All Activity

I do think we should look at a QB in this class. It is fairly loaded with good backup QB prospects. It would be nice to tote a developmental prospect around again for a bit. Well, one that isn't a three year starter....

ESPN has this qualifier. To qualify, a player must have at least 14 attempts per team's games played Statistics are updated nightly NFL.com does not and it has Gunner and Cam Akers with the best rating. Just another reason why pure stats are silly. Funny enough neither of them remove data from games players didn't start or finish. Weird right?

Shough is not playing well. In six games played he has seven turnovers, a 1:1 turnover/TD ratio, and a 2-4 record.

double post

For you it doesn't, for me it doesn't because we don't like (we hate) Notre Dame. But you are wildly underestimating how many Notre Dame fans are in this country, who would tune into to NBC every weekend to watch them play Northwestern, Purdue, Maryland, etc. And that's a huge reason for the Big 10 to consider it - money, eyeballs, and recruiting. Notre Dame would never pursue the SEC. Notre Dame doesn't want to run the risk of losing to the 8th thru 13th place SEC teams, like a Tennessee, LSU, Florida or Auburn which could absolutely happen to the Irish on any of those teams "good days". See Florida beating Texas this year.

I would. Give Shough another offseason and see if he can keep getting better as they build the roster. Honestly Rattler wasn't horrible and could develop into a nice backup as well.

I guess technically speaking, Gunner Olszewski is the best passer in the league right now going 1 for 1 for 33 yards and a TD and a 158.3 rating on the season.

They should absolutely pass and go BPA. This years class doesn’t look great. At most take another guy on day 3.

I think the Big 10 would tell them to fug off. I don't think they'd bend over and take it like the ACC has. Same with the SEC. The ACC is largely willing to deal with it because they're basically just barely hanging on as a major conference in football. But ND beating their largely lower level teams on national TV isn't helping their reputation.

I'd start the game going pass heavy, like in the second Falcons game, to exploit the heavy box sets New Orleans will undoubtedly start with. Then after building a lead and creating a tired Saints defense, punish the Saints with a very heavy run game, wearing them down more and churning out the clock.

I agree with you in theory. In practice the ACC doesn't gain anything by crapping on Notre Dame. This year, the ACC was the benefactor of NC State, Syracuse, Pitt, and Miami being on Prime Time linear (which is still massive compared to streaming) network TV BECAUSE of Notre Dame. You could maybe argue that Miami could get on Prime Time anyways because of who they are, but they were in the opening weekend ONLY game on SUNDAY mostly because they were playing Notre Dame. I work with a ton of dipsh*ts, and self-absorbed assholes in entertainment, and while I'd love to tell them to fug off, I realize the reward is worth the tolerance needed to reap it. I think the ACC is in the same boat with Notre Dame. The last thing you want to do is piss off Notre Dame and have them take their ball, go home, and call the Big 10 to be their new "friends". Then every ACC game is on the CW Network, or the 11am kick on ESPNU. That's significantly less money, brand visibility, and recruits looking at schedules to see how often mom, dad and grandparents can see them play.

I think Shough is playing well. Kellen Moore knows how to develop/help a QB. If Shough keeps this up the Saints might be able to pass on drafting one this year to give him another season. He is an older rookie so he needs to play well fast and he appears to be doing so. The 4th quarter play was my point. It doesn't change much but it happened to drop him below Bryce which you clearly aren't a fan of so you had to manipulate the data to make him higher and just look at starts vs season totals. Regardless they are very close this year and you seem to think Shough is playing well... which means???

I mean, I often separated PJ Walker's starts vs his garbage time. We generally edit out 2 games from Bryce when talking about him last year. All depends what discussion you are having. but if you are having an honesty discussion on Shough and how he is playing and start talking per game production.....a 0-2, 0 yard, 4th quarter technical appearance is going to massive distort his per game production given his limited playing time. The OG goal of of this thread was a legit look at surprisingly play of our next opponent. That's supposed to be normal football talk. But most QBs indirectly make Bryce look bad and the stans can't have that.

The only way Kamara would win over Chuba and Rico would be based on name recognition and how he played several years ago. Which to be honest feels like what you're doing here.

I cannot believe I just saw someone say the Saints have a better supporting cast around their QB. Bye week brain rot is real.

So if a QB get benched his stats for that game disappear? Season totals are typically the stats that are highlighted. What you are saying it all true though. It's why looking at stats without context is pointless. If you are just looking at stats this year Bryce Young mimics Bo Nix. Bryce barely edges him out in YPA and completion but Bo has one more passing TD and the same INTs. They are two very different QBs though but statistically they are very similar. Nix's team is the current 1 seed and we are trying to sneak in.

the Bryce stans basically have been ripping off the Skip/The Golden Calf of Bristol argument. It doesn't matter if he is below average 98% of his snaps. That 2%!!!

Goddamn you actually took time to right all that out. If you think their line and rbs are better than ours you are clearly losing it

But the opposite is also true. A QB comes in up by 3 scores and hands off the rest of the game and throws 2 passes, it throws off the stats. Using a complete game is a more accurate reflection is all. Same as if a QB got knocked out on the 2nd series. That game shouldn't count as a complete game for stats purposes.

Correct and the defense is probably in prevent. These were referred to as "garbage time" stats when Bryce does them. It should help the QB in theory.

I just click ESPN, NFL, Stats and it goes straight to season totals. If you want to dismiss certain games to help one player vs another you go right ahead. You only think one side is way worse because you are on the other side. They both are annoying I assure you.

But I was assured it was "Bryce stans" who were causing all the ruckus I'm starting to think some of our guys would look at a boxing match that ended in a knockout but argue the loser was really the better boxer because "the stats show he landed more punches"

If a backup QB comes into a game down by 3 scores, they're passing. It's probably going to be 4:1 pass to run. The stats are going to be skewed. It's not going to be an accurate reflection of an entire game plan from start to finish. Pretty simple stuff.

if you are talking game production as the discussion, you basically are forced to remove them to even get in the realm of honest discussion. Shough has a 2 pass 4th quarter game and a late 3rd quarter entrance game. That will wildly distort the numbers if you are wanting to talk about what he has done in games. and the generally narrative we talk about most QBs is their starts. Because is what a QB is. The Bryce gymnastics and gaslighting and way worse than the "hate" around here.

Well I'm watching every game this season so it's the same football, same time frame. I see things differently than you do. I can't tell what your actual opinion is because lately it's been coming from Joe Person and others. For someone who doesnt believe in stats you sure as poo seem to be hung up on them. And let's not forget, Jake was a practice squad QB, not the number 1 overall draft pick. They aren't even comparable in expectations of past performance or expected level of QB play. I didn't even mention stats for the 1st 2 years with Bryce. That would be you. What he looked like from the 1st 2 years was that same QB with the same god awful mechanics making throws squared up to the line, not driving his passes, bailing out of the pocket too early, sloppy footwork on drop backs, hopping to get his pass over the line because he's not tall enough to actually throw over a defensive player. When things aren't perfect, he looks like that same awful rookie player. That's why I said you can't ignore past performance. You go back and look to see if he's still doing those things or if he's developing.