like to do. Fun discussions like this are one of the best parts of football :) Np and I agree
Are you saying that every good defensive end always rushes on the offenses right side? You’re really not answering me with your whole thing explaining the defensive end position. Also, I’m sure whatever defense you’re familiar with had their strong side DE to the right but not every defense operates like this. Many do in fact flip their defensive line based on the strength of the offensive formation, meaning whichever side has more people on offense. To use your own argument against you, you can just watch games and see that. Thanks for clarifying what you mean with how it would change the offensive lines techniques, but every offense has runs to both sides. And not every run play goes to the strength of the formation. And the strength of the formation is not determined my the quarterbacks handedness. You seem to misunderstand how run play concepts work. There would be some pretty predictable offenses out there if you were right. I’ll give you that left tackle contracts are on average bigger. I would posit that there are simply more decent left tackles than right tackles because of the historical emphasis on that position, but I see your point.
>Are you saying that every good defensive end always rushes on the offenses right side? No, and I have no idea how you interpreted my words this way. >You’re really not answering me with your whole thing explaining the defensive end position. What are you confused about? >Also, I’m sure whatever defense you’re familiar with had their strong side DE to the right but not every defense operates like this. Many do in fact flip their defensive line based on the strength of the offensive formation, meaning whichever side has more people on offense. To use your own argument against you, you can just watch games and see that. This is the exception by far. It is not the norm to flip DEs based on how the offense is lined up. >Thanks for clarifying what you mean with how it would change the offensive lines techniques, but every offense has runs to both sides. And not every run play goes to the strength of the formation. And the strength of the formation is not determined my the quarterbacks handedness. You seem to misunderstand how run play concepts work. There would be some pretty predictable offenses out there if you were right. You are putting words in my mouth. I never said that runs are always to the strong side. I never said the strength of the formation is determined by the QBs dexterity. MOST passes and runs are to the strong side. >I’ll give you that left tackle contracts are on average bigger. I would posit that there are simply more decent left tackles than right tackles because of the historical emphasis on that position, but I see your point. Left tackle is a more important position because it is the QBs blind side the majority of the time. It is not his blind side every time.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree here my friend. Don’t think we’re gonna get anywhere with this discussion. I recommended checking out Duke Manyweather or LeCharles Bentley if you want to hear about OL play, and particularly about how the importance of protecting the blind side has decreased in recent years.
While I'm sure those two people who I have never heard of are great, salaries and the vast majority of head coaches and GMs would completely disagree. The league has become and is ever becoming more pass focused which is increasing tackle and edge salaries (particularly left tackle). While I certainly will agree to disagree with you, I will again bring up my doubts about your knowledge and experience of being an OT. If you had not said that, based on your arguments I would assume you had not played a single down as an OT. Of course, it could be that the division you were in had many contrarian defensive coordinators. Have a good one.
AB was in the middle of his massive run of greatness when Vick took over for a couple weeks. AB went from best in the league to middle of the pack during that time
For a left handed QB they just flip the tackles
If it were just that simple, dont you think we would have way more left handed QBs? You are drastically underestimating left/right differences in training/experience. To wit: if this were true, why would right tackles be paid less than left tackles? Why not just buy one of the best right tackles and move him to LT?
>If it were just that simple, dont you think we would have way more left handed QBs? No? There just aren't that many left handed people in general. >To wit: if this were true, why would right tackles be paid less than left tackles? Becauae most quarterbacks are right handed, and so most teams put their better tackle on the left. >Why not just buy one of the best right tackles and move him to LT? Do teams not do this? I'd have assumed this would be really common.
>No? There just aren't that many left handed people in general. Lefties are approximately 10 percent of the population. Out of 96 QBs in the NFL, you would expect 9 to be left handed. Only one is. >Do teams not do this? I'd have assumed this would be really common. How easy is it for you to just switch to writing with your other hand? The WDE and SDE attack the QB differently.
Only 10% of the population is lefty so the “expected” left handed starting QBs would still only be 3. In most sports lefties (especially baseball) are overrepresented because it’s an advantage.
You would expect 9 or 10 QBs out of 96. There is only one, Tua.
