|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Spectre has never said DA sucks.
That woulda been me 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
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.
That really is all he has ever said.
I don't know why so many get in such a bunch about it.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
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.
EDIT: Removed for below post.
Last edited by Spectre; 11/08/07 09:40 PM.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
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.
I´m also not sold on DA yet...but this QB rating argument is weak....if not for a review (KW TD) and back to back drops on potential TD-throws his rating would be much better....and then he shredded the almighty Ravens-D which many on here like to forget
he picks apart 2 0-8 teams and it´s beacuse they are 0-8 teams...again, he can´t do more than pick apart those teams
comparable to Frye situation? Just take a quick look at both yds/attempt and TD/INT ratio and then come back with "that" argument...and btw, I never saw Frye pick apart weak Ds.....
btw: my fav. "scout" D.Boylhart had a pretty flattering DA-review I was very surprised in (PM me if u want an "excerpt"  )....he said back then (when he was a "prospect") that he saw development from season to season and he basically said he just needs repetitions.....he´s looking like a genius with that review right now (and he´s pretty spot on on QBs of the last 3-4 years like A.Smith, V.Young, Losman etc...considering that, he has only good things to say about Quinn too ) 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
he picks apart 2 0-8 teams and it´s beacuse they are 0-8 teams...again, he can´t do more than pick apart those teams
Again, I'm not saying it's a negative (why do people keep putting words in my mouth) - I'm saying that beating three straight teams with a 4-20 combined record isn't reason to go off and proclaim the guy "savior" just yet because he lit up some easy opponents. What he CAN do more than pick apart crappy teams is do well against the good ones, which is exactly what I'm hoping to see him do this weekend. I don't know what's so wrong with that...
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
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'm sorry dude, it was otto's second sentence quoted above that I was refering to when I said "That's all he's ever said."
That's why I wondered why so many were getting into such a bunch about it.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Quote:
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'm sorry dude, it was otto's second sentence quoted above that I was refering to when I said "That's all he's ever said."
That's why I wondered why so many were getting into such a bunch about it.
Ahhh, I see what you were trying to say. Chop off the quote even more next time.
I can't figure it out either to be honest, but for some reason, everything around here has to be black and white. Drives me crazy personally. There's nothing at all wrong with wanting to evaluate and see more while still enjoying the wins IMO.
Heck, I bet our FO is doing the exact same thing.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Heck, I bet our FO is doing the exact same thing.
You can bet I am too.
I've just wanted to stay out of this one for reasons that are very real and obvious to you.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Let's say that, hypothetically, we beat pitt and DA does really well.
At what point after that do we begin to think about getting DA to resign before he hits the RFA market? And also, a follow up, what would it take to resign DA before he hits the market?
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Let's say that, hypothetically, we beat pitt and DA does really well.
At what point after that do we begin to think about getting DA to resign before he hits the RFA market? And also, a follow up, what would it take to resign DA before he hits the market?
I don't think talking extension mid-season will work, so if we wanted to re-sign DA, it would have to be after the season ended. There's no chance we'll get to the Super Bowl with this defense, so we could start talking things up soon after. Free agency doesn't actually start until March and the deadline for setting an RFA tag is right before that I think, so there's some time there.
Concerning what it would take to sign DA... I don't think the money would be nearly as difficult to deal with as would be the Quinn situation. Unless DA feels like having to compete for and earn a job for the duration of his next contract, he's not going to sign here unless we do something with Brady. That'll put us between a rock and a hard place if we're trying to lock DA up.
JMHO of course.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Quote:
Heck, I bet our FO is doing the exact same thing.
You can bet I am too.
I've just wanted to stay out of this one for reasons that are very real and obvious to you.
Oh really? I have no idea what you're talking about.  
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,316 |
Quote:
When I watch DA against better teams, his decision making is decidedly worse.
 Any QB is going to look worse when his receivers are covered, he has less time in the pocket, and his running game is not going well. It's not rocket science. The better Defensive teams make all QB's look worse than the teams with weak D's do.
Quote:
His go-to receivers, unlike against bad teams, are actually covered, but he forces balls there anyway.
I have not and can't disagree with that.
Quote:
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.
Neither can most other NFL QB's, and guess what good D's do capitalize. Thats one of the reason's they are good D's.
Quote:
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.
I'll assume you ment good teams, not bad ones *LOL* But bye golly look at that, your admitting QB's don't look as good when they get pressure, and their receivers are not open. Imagine that
Now before you lump me in as a DA lover, just remember I have not made up my mind on the guy yet, and I doubt if I will till after the season.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530 |
I got news for you guy he has been saying the same thing over and over again and that DA plays better against cupcake teams and struggles against the better defenses. We all know that most QB's do suffer some against the better defenses, and we accept that fact. Thats why they are the better defenses. Reading comprehension you must be kidding we have seen and rejected his remarks, and yet he continues. It's not us that lack sound reading comprehension skills its him , and perhaps you, as well.
