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!

     

The QB controversy post-SF


MechaZain

State of the QB controversy post-SF  

53 members have voted

  1. 1. Did week 8 sour your opinion of Kyle Allen? (multiple choice)

    • No/no change in opinion.
      23
    • Yes.
      7
    • Allen can become the franchise QB.
      4
    • I want Cam starting at QB.
      24


Recommended Posts

Ive been saying Kyle wasnt the answer all along. I didnt ever bash him. Im glad he played as well as he did before this game. I truly appreciate it. He was a unproven commodity, and I was always irked how quickly our fan base wanted us to kick Cam to the curb. Im thankful for Kyle because he actually gave Cam time to heal instead of forcing to play injured to keep Ron's job. So despite this game, Kyle salvaged the season, now if we get back the Cam we all know and love we can get another streak going again. Our only shot is the WC, even with two games left vs brees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

missing option for Allen already is a franchise QB. a lot of those plays people thought were bad were actually good if you know anything about football. for example, when he dramatically underthrew or overthrew receivers on every deep pass attempt he was trying to keep them from getting winded because he knows that it sucks to have to catch the ball and you can get tired or even hurt. he's playing at a level that we aren't used to seeing around here so fans dont know how to handle it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Forty-Eight said:

I want Cam back but not against Tennessee and its 8th ranked defense. I rather have Allen the next two games and hope that he can split one. Then bring Cam in vs Atlanta. 

If Cam is healthy why wouldn’t you want him back? If he’s healthy and you still don’t want him to start because he might play badly against a solid defense then he definitely isn’t the guy either. We might as well start Grier for the rest of the year to see what he has if that’s the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, stankowalski said:

If Cam's totally healthy you have to start him.  I gotta be honest though, I'm not sold that he's going to remain healthy enough throughout the year to be effective.  If he could become more of a pocket passer that would help.  Stop running him unless totally necessary.

I always believed he got crushed and hurt in the pocket a hell of alot more times than when he ran. Only time I know he got hurt running was his concussion in atl at the goaline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, usmcpanthers said:

I always believed he got crushed and hurt in the pocket a hell of alot more times than when he ran. Only time I know he got hurt running was his concussion in atl at the goaline.

Broke his ribs in 2014 against the Pats in preseason running as well and the shoulder was chasing down an interception but yes most of his big hits have been in the pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...