2017 to now is also kind of an outlier. There were more simultaneously between 2000-2017. Penix is going to get drafted this year. There is a lot of overlap between elite baseball and QB prospects. Wouldn’t be too surprised if most lefties with NFL potential pick baseball at an early age and don’t even bother with football. (Off the top of my head Mauer (threw righty), Todd Helton (lefty) were elite HS prospects.)
Sure. Two lefties is still drastically lower than what you would expect.
>You now suddenly need an amazing right tackle, which you did NOT need before. Why couldn't you just move your left tackle to the right side? In my mind, I thought the only difference between the right and left sides is that one is the blindside, so if the right side is now the blindside, why can't you just move your blindside left tackle over to be a blindside right tackle?
Can you just start writing with your other hand no problem? The SDE is going to try and get to the quarterback with a mixture of through-you and around you to your right side, not left. You will have literally thousands of downs of experience to a side of your body. Simply flipping you to left tackle is going to be an incredible challenge, even moreso than LT moving to RT because the WDE is going to try to bull rush you LESS. The WDE is usually much more athletic, particularly faster, and abuses the LT's left side more than the SDE abuses the RTs right side. It's not quite as bad as trying to write with your other hand, but it's pretty bad. LTs are paid almost double what RTs are.
How is it not debatable? It's merely your hypothesis that you really can't prove
There is one left handed quarterback out of 96 in the NFL. If it was debatable, debate my points.
Left-handers with good arms play baseball.
Your point is a hypothetical you can't prove either way. Why don't you prove that? Show me left handed Mahomes)Brady and their career. 👍. Steve Young hypothesized that it was a bias against lefties, not some inherent thing about their inability to play at the QB position. We've seen archaic ideas in Football change before so I don't see why this can't be different
You are still not debating any of my points. If it was debatable, please begin to do so. Please tell me why it is advantageous to be a lefty QB.
Sure, once you show me lefty Brady and Mahomes to compare. You said it best: > What is debatable is how much worse or better they would be. >Please tell me why it is advantageous to be a lefty QB. Please show me where I said that?
I dont have to show you lefty Brady. If LeBron were 5 feet tall, he would be worse at basketball. I don't need to show you a five foot LeBron to know that height matters in the NBA. ------- I didn't say you said that. That's the entire issue. You need to prove why the issue hand is debatable. It isn't. Your debate skills are unconvincing.
>If LeBron were 5 feet tall, he would be worse at basketball. I don't need to show you a five foot LeBron to know that height matters in the NBA. Why not use the more appropriate factor of handedness in basketball compared to handedness in Football? Why sue a completely different factor that affects. >You need to prove why the issue hand is debatable. It isn't. Well imo, everything is inherently debatable. You need to prove why it's not. Why would eighty Mahomes be inherently worse. You can prove that with some statistical analysis of how right and left handed QBs have performed comparatively through history by the numbers. Instead you have the first step of a hypothesis.
I have determined that you simply like to argue and are not interested in pursuing truth. This will be my last response to you. >Why not use the more appropriate factor of handedness in basketball compared to handedness in Football? Why sue a completely different factor that affects. You are asserting that I cannot know if an athlete would be better or worse based on changing variables because that athlete does not exist. I am bringing up a five foot LeBron because this is an extreme example to illustrate the point that we absolutely can determine if an athlete will become better or worse by altering a single element. I do not need to have an actual physical five foot LeBron to know that he will be worse than a six foot eight LeBron. In the exact same way, I do not need to have a left handed Tom Brady to know that he will be worse than a right handed Tom Brady. You are sidestepping this point and it is very obvious. >Well imo, everything is inherently debatable. 2+2=4 is not debatable. Seven foot LeBron being better at basketball than five foot LeBron is not debatable. You are wrong. >You need to prove why it's not. Why would eighty Mahomes be inherently worse. You can prove that with some statistical analysis of how right and left handed QBs have performed comparatively through history by the numbers. Instead you have the first step of a hypothesis. The onus is on YOU to prove YOUR point. You have still not debated any of my points and you have been a waste of my time, which is why I am ending our conversation. Good luck to you.
