|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316 |
Quote:
I can't help but conclude they don't know what they are talking about.
I concluded that about everybody but myself years ago 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
What was, and is ludicrous is to expect Anderson to have to put up numbers that NOT ONE OTHER QB puts up against premiere defenses. That's not only ludicrous, it's ridiculous.
It's ludicrous for me to expect DA to put up games over 57.0, 59.0, 65.2, and 75.3 against the only Top 10 defenses in QB rating allowed we've faced so far? Sure... keep telling yourself that... 
I'm not asking him to kill them, I'm just asking for more than awful-mediocre. It's obvious SOMEONE is doing it, because he put up a QB rating lower than Oakland, New England and Pittsburgh are allowing on the year, even though each team is allowing in the low 70's.
Exactly how low should I set the DA QB rating bar versus top defenses? 70? 60? Should I be spinning a 50+ as a success this week because DA gets absolved from bad games against teams above .500? Get real.
You want to make him into a franchise QB? You sure as heck should expect him to perform better against competitive defenses, because that's ALL we're going to see in the playoffs.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
For years most of the same people used every EXCUSE in the book to support QBs who pretty much sucked, yet now that we finally have a qb playing pretty solid ball, all of a sudden the guy can't do this or can't do that.
I can't help but conclude they don't know what they are talking about.
Derek Anderson...
- has not played well against or beaten a team currently above .500 yet
- is facing the league's 2nd easiest schedule that contains two last place finishers, the two worst divisions in football each with an 0-8 team and the mediocre North x2.
- has put up QB ratings of 57, 59, 65 and 75 against the four Top 10 defenses in QB rating allowed we've played.
- has put up 11 of his touchdowns against three of the league's worst defenses. Outside of those cupcakes, he has only 6 in five games but 8 INTs.
Pardon me if I temper my expectations.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Spec
Baltimore and Seatle were both above 500 when we beat them. Also the QB rating stat is the most worthless stat i've ever seen.
But you won't be satisfied until he puts up 4 td's on Pitt...so whatever.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Spec
Baltimore and Seatle were both above 500 when we beat them. Also the QB rating stat is the most worthless stat i've ever seen.
But you won't be satisfied until he puts up 4 td's on Pitt...so whatever.
Baltimore has also hidden the fact that their defense is in the decline by playing easy teams. Against nearly every single difficult offense they faced, they crumbled.
Seattle actually has the WORST schedule in the NFL. We're at .404, they're something horrendous like .375 I have a feeling they might be a product of their schedule as well.
You don't like QB rating so tell me objectively... was he GOOD against Oakland? Was he GOOD against Pittsburgh? Was he GOOD against New England? He was bad against all of them - QB rating is just a quantitative way of getting it across.
I don't want to see him put up 4 TDs against Pittsburgh... well, I do lol, but I don't NEED to see it. What I NEED to see is a good performance against a top defense. I won't be convinced without it. If he turns the ball over twice or more, it will solidify my point for me. I'd like to be wrong, but I don't have the evidence yet to disprove myself. I'm hoping this week provides some.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
I don't want to see him put up 4 TDs against Pittsburgh... well, I do lol, but I don't NEED to see it. What I NEED to see is a good performance against a top defense. I won't be convinced without it. If he turns the ball over twice or more, it will solidify my point for me. I'd like to be wrong, but I don't have the evidence yet to disprove myself. I'm hoping this week provides some.
Seatle has a good d...but they are a product of their schedule I guess. I don't know...the Seatle game is convincing me that DA may be more than just an average or flash in the pan QB.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Seatle has a good d...but they are a product of their schedule I guess. I don't know...the Seatle game is convincing me that DA may be more than just an average or flash in the pan QB.
Their D is fine, but it's not elite, and it's not like Anderson blew them away - he was alright, but he just satisfied me, he didn't make a statement like I was hoping. Seattle's record is a product of their schedule because Alexander stinks without Strong and Hutchinson, Branch has been hurt for half the year and they're still somehow .500.
