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!

     

Sam Darnold Thoughts After Game 1

mav1234

By mav1234,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

glenwo2 Grand Master

glenwo2

Posted
Posted
Just now, Floppin said:

That's not how passes work though. Sam's job is to hit the receivers in stride based on their running speed within the route. So technically  he underthrew Robbie slightly, but on a long pass a slight underthrow becomes much more obvious because of the flight time of the ball. 

Well then we'll just have to agree to disagree because I disagree with that take.

Overall, though, Sam has to get better at connecting with his receivers in the endzone.  

It's only Game 1 so let's see how he progresses in Game 2 against the aints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Floppin Grand Master

Floppin

Posted
Posted
Just now, glenwo2 said:

Well then we'll just have to agree to disagree because I disagree with that take.

Overall, though, Sam has to get better at connecting with his receivers in the endzone.  

It's only Game 1 so let's see how he progresses in Game 2 against the aints.

I'm not saying that it was a bad throw by any means, and I feel like I've made that clear. It was a great throw while moving away from pressure and anyone trying to overplay the underthrow into a large negative are being idiotic. That doesn't change the fact that it was a very slight underthrow and there's nothing wrong with admitting that.

I know that you're a Darnold fan and you came here from the Jets because of him but you're not going to do yourself any favors if you're being intellectually dishonest with your arguments. You're just going to come across as an irrational white knight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, glenwo2 said:

No it wasn't "pretty obvious".

He was ahead of both Defenders so much that he had to slow down because HE WAS OUTRUNNING the Pass, not because Sam underthrew the ball!!  😡

You're making it sound like Sam threw a Duck into the wind up in the air or something...

He was outrunning the pass? Otherwise known as the ball being under thrown

Nobody is calling it a duck, if the defender has good coverage it probably would have been an incompletion because Robby had to slow up for it. On the flip side if the defender had good coverage Sam might have led him more but we will never know.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
glenwo2 Grand Master

glenwo2

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Floppin said:

I'm not saying that it was a bad throw by any means, and I feel like I've made that clear. It was a great throw while moving away from pressure and anyone trying to overplay the underthrow into a large negative are being idiotic. That doesn't change the fact that it was a very slight underthrow and there's nothing wrong with admitting that.

I know that you're a Darnold fan and you came here from the Jets because of him but you're not going to do yourself any favors if you're being intellectually dishonest with your arguments. You're just going to come across as an irrational white knight. 

Irrational white knight?   What is that even supposed to mean?

Agreeing to disagree is just a way of me saying "I'm no longer going to argue with you".    You have your viewpoint and I have mine.  

Was I being "intellectually dishonest" when I said that Sam had to be better in the Redzone?

Look, I think you're a cool poster and I don't want that to change in my eyes here.

So let's let drop this and focus on next week, okay?   🙂

 

Edited by glenwo2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
  • Author
Posted
34 minutes ago, Floppin said:

That's not how passes work though. Sam's job is to hit the receivers in stride based on their running speed within the route. So technically  he underthrew Robbie slightly, but on a long pass a slight underthrow becomes much more obvious because of the flight time of the ball. 

I think that usually if a receiver has to adjust slightly to a ball, even if that means slowing slightly, we don't call it an underthrown ball.  it isn't like Robby had to stop (and how many times did we see him have to stop last year? plenty...)  Especially a slight underthrow on a ball thrown to the opposite side of the field right after escaping pressure...  But I agree that it was technically slightly underthrown.

It was a great throw... (I know you aren't arguing otherwise)

some people just got so used to Cam throwing 50 yard ropes on a dime they can be overcritical. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Floppin Grand Master

Floppin

Posted
Posted
Just now, mav1234 said:

I think that usually if a receiver has to adjust slightly to a ball, even if that means slowing slightly, we don't call it an underthrown ball.  it isn't like Robby had to stop (and how many times did we see him have to stop last year? plenty...)  Especially a slight underthrow on a ball thrown to the opposite side of the field right after escaping pressure...  But I agree that it was technically slightly underthrown.

It was a great throw... (I know you aren't arguing otherwise)

some people just got so used to Cam throwing 50 yard ropes on a dime they can be overcritical. 

Yeah, I mean, that's pretty much what I was saying. I know it's all basically a semantical argument, but denying the reality of it isn't doing anyone's argument any favors. I was just trying to point that out. 

As I said, it was a great throw. It showed off his arm strength while throwing in tandem with solid pocket awareness while eluding interior pressure. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Floppin said:

Yeah, I mean, that's pretty much what I was saying. I know it's all basically a semantical argument, but denying the reality of it isn't doing anyone's argument any favors. I was just trying to point that out. 

As I said, it was a great throw. It showed off his arm strength while throwing in tandem with solid pocket awareness while eluding interior pressure. 

it is the kind of play you know the coaches were counting on when they pushed to pick him up. 

tbh if his chemistry continues to improve with the receivers I think he could turn his career around.  but we'll see - it is just one game.  but a promising start to Darnold 2.0.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SteveSmithTD89 Proficient

SteveSmithTD89

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, AU-panther said:

rare?

Anderson was wide open, and had to slow up.

If it would have been tight coverage it probably would have been an incompletion.

A rare throw is when your WR is covered but the QB puts it in the one little spot where the WR can catch it.

Don't get me wrong, it was a nice completion, but not what I would consider a big time throw.

 

So examples of rare throws would be like the 25 yard dart to Marshall on our first drive that he dropped?

Or the back shoulder fade to the opposite hash to DJ Moore for 27? 

Secondly I respectfully disagree. Darnold navigated the rush, stepped up in the pocket and while drifting left launched a ball to the right hash that traveled from our own 35 to the NY 12. Did Robby slow up? Yes. Did he have to come to a complete stop or come back to the ball? No. Id argue that was by definition a big time throw. 

I dont want to make excuses, he wasn't perfect but people throwing around words like "mediocre" either haven't been fans very long, have a vendetta or have somehow forgotten the poo show of QBs we've matched out the last 10 years. 

Those are throws we haven't seen made since 2018.

  • 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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • tukafan21
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      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.
    • CamWhoaaCam
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By CamWhoaaCam · Posted

      Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
    • CamWhoaaCam
      With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!

      By CamWhoaaCam · Posted

      Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...