MasterAwesome

I would've agreed with you two staffs ago...but this is the third consecutive staff who apparently has no idea what to do with him. First it was Snow, then Wilks, now Evero. We're all still clinging to his amazing rookie season, but that was three years ago at this point.

14 carries for 20 yards is not a 0.7 YPC average. You're mixing up the numerator and the denominator.

No wonder David Gettis's career never blossomed He just barely missed the cut.

This is what appears to boil down to. We clearly have different criteria for what "shutting down" means. If you're at QB and Justin Jefferson is immediately running free on every play with 10+ yards of separation and the CB is getting juked out left and right but you just throw the ball into the dirt on every play, I wouldn't say the CB "shut him down". That would be quite a silly characterization IMO. You appear to be arguing from a Box Score perspective, the best I can tell? Like how many catches did the CB allow? That's why I explicitly stated in my initial post that the *tape* will shed light as to whether he's a shutdown CB or not. Same thing as a LT vs. DE matchup. If a LT technically doesn't allow a single sack or pressure but the QB immediately snaps the ball and scrambles right on every play and gets the ball out within 2 seconds while the LT loses literally every pass rush snap, immediately getting pancaked on his ass...I wouldn't say that the LT shut the DE down. My assessment is similar to the PFF approach, where they evaluate every single snap of a 1-on-1 matchup (like CB vs. WR, LT vs. DE) regardless of whether it was ultimately relevant to the play or not. It's possible that a CB could allow one catch for 11 yards all game and still end up with a 40.0 coverage grade.

Can you elaborate on that first point? How does a CB's *coverage* of a WR depend upon which QB is throwing the ball? If you're a CB who can stick to the WR like glue step for step on every play (which is more-or-less what a "shutdown CB" would entail), then again...what is an elite QB going to do? Basically just throw a 50/50 ball at that point. Maybe Mahomes gives Hill a better chance to catch that ball vs. Clausen, but coverage is coverage...it would be an amazing pitch and catch rather than an indictment of the CB's coverage. I think you're making an intuitive argument instead of actually thinking through the rationale. I can only assume you didn't read the second half of my post because I acknowledged that I don't know if Jaycee Horn is a shutdown corner or not...so why are you asking me to prove that he's a shutdown corner? You want me to prove an argument I never made? I was arguing conceptually that you can still be a shutdown corner without having played against an "elite" QB. Also, to your very last sentence: I know you posted in the Bill Barnwell thread where he put Horn's trade value as a 1st round pick, so I don't know why you would argue that no one outside of the Huddle considers him a shutdown corner. I didn't have access to the full article so I don't know if the actual term "shutdown corner" was used, but the OP paraphrased Barnwell's explanation as Horn "only" being worth a single 1st because of his injury history. That kind of value certainly seems in line with what a shutdown corner would fetch. So I think you meant to say "no one outside of the Huddle that I agree with is talking that".

If Reich coaches a good game and Brown has a strong performance in his playcalling debut and we ultimately win, I think that'll still reflect favorably. Especially if that success continues throughout the season. I doubt anyone within the Panthers' FO or any of us fans will hold onto a grudge about the first 6 games if Bryce and the offense starts firing on all cylinders and we start popping off some wins. Well, definitely some Huddlers will...but I'm guessing Frank's seat will still cool down a bit with Tepper.

I don't think bad QB play precludes you from judging a CB's coverage skills. You can always evaluate the matchup between a CB and a WR, independent of what the QB does. If a CB gets beaten on a double move but the QB doesn't see him and instead throws a checkdown, can we not say that was bad coverage on that play? Or if a WR has three steps on the CB but the ball is underthrown and allows the CB to make a play on it, we can still call that bad coverage right? On the other hand, it's of course very much possible for a CB to legitimately shut down his WR even if his QB stinks. If a CB is covering his WR step for step, what's a great QB going to do? Throw a catchable 50/50 ball? Then it's essentially a toss-up at that point. I don't think the "shutdown CB" label for Horn is as murky as you're making it out to be. I imagine there is more-or-less an objective truth to that question, which is revealed on the full game tape. Not what's shown on our TV screens at home on our couches, or what's revealed in box scores online. I won't pretend to know the answer to that question because I acknowledge that my perspective is limited as a fan who simply watches the weekly broadcast coverage. But I am guessing NFL GMs probably have an idea as to whether he's fitting of that label.