The Steelers game will be a statement game because of the level their defense is at right now. If DA comes out and puts up a 100 on them, I'll give him huge props. On the same hand... if he comes out and puts up something below a 70... well, that'll tell me all I need to know.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 435
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 435 |
j/c I agree with you. The thing about the Seattle game. If you look at his QB rating...yea its a mediocre 75. But he also drove the team to 4tds, and a game winner in overtime. Jamal got 1.9ypc and 4td. Did we just magically metriculate the ball down the field?  No, Anderson had a good game, the numbers just dont show it. He completed 60% of his passes and had 350+ yards, which is a good game regardless of QB rating. This isnt like Couch having a random 300yd game, and I don't think that Chuckles was capable of throwing for 300yds. Anderson has played consistently well in the past 3.5 games, and has led us to 3 straight wins. While he might stink it up the rest of the year, I think that is less and less likely. I expect to see him play well against the Steelers, but I dont care how he does if we get a W.
"I don't remember any of my catches. I remember the drops." - Kellen Winslow II
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
j/c
Here's what I wanna really know that might help us in our DA analysis and what we do in the offseason...
How has Quinn looked in practice? It's only practice but it could tell us a lot on whether or not he looks lost or is ready to take on the starting role.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 880
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 880 |
Spectre, say what you want about Anderson. But how many ELITE defenses are there in the league? Not that many Thankfully, there are more playoff teams then there are elite defenses. The Saints were evidence of that last year.
And the next head coach is ......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 305
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 305 |
Quote:
On the same hand... if he comes out and puts up something below a 70... well, that'll tell me all I need to know.
How many 25 year old, 10 career starts QB's would this way of thinking ruined? So let me get this all correct.....If he does good agaist a bad team then he stinks. And he does marginal against a really good team he still stinks. I don't think the kid has a chance in your mind. He is going to struggle Sunday....That is just how it works, what 25 year old QB has gone into Pitt and figured out a way to move tha ball against that defesne? Becuase you know they are not going to let us run the ball.
I have a question for you....Does he give us a chance to win?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
So let me get this all correct.....If he does good agaist a bad team then he stinks.
When did I ever say that? I'm thrilled that he does well against bad teams... but when you're obliterating bad teams by THAT much, some of it should translate over against your toughest competition... and it doesn't. That raises a red flag for me.
Quote:
And he does marginal against a really good team he still stinks.
Define marginal. I definite it as the Seahawks game. He wasn't spectacular and his rating reflected that, but was good enough to get us in a position to win the game. A 57, 59, 65 and against the 3 toughest pass defenses he's faced isn't marginal to me. That's just bad.
Quote:
I don't think the kid has a chance in your mind. He is going to struggle Sunday....That is just how it works, what 25 year old QB has gone into Pitt and figured out a way to move tha ball against that defesne? Becuase you know they are not going to let us run the ball.
This is the attitude that frustrates me most. People talk about Anderson as a Pro Bowler and rock solid QB in one breath, but then say he shouldn't be expected to beat Pittsburgh in the next. You can't have your cake and eat it too - which is it?
Personally, I think that if Anderson can look like a bonafide stud against St. Louis, Miami and Cincinnati, that he should at LEAST be able to top 70 against Pittsburgh. If he can't do that, it makes me incredibly leery of putting my future in his hands.
Quote:
I have a question for you....Does he give us a chance to win?
Against moderate to poor defenses? Absolutely. Against top league defenses... I haven't seen it yet. This is the last one he faces all year. I hope he proves me wrong.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,790
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,790 |
Quote:
How has Quinn looked in practice? It's only practice but it could tell us a lot on whether or not he looks lost or is ready to take on the starting role.
From what i understand he doesn't get mant reps. That makes it hard to tell IMO.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
You make valid points, but I think you're putting too much emphasis on the QB Ratings.
As an example, against Seattle he was 29 of 48 for 364 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT... his passer rating was a modest 75.3
With nothing else changing, had just ONE of those passes been a TD (such as the one K2 dropped), the rating jumps to a very respectable 82.3. A 2nd one would jump it again to 89.2.
