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!

     

Cowboys at Bucs - NFL opener GameDay thread


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

So I have a rating scale for QBs - 1-10.

Prescott is similar to Newton - he's a 7 (borderline 8). A guy you can win a lot of games with, but he's never going to consistently push his team to the next level. He's also too good to easily move on from - you're kinda in limbo with the guy if you can't build the rest of the team around him.

Tonight Prescott has struggled to get off his first read a lot - it's very limiting. 

Cam's prime (albeit quite short due to injury) as an overall weapon and QB was way better than what Dak has shown so far. Dak could still take a step forward and he's been a bit more consistent but he's absolutely nowhere near the threat that Cam was at his best. Cam carried a bunch of nobodies on O to the SB. Dak hasn't been able to get anything done despite having a stacked offense pretty much his whole career. Imagine what Cam in his prime could've done with the OL that Dak had before the past year or two.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OldhamA said:

I mean he's always been a cerebral QB. 95% of the time he knows what's coming and where all his guys are meant to be. He almost never has to move from his spot - he's just playing backyard pitch and catch.

I'm actually surprised Brees fell off so quickly - I don't know if he had some arm / shoulder surgery? He certainly lost his fastball. 

I don’t think Brees was a great as everyone made him out to be. He dinked and dunked his whole career in NO. A high completion % doesn’t mean you’re clutch or always know where to go with the ball. He was a stat padding candyass that choked more often than not with the  game on the line.
 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, t96 said:

Cam's prime (albeit quite short due to injury) as an overall weapon and QB was way better than what Dak has shown so far. Dak could still take a step forward and he's been a bit more consistent but he's absolutely nowhere near the threat that Cam was at his best. Cam carried a bunch of nobodies on O to the SB. Dak hasn't been able to get anything done despite having a stacked offense pretty much his whole career. Imagine what Cam in his prime could've done with the OL that Dak had before the past year or two.

Newton in his prime was a problem for everyone. Unfortunately it was a very short lived prime. My 7/8 score is based on his entire career with the Panthers - maybe Prescott is a 6/7 and Newton is a 7/8, but there's an overlap for sure imo. 

Prescott's supporting cast is stellar - I love our WR corps, but theirs is just as good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OldhamA said:

Newton in his prime was a problem for everyone. Unfortunately it was a very short lived prime. My 7/8 score is based on his entire career with the Panthers - maybe Prescott is a 6/7 and Newton is a 7/8, but there's an overlap for sure imo. 

Prescott's supporting cast is stellar - I love our WR corps, but theirs is just as good. 

Give Cam these weapons now, 3 time Superbowls, no 🧢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

As I keep on saying, in College you drop the biggest bags for QBs, DTs and CBs. 

It's a passing league, you have to have multiple CBs that can turn and run with 3/4 WR sets.

Rhule / Fitterer get it - you can't hide behind soft zones and a good pass rush in the NFC South. 

Absolutely, especially after D Jax is a turf toe away from missing the season. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OneBadCat said:

I don’t think Brees was a great as everyone made him out to be. He dinked and dunked his whole career in NO. A high completion % doesn’t mean you’re clutch or always know where to go with the ball. He was a stat padding candyass that choked more often than not with the  game on the line.
 

 

 

 

Agree to disagree.

He was another QB that knew what was coming 95% of the time. You sat back in zone, he took his time and dissected you. You blitzed, he knew exactly where it was coming from and threw the ball to his hot read. 

Unbelievable player - for some reason our fan base hates that he just methodically took what the defence offered him. I thought it was beautiful to watch - if frustrating when playing against him. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • 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...