I would almost propose a different perspective on the Seattle game altogether. To me, the Seattle game was a cautionary tale and in part affirmed that our offense isn't built for the deep pass. Did Dalton take a few more deep shots? Yeah sure...did he also take a hell of a lot of hits, far more than we'd be comfortable with our expensive investment rookie QB taking? Anyone who watched the game would see that Dalton was routinely getting hit as he threw, certainly in part due to the extra fractions of a second it took to let those deep plays develop, en route to 10 QB hits for the game. I wouldn't want Bryce taking 10 hits a game. Dalton did an admirable job, I was genuinely very impressed with his poise and decision-making. But no way in hell is that kind of performance sustainable over the course of a season if he's having to stand there and take 10 hits a game and is routinely under pressure. That is exactly the type of game where I could easily see 3-4 interceptions thrown if the timing isn't absolutely perfect on those throws. It's just a crazy small margin of error. Also, "markedly different" offenses? Do you just mean there were actually a few "deep" shots completed...4 to be exact, out of 58 throws? The vast, vast majority of throws are still in that 0-15 yard range. I guess maybe we have different criteria for what "markedly different" means but it basically looks like the same exact scheme and pass distribution, just with a few deep passes completed. Which isn't crazy to imagine when you're talking about a QB who threw almost 60 passes. To be clear, I like that a few more deep throws were sprinkled in there and I do want that out of Bryce. I just think people are very much exaggerating how crazy different our offense looked with Dalton under center instead of Bryce. Most (not all) of the difference can be explained simply by the sheer volume of passes from Dalton.

I think the Young - Thielen connection goes beyond simply his ability to get open. Young is an anticipation thrower, and anticipation throws are predicated on a high degree of trust that your receiver is going to break exactly when he's supposed to and run his route at exactly the depth he's supposed to. I don't think Bryce necessarily needs elite receivers who can get open on every play (although that would obviously be ideal), rather than smart receivers who excel in route running who he can trust to be exactly where they are supposed to be when he releases the ball. TMJ, Mingo, Chark, and Shenault don't strike me as proficient route runners. What worries me about anticipation throws is that they seem like they have such a slim margin for error. I've seen some elite anticipation throws from Bryce, but I don't think it's sustainable to rely on it as your bread and butter.

I don't really disagree with much of this, but mainly because you've now arrived to my same argument lol. Your post I quoted literally said "This says it all, no need to dive in much deeper" and now you are actually diving deeper beyond the statistic, which is what I was advocating. It's not enough to say "hey look at this damning stat" - you've gotta evaluate what is contributing to that statistic. Same thing you just did with Joe Burrow. It would be foolish to go "Look at Joe Burrow...worst in the league in Y/A. Enough said, no need to go any further than that". The application of nuance and critical thinking seems to often be selective on these boards; people are willing to go to great depths to offer rational comprehensive analyses of other QBs, but when it comes to Bryce, it's all of a sudden extremely black and white for some reason. So yeah, our offense clearly emphasizes the short to intermediate passing game to where we're too one-dimensional, but we can't say for sure why that is. Sure it could be in part because the staff views Young as limited, or it could be because our o-line struggles to hold a block beyond 2 seconds, or because we seemingly only have one reliable receiver who seems to know how to run a proper route (and he's the furthest thing from a deep threat), or a number of other reasons.

I would say IAY/PA is the more reliable stat you're looking for. Y/A doesn't control for things like YAC where your receiver catches a short pass and takes it 80 yards to the house (we're among the worst in the league for YAC). Young is actually 0.1 yards higher than Mahomes, the best QB in the league who has largely been dinking and dunking his way to basically a top-2 QB statistically this year. He threw for over 400 yards and 4 TDs last night in a game where his longest throw was 22 yards. So is this a useless metric? Not at all, but it's just one chapter of a bigger story. I think people like to point to this stat as one of the most indicting testaments to Young's struggles but awkwardly ignore several of the elite QBs who are right there with him in that same statistic.

Well this trash Saints team beat the Patriots 34-0. They're pretty awful.

There are some totes chill vibes in here.

OP is one of the biggest Bill Barnwell shills...may even be the man himself if you ask me.

Hopefully he didn't succumb to that deadly strain of Italian Covid.

Damn...you didn't have to call out @mrcompletely11 like that for calling people delusional and Neanderthals for being encouraged by Bryce's improvement! But well said, I agree.

I think it's silly that you're arguing against absolutes while defending the usage of the term "positivity only"...which is by definition absolutist and was the whole point I've been debating on here before you interjected. Unless you and I define the word "only" differently. Arguing that someone can be a "hater" of someone while still saying nice things about them is much more defensible than saying someone "only" says hateful things about someone but somehow simultaneously also says some nice things about them. The former is sensible, while the latter is contradictory...you can't "only" say hateful things while also sometimes saying nice things. That doesn't make sense...that's the power of the term "only". And if you're not arguing "absolutes" and want to disregard the term "only", then at the end of the day you're simply saying that some posters skew more positively than others but also still post negative criticisms too. Which is an incredibly obvious statement to make but has little to do with the topic at hand.

