Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Practice Observations


This topic has been archived.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

#71 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,137
  • Reputation: 5,289
Moderators

Posted 19 August 2011 - 03:27 PM

Good read.

The thing that jumped out at me was how preditably consistant Clausen was. In reality that isn't a good thing. If the coach of another team can easily see your pattern is so consistant, they can pick you off easily. Hence what happened on Saturday and maybe the reason for so many inceptions last season. Yes, interception can come from being too predictable.

Being a little eract can go a long way in keeping the coaches guessing. And, IMO, will keep our receivers on their toes instead of feeling it will automatically land where they expect it cause if you automatically expect it at a certain spot all the time, then so will your rivals.

In saying that, I still feel that Clausen should start the season for the bear fact that he deserves to prove whether last season was because of the team or himself.


I agree Clausen's consistancy can be used against him....but I don't worry about INTs with him....I worry about consistant 3 and outs. Not moving the offense.

Need to see more. He still doesn't seem to move the O well......a his pocket issues don't seem to be improved to a degree where I think he will be able to consistantly move the offense.

With a young QB INTs don't bother me that greatly.....they will happen with Cam or Clausen. The things about camp that stood out is Clausen OVERALL just seemed content to play it safe.....and ensure himself a spot on the roster.

#72 chef17

chef17

    Senior Asshole

  • Joined: 28-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,504
  • Reputation: 105
HUDDLER

Posted 19 August 2011 - 03:29 PM

Might help to define terms.

"Consistent"doesn't necessarily equal "predictable". It can, bur doesn't have to.

The question would be which term more accurately describes Clausen.


a QB can be consistent and still perform at a low level.

consistent in being able to hit his receivers? good thing.
consistent in the QBs tendencies? not good...that falls under predictable. jake's last season playing he was telegraphing his tendencies which was the reason he was picked off so much.

now favre was consistent in that you knew that he was going to give it his all and that he was clutch. he was very inconsistent, though, in that you didn't know how pretty or ugly any of his passes were going to be. you never knew if he was going to be throwing more INTs or TDs in any given game because there was a pretty equal chance of both happening. jake had a lot of the same qualities...when he was at his best anyway.

being consistent as a passer is nice, but isn't necessary. it brings about less ulcers from watching, but to be a winning QB it doesn't have to be there.

that said, newton did a good job of keeping his INTs low while his number of TDs was really high. he had a good comp. % and his passer efficiency rating was really high...one of the best in the league. it might take him a little time to adjust, but once he gets the hang of it i don't think we will be seeing him with more INTs than TDs in a season.


Both good points. When he said being consistent is bad and it's better to be eratic, I was thinking in terms of consistently throwing to a spot vs. throwing left or right and the WR always having to adjust. I misunderstood and didn't see he was talking about tendencies. My fault.

#73 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 44,810
  • Reputation: 13,352
SUPPORTER

Posted 19 August 2011 - 03:31 PM

I watched (and cheered for) a Panthers team led by Jake Delhomme for the better part of eight years.

Obviously, I have no problem with winning ugly.

#74 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 44,810
  • Reputation: 13,352
SUPPORTER

Posted 19 August 2011 - 03:47 PM

And to be clear, I think "erratic" is a bit too strong a word for Newton's throwing motion at this point.

"Inconsistent" might be okay, maybe even "variable". But it's not like we have Wild Thing Vaughn back there under center.

#75 chef17

chef17

    Senior Asshole

  • Joined: 28-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,504
  • Reputation: 105
HUDDLER

Posted 19 August 2011 - 03:52 PM

I watched (and cheered for) a Panthers team led by Jake Delhomme for the better part of eight years.

Obviously, I have no problem with winning ugly.


And to be clear, I think "erratic" is a bit too strong a word for Newton's throwing motion at this point.

"Inconsistent" might be okay, maybe even "variable". But it's not like we have Wild Thing Vaughn back there under center.


:lol: I think that's what got me. When I think of erratic, missing a receiver by a couple yards comes to mind. So I was like how is that good?

#76 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 44,810
  • Reputation: 13,352
SUPPORTER

Posted 19 August 2011 - 04:14 PM

:lol: I think that's what got me. When I think of erratic, missing a receiver by a couple yards comes to mind. So I was like how is that good?

Well, truth be told, he might just do that a time or two early on :lol:

Happily, Newton's got a better 'Mike' coaching him than Delhomme had.