The 'starting slow' and being bad between the 20's is interesting. I'm curious what could be behind that.
Your earlier post sounds like correlation vs causation. I think it makes perfect sense that he'd have worse numbers in games where his team is losing. He basically WAS the offense in Houston IIRC.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
An interesting collection of data on Watson from his Situational Stats on NFL.com. I went there to see how this year stacks up against what he used to be and in the process stumbled on this bit of data
When playing from behind, regardless of by how much, he has a passer rating of 81.7, no INTs, and a 30% 1st Down rate, but his completion rate is barely above 50%.
When playing a tied game, however, his passer rating plummets to 55.4, with 2 INT, and the 1st Down rate drops to 25%, but, oddly, his completion rate is 62.5%. When Tied or Behind, he's hitting only 5.3 Avg Yds and averages 4 Sacks
When playing with a Lead:
Lead 1-8 Pts: Passer Rating is 64.5, 1 INT, 28.5% 1st down rate, 56.4% completion rate, 6.3 Avg Yds Lead 9+ Pts: Rating is 140.6, 0 INT, 50% 1st down rate, 75% completion rate, 8.8 Avg Yds When playing with a lead, his Sack average drops to 2 or less
Just looking at these numbers, I think the dude is playing WAAAAY too tight and doesn't play well until/unless there is no pressure.
Could be. I have coached a lot of baseball....HS and college players in summer leagues. Some guys cruise until pushed to perform or it was time to pad numbers.
I would call them slack to their face, in a teaching kind of way. You play hard from start to finish. If hustle and attitude slump, that's on nobody or anything but you. Hustle and attitude are always 100% in your control.
I suspect Watson never played baseball to any degree. Baseball teaches failure because in baseball you fail at a high percentage of the time.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
Your earlier post sounds like correlation vs causation. I think it makes perfect sense that he'd have worse numbers in games where his team is losing.
oh, it's definitely not enough data points to come to anything definitively conclusive, by any means, but it is enough to get one wondering and realizing that there may be more to look at, even if the end conclusion is that there's nothing to see there.
I mean, clearly, there is a fire.... we just have to figure out where the smoke is so we can put it out.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
The 'starting slow' and being bad between the 20's is interesting. I'm curious what could be behind that.
Your earlier post sounds like correlation vs causation. I think it makes perfect sense that he'd have worse numbers in games where his team is losing. He basically WAS the offense in Houston IIRC.
"He is also really good in both red zones, but between the 20's, he's borderline atrocious."
Not sure how dramatic these stats are other than knowing it's definitely fair to take Purp's takes at face value. But the rest of your post helps answer your question, from a 'food for thought' pov, anyway.
Inside your own 20, defenses know they have an entire field behind them, I would think most QBs compare similarly. Inside the Red Zone? He's a dual threat QB, and in a situation where even a short run could be devastating, maybe that opens things up for him from a "production" standpoint? A QB like Watson is able to move in the pocket and make the choice between a 'good' pass and a short gain with his legs.
Between the 20s tells the tale of a crappy team having heavy influence on his personal stats. Against teams where they were plainly outmatched (most of their opponents), you're spending the entire game there. You're stinking up the stats between the 20s without having much opportunity to get in the redzone and stink them up there.
Your earlier post sounds like correlation vs causation. I think it makes perfect sense that he'd have worse numbers in games where his team is losing.
oh, it's definitely not enough data points to come to anything definitively conclusive, by any means, but it is enough to get one wondering and realizing that there may be more to look at, even if the end conclusion is that there's nothing to see there.
I mean, clearly, there is a fire.... we just have to figure out where the smoke is so we can put it out.
I think some of it is that Watson has always been a somewhat streaky passer. Unfortunately, he's had more cold streaks than hot streaks here. I think the surrounding environment is a factor. It's hard to get hot when your own team's fans treat you like a villain, and you are used to being the hero. He might have to learn to embrace the hate and play the heel. It's not something he's had to do before.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
Perhaps someone with a better football acumen than me can chime in here, but could the possibility be that coverages are much more simple inside both 20's (albeit for opposite reasons)?
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
First and foremost I would like to thank the official who made the phantom PI call late in the 4th quarter that allowed Hunt to go into the end zone for the late game TD that secured the victory. That pass attempt was so out of bounds it would have been impossible for the WR to have caught in in bounds. It was an uncatcahable ball. Please do not think your contribution to the W went unnoticed or unappreciated. Far too many times throughout the years such calls have gone in the other direction. At least your call helped even things out......... a little bit.
In regards to the D, they looked bad and bad is putting it mildly. But this is the first time they've looked that way. So for now I'm going to call it an anomaly rather than a warning sign.
Once again the Browns won ugly. A game that could have gone in either direction. One of those very close games that people have complained never went the Browns way in the past. Claiming that good teams find a way to win those close ones. And it has been done without a legitimate QB. Now they have won that type of game for two weeks in a row. And yet people still complain.
