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!

     

Bryce is going to be a good QB btw...


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Those 7 Mahomes deep shots make all the difference in how the db's play you though. It doesn't have to be every drive, you just have to try it way more than we do

Oh I agree. We absolutely need to be taking more deep shots but we also need someone who can get/win deep and our OL to hold up. But yes, more deep shots for sure. 

I did question Young’s ability to throw deep coming out of college. Seeing Bryce make progress in the other parts of his game through 6 weeks gives me hope the deep ball will come but I’m going to need to see soon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

According to the data Howell has more pocket time on average though. That’s what’s weird?

I think "pocket time" is misleading. I think "time to throw" is more accurate. Howell is good at buying time and he'll make throws knowing he's about to get clobbered. I wouldn't consider that "pocket time". It's simply a measurement of how long it typically takes a QB to deliver a pass.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, your eyes are lying to you about how many deep shots Sam Howell is actually taking. You see what you want to see. Also, his best receiver can actually run the routes. On average, Sam Howell goes deep an average for 1.7 times a game. That includes 2 games that he threw nearly 100 passes combined.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/charts/player/sam-howell/HOW692969/2023

Charts for proof.

Edited by Jaxel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I think "pocket time" is misleading. I think "time to throw" is more accurate. Howell is good at buying time and he'll make throws knowing he's about to get clobbered. I wouldn't consider that "pocket time". It's simply a measurement of how long it typically takes a QB to deliver a pass.

That makes waaaaay more sense if true.  Whenever I watch him play he is running for his life like he did his last year in college. So "pocket time" is kind of a dumb measurement which can look better if your QB is more mobile.  

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jaxel said:

The problem is, your eyes are lying to you about how many deep shots Sam Howell is actually taking. You see what you want to see. Also, his best receiver can actually run the routes. On average, Sam Howell goes deep an average for 1.7 times a game. That includes 2 games that he threw nearly 100 passes combined.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/charts/player/sam-howell/HOW692969/2023

Charts for proof.

I think the point is a couple deep shots a game (especially if they are close) makes the defense have to respect it, because if they don't that's a TD.  It's something we can incorporate with Young.  We need a running game and a nice PA bootleg deep to Chark would be nice since our guards are struggling in pass protection.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

I think the point is a couple deep shots a game (especially if they are close) makes the defense have to respect it, because if they don't that's a TD.  It's something we can incorporate with Young.  We need a running game and a nice PA bootleg deep to Chark would be nice since our guards are struggling in pass protection.

Agree, and to his point, Sam has connected on a good number of them. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

Yeah, I'm sure you really didn't read that thread from last week and never saw it. Oh wait, guess who posted this in it:

"Let's be honest if he were getting positive grades from PFF they would be getting posted in just about every thread about him. Every fanbase hates PFF when their team sucks"

 

 

 

What's untrue about the statement? The majority of the huddle does not like PFF now. Back when we were winning or at least competitive it was used as gospel. Through all the losing the last few years it's become a target of ridicule.

Anywho. Is there any particular reason you only want to talk about PFF and not Bryce Young's season numbers?

Edited by frankw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Those 7 Mahomes deep shots make all the difference in how the db's play you though. It doesn't have to be every drive, you just have to try it way more than we do

People are coping right into an asylum with these passing charts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, frankw said:

People are coping right into an asylum with these passing charts.

OK this is a little bit comical as well...  So people are critiquing Young's passing chart and rightfully so but they can't look at other QB's charts for comparison?  He needs to connect on some big passes, I will say on his one deep attempt he was hit and couldn't throw a good pass due to it, so OL is absolutely part of the issue.  On the counter Howell might have a worse OL and he manages to connect on several of those deep passes (he also has a cannon for an arm which helps).  We need to continue to attempt 2 plus deep ones a game and hopefully connect on several.  I think everyone agrees on that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, frankw said:

What's untrue about the statement? The majority of the huddle does not like PFF now. Back when we were winning or at least competitive it was used as gospel. Through all the losing the last few years it's become a target of ridicule.

You are changing the subject. You made the claim that people don't post PFF threads anymore in general and that there's no bias when they are (when it was brought up that Bryce had a good rating this week, but no thread was created). I point out that not only was last week's thread posted within minutes of the ratings coming out, the subject line even said Bryce was in the bottom 5, you attempted to handwave it away like it didn't exist even though you posted in the thread!

 

Edited by X-Clown
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...