Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Matt Ryan and his sophmore season?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
48 replies to this topic

#46 Fireball77

Fireball77

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,398 posts

Posted 04 February 2009 - 09:55 AM

Jay Cutler: 3rd year in the league, 25/18 TD/int, 62% of passes, 4500 yds, almost identical perstats as his second year.

Aaron Rodgers: 4th year in the league, 28/13 TD/int, 63# of passes, 4038 yds

yeah jury is really out on these new kids


So after one year of production for Rodgers, are you comfortable saying he isn't the "product of a system" while I do believe you have said recently that the system is more responsible for Brady's and Cassel's #s?

McCarthy and Shanny are offensive driven HCs who have gotten the max out of even average to subpar QBs like Brooks and Plummer and Smith is a defensive HC so it makes sense that their expectations of their QB would be a bit different. Denver's and GBs run game struggled this past year and it was a part of why they were putting it up in the air so much. That said, I would bet that if Ryan as a pure 1st year guy, or Flacco as well had to air it out that much as rookies they wouldn't have done very well. And I am guessing neither would Cutler or Rodgers were they pure rookies.

Guys who sit seem to perform better their first year as a starters. I have no hard evidence to back me up, but I don't think that if Cutler or Rodgers had to start on the teams they had when they were rookies that they would have done a bunch better than Ryan did. I still say I would like to see three years.

#47 Fiz

Fiz

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,063 posts

Posted 04 February 2009 - 10:11 AM

So after one year of production for Rodgers, are you comfortable saying he isn't the "product of a system" while I do believe you have said recently that the system is more responsible for Brady's and Cassel's #s?

yes. i don't believe I ever said that Brady was a system QB, though I think a lot of Cassel's success can be attributed to a very friendly QB system. for example, with Rodgers and Cutler, both of them are very good at reading a defenses and hitting their second and third reads. Against Carolina for example, Rodgers was picking us apart in the pocket and they were getting decent pressure on him. They weren't just dump offs to Ryan Grant either; he was nailing Jennings and Driver 15, 20 yards down the field. He did that all year. The only reason he wasn't talked about more as having a great year is because of the person he replaced and the media's fascination with him.

Shanahan aside, Cutler is one of the best young QBs in the league. If you want to say he was just a product of that system, well, I can't really argue that since it's the only system he's been in, but I saw nothing from Jay that would suggest he couldn't thrive in the Patriots' Amoeba system that mcdaniels is doubtlessly going to install.

With Cassel, if you watch him play, he has horrible measurables, no pocket presence, likes to fumble, and generally just sticks to one guy. Anyone can hold the ball for 2 seconds then hit heath evans in the flat. A typical pass play is stare at Randy Moss until he gets open, if not dump it off to Wes Welker. That's the main reason I don't want the Panthers anywhere near the guy; we don't have the talent or the scheme to make him successful. Neither do the Vikings for that matter.

McCarthy and Shanny are offensive driven HCs who have gotten the max out of even average to subpar QBs like Brooks and Plummer

Aaron Brooks was actually a fairly effective QB before everyone realized how to play him. Plummer used to be great. Just because his career hit the shits in Denver doesn't mean he wasn't a pro bowl QB. I mean it's not like Shanahan turned Patrick Ramsey into a starter or anything.

and Smith is a defensive HC so it makes sense that their expectations of their QB would be a bit different.

Smith has nothing to do with Ryan. Mularkey, former head coach and brilliant offensive coordinator, was the only one who was even allowed near him.

Denver's and GBs run game struggled this past year and it was a part of why they were putting it up in the air so much.

They had a thousand yard rusher in GB and Brandon Jackson averaged 5.5 yards a pop. They threw so much because that's where the talent on the team is; at QB and WR. You can't really fault them for that, and it's not like Rodgers didn't live up to it.

Denver's offense this year was still one of the highest scoring until everything completely fell apart at the end.

#48 Fireball77

Fireball77

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,398 posts

Posted 04 February 2009 - 10:55 AM

FTR, I think Rodgers is the real deal myself...just not ready to jump on the FOR SURE yet. Cutler has an arm on him which lets him get away with a ton of stuff other QBs probably can't (which is why I can't say I think HE is the real deal yet) but he also has an ego on him so IMO he will have to have a severe attitude adjustment. You can act like a prick after you prove yourself and your teammates will probably still tolerate you because of your performance, but I think it is unwise to act like a prick before you prove yourself.

Yes I agree 100% that Mularkey was a big part of Ryan's success. The point I was trying to make is only that Smith's philosophy isn't as aggressive offensively in the air as McCarthy's or Shanny's. I don't fault either guy at all for going to their strengths (though I really loathe pass heavy offenses as a rule, they are too "soft" in my book...AZ's is an exception), but traditionally Shanny and McC have employed good run game in their offenses.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on Brooks and Plummer. I see two guys there who had their best years under McCarthy and Shanny and weren't as good without them.

I think GB was struggling early on in the run game and got it going later in the year. I just seem to recall that McCarthy was constantly having to answer questions about he lack of effectiveness of their run game. And of course Denver wasn't putting out their usual solid run game last season either.

I don't know how much of Cassel you watched, but it sounds to me like you watched him more early on in the year than later because your description of his play matches how he was playing early on. He was a big part of making his OL look bad though they were playing poorly as well. It was actually quite astonishing the difference between Cassel in his first 5-6 games and after that. Though they lost to the NYJ that second time, he came of age in that game, IMO. That throw to Moss in the EZ to tie the game was absolutely unbelievable. They started off slowly on O with simple stuff and by year end they were running pretty much their entire Brady offense with him. He was getting them into plays, etc, and not just running that screen to Welker every down just about. He had a very good coach in Mickey D, and some really good skill players but he also worked his behind off which is a quality that will translate to another team. That said, I have NO CLUE if he can continue to develop elsewhere and with average to decent skill players only around him.

#49 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • ALL-PRO
  • 8,553 posts

Posted 04 February 2009 - 02:17 PM

wins wins wins wins wins wins WINS WINS WINS WINS WINS WINS WINS WINS


it's pretty obvious because you're talking nonsense about him.


I dont understand that at all.


Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com