Will DA play as well against the number 1 defense in the NFL, well if I was to guess, I would say no. So, if he doesn't turn the ball over and manages the game in a way that gives the Browns the best chance to win, I would say he did pretty good. On the other hand should the Browns defense play poorly, and dig a hole for the offense, do I expect that he will likely take more chances with the ball, thus increasing the possiblity that he may turn the ball over, yup I sure do. So is the measuring stick the Steelers defense, yes and no!! But don't think we don't get it we do, and restating the same crap over and over aint going to change anybodies opinion so drop it! The End
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: 39,560
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,560 |
Quote:
Quote:
His go-to receivers, unlike against bad teams, are actually covered, but he forces balls there anyway.
I have not and can't disagree with that.
I don't disagree either.......but at some point a qb has to decide to make a play(or try) or take a sack.
Much has been said about how well the line has played, and I agree 100%, they have, but the low number of sacks can't just be put on the lines shoulders. The QB has something to do with that.
If we think back, how many times in the past did we hear comments about Chuck, or Tim, or whoever about holding the ball too long? A good number of the sacks allowed in the past weren't so much a problem of the line as much as it was a problem with the qb.
In the NFL you very rarely have wide open players, especially against good teams. Many times that window of opportunity is a small one and the ball has to be thrown just as a qb thinks the receiver is going to get open.
This year we have seen many balls completed while a defender has his head turned, but otherwise has pretty good coverage...the same kind of completions guys like Favre and Manning make all the time.
In the past, our qbs wouldn't have thrown that ball, instead looking for a wide open player....that is how you end up getting sacked 50 times a season.
Again, this isn't taking anything away from the linemen...they are playing great.....but as I said a long time ago...a qb can make his line look good, and more to the point, he can make them look bad if he doesn't get rid of the football.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
His go-to receivers, unlike against bad teams, are actually covered, but he forces balls there anyway.
I have not and can't disagree with that.
I don't disagree either.......but at some point a qb has to decide to make a play(or try) or take a sack.
Much has been said about how well the line has played, and I agree 100%, they have, but the low number of sacks can't just be put on the lines shoulders. The QB has something to do with that.
If we think back, how many times in the past did we hear comments about Chuck, or Tim, or whoever about holding the ball too long? A good number of the sacks allowed in the past weren't so much a problem of the line as much as it was a problem with the qb.
In the NFL you very rarely have wide open players, especially against good teams. Many times that window of opportunity is a small one and the ball has to be thrown just as a qb thinks the receiver is going to get open.
This year we have seen many balls completed while a defender has his head turned, but otherwise has pretty good coverage...the same kind of completions guys like Favre and Manning make all the time.
In the past, our qbs wouldn't have thrown that ball, instead looking for a wide open player....that is how you end up getting sacked 50 times a season.
Again, this isn't taking anything away from the linemen...they are playing great.....but as I said a long time ago...a qb can make his line look good, and more to the point, he can make them look bad if he doesn't get rid of the football.
I agree peen, not 100% but I get what your saying. The QB needs to take his reads, and if he is playing the Cupcakes and has time perhaps go back to his 1st read again, but the ball must come out quickley and to steal a phrase from the great SR, sometimes the best throw is to the blond in the front row. I think thats how you measure a QB, does he get rid of the ball and does he know when to throw it away. If DA can do those things he will be OK. I have no idea if he will play OK against the Steeler defense, but the best idea as to where he is at as a QB will be the throws he doesn't make or does make to the blond..
JMHO
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: 39,560
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,560 |
I agree, you have to throw it away sometimes......but you can't do that all the time either.
I can't go back and dissect every pick DA has thrown this year.....but the number of really bad throws isn't that high.
It's easy for some "coach" on a message board to say he should have never thrown that ball, but the number of balls completed that the same "coach" says shouldn't have thrown have been completed
have changed the direction of this season.
In the real world, you have to take the bad that comes along with the good. You balance it out and see what you have.
Favre has thrown a lot of picks to go along with all those TD passes.
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:
I got news for you guy he has been saying the same thing over and over again and that DA plays better against cupcake teams and struggles against the better defenses. We all know that most QB's do suffer some against the better defenses, and we accept that fact. Thats why they are the better defenses. Reading comprehension you must be kidding we have seen and rejected his remarks, and yet he continues. It's not us that lack sound reading comprehension skills its him , and perhaps you, as well.
You obviously DO lack reading comprehension. When have I EVER said that DA shouldn't do better against easier teams and worse against better ones?? What you're doing is reading my sentences and completely simplifying my verbs. He doesn't just beat bad teams, he OBLITERATES them. He doesn't just underpeform versus the better defenses we've faced, he's HORRENDOUS versus them. That doesn't add up. I don't know how many times I have to tell you, it's not that he underperforms versus better defenses, it's the degree of under performance versus over performance.
You can watch the games and learn the same things the stats will tell you.
