Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Ross Cockrell’s QB Rating In Zone Coverage is...Incredible


Saca312

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, MtnProwler said:

 

I think you're looking for definite or definitely, but I'm not perfect and I know what you mint.

 

    No, I am defiantly happy with my verbiage usage. 

 

    It's like SuperB owl. It is a Huddleism that tickles me every time I use it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Saca312 said:

Well this really caught my eye. Now, understand I’m not a fan of QB rating in applicable terms of the QB, but for how well a cornerback does I think it more or less tells a good story.

So, feast your eyes on this:

Yes, that is a 13.8 QB Rating allowed, 35% comp %, 3.6 Yards per Target, and 81% success rate. Most stats are top 5 in each category.

He’s first in the NFL at allowing a low QB rating. Pretty impressive.

Certainly looks like he’s a pretty decent cornerback. Film also checks out. 

Great add. Better than Worley for sure.

SACA MADE ANUDDER POST WHAR IT WILL NUT EVAR CUM TRUE HUR DUR!!!

(Am I doing it right?)

(P.S. Nice info, Saca.)

(P.S.S. Nice snag, Hurndawg.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, iamhubby1 said:

Another hole filled. At a decent price as well. This team is shaping up, one player at a time.

My only critique would be Cockrell sounds like a BETTER fit for Rivera's defense than the previous corner, Breeland, who they tried to sign for 3-times the salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

My only critique would be Cockrell sounds like a BETTER fit for Rivera's defense than the previous corner, Breeland, who they tried to sign for 3-times the salary.

 

    So, although Hurndog tried to screw up by overpaying Breeland. Because that deal fell through, and he got lucky and got Cockrell on a fair deal. He went from almost stinking the place up, to smelling like a rose. 

 

    Maybe this is the start of one of those years where everything seems to go our way? A year where for some odd reason, things still manage to work out for the best. Even though ol' Hurndog may not have planned it out that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...