No legitimate QB. Browns record is 4-2. Some people never let facts get in the way of finding a reason to whine.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
First and foremost I would like to thank the official who made the phantom PI call late in the 4th quarter that allowed Hunt to go into the end zone for the late game TD that secured the victory. That pass attempt was so out of bounds it would have been impossible for the WR to have caught in in bounds. It was an uncatcahable ball. Please do not think your contribution to the W went unnoticed or unappreciated. Far too many times throughout the years such calls have gone in the other direction. At least your call helped even things out......... a little bit.
In regards to the D, they looked bad and bad is putting it mildly. But this is the first time they've looked that way. So for now I'm going to call it an anomaly rather than a warning sign.
Once again the Browns won ugly. A game that could have gone in either direction. One of those very close games that people have complained never went the Browns way in the past. Claiming that good teams find a way to win those close ones. And it has been done without a legitimate QB. Now they have won that type of game for two weeks in a row. And yet people still complain.
No legitimate QB. Browns record is 4-2. Some people never let facts get in the way of finding a reason to whine.
I was more surprised it was PI and not defensive holding. To me it was an obvious holding call, unless for some strange reason you can't call defensive holding if the ball is in the air, and you are the intended receiver. I know it can be called away from the ball because it is done all the time.
It doesn't get the ball to the 1 yard line, but first and goal inside the 5. No doubt in my mind it was a penalty, maybe not PI but at minimum holding. I have watched it 4 times and the DB grabs his arm for an extended period of time.
The Browns have been on the other side of questionable calls for what seems like forever. Remember the Raider game when they reviewed if it was a first down or not and actually changed the call when it was obviously correct to begin with. We had a facemask call against us recently when the offensive player also grabbed our defenders and yanked the helmet down.
I can even remember in 75 or 76 when we kicked off to Pittsburgh in OT and their returner fumbled without being touched. Browns recovered at about the 30 but refs blew it dead. Steelers scored on a flea flicker to TE Bennie Cunningham.
I don't consider the call a gift and I won't apologize for winning a game if it had been. The Browns are due for some breaks. he
You don't have to go back that far. The holding/PI no-call vs Steelers on the final play (?) of the game.
I live in Cinci, and all my hockey buddies were chirping about the 2 calls. My response was that even IF those calls were as bad as they were making them out to be, that could keep going all year and I wouldn't sweat it one bit. That's how much karma this team has banked up.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
Actually I think it’s incredible the number of grabs and holds no calls I’ve seen across the league each week. Then someone grabs a jersey for a split second and out comes the flag.
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives. – Jackie Robinson
Your earlier post sounds like correlation vs causation. I think it makes perfect sense that he'd have worse numbers in games where his team is losing.
oh, it's definitely not enough data points to come to anything definitively conclusive, by any means, but it is enough to get one wondering and realizing that there may be more to look at, even if the end conclusion is that there's nothing to see there.
I mean, clearly, there is a fire.... we just have to figure out where the smoke is so we can put it out.
I think some of it is that Watson has always been a somewhat streaky passer. Unfortunately, he's had more cold streaks than hot streaks here. I think the surrounding environment is a factor. It's hard to get hot when your own team's fans treat you like a villain, and you are used to being the hero. He might have to learn to embrace the hate and play the heel. It's not something he's had to do before.
Just to add to this point, I have noticed in pregame warmups he always wears a t-shirt with a Browns legend on it. I always felt a little off about that like he was trying to buy likes from fans.
and as the game continued yesterday, Watson kept covering up more and more ... nothing, then winter hat, then big jacket ... reading his body language, he's super uncomfortable in this setting (and with the idea of being a vilified person, not playing well, etc)
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
I’ve seen a lot of crazy browns games but yesterday might have topped them all. I literally almost didn’t care if we won, by the end of it. Just end this torture!
When walker got stripped at the end and they recovered, I thought it was over, but they had a penalty, then another. We had 1st and goal at the one and three incompletions later Hunt barely crossed the goal line for the W.
It was a roller-coaster game, lead changes galore, big plays all over the place.
you bring up a good point about Watson's shape. He is not anywhere near the athlete he was 2-3 years ago, and you can see him struggle with it. He relied so heavily on his legs and eluding the rush that he could extend plays and find open receivers.
with his tenure here, he's much slower and it makes his eyes drop down to look at the rushers ... he's simply got heavier legs and slower eyes
I have noticed this as well. I was a big fan of Watson at both Clemson and Houston. You used to watch him, and he he was so much faster than his combine 40 time. He would excel getting out of trouble, and presenting issues for defenses when he would then take off. He appears to be a shell of himself, while still possessing some athletic gifts...those jets are nowhere to be seen. Just seems to me that his body, is much more older than his given age at 28. Prior to him getting his shoulder hurt, I was saying he's going to get himself killed by trying to be his former self...because he just doesn't seem to have that high end trait while eluding anymore....for whatever reason, I'm not sure.
As bad as P.J. Walker has looked the last eight days, (not always, but a lot of it) he’s led the Browns to a pair of game winning drives, when he had to. Props.