His two .500 opponents were fair defenses where he gave good enough performances to keep us in the game and win, so I'm not going to complain.
Against his three worst defensive opponents, DA has a QB rating around 135. He's thrown 11 TDs and 1 INT. He's won all three games against these teams with a combined record of 2-22.
Against his three best defensive opponents, DA has a QB rating around 60. He's thrown 4 TDs and 6 INTs. He's lost all three games against these teams with a combined record of 17-8.
If you don't like QB rating or stats, I have this to say to you... you CAN'T excuse away a 75 point differential in QB rating between challenging and easy defenses. You CAN'T excuse away a +10 TD/INT differential in 3 games versus easy teams and a -2 TD/INT versus hard teams. If that somehow doesn't do it for you, watch the games and after you do, TRY and tell me Anderson is the same QB from game to game.
Hence, this is why I NEED to see Anderson perform well against Pittsburgh. He needs to show me he can get it done against a good defense in at least a remotely similar fashion that he handles the crap on the schedule.
I just don't get why that is so difficult to comprehend.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530 |
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: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
It's really pretty basic, as are most things.
We have a much improved OL. The QB's blind side is FAR more protected. Any time ANY QB can get into a "comfort zone" he will be more relaxed, feel more assured and perform better. What seperates QB's, is how a QB performs against better D's who apply more pressure.
Will that QB step up and still perform well? Or will the "mistake factor" increase dramaticly under such circumstances to make him appear like a different QB all together?
I think that's the entire difference in what you and Spectre are saying.
As you assert, a QB will not "put up the numbers" against a great D that he will put up against a mediocre or poor D. But will the "mistake factor" creep in?
You see, a good D doesn't give you the oppertunity to pass for 350 yards and four TD's. But what does a QB do with the oppertunities he's given against a good D? Does he make the most of it, take advantage of the oppertunities given him? Does his int./TD. ratio change?
A really good QB will not get shell shocked against good D's. They will not increase the "mistake factor" against good D's. They will play within themselves and take advantage of the oppertunities they're given and make the most of them.
I think this is the basic difference between what you and Spectre are saying. You wish to think that better D's equate to more mistakes, bad throws and an excuse for the int./TD ratio to change. It's just not so. It will mean that a good QB will most likely not have huge yardage, but choking up and making mistakes shows a weakness in your QB far more than showing the strength of the oposing D.
JMHO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 890
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 890 |
Quote:
Quote:
he picks apart 2 0-8 teams and it´s beacuse they are 0-8 teams...again, he can´t do more than pick apart those teams
Again, I'm not saying it's a negative (why do people keep putting words in my mouth) - I'm saying that beating three straight teams with a 4-20 combined record isn't reason to go off and proclaim the guy "savior" just yet because he lit up some easy opponents. What he CAN do more than pick apart crappy teams is do well against the good ones, which is exactly what I'm hoping to see him do this weekend. I don't know what's so wrong with that...
Don't bunch the Seahawks in with the other two teams to make your point look better... The Seahawks had allowed 15 points per game up until our game... We dropped 33 and DA basically had 4 tds IMO our run game got the credit but he and the receivers were the reason why we were there every time.
![[Linked Image from i4.photobucket.com]](http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y132/Defiantmac/nickk2.jpg) PRO-BOWLER!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,530 |
I honest to God get that part. Lets take a look if you will.
Last week I think Tom Brady Doubled his INT total for the season by throwing 2 picks. Now that says that Brady struggled some against the Colts defense, a pretty good defense, but not ranked as highly as the Steelers. The fact that NE trailed for a good part of the game, means that perhaps TB was put in the situation where he had to take more chances with the ball against a better defense then perhaps he has seen to this point in the season. Having said all that TB didn't get his to date 20 TD's a game with no INT's, but I don't see anybody in NE wanting to throw TB under a bus, and I don't see anybody in NE ready to bench TB and start his backup in his place. Thats the point missing from his DA has to play great against a great defense in order for me to buy in. He is likely to have his moments, and if the Steelers get up on us he will take chances with the ball all good QB's know when it's time to take a chance and that is when your losing. So if we fall behind and DA is playing a catchup mode I hope he can play mstake free, but I wouldn't count on it. And I wouldn't say he sucks if he had a bad game even against a bad team, it happens. One game doesn't make for a good or a bad QB. And DA has done about as good as any QB in the league to this point, and I refuse to believe that because he has a bad game against a good team we should all think he sucks. He hasn't said that directly that DA sucks but thats where he's going with it. And I for the 1,000 time do not agree...
JMHO
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: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
So since when exactly did the BAL defense become "average" all of a sudden? Yeah, I get the point that they are a .500 team (as SEA...btw only because the Browns AND DA beat them...otherwise they would be over .500, right?) but that´s to 90% thanks to their D play....
Im no DA fanboy, far from it....but he´s doing a good job, considering the circumstances
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum A spin on the DA situation
|
|
