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!

     

Cold Hard Facts : Ron and Norv since 2018 are 10-3 When Going Into a Game With a Healthy QB


Pantha-kun

Recommended Posts

  • 6-2 first half of 2018 with a HEALTHY Cam (before TJ Watt Hit if you want to use that as the flashpoint where Cam wasn't the same afterwards) 
  • 0-6 after that with an INJURED Cam
  • 0-1 with a HEALTHY HEINEKE/ALLEN (they were healthy when the game started)
  • 1-0 with a HEALTHY ALLEN (healthy when the game started)    
  • 0-2 2019 with INJURED Cam
  • 3-0 2019 with HEALTHY ALLEN

Do the math, this means Ron/Norv are  10-3 when going into a game with a healthy Quarterback , and he's 0-8 going into games with an injured QB.

I'm pretty sure his system is working and translating to wins when there's a healthy QB to mostly be a game manager and hit key throws, and CMC to run it down the other teams gullet. That's my point. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key stats are 0-8 with with injured Cam.. he HAS to be absolutely 100% before he steps on the field again. Because these wins stacking up in his absence are piling on evidence that we were losing primarily b/c Cam trying to play through injury.

Norv's system fails massively when you have a QB that cant make key throws. In his system the QB doesnt have to make ALL the throws but the key throws are needed to win.

All the QB really needs to do is be a game manager who can make a few timely passes and not throw picks. B/C our Defense and running game are good enough otherwise that we dont need the QB to be otherworldly to win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Pantha-kun said:

All the QB really needs to do is be a game manager who can make a few timely passes and not throw picks. B/C our Defense and running game are good enough otherwise that we dont need the QB to be otherworldly to win. 

Sounds suspiciously like the 2015 Broncos . . . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MVPccaffrey said:

And we're winning now with a game manager. 

***On 10/2/2019 at 12:17 AM, 332nd said:

"Game manager" is a QB who has a few games a season where they light it up, but for most games they just don't turn the ball over, have rather pedestrian stats, but they keep the defense off balance enough that they usually come out with a win. 

Basically they don't carry the team, they just make sure everyone does their job.***

----------------------------------------

Another guy provided that as the proper definition of a "game manager".

Sounds like they "light it up" 3 to 5 times per year and come out with the win....let's call it 4 wins while "lighting it up".

Then they "usually come out with the win" in the other 12 games...."usually" implies a lot more than 50% but in order to be conservative let's call it 7 wins with "no turnovers, pedestrian stats, keeping the D off balance", etc....

....adds up to 11-5.

That sounds fantastic....implies playoffs just about every year, let's call it 6-of-7 years....

....sign me up for that --- folks I know who are Seahawks fans tell me it's a terrific state of being!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SBiii said:

 

....adds up to 11-5.

That sounds fantastic....implies playoffs just about every year, let's call it 6-of-7 years....

....sign me up for that --- folks I know who are Seahawks fans tell me it's a terrific state of being!

 

I too would like to sign up for 11-5 every year.  That's entering elite territory tbh.  Maybe you slide to 9-7 on a bad year, maybe you go 13-3 in a good year.  This sounds like a team that could really keep a fan base engaged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SBiii said:

***On 10/2/2019 at 12:17 AM, 332nd said:

"Game manager" is a QB who has a few games a season where they light it up, but for most games they just don't turn the ball over, have rather pedestrian stats, but they keep the defense off balance enough that they usually come out with a win. 

Basically they don't carry the team, they just make sure everyone does their job.***

----------------------------------------

Another guy provided that as the proper definition of a "game manager".

Sounds like they "light it up" 3 to 5 times per year and come out with the win....let's call it 4 wins while "lighting it up".

Then they "usually come out with the win" in the other 12 games...."usually" implies a lot more than 50% but in order to be conservative let's call it 7 wins with "no turnovers, pedestrian stats, keeping the D off balance", etc....

....adds up to 11-5.

That sounds fantastic....implies playoffs just about every year, let's call it 6-of-7 years....