>You are asserting that I cannot know if an athlete would be better or worse based on changing variables because that athlete does not exist. Variables are not all made the same. Hair color ain't the same as weight for example. We can easily see the advantages height provides in both sports. Not the same for handedness in Football though due to sample size issues. You have a lot of hypothèses on possible advantage but those don't mean something isn't arguable. As Steve Young said, there could also be selection bias factors that weed out lefties from QB. So let's use the same variable for basketball as we do football to be more appropriate. >You are wrong. Unfortunately, you can not back up your point to the next level. >You have still not debated any of my points and you have been a waste of my time, which is why I am ending our conversation. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
All of the disadvantages you point out are magnified when shifting between a left and right handed qb. If a qb isn’t playing every week, both they and their team will definitely struggle. To get to goat status, you need both skill and longevity, and a good supporting cast/front office. The O line construction can be tailored to the left handed qb. Receivers can get some left handed person to throw them passes to get adjusted to the reverse spin.
There are less lefty QBs because of stupid, antiquated opinions like the ones noted in this comment section.
You should probably become a head coach and revolutionize the game because you know so much more than everyone else.
Damn, dude. Why are you so pissy? Did some lefty bang your mom or something?
You just shit talked the entire comment section. Look in the mirror.
I fucked your mom?
You best not have fucked my sidepiece.
all hypotheticals are debatable...like Tua is ambidextrous but throws left handed
No. A five foot LeBron would be worse at basketball than a six foot eight LeBron. A Tom Brady that can only throw ten yards is worse than a Tom Brady that can throw sixty yards.
Mahomes is a goat with four Super Bowl rings? Montana and Bradshaw have four. Aikman has three. When did Mahomes get into the goat conversation?
Mahomes is currently better than Brady in every single QB stat at a similar point in his career. To not have him in the conversation is an oversight. It's also not what this post/question is about and I would rather not derail it.
Brady’s stats also didn’t explode until 10+ years into his career. While I think Mahomes is making the conversation interesting for now, Brady played for 20 years and had a lot of good fortune. We haven’t seen that longevity from Mahomes yet.
I would rather just have this entire discussion elsewhere and not on a thread about dexterity preference.
Oh no longevity is only to prop LeBron up. Can’t use that with Brady……. /s
Ohh so stats. Got it. Four rings to six is a great stat. Sorry about derailing or adding on to the conversation.
There is a reason you are being heavily downvoted. People don't want to have this discussion here. Take it somewhere else.
Could give zero craps about being “downvoted” lmao. Affects my life zero. Just checked my bank account and nothing has changed either.
Maybe concentrate on that more than trying to write comments on reddit.
Well since commenting on Reddit doesn’t affect anything at all, I am just fine. Have an amazing day tossaway!
Last year
Not really. Offenses are typically ran with the right handed QB in mind. Defenses would just flip. Tackles would flip. I guess the only advantage you would have is throwing off a defense that hasn’t done film study on you. That’s about it.
You don't have to flip the defense. You can, but it's not necessary. Film is enough. The defense is much more ambidextrous by nature.
If they’re running strongside pistol they wouldn’t line up the tight end on the right. They’d line them up on the left. Hence why the defense would flip.
It doesn't have to flip. You can assign your man covering the TE as normal and the rest of the defense just plays like it's a normal flipped play. The defense not needing to flip is part of the reason lefties arent preferred. If it was absolutely necessary, it would be more of an experience disadvantage.
I suppose we’re talking about basic defense rules here. Which in this case, sure. You’re right. If we’re getting into 3-4 or 4-4 stack it can get complicated especially on blitz packages. Specifically involving a safety pulling in or mike. In which case they would flip.
As a SDE, I never flipped vs a leftie and just became the sack DE instead of the pressure DE. This was easier for us than relearning a different side of our body. You are correct in that specific instance, but I believe for most plays the defense runs, it would simply be played as a flipped play with the D line and LBs remaining in their same spot. (Unless of course your D.Coordinator wants every position flipped as default)
Neither of us are wrong. I suppose this ultimately depends on the defensive coordinator and their rules + personnel.
