tukafan21

Multiple people have said in this thread how those weren't dots, but sure, it's just me who can't see it. Nobody is bashing the throw like you seem to think we're doing, we're just pointing out that you're trying to call it something that it just wasn't.

Oh I get what he was saying, but it really was more applicable 2 decades ago than today. In today's game you get last year's Vikings. A team that might put up a good record when the ball bounces their way enough times, but in the end, that QB isn't going to be able to will the team to victories when it's needed and they're going to end up losing badly in the big games when it matters because they're not able to step up when needed. If Stafford doesn't have 2 red zone turnovers and a pick 6, I don't think Bryce is willing the team to victory today in that weather.

Eh, feels more like a chicken or egg discussion to me. Have his downfield throws actually improved or is it that they only allow him to throw it downfield in very specific and few situations to where he can't be making bad throws? We don't ever let him just rip it downfield and put it into tight windows or true deep ball shots. They only let him throw it more than 10 yards downfield when they know the player will/should be running open and he's able to place it where it needs to be.

I genuinely don't think you know what it means to "throw a dot" in football terms. Here's a hint, it's not a 15 yard lofted pass where a player runs underneath it to catch it in stride and continue running. "throwing a dot" can be attributed to numerous throws, but not those. It's throwing a perfect touch pass high and outside on the sideline where a WR is the only one who can make the catch and make a toe tap to complete it. It's where a QB throws a 40-50 yard pass into a perfect spot for the WR to make the catch. Those TD's were well thrown balls, I'm not saying he didn't make a good pass. But in no world were they "dots" like you seem to want to call them. They wouldn't even be considered "dots" if they were thrown in a HS game, sorry, but just the way it is.

#1 overall pick who the players like, period. You can't have the #1 overall pick be a 3 year starter, pick up the 5th year option, and then put him into a competition for the starting spot with a newly signed FA QB for that 4th season. Don't get me wrong, I get it from the fan standpoint and just looking at Bryce objectively without draft or locker room status. But you just can't ignore those things in real life roster management. If you bring in that competition and they play better than Bryce in the pre-season, you have an ugly mess on your hands that can have repercussions for years down the line. Because then you either still start Bryce over the guy who played better, or your then benching your #1 overall pick, a 3 year starter who the players like and have voted as one of their captains. It's Daniel Jones' last year on the Giants but magnified by him being the #1 overall pick who is liked by his teammates better than Jones was.

Oh I totally get it, I kinda called this 3 years ago... Bryce is the picture perfect recipe for putting a team in QB purgatory, and just because there isn't a clear other path to follow right now, doesn't mean we should continue down this one as we also know how that movie ends too. Trying to start over now might bring more hurt than is needed over the next 2-3 years, but it also might (is?) the fastest way to actually getting back to being a true contender in the future. Which I 100% understand is a hard sell to a fanbase so starved for wins like we are, but it's why I was so against Bryce from the jump. This just seemed like the inevitable path everything would go down.

So there's a couple issues with this thinking about the type of QB you need to win games. Those QB's win regular season games, but they do not win you playoff games in this day and age of the NFL. And that's what the anti-Bryce people have been saying for years, he's just never going to be that type of QB who can drag an inferior team to wins because of their QB play. The other is "make 2-3 explosive completions per game" is giving a lot of credit to Bryce for making 2 throws today that literally every single starting QB should be able to make with their eyes closed. He made two well placed lofted throws with no safety help on either of them, that yes, lead to an explosive play, but aren't exactly ones you can objectively say were explosive because of the QB's throw. Also all of your post fails to recognize that in the end, Bryce still didn't "win us this game" as much as Stafford's turnovers cost the Rams the game.

It's because the "Stans" are box score merchants. They see 15/20 for 206 yards and 3 TDs with no INTs and think he just played a near perfect game and should be signed to a $200 million extension because of it. Never mind that he had 3 passes that accounted for 111 of those yards and all the TDs, one of them a screen pass that went for 35 yards and the other two just touched lofted passes (albeit good ones, but nowhere near darts into tight windows like elite QB's are able to make). Yes, he gets credit for the good throws, but extrapolating a small handful of good throws/plays a game to say he's played great games/seasons is the asinine part and what is going to end up screwing us over long term when he's kept around because of the blinders these wins are putting on people

And actually now that I think about it, the only time he didn't throw a lofted downfield pass, so the only time he tried to sling a dot, he almost got T-Mac killed.

He doesn't need to, because it's obvious. We're winning games and in the playoff hunt, for Tepper and this fanbase after how bad we've been for so long, that's always going to be enough at this point. Bryce hasn't earned that extension getting picked up, but when you're in the playoff hunt at this point in the season after how our last decade has been, it's going to get that QB's option picked up almost no matter what. And that's the problem, we're going to screw our long term future because people can't look past wins. And I also have to be clear, this isn't a Bryce bashing post based on today, he did just play one of his better games of the season just by way of not making bad mistakes and by making a couple well placed throws. But having said that, it also need to be pointed out that it's not a recipe for long term sustained success either. It's the recipe for those teams that have random years of hovering around .500 before falling back to earth the next season because the ball isn't bouncing their way every week.

You do realize that none of his downfield completions were him "slinging dots", right?!?! All of the downfield plays were lofted touch passes, which yes, they were well placed throws. But there is a Grand Canyon sized gap between a well placed touch pass and "slinging dots" which would be driven throws into small windows. I'm not bashing Bryce after today because it's not warranted, but let's not start giving him credit for things he wasn't doing because you can't differentiate various types of throws. Just sayin'

Eh, I get what you're saying, but I don't think THAT play call was that. That wasn't a play call that just fooled the defense and caused an easy 4th down conversion, it was Bryce and Coker making a great play to get it done. If you want to give Canales credit on the T-Mac 4th down TD, I wouldn't fight it. And again, no, that has NOTHING to do with that play having been T-Mac and the other wasn't. It was that there were multiple options on that play call for Bryce to find the open guy and make the conversion. The other was a 4th and short and the play call was for an immediate 15+ yard down field throw, which I thought was just moronic.

