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!

     

How short a leash will Young be on?


Jmac
 Share

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, mrBdawg said:

I think the coach who ran an archaic 90s offense that mostly consisted of 4 players running a 10 yard curl killed himself. Bryce didn’t play well but he was a rookie who had the leagues worst receiving corp and a bottom 3 offensive line. He did not kill any coach. That poo is laughable.

Canales wasn’t exactly running something new age last year.  Offense probably more built for Jake Delhomme than Bryce Young. 

it wasn’t a very good or efficient O….that was largely kept alive by Baker chucking it downfield.  He lead the league in pass attempts 20+ yards in air downfield. 

Leggette is 100% a match.  

Bryce? Nothing IMO about his offense last year screams Bryce Young

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CRA said:

I think the coach who ran an archaic 90s offense that mostly consisted of 4 players running a 10 yard curl killed himself. Bryce didn’t play well but he was a rookie who had the leagues worst receiving corp and a bottom 3 offensive line. He did not kill any coach. That poo is laughable.

While I agree with you to a point, I think the routes were simplified to deal with Bryce's physical limitations. I think we would have seen much more creativity in the offense if we had a big armed QB behind center like Stroud, Richardson, or Levis.

If you take time to watch that video on page 6 of this thread, you'll see that Bryce was terrible on the deep pass last year. 

 

Teams quickly figured out that he wasn't able to throw deep with consistency and not a threat to throw outside the numbers unless it was a short curl or a bubble screen. You really only had to drop 10 yards and take the area between the numbers. Even if we had receivers last season that could get better separation, the opposing team still would have been able to defend our passing plays because it's easy to sit on the routes.

Edited by SCO96
  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

While I agree with you to a point, I think the routes were simplified to deal with Bryce's physical limitations. I think we would have seen much more creativity in the offense if we had a big armed QB behind center like Stroud, Richardson, or Levis.

If you take time to watch that video on page 6 of this thread, you'll see that Bryce was terrible on the deep pass last year. 

 

Teams quickly figured out that he wasn't able to throw deep with consistency and not a threat to throw outside the numbers unless it was a short curl or a bubble screen. You really only had to drop 10 yards and take the area between the numbers. Even if we had receivers last season that could get better separation, the opposing team still would have been able to defend our passing plays because it's easy to sit on the routes.

This is something the Bryce camp just can’t realize. Opposing teams are more than happy to give up a couple bigger plays a game by leaving deep shots open because they know the odds are so slim of a successful completion. 

The formula was pretty simple, even for the worst defenses. Bro just had nothing over about 20 yards. The season opener in ATL showed the entire league the blueprint. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

While I agree with you to a point, I think the routes were simplified to deal with Bryce's physical limitations. I think we would have seen much more creativity in the offense if we had a big armed QB behind center like Stroud, Richardson, or Levis.

If you take time to watch that video on page 6 of this thread, you'll see that Bryce was terrible on the deep pass last year. 

 

Teams quickly figured out that he wasn't able to throw deep with consistency and not a threat to throw outside the numbers unless it was a short curl or a bubble screen. You really only had to drop 10 yards and take the area between the numbers. Even if we had receivers last season that could get better separation, the opposing team still would have been able to defend our passing plays because it's easy to sit on the routes.

Good thing we paired with Canales….who needed his QB to lead the NFL in 20+ air yard attempts last year 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

While I agree with you to a point, I think the routes were simplified to deal with Bryce's physical limitations. I think we would have seen much more creativity in the offense if we had a big armed QB behind center like Stroud, Richardson, or Levis.

If you take time to watch that video on page 6 of this thread, you'll see that Bryce was terrible on the deep pass last year. 

 

Teams quickly figured out that he wasn't able to throw deep with consistency and not a threat to throw outside the numbers unless it was a short curl or a bubble screen. You really only had to drop 10 yards and take the area between the numbers. Even if we had receivers last season that could get better separation, the opposing team still would have been able to defend our passing plays because it's easy to sit on the routes.

they got to preseason specifically the jets scrimmage and were like "oh fug, oh fug" and it didnt really get any better from there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CRA said:

Good thing we paired with Canales….who needed his QB to lead the NFL in 20+ air yard attempts last year 

Baker is a great deep ball thrower though. Wouldn’t that be designing an offense to his strengths? Also if your offense has Mike Evans you better be throwing it deep often…

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SCO96 said:

While I agree with you to a point, I think the routes were simplified to deal with Bryce's physical limitations. I think we would have seen much more creativity in the offense if we had a big armed QB behind center like Stroud, Richardson, or Levis.

If you take time to watch that video on page 6 of this thread, you'll see that Bryce was terrible on the deep pass last year. 

 

Teams quickly figured out that he wasn't able to throw deep with consistency and not a threat to throw outside the numbers unless it was a short curl or a bubble screen. You really only had to drop 10 yards and take the area between the numbers. Even if we had receivers last season that could get better separation, the opposing team still would have been able to defend our passing plays because it's easy to sit on the routes.

Ouch that guys scorches him lol. 

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gapanthersfan said:

The first TC practice will show A LOT.

About what? the QB or the offense? For the QB, last year it was the first padded practices where negative reviews, or reports of struggles, happened. He is okay playing catch in shorts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Baker is a great deep ball thrower though. Wouldn’t that be designing an offense to his strengths? Also if your offense has Mike Evans you better be throwing it deep often…

I mean all we got is what we got on him.  And you can trace it back to Seattle.  Wilson is a downfield thrower.  Always a heavy/top air yard QB going downfield. That’s the Canales background and resume to date.  

I mean, I would think if the goal was to do something new catering to Bryce vs doing what you do….you would’t draft Leggette with your first pick.  Basically an Evans/DK deep ball guy and draft some route runner like Ladd to get the ball out quick.  

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

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • 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.
    • 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?
×
×
  • Create New...