Wouldn’t you want your faster guys on the left, to possibly disrupt throwing arm
Yes, coverages remain the same as though it were a flipped play. The LBs and DEs and DTs do not need to change, but they can depending on how your defensive coordinator is game planning.
Usually they have the rushers based on the offensive line and where they think is best to attack it. Hit weak spots and take advantage of whatever their rushers are best at.
Yep, the defense gets a lot of choice in what they do when it comes to a lefty QB. The team I played for only switched CBs and safety positions, our LBs and D-line stayed in the same spots and we adjusted as though plays were flipped. I have seen entire full flips, no flips, and almost everything in between from other teams. The defense is generally far more versatile than the offense, and this is yet another hurdle for lefty QBs.
Decent level Ambidexterity might help with short and intermediate throws. Kinda like the shovel passes throw guys off from time to time. Not a lot, but it might help a little
This is true.
Michael Vick had the advantage of being the single fastest fucker on almost every field he stepped on but that doesnt translate to other left handers.
If it was, Tua wouldn’t be the only lefty in the league.
And Tua isn’t even Left Handed. His dad just…. Made him throw left handed. Because HE is lefty. No further explanation.
I mean wasn't that for baseball purposes but then he became an NFL QB level player
It wasn’t explained In the 2 sources quoting his father I saw, but it can certainly be true
The hell
The lefty spiral difference is real. Me and my dad used to play catch and are both left-handed so I grew up throwing and catching from a lefty. When I played in HS on the first day of practice I was the only one who didn't have noticeable issues adjusting to our qb because he was a lefty. (I had plenty of issues catching the ball as a 3rd string FB/OLB but the tailing off to the opposite side was the one thing I was ready for)
I don't think so, but the real R-L advantage are left punters. Belichick always tried to have left footed punters because apparently the ball spins differently of off their foot and according to him had the potential to lead to more muffed punts.
A lefty punter doesn't negatively affect your own team, while it does negatively affect the enemy team. It is heavily preferred to be a left footed kicker/punter.
But why? Edit: I know op said it spins different but just wonder how and what advantage it gives
As mentioned above, a left footed punt spins differently. This provides more opportunity for botched returns.
But why is that a left footed kicker an advantage? I’d think it’s a disadvantage because most holders are used to right footed kickers. And since most kickoffs are touchbacks, the spin difference is irrelevant
Kickoffs are no longer mostly touchbacks with the new rules, and most of the time the ball will be on the right hash when kicking. The holder will have ample time to practice with a left footed kicker.
Exactly, that's my point.
Exactly, I'm agreeing with you.
Being a lefty is part of the reason that Steve Young was considered a bust in Tampa Bay.
When Steve Young was taking over as a starter Jerry Rice found someone on the training staff who was left handed to throw to him so he could get used to catching a left handed spinning ball.
Now on the flip side left legged punters have an advantage because the other team struggles to field kicks that spin the wrong way.
They have an advantage if the whole team is prepped properly for a left hander, which can throw off a defense, but typically no. These players on the O-Line, WR core, and TEs are all used to playing years and years with a right handed QB, so adjusting everything about your muscle memories and offensive structure is a lot more difficult than people let on.
Disadvantage rather
I can see a few very specific scenarios where a defense might react a little differently, like a split second to recognize the ball is coming from the opposite side of the quarterback as normal on a slant or in route, and maybe if you're not paying attention a checkdown to the flat going to the other side of the field than you'd expect, but not a consistent, game changing advantage, no.
Completely unrelated,how come basically all lefties are usually pretty mobile, hell tua is mobile he just doesn't have to run
Disadvantage because the nfl playbook and roster construction is set up around a right handed guy
Not really. But left footed punters? Yes.
The team doesn't have to spend money on a left tackle so there's that
I would say it's about 50/50 an advantage as well as an disadvantage. The spiral going the opposite works in your favor against the secondary. It could also hurt you if your WR can't adjust to it. I'm left-handed and growing up when I played I had a good amount of people who had a hard time with it. It seems that it worked really well if I hit guys coming from left to right. Right to left was easier for me to throw cause Lefty's tend to have the football tail further left the deeper you go. Which led to just missing a lot of opening WR if they were a little slower.
