Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Seriously, it's time to give Walker an honest look


LinvilleGorge

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, MechaZain said:

Teddy's QBR is high because of the system not because he's executing it particularly well. I'd argue that any pedestrian passer could produce similar results and the Detroit game backs that up. 

His lone touchdown today a was 5 yard dump to directly in front of him to an open Robby. You or I could have done that but I'm sure it helped his QBR.

it's true to an extent. i think the leaguewide adjustment to adopting this kind of hybrid system between WCO and Spread type formations has been a function of attempting to keep some of the older quarterbacks in the game even when their arm strength has started to slip. but i wouldn't assume it's simple to produce results in these systems unless you're a good short to intermediate thrower in terms of placement and teddy does that pretty well most of the time. he didn't today for sure. we tried to run a similar concept with cam two years ago and despite it giving him his best completion percentage of his career, it took almost all the pop out of the offense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teddy sucks. He’s a phantom QB that plays fine in the first half and then chokes when the game is on line. His numbers aren’t impressive because he pads his stats with check downs. Same thing Brees does in NO. 
 

We got rid of Cam to sign this guy to 3 years a and 60 million. I’d take Matt Moore over this dude any day. 
 

Efficiency stats don’t  make a good QB. Intangibles and clutch football win games. Teddys missing the most important piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Vagrant said:

try again. you can find cogent rationale to disagree other than post length. i apologize that things can't always be condensed to solve for your fruit fly attention span. 

I appreciate that you're trying to come off as intelligent, but intelligent people can communicate their thoughts without rambling on incoherently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I appreciate that you're trying to come off as intelligent, but intelligent people can communicate their thoughts without rambling on incoherently.

i'm not trying to come across as anything except someone that has looked at the data. it's not incoherent if you can read is the point. i don't have anything to prove to you. however, you attacking me instead of the points says enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Vagrant said:

we tried to run a similar concept with cam two years ago and despite it giving him his best completion percentage of his career, it took almost all the pop out of the offense. 

We were tied for 14th in the NFL in scoring two years ago.  We're 21st this year. We were 10th in yardage two years ago. We're 19th this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Vagrant said:

i'm not trying to come across as anything except someone that has looked at the data. it's not incoherent if you can read is the point. i don't have anything to prove to you. however, you attacking me instead of the points says enough. 

 I don't think anyone actually got to the crux of your point in that rambling mess because... well, it was a rambling mess. Once you started spewing excuses I tuned out. Try to communicate better if you want anyone to take your points seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

We were tied for 14th in the NFL in scoring two years ago.  We're 21st this year. We were 10th in yardage two years ago. We're 19th this year.

how much of that would you say is a function solely of the quarterback against missing CMC, who had the first of what will hopefully be many MVP caliber years? that was a better team on the offensive line and we also had a tight end. it's apples to oranges to what we have today. plus, it was different coaching and schemes. it was just an anecdotal observation about the direction the league is going regarding a higher emphasis on efficiency at the position being favored at times over explosiveness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

 I don't think anyone actually got to the crux of your point in that rambling mess because... well, it was a rambling mess. Once you started spewing excuses I tuned out. Try to communicate better if you want anyone to take your points seriously.

I do well enough. not perfect, but if you're interested in discussing my form instead of the veracity of the points that sounds pretty pointless, mr. moderator. you must have strengths other than moderating conversation if you do this poorly with your own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Vagrant said:

how much of that would you say is a function solely of the quarterback against missing CMC, who had the first of what will hopefully be many MVP caliber years? that was a better team on the offensive line and we also had a tight end. it's apples to oranges to what we have today. plus, it was different coaching and schemes. it was just an anecdotal observation about the direction the league is going regarding a higher emphasis on efficiency at the position being favored at times over explosiveness. 

I'd argue that OL was basically a push vs. this year's. It wasn't good. Chris Clark was our starting LT. TE was much better. WRs were much worse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Vagrant said:

I do well enough. not perfect, but if you're interested in discussing my form instead of the veracity of the points that sounds pretty pointless, mr. moderator. you must have strengths other than moderating conversation if you do this poorly with your own. 

Just offering advice. No one on a forum is reading a post that long and rambling especially when it starts off so uninterestingly. If you want to keep arguing about it, feel free to continue. But there's a reason why no one else is discussing your post... they didn't read it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Just offering advice. No one on a forum is reading a post that long and rambling especially when it starts off so uninterestingly. If you want to keep arguing about it, feel free to continue. But there's a reason why no one else is discussing your post... they didn't read it.

I'd think if you want to lose out you pray for TB to start the rest of our games.... If we lose out we could get as high as #4 maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the best reason to not bench Teddy is because we don't want to rub him the wrong way?

I know his contract seems like a lot of money, but I don't see him on the team beyond next year anyways.

The coaches said publicly they think Teddy's a franchise QB, but Rhule also said he couldn't wait to coach Cam.  I think it's lip service and they know the score.  They aren't that stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...