The rating is so skewed by whether or not a completion counted for a TD that it is almost a penalty when it isn't. I'm not sold on him either, not by a long shot.. .but he's been getting the job done and he actually has me to the point where I EXPECT touchdowns... because he's been delivering them. He took us down 4 times and 4 times we punched it in on the ground, just like we should when we're imposing our will on a defense.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,790
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,790 |
Quote:
You make valid points, but I think you're putting too much emphasis on the QB Ratings.
As an example, against Seattle he was 29 of 48 for 364 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT... his passer rating was a modest 75.3
With nothing else changing, had just ONE of those passes been a TD (such as the one K2 dropped), the rating jumps to a very respectable 82.3. A 2nd one would jump it again to 89.2.
The rating is so skewed by whether or not a completion counted for a TD that it is almost a penalty when it isn't. I'm not sold on him either, not by a long shot.. .but he's been getting the job done and he actually has me to the point where I EXPECT touchdowns... because he's been delivering them. He took us down 4 times and 4 times we punched it in on the ground, just like we should when we're imposing our will on a defense.
Where have I read this before? 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,560
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,560 |
Quote:
The rating is so skewed by whether or not a completion counted for a TD that it is almost a penalty when it isn't.
I agree and well said.
The way some people think it sounds like it sucks because his passing yardage set up 4 TD rushes
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
The rating is so skewed by whether or not a completion counted for a TD that it is almost a penalty when it isn't.
If you add touchdowns one at a time to DA's game versus the Seahawks like you said, his rating goes up 7 points for each one. I hardly consider that "so skewed". Heck... he would've needed to pass for ALL 4 TDs just to post a rating over 100. He clearly wasn't as dominant as some seem to believe he was. Plus, it's not like he didn't get cracks at it... he threw the ball 9 times (excluding pass interferences) in the red zone.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,560
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,560 |
Sorry man, you are one of the few who think DA isn't playing good ball.
Being in the minority isn't a bad thing mind you.....as long as you are right.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Sorry man, you are one of the few who think DA isn't playing good ball.
Being in the minority isn't a bad thing mind you.....as long as you are right.
I'm not saying DA isn't playing good ball, I don't know why people keep saying that. He's playing excellent ball against the easiest defenses in the league and decent ball versus the middle of the pack. I'm just trying to keep the enthusiasm in perspective, because he's just been flat out awful versus the best defenses we've faced. Beating up on the gimme teams so hard that your rating inflates isn't enough for me to stake my future in him.
I think Anderson struggles in Pittsburgh this week. I think he does alright against Baltimore. After that, I think he lights it up the rest of the way out. However, a bad game in Pittsburgh will mean he's put up stinkers against Oakland, Pittsburgh x2 and New England, a list that includes all three of the current games on our schedule over .500 and 4 games against Top 10 defenses.
This week is his last top tier test. If he fails this one... can you truly believe in a guy that's gotten his wins against teams with a combined record of 10-30 through Week 9?
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
The way some people think it sounds like it sucks because his passing yardage set up 4 TD rushes
But rushing TD's don't do a thing for his QB Rating so he sucks.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,440
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,440 |
When I first looked at this thread I thought for sure it was going to be another QB thread. That is the pick we should be asking if we missed on. If we don't use the second round pick for a QB and we take a DL how would that effect our team right now? We would also not have lost our first next year.
I know hindsight is 20/20 and nobody saw DA doing what he has done but it really puts us in a jam if those are picks we gave away for a backup QB. There is no telling what the future holds but if DA continues to improve there is a chance he becomes the long term answer at the position.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316 |
Quote:
But rushing TD's don't do a thing for his QB Rating so he sucks.
*Biting my tounge not to mention that QB ratings are as useful as used toilet paper*
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 305
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 305 |
i agree with a lot of the things you are saying. I think he will struggle against Pitt Sunday. I don't think you take away how well he has played becuase Pitt gets to him sunday, thats the same as everybody saying he is great becuase he torches bad defenses. You can't have your cake and eat it to either. If we cna't judge him against the bad teams then we can't judge him against the good ones either... I don't know if he is the future or not, but I do know that he has played well enough to give us all something cheer about (which is nice)....He has also p[layed well enough to possibly get us back into the first round. I know you don't buy that, but I can tell you he is better than anythihng that is coming out of college.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Actually, used toilet paper is better. You can place it 10 feet from where you are going to sit in the living room and it will keep the flies busy and away from you.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 435
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 435 |
 Made me think of a joke my grandpa used to tell! 