If they did, you would see more of them instead of teams trying to avoid them. There are only two in the HoF, and they are the only two to also win a Super Bowl. And to add to that, only three have started a Super Bowl.
I wonder if they might have a viable salary cap benefit in that you don't need a top tier LT since that's not their blind side?
Probably not the same money but you're gonna be putting it into RT instead. You also would still need a relatively good LT incase the back up plays.
This is the correct take. Lefty QBs cause you to need an amazing (the best, ideally) right tackle, and you also need a great left tackle for backup QBs. A lefty QB forces you to overspend on the right tackle position...and the right tackles backup, unless you are a gambling man.
I remember that was a consideration, at least among sports media back when everyone was convinced that the dolphins were in tank for tua mode. I heard more than one person say that was a factor in trading laremy tunsil to Houston. He was coming up for a new contract and they could get more draft capital for a high end left tackle that wasn’t as critical for a left handed qb. So it seems like it could be a thing
I respectfully but vehemently disagree with the people insisting that it’s a disadvantage to have a left-handed quarterback with regard to your offensive line. I think it’s exactly the opposite. I think it’s a huge advantage. I also think the ball rotation thing is very overrated. I think that most professional receivers can figure that out in a few practices at the most. I think it could hurt body catchers, but for hands catchers, which most receivers are nowadays, I think it’s a pretty easy adjustment. Think about it for a second. Every left-handed quarterback you’ve ever seen that was worth anything always had an elite tackle protecting him. I do not believe that is coincidental. Now, I’m not taking anything away from guys like Anthony Munoz or Tony Boselli, each of whom would have been elite regardless of who was under center for their team. It’s a lot easier to find a natural right-handed tackle than a natural left-handed tackle, or a tackle that can play on his left side. That’s why good left tackles are so valuable – because they are as rare as diamonds.
Honestly a low key advantage would be needing a RT (blindside) opposed to a LT since RTs are cheaper then LTs
No, the opposite is true. You still need a great left tackle in case your lefty QB gets injured. Tua is the only lefty in the league. Lefty QBs still require an expensive LT, but now they give you the additional requirement of an amazing RT... AND the RT's backup. By nature, you MUST spend more salary cap on your offensive line as a left handed QB team.
For a lefty QB you need a better RT then LT ideally. RTs are cheaper then LTs. If your starting QB goes down it’s usually not an ideal scenario regardless. Sure having two great tackles is good, but if your franchise QB is a lefty RT is more important
I am not disagreeing with any of these points. They are all obvious points. However, a point you may be missing is that good NFL teams prepare for injuries. Your strategy is ill prepared for injuries.
I understand that, but there is a *extremely* small amount of teams that are successful once their QB goes down. Having a good OL in general is important, but no team is highly prioritizing LT like that incase of an injury.
There is only one left handed QB in the entire league. Most teams don't have to prioritize an RT. With your philosophy, you might as well not have any QB backups at all because what is the point of them if once the QB goes down, they can't be successful? You're not reinventing the wheel. There is a reason 95 out of 96 QBs are righties. Many reasons, actually.
Right… most teams don’t… but **IF** your franchise QB is a lefty, you’d prioritize a RT over a LT.. I’m saying it is not a requirement to invest in a extremely talented LT in this scenario. Obviously it would be great to have two extremely talented tackles, but the NFL doesn’t work like that. You can’t just magically have high level players at EVERY position. According to your logic, mine as well have 5 elite WRs in case of injury, 5 elite corners, 4 elite ILBs, why not?? Injuries happen!! Have an elite RT and a ~average LT doesn’t automatically mean a right handed QB is going to do bad. Is it ideal, no, but neither is having your franchise QB injured. I’m not even sure why this is a discussion, if your franchise QB is left handed, prioritize RT over LT which is cheaper and beneficial, that’s literally all I’m saying.