Said this in another thread last night, but that's a completely unrealistic notion. You can't have a former #1 overall pick who has started for that team since Week 1 of his rookie year (a few weeks aside), pick up his 5th year option, and then still put him in a true competition for the starting spot in year 4. If you're putting him in a true competition, you need to just cut/trade him and move on. It's either his job or it's not at this point, and that is the problem. I said this in a thread before that draft, the worst case scenario is he's too good to flat out cut, but not good enough to actually be the reason for winning and we'll get stuck in QB purgatory with him.

No he didn't. He came into the game with the correct strategy of "we're going to force the run all game long" and he stuck with it. That's not calling his best game of the season, there were lots of terrible play calls in key situations where the players made extraordinary efforts to make the play work. That's on the players for doing well, not on Canales for making the right play calls.

17 points but yea, the point still stands (as that last one wasn't going to be a TD but a FG)

LOL, that second line was funny as I literally just edited my post to say had that been T-Mac, I'd still have thought it was a terrible call. It was 4th and 3 and we called a play where Bryce takes the snap, doesn't even take a drop back, and rises to throw a floater 15+ yards downfield. I'm sorry, but how is THAT the call on 4th down? Where there wasn't even a 2nd option after the snap, had that pass not been completed, this place would have had a collective aneurism over how bad of a play call it was in the situation. 4th and 3 with a bunch of big bodied WRs, call a play with multiple guys running 4-5 yard routes and let Bryce find the open man. If that fails because Bryce Bryce'd it up, then it's one where I would have blamed Bryce but still given Canales credit. I don't view the result of the play as one to give Canales credit for tricking the defense or anything, I just felt it was a stupid play call in the situation. And again, my issues were more than that one play call. As I pointed out, I thought our players bailed him out with great plays off of terrible play calls on numerous occasions all game long. Today is a day to give the players credit for a well played game to get the win. I just didn't see it from Canales today outside of saying "we're going to run the ball more because of this terrible weather" and actually sticking with it. That's HC'ing 101, not some great decision making and play calling by the HC.

Hate to be that guy today, but I see it very differently on Canales. Yes, I give him credit for focusing on the run today, especially with the weather. But that's something that 32 out of 32 HC's in the NFL should have been doing in a game like this with the roster we have, so why does Canales get credit for doing the right thing as opposed to just being an idiot? There were still a ton of play calls today that I thought were terrible and we got bailed out by the players making a great play. For example, how many times did we run it up the gut on 3rd and 4ish, get stuffed, but see the RB break a tackle to bounce outside and get the 1st all on their own? Or the TD to Coker, great throw by Bryce, but still hated a 4th and 3 play call of being an immediate 15+ yard downfield throw after the snap. I said it before and I'll say it again, even as a massive anti-Bryce guy, if I'm being told one has to come back next year and one has to get replaced, I'm bringing Bryce back over Canales 100 times out of 100. It took Stafford turning it over 3 times for us to get this win, something he hadn't done once in like 2 months or something. Today is a day I'm giving the players credit for the win, I don't see Canales having done anything to get this win today other than having an overall smart gameplay to run in bad weather, something any 12 year old would know to do. And before someone says it as I know someone will... this has NOTHING to do with T-Mac only getting 2 targets. That Coker TD for example could have been T-Mac instead and I'd still have said it was a terrible play call that got bailed out by a good throw/play by the players themselves. I've also said this numerous times this year after wins, where I felt it was credit on the players and not Canales.

Wait a second... targeting your best player actually turns out to be a good thing?!?!?! Who would have thunk it?

Agree, I even said he did, but this idea seems to be more geared towards helping Canales poor game day decisions. Which to me was Rivera's biggest flaw, he's the #1 Monday-Saturday coach I've ever seen.

And I didn't knock your idea itself, just the suggestion of Rivera.

Wow, can't stop a catch like that, hat off to you on that one Puka

He didn't tackle him, he just ran right through him and continued to make another block down field, hell of a play by that WR

What was the play call there on that sack? Bryce steps up in the pocket to throw, but T-Mac and someone else (didn't notice who, maybe a TE?) were both downfield looking to throw blocks, not running routes. Couldn't have been a screen pass or he wouldn't have stepped up into the pocket like that, what was that?!?!

Great throw and catch, but I actually thought it was a TERRIBLE play call, despite it working. 4th and 3 and you call a play for a 15+ yard pass downfield with no other possible options since it was a snap and immediate throw? It worked, so it's hard to fault it too much, but it was 4th and 3, why are you calling a play where it's a downfield throw and only a downfield throw, just found it odd. Had they not completed the catch, it would have REALLY looked like a bad call. So credit where credit is due, with Bryce for making a good throw, but still not a fan of the play call by Canales even though it worked.

LOLOLOL is this a serious suggestion? Rivera was one of the worst game day coaches I've ever seen and had the exact opposite of a killer instinct (don't get me started on the whole Riverboat Ron thing, that wasn't him being a gambler, it was him finally just going for it in situations where every other coach would have gone for it but he previously never would because he's too old school). I thought he was a great player motivator Monday thru Saturday, his players loved him. But his game day coaching was atrocious and always felt we won games in spite of him and because of our elite talent on those teams, never because of Rivera himself.