"I don't remember any of my catches. I remember the drops." - Kellen Winslow II
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Quote:
But rushing TD's don't do a thing for his QB Rating so he sucks.
*Biting my tounge not to mention that QB ratings are as useful as used toilet paper*
There are problems with it to be sure, but to say it's useless... I don't know how anything that takes into account passing yards, completion percentage, YPC, touchdowns and interceptions can be "useless"... but let your eyes do the talking instead. Is Derek Anderson the same quarterback against Cincinnati, Miami and St. Louis that he is against Oakland, Pittsburgh and New England? I watched all those games and "bad Derek" always seems to rear his ugly head against the good defenses. It's not coincidence IMO.
Everyone says Anderson has made progress, but few are willing to say that the "progress" he made was mostly from his two games against 0-8 awful defenses. Watch this game to see the real progress. He's faced Pittsburgh already and has faced several solid defenses before his great "improvement"... if his improvement it legitimate, I expect it to show against a legitimate defense. I hope it does... but there is no pattern thus far that encourages me that it will. Both the QB ratings and what I see on the field tell me that; choose whichever metric makes you happy.
We'll see come Sunday.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
I think its funny how pathetic this whole argument is. I don't see why we wouldn't keep both QB's. If you look at the way QB's have been getting beat up the past few years one can assume that keeping two QB's is the way to go.
How many teams have seen there #1 go down for the year in the past two years. This trend should prompt teams to make sure to have a starter and reliable backup----and BQ and Anderson fit that bill. Why wouldn't we keep Anderson around for a few years while Quinn develops---kind of like what Cincy did with Kitna and Palmer.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
I think its funny how pathetic this whole argument is. I don't see why we wouldn't keep both QB's. If you look at the way QB's have been getting beat up the past few years one can assume that keeping two QB's is the way to go.
How many teams have seen there #1 go down for the year in the past two years. This trend should prompt teams to make sure to have a starter and reliable backup----and BQ and Anderson fit that bill. Why wouldn't we keep Anderson around for a few years while Quinn develops---kind of like what Cincy did with Kitna and Palmer.
Kitna was already under contract. If we had DA on a longer term deal, we wouldn't have to worry about anything. As is, he's a RFA, so he already runs the risk of being poison pilled and he, in essence, controls his own fate. Plus... if we can get some franchise in utter desperation to offer up a 1st and a 3rd... well, I think we'll do just fine with Quinn and a veteran backup. Kitna left Cincinnati for nothing after the '05 season. The Chargers chose to keep Brees for that extra year everyone seems to want for DA, and then lost him for nothing in '06. If both QBs aren't in our plans (which they aren't), do you really think our team is good enough that we can just let someone go for nothing if a first and third are on the table for pulling the trigger a year earlier?
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 496
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 496 |
Quote:
I think its funny how pathetic this whole argument is. I don't see why we wouldn't keep both QB's.
I would agree with you if this was even close to being a possibility but it is not. Have you ever seen a quality QB in they're prime willing to sit on the pine and watch while possibily his best years are passing him by? Most QBs don't play in this league for 30 years like Vinie Testaverdy (just kiding it's only been about 25 years right) . 
Quote:
How many teams have seen there #1 go down for the year in the past two years. This trend should prompt teams to make sure to have a starter and reliable backup-
And some how you believe you are the first to see this! Let me put it to ya this way how many teams (keeping in mind the salary cap) can afford to keep two high dollar QBs on the roster. That is what we are looking at under your plan. It would be great if we could but I see it as nearly impossible 
Just wait till next season, I have heard that for over 40 years!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316 |
Quote:
Is Derek Anderson the same quarterback against Cincinnati, Miami and St. Louis that he is against Oakland, Pittsburgh and New England? I watched all those games and "bad Derek" always seems to rear his ugly head against the good defenses. It's not coincidence IMO.