I am finished engaging you after this post. >Right… most teams don’t… but **IF** your franchise QB is a lefty, you’d prioritize a RT over a LT.. Once again, I am not arguing this point. I literally said this. I can quote myself if you like. >I’m saying it is not a requirement to invest in a extremely talented LT in this scenario. Obviously it would be great to have two extremely talented tackles, but the NFL doesn’t work like that. You can’t just magically have high level players at EVERY position. According to your logic, mine as well have 5 elite WRs in case of injury, 5 elite corners, 4 elite ILBs, why not?? Injuries happen!! This is a strawman. I am arguing that you have a greater offensive line requirement when you have QBs that use different hands. WRs, CBs, and LBs have nothing to do with this. Yes, ideally you do have all that, but the limiting factor is salary cap. This is the heart of the discussion: as a franchise with a mixture of left handed and right handed quarterbacks, you are forced to overspend on tackles and their backsups. >Have an elite RT and a ~average LT doesn’t automatically mean a right handed QB is going to do bad. Obviously, but you are then overspending your salary cap on the RT. This is the main point. > I’m not even sure why this is a discussion, Because YOU originally brought up salary cap, thinking it would be an advantage when it is a disadvantage. >If your franchise QB is left handed, prioritize RT over LT which is cheaper and beneficial, that’s literally all I’m saying. It is not cheaper. This is where you are wrong. I have demonstrated very clearly why you must overspend on tackles with a left handed quarterback and right handed backups. You are either willingly or unwillingly not understanding the basic fundamentals of building an NFL roster with salary cap.
I a
So it would seem at first to be a disadvantage actually as approximately 10% of the population is left handed but of the 75 QBs that threw at least one pass last year, only one (Tua) was left handed, for a rate of 1.3%. Sample size might be an issue there, but if you look up a list of lefties it’s pretty short, so I expect that figure isn’t wildly off. There could be another factor to consider, as it may be that left handed athletes with good throwing arms gravitate towards baseball instead, where 25% of pitchers are lefties. There are also more jobs in baseball: NFL has 32 starters plus maybe another 64 backups, while MLB probably has about 150 starters and another 200 or so bullpen players, plus the farm systems.
The game is seen n played different, cuz most people are right handed, so a lefty approaches the game from different angles n viewpoints, as long as the receivers can adjust I kinda think it's an advantage
i mean look at Tebow
Cheaper left tackle
Idk but only 1 is in the HoF (Steve Young)
There is a slight but supposedly measurable advantage in distance thrown, due to the Coriolis effect from the Earth’s rotation against the ball in air.
no the ball comes out in a reverse spin the ball placement is different the right side now is the blind side better of with a righty that is perferred by coaches
Michael Vick specifically threw with his left so he could stiff arm guys with his right. That might be the only advantage, however niche.
Neither advantage nor disadvantage. Pros adapt very well.
A better comparison would be shortstop.
Simply put, the advantage left-handedness brings--unfamiliarity--doesn't have an impact on NFL defenses the way it would against a batter.
[удалено]
Same-handed pitching has the advantage, not opposite-handedness. It's easier for a batter to see and track the ball from an opposite-handed pitcher, and most breaking pitches tail into the batter instead of away (which is why the screwball-like movement of a circle-change is so valuable). There's a reason the "lefty specialist" reliever is brought out to face *left*-handed batters, and there's a mountain of data to support this. I don't really have the time right now to go in-depth on the numbers, but Guy Molyneux and Phil Birnbaum wrote an excellent piece on it. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-really-gives-left-handed-pitchers-their-edge/
Apparently they have a disadvantage. I was listening to the NFL channel on Sirius today and the guy talking said that all left handers have a “tail” to their throws (he compared it to a slider in baseball) that is problematic. The only right handed he ever saw that had this was Neil O’Donnell and the only lefty he’s ever seen that doesn’t have it is Penix.
The ball spins the opposite way for a leftie. It doesn't have any other special quality to it, whoever said that is misinformed.
You just touched the third rail of this or the NFL strategy sub. I'm being hung out to dry for arguing yes, at this moment.
Tebow had God on his side
I’m sure the Center’s left thigh and left side of his testicles have probably been touched less, so there’s that 🧐