I agree lamp. Give Walker credit because he DID make big throws to Moore, Cooper, DPJ, etc ... it's been UGLY at times, but he's given us just enough to squeak them out
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
I was more surprised it was PI and not defensive holding. To me it was an obvious holding call, unless for some strange reason you can't call defensive holding if the ball is in the air, and you are the intended receiver. I know it can be called away from the ball because it is done all the time.
My understanding is holding is called before the ball is in the air. PI is called on when the ball is in the air and is headed towards the receiver to which the ball was thrown.
I think the call was borderline, but not out of the realm. The contact was made in a way that prevented our receiver from being able to jump to attempt to catch the ball. The ball wasn't so far over his head to say he couldn't get to the ball. Nobody can factor the geometry on that is a split second. What they can factor is that he was never given the opportunity to catch the ball.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
There should never be a situation where you can grab and pull receivers arm with both hands before the ball arrives and not get a call.
I am a big fan of refs swallowing their whistles late in games and letting tbe players decide close games. You never want a ref to decide the game, imo.
My argument that the refs did not decide the game are the first holding was legitimate. The PI I thought was a terrible call but all it did was put the Browns at the one. I believe they still would have had two plays to win it had the PI not been called.
Now was PJ getting them in the endzone in those two plays? We'll never know.
There should never be a situation where you can grab and pull receivers arm with both hands before the ball arrives and not get a call.
I am a big fan of refs swallowing their whistles late in games and letting tbe players decide close games. You never want a ref to decide the game, imo.
My argument that the refs did not decide the game are the first holding was legitimate. The PI I thought was a terrible call but all it did was put the Browns at the one. I believe they still would have had two plays to win it had the PI not been called.
Now was PJ getting them in the endzone in those two plays? We'll never know.
I sure didn't like the no call on the blatant holding of DPJ by the Steelers CB on 4th down of the Monday night game. You win some and you lose some. Last two weeks the calls went the Browns way. I'm not going to apologize because a penalty was committed and was called. Just like the Steelers did not apologize when the penalty was committed and not called, and the Browns were not given a chance to win that game in the last minute.
Romans 10:9 "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
just like we imagined: a complete rollercoaster lol
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
I was more surprised it was PI and not defensive holding. To me it was an obvious holding call, unless for some strange reason you can't call defensive holding if the ball is in the air, and you are the intended receiver. I know it can be called away from the ball because it is done all the time.
My understanding is holding is called before the ball is in the air. PI is called on when the ball is in the air and is headed towards the receiver to which the ball was thrown.
I think the call was borderline, but not out of the realm. The contact was made in a way that prevented our receiver from being able to jump to attempt to catch the ball. The ball wasn't so far over his head to say he couldn't get to the ball. Nobody can factor the geometry on that is a split second. What they can factor is that he was never given the opportunity to catch the ball.
This 100.
I've been saying this for two days and nobody seems to wrap their brains around it. DPJ didn't intend to just fall out of bounds and watch the ball go over his head... he looks as if he was gathering to jump just as he's anchored to the ground by the hold. Combine that with the fact that officials very seldom try to 'predict' whether a player can make a catch, ie... it has to be a pass way, way over the WR's head anymore. And honestly, personally? I'd probably rather have a 1st and G at the 8yd than the 1yd. That call was made on 1st and G, it's not like we got bailed out on a 3rd and 20.
In my opinion, the illegal contact call on Cooper WAS warranted ... Walker was holding onto the ball waiting for Cooper, who was being held up ... that's the definition of illegal contact
The DPI was more questionable and should have just been called a defensive hold IMO ... that would have put the ball at the 5 instead of the 1
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
The ball was 15 feet up in the air as it crossed the back of the end zone and landed over 10 yards out of bounds and people have convinced themselves he had a chance to catch that ball. That's hilarious.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Who said that? Just so we can reenter the world of reality...
This is from Peen's post...............
Quote
I think the call was borderline, but not out of the realm. The contact was made in a way that prevented our receiver from being able to jump to attempt to catch the ball. The ball wasn't so far over his head to say he couldn't get to the ball. Nobody can factor the geometry on that is a split second. What they can factor is that he was never given the opportunity to catch the ball.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I took it to mean it was within the realm of possibility... which it was.
You saying it was 15 feet high and ten yards out of the endzone was much more of an exaggeration.
I've gone back and watched a few more times... That ball looked to cross the endline at about 10-11'.
DPJ has one of the best verticals in the history of the NFL. Second highest in 15 previous years when he was drafted and better than 95% (conservative) of the NBA.
He can get up very close to 12 feet if unimpeded.
And again, officials only call that if it's obvious to just about anyone on the planet.
The ball was 15 feet up in the air as it crossed the back of the end zone and landed over 10 yards out of bounds and people have convinced themselves he had a chance to catch that ball. That's hilarious.
Watch the replay.
The ball was not 15 feet in the air as it crossed the back of the end zone. And the ball did not land 10 yards out of bounds. Look at the endzone. There's not even 10 yards from the back of the endzone to the seats. Here:
Shoot, as a high schooler I almost caught a pass that was just under the crossbar of the goal post.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/fkjZc8B/Bull-Dawg-Sig-smaller.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg)