Every QB is going to look worse against a good defense than they will a bad defense. Just like every O-line will look worse against a good D-line, than it will against a bad D-line. The QB rating system is a joke. A QB playing behind a good O-line, with a good running game is going to have a much higher rating, then he would if he was playing behind a bad )-line and had no running game, yet he would still be the same QB. If you wanted to call it a offensive passing rating then fine, but it involves the whole offense not just the QB.
Now lets compare two QB's
QB # 1 goes 15 for 30 during a game for 150 yards. He has no TD's and two int's. Five of his passes were dropped by his receivers, and two more of his passes were bobbled and picked off (not his fault)
QB # 2 goes 22 for 30 for 320 yards. He has 3 TD's and zero int's
Now the only difference between the QB's was that QB #2's receivers dropped and bobbled zero passes, his running back took a swing pass 80 yards for one TD. His WR broke 4 tackles on his way to a 40 yard TD, and his TE held onto the ball in the end zone.
Exact same passes and plays between QB # 1 and # 2, but look at the difference in their QB ratings.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
"I don't see why we wouldn't keep both QB's. If you look at the way QB's have been getting beat up the past few years one can assume that keeping two QB's is the way to go."
Simply put...cause one of them will be sitting on their butt the whole season doing nothing. Whoever that is will want out!!!
I don't see Peyton Manning getting beat up...who is his backup?
I don't see Brady getting beat up...who is his backup?
Fact is - we have finally made a QB friendly environment here...hard to get use to it but the years of us going through 3-4 QBs per season due to injuries are over!!!
Halllaleuhia!!!
Back to our QB situation.
I just don't see us getting rid of BQ.
DA we won't be getting rid of.
Let me quantify "RID OF" getting something of lesser value in return. We got "RID OF" Charlie Frye.
DA actually will be a blessing of returns especially since we don't have a 1st round pick this season.
The weapons will still be here.
The OL if anything we will continue to upgrade.
We have an environment for a young QB to succeed.
DA is doing better than most could have imagined...that is great. But he is not a great QB some invision him as...and on the other spectrum also...he could get better as he is young.
You know who he reminds me of?
Scott Mitchell of the Dolphins....Great OL there and good weapons he had success I can only assume Marino went down for sometime. He was the next Great QB and when he left that environment - he was not that great.
He had a strong arm, could make all the throws.
If we get a chance at a first round pick and then some (3rd also with the RFA) - I think we will take it and improve this team.
JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,864
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,864 |
Quote:
I think its funny how pathetic this whole argument is. I don't see why we wouldn't keep both QB's.
I don't think it's so much that we don't want to keep both QB's,,, I think in the end it will be more so that one of them is gonna start, and eventually, the other isn't gonna be happy and want out.. when you think about, would you blame the guy sitting on the bench for wantiing out and wanting an opportunity to play..
I wouldn't blame DA or BQ for wanting out if they are on the bench at some point.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,292
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,292 |
Quote:
Scott Mitchell of the Dolphins....Great OL there and good weapons he had success I can only assume Marino went down for sometime.
Yep, during a game in Cleveland (92 or 93), he blew his Achilles on a harmless drop back.
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Exact same passes and plays between QB # 1 and # 2, but look at the difference in their QB ratings.
If that's what actually happened in DA's bad games versus good games, the point would be made, but tell me... is that what you see, or what you want to see?
When I watch DA against better teams, his decision making is decidedly worse. His go-to receivers, unlike against bad teams, are actually covered, but he forces balls there anyway. He hasn't consistently hit his receivers in the perfect location like he does against cupcakes and good teams have capitalized, whether by forcing a punt or making an interception. He can't set his footwork against good pressure and if you're ever watched DA try to throw outside the pocket, you know just how bad it gets.
DA is not just unlucky versus the bad teams, he plays much worse. I think much of that has to do with (versus cupcakes) our line blocking well enough to take away most pressure and our targets not being taken away because coverage is so poor.
DA is a good quarterback in a vacuum, when it's just him and his receivers. IMO, that's why everyone said he looked so amazing in OTAs but he lost the job to Frye in the pre-season when contact and pressure were added. I don't know about you, but I don't just want my QB to be good in a vacuum, because if something goes wrong, he's barely useful. That's why I think the Steelers game will be such a great measure of what DA has done so far - they won't let him just sit there chucking the rock all day and they won't leave his targets wide open. It'll test his mettle, which is something that NEEDS to be done given how easy our schedule is. I just can't believe that there's only a few people who seem to care if he passes or not.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 305
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 305 |
Quote:
I just can't believe that there's only a few people who seem to care if he passes or not.