....sign me up for that --- folks I know who are Seahawks fans tell me it's a terrific state of being!

 

Is Allen good enough to do anything in the playoffs against the best defenses in the League? He’s definitely not Russell Wilson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BrianS said:

I too would like to sign up for 11-5 every year.  That's entering elite territory tbh.  Maybe you slide to 9-7 on a bad year, maybe you go 13-3 in a good year.  This sounds like a team that could really keep a fan base engaged.

What you describe is exactly what Russ Wilson has produced since being picked in the 3rd round of the 2012 NFL draft.  Russ wasn't blessed with excessive size, or strength....can't overpower anyone....

....but he can damn sure manage a football game.

(PS...NOT putting Kyle in Russ's category...Kyle has a long way to go but I think his ceiling is high.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • What's up gents, the OGs remember me, the guy who single-handedly gave the Panthers the greatest uniform in history moniker. Not too long after that I got involved with Pro Football Focus (pre-Collinsworth acquisition) and ended up taking backseat here to preserve some objectivity. But from a distance I noticed a lot. After the end of the Cam era this place devolved into the most un-fun, petty, negative cesspool of whining and bitching that has ever graced the internet. The worst part of it all is that the level of discussion turned into the most ill-informed, hot-take, unnuanced crap, rife with people talking out of their posteriors as if they have any clue about what they are watching. Once you get into the professional side of the sport and actual film rooms, you start to understand there's an absurd number of moving parts to pretty much every snap and the details you are privy to are truly only half the picture. The absolute most important thing I learned from being part of professional level football analysis is that quarterbacking is literally the most intricate and difficult position in all of professional sports, and that the NFL itself is struggling to develop any workable model that allows them to understand what makes one succeed vs what makes one fail. Because of this paradox it has also made the quarterback position itself grossly overvalued from a fan and media standpoint, creating an absurd fixation on the results delivered by a single player who has to rely on the contributions of everyone around them. This also drives the dreaded inflation of QB salaries that inevitably cause even elite teams to lose key talent all to pour cash into the one player supposed to be able to single-handedly elevate the entire team (and defense and special teams and coaching and ownership by some mysterious proxy), yet without those same players even talented teams can wander the wilderness searching for the right guy to take advantage of their talent window. The discussions the last few years around Bryce has personified this insanity, as this board has devolved into some sort of electronic civil war between the hyperbolic Young supporters and the vitriolic Bryce haters. The reality, like practically everything in this world, is somewhere in the middle. He has traits that can absolutely elevate a team with creativity, play recognition, off-arm angle throws, mental toughness, etc. He's also physically limited, with mostly "good-enough" qualities for most situations that a professional quarterback is asked to do, and will never be an overpowering physical force like pre-injury Cam. But "good-enough" physicality represents a large majority of championship-winning quarterbacks, even in the modern era. There's a reason the corpse of Peyton Manning took the chip from elite physical specimen Cam, because the team surrounding him was talented enough to get him there, while we all know Cam was the driving force of that 2015 team. That's no knock on him, that's just how the game of football tends to work: the more complete team usually wins. The summary is this: if this team lives or dies solely on the performance of its quarterback, then it is absolutely a paper tiger even if he plays brilliantly week in and out. There are no superheroes in this sport, there are only conduits that proxy the collective efforts of much of the team around them. And no one alive can tell you how the position is played perfectly, it's all a confluence of circumstance and what unique collection of traits each player brings to the position, which can never be truly recreated season after season, even for the same player on the same team. If this place remains a raging hellscape of idiotic hot takes I will happily remove myself again and do something more productive for yet another decade, but maybe's there hope that we can all get back to the old adage, and keep pounding.
    • Really impressed how the bottom six have looked the past couple games
    • 1st ⭐️ Big Bussi - 17 saves, .941 save % 2nd ⭐️ Logan Dankoven - 2 assists, 3 SOG, +3, 16:25 TOI 3rd ⭐️ Ghost Bear - 1 goal, 3 blocked shots, +2, 18:48 TOI
×
×
  • Create New...