Oh god, if guys like you and Casillas are considered "positivity only" posters, then we're all doomed. I would say I'm least one tier below you guys since I have a much harder time maintaining my composure when MGM starts slinging mud. You two have the patience of a saint...truly the best our caveman community has to offer.

You making the bolded claim quite literally means yes, I can go to someone's post history and pick out posts criticizing the players/team and that wholly refutes what you just said. That's the problem with making hyperbolic claims like you are doing - they are very easy to prove wrong. It just sounds like you have a problem with people disagreeing with you. Are these people offering up arguments as to why they thought Miles Sanders and Frank Reich were good acquisitions? Or are they just saying "Shut up! Shut up!" to you in thread after thread? I remember getting into arguments with you about McAdoo and I was generally always backing up my position with data and numbers from the Giants before and after McAdoo. So am I one of these people simply defending the honor of everyone in blue and black? Or did I have a difference in opinion and explain why I thought differently? Again, the implication of "positivity only" Huddlers is that they are irrational and can't handle criticism. Hell, you were a big defender of Joe Brady for the longest time on these boards so it sounds like you are one of the same people who you are describing because I distinctly remember virtually every time he was mentioned in a negative light, you would rush in and defend him. Were you being "positivity only" or did you simply have a difference of opinion about a member of our organization? Also I'm just curious: based on your very loose description of "positivity only" Huddlers...I've gotta assume you believe in the existence of "negativity only" Huddlers as well?

I mean it just sounds like you're describing optimism...yes, there are optimistic posters here lol especially in the offseason when there's a clean slate and your imagination can run wild for your seasonal aspirations. There's a huge leap IMO to go from "optimistic mindset" to "positivity only". The latter suggests that these people are wholly intolerant of any criticism towards the team. You can vaguely allude to this menacing shadow group of Huddlers but I'm willing to bet that if you actually gave me some names of who you think falls in this category, I could spend less than 30 seconds scrolling through their post history and find quite a lot of criticism towards the team...or "negativity", if you will. I would maybe be willing to concede iamhubby/Gerry Green as the singular poster who you could argue would fall under the "positivity only" mindset. Basically all the others are people who simply hold more nuanced positions than "everyone and everything sucks" and then get thrown into that category because they don't toe the line of the Huddle's Mean Girls.

The notion that there are posters who only want positivity and will not tolerate a single ounce of criticism towards the team is laughable on its face. This characterization is very deliberate, with the intention of painting a certain group of posters as delusional, intolerant, irrational, unreasonable, etc. simply because they are annoyed by every topic being instantly derailed by the same talking points ad nauseum. Even the ones that almost definitely inspired the creation of this thread (unless it was just purely coincidental that Linville started this thread immediately after getting into it with people in the QB School thread) are saying that Bryce Young is struggling because of his bad supporting cast. That is BY DEFINITION a criticism of the team as a whole. "Positivity only posters" would suggest that people think our 0-6 start is amazing and going just as planned and our future is incredibly bright.

I know it makes some people grumble, but I like to use Joe Burrow as a basis of comparison for Bryce because I think Burrow is also a player without any elite physical qualities (other than being tall) who has risen to prominence as an elite QB once his FO started to help him with some talent. So let's take a look at Burrow's passing charts at the start of his rookie season. I've crunched the numbers and Burrow did not complete his first deep pass (25+ yards) until his sixth game of his rookie season. In fact, he was a truly impressive 0 for 17 on deep passes until that point. Just an interesting little fun fact. I know I know, "look at all those 300 yard passing games!!" - but this is a thread specifically about deep passes which is the element I'm comparing here.

This whole idea of a "positivity only" thread is weird and condescending. Like "okay you kids go on and play in the sandbox with your sunshine and rainbows, while us adults go and talk about grown-up things like how Bryce Young literally cannot throw a ball further than 3 yards".

"Bryce Young is dead last in Air Yards per attempt" ..."Okay whatever Bryce Young is second to last in Air Yards behind an injured QB" ..."Okay sorry Bryce Young is third to last in Air Yards" ..."Okay it's not even really about that stat at all" That was quite the journey.

Well, third to last...but also virtually identical to Patrick Mahomes. Which is kinda my point - if we're keying in on a stat that puts Bryce Young on the same level as the best QB in the league, then I don't think that stat is as telling as we want it to be. As I said, I would like him to take more deep shots but I think that largely boils down to our desire for "flashy" plays rather than truly what's holding this offense back. I don't know if the lack of deep shots would even crack my Top 5 of things wrong with our offense at this point.