This is not true. I like a lot of others I am sure, are very interested in seeing how he does against a very good defense, but I am not going to write off a youg QB who has been playing great becuase of one game. How many other Qb has the Pitt defense made look bad...That list is long.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
This is not true. I like a lot of others I am sure, are very interested in seeing how he does against a very good defense, but I am not going to write off a youg QB who has been playing great becuase of one game. How many other Qb has the Pitt defense made look bad...That list is long.
Again though, what is DA? Is he a young QB that isn't proven as a quality quarterback yet that is destined to have some struggles, or is he a good starting QB putting up great numbers that are so good, Brady Quinn shouldn't even be in the picture? Most people don't make that distinction.
When DA is doing well against bad teams, to most people - he's worth a Pro Bowl consideration, he won the game single-handedly, he's matured, he's clearly starting material, and he's likely the future of this franchise. Yet, when he puts up an absolute stinker against a quality defense, he shouldn't be expected to do well against them, he's young, he has only started 10 games, he is better than his quarterback rating shows, his interceptions weren't his fault, etc. etc.
It reminds me a LOT of the Frye situation in that people were willing to write off his failures due to a bunch of different reasons - they'll say anything to make a player into something he isn't, just because we want it to happen. I'm done making excuses. He's sat on the bench for 2 years, played in a handful of games, has started almost a full season's worth and has absolutely dominated in every game he's had against poor defenses. If he can get it done versus Pittsburgh, it'll go a loooong way in changing my perception of him. If he can't, I'm not making any excuses for him... in my mind, he'll be a guy that can light it up all day against easy competition when he's not challenged but, when faced with a truly difficult defense, he struggles.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
When was DA's last bad game though? Against the Raiders?
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
When was DA's last bad game though? Against the Raiders?
Against the Patriots. After that, he's faced two 0-8 teams with bottom of the league defenses and a 4-4 team that he didn't even sniff a rating of 100 against. To say he's progressed after that Patriots game as a cold, hard fact has to completely ignore the sample.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530 |
Wow now hold on spec your not saying that DA didn't play well against that seahawks now are you. You can twist this up all you want but we all saw the game to OK. He did pretty darned good, and you know it. Now you can take the QB rating and stick it where the sun don't shine. Numbers don't tell the whole story and you know that much if you know anything at all. If you can honestly look at yourself in the mirror and say that this kid hasn't performed way beyond your wildest dreams then buddy your in need of some serious help.
You do realize that it is more then likely that DA is about to shatter Sipes single season record for passing yards and TD's. Now if he can do that NOBODY is going to tell me that the kid can't play. Do you watch the NFL network, do you follow football at all, every single sports reporter in the country is talking about how great this kid has played, every single team we have played the coach has talked about how great this kid has played, and you want us to believe that our own eyes are lieing to us, come on guy give it a rest we don't buy what you are selling on this subject let it go. You got every right to believe whatever you want to, but don't expect to many people to agree with you, we got eyes and we know what the score is, enough is enough already, save your comments for when you have something to actually back up your claim that DA sucks. We understand that you don't like him we get it, but lay off the guy sucks stuff OK, we aint buying it!!
BTTB
AKA Upbeat Dawg
Can't believe I am in a group that is comprised of the best NOT just fans but people on the planet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
You guys really need a reading comprehension course.
Spectre has never said DA sucks. All he's saying is that he'd like to see him perform similarly against a good team as he does against a bad one. I for one, agree.
The problem with guys like you is that, apparently, in your world everything is black or white. No shades of gray. DA is a Pro Bowler or DA sucks. Nothing in between. Sorry, life and football are not like that.
The game this weekend will tell us all a lot about Derek's abilities. I say we wait and see what happens before we sign Derek to a long term contract or ship him out the door. Both dumb ideas that have been floated on here in the last 2 weeks.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum A spin on the DA situation
|
|
