Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 5/12/2025 at 10:57 AM, BurntEyes said:

If we can't all agree on our love for big men scoring a TD, I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

Don Beebe says, "Mars is that away."

jhz6Kv.gif

  • Replies 26.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
24 minutes ago, Derka said:

on our one and only scoring drive of the 2H vs asu we converted a 3rd and 10 on a go route to matthew golden. the ball did not lead the speedy golden, in fact it was a bit under thrown (a product of lofting every single pass you make) and towards the sideline. an accurate pass which led golden would have been a TD. instead golden had to adjust to the pass and jump towards the boundary to catch it. 

 

IMG_2339.jpeg

IMG_2341.jpeg

On the flip side, here is JT O’Sullivan’s opinion on the play. (I hope the sound works)

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 hours ago, markstanco said:

giphy.gif

 

Star Trek Report GIF

 

4 hours ago, markstanco said:

Holy hell....I forgot all about that thread.  "TheJosh" is a retarded MFer. 

 

Or a legendary troll.

 

3 hours ago, Had Enough said:

Here is the midpoint on completion percentage at each depth:

Deep                 36.4%   Only 7 guys above 50%

Intermediate     54.6%

Short                  74.4%

Behind the LOS  90.3%.  106 of 126 are above 85%.

 

So again, using completion percentage on a standalone basis when other data is fairly readily available is not a good indicator.  If you stay short and behind the LOS, if you do that in an equal ratio, the average guy is around 83-84%.  That same consideration for intermediate/deep is around 45%.
 

The fact is, and strongly supported by the numbers, that if you push the ball down the field, the completion percentage goes down.  
 

At this time, I am looking up the numbers as I type.  Well will go Dart, Ewers, Shough.

Ewers on deep/intermediate is at 34% of drop backs.  At short/behind the LOS, he’s at 60%.  On the first grouping he’s at 47% completion percentage.  83% at the shorter depths.  Overall completion percentage at 65.8%.

Dart.  44.4%/49.8%.  56.5% completion percentage deep/int and 88.4% short/los.  Overall completion percentage is 69.2%.

Shough.  31.9%/58.5% on target breakdown.  52.8% and 77.2%.  Overall completion percentage is 62.1%.

 

This tells you some things about Dart relative to the other two.  Ewers looks better than Shough.  Shough is behind the LOS 13% of the time, 10% of those are screens.  Ewers is at 28% with a 17.5% screen ratio.  So when parsed a bit more Ewers gains about 2% completion points compared to Shough because he goes even shorter more often.

 

So... the thing about this kind of analysis is that it appears to tell you something while telling you nothing at all.

The reason I like Warner's analysis of quarterbacks so much, and weigh it so much more highly than others, is that it's not about statistics; it's about "Here are the skills I think you need to have to succeed in the NFL; here's how well this quarterback executes those various skills."  Percentages, success rates, etc are meaningless; he doesn't even consider them. What matters is: What are you doing in this situation, and is it what you're supposed to be doing? What do you need to do to get at that level?

And later on, when Ewers was on Coach Chucky's show, he mentioned that he was working on one of the two things Warner identified: His footwork.

It's bad footwork that leads to inaccurate throws from Ewers. When his footwork isn't sloppy, he is insanely accurate and throws very catchable balls. He makes throws no other QB in this draft class does. When it's sloppy, he has such a good arm that he STILL is often accurate... but every missed throw can be attributed to either bad footwork or the receiver just dropping the ball.

The other thing, of course, is making the right read under pressure. Ewers faced three defenses that show you one look, then switch to another: Georgia, OU, and tOSU. He struggled against those. I don't think very many other QBs faced a similar gauntlet of skilled, well-coached defenses. Of course, that's what NFL defenses do. That Ewers has seen this, and others in this year's class haven't, actually helps him in the long run, especially how young he is.

The real problem with Ewers as an NFL prospect is that he's made of glass.

 

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

Here's how Miami's QB situation will go:

Tua will get concussed;

MILF hunter will come in and suck;

Ewers will come in and play well - giving the Dolphins fans hope - then get injured because he always does;

Miami trades (on an overpay) for Kirk Cousins.

 

 

This is painfully likely.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Levi said:

On the flip side, here is JT O’Sullivan’s opinion on the play. (I hope the sound works)

 

 

That's an aspect of Ewers that Warner loves, too - the touch on his passes. That Ewers CAN throw rockets, but instead throws accurate, well-timed arcs that go over the defense's heads and be very easy for receivers to grab is his biggest strength.

Posted
18 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

image.thumb.jpeg.b2e050b9ff80cbbdc79767a492f1832a.jpeg
 

For reference is is Klubniks

image.thumb.jpeg.30031561aafc24ac64b56ab357cda9cf.jpeg
 

Leavitts

image.thumb.jpeg.706d7cc317ac9f75877e5ff2ec6531d1.jpeg

This is interesting.  Thank you for bringing this up, and bring up a source that I could link to.   

Since you are more familiar with it, can you elaborate on the on-target rate vs. completion rate and explain the meaning between the differential?  For example, CK's 20+ yard differential is ~12% where as SL's and QE's are about 18% differential.   Is there a metric which shows how QE was performing this year pre-oblique injury and post injury return, and one from last year and the year before?  I think one of the scouting reports I read stated QE had trouble with intermediate passes to his right side, and I was curious if that was present pre-injury data. 

Quote

While recognizing the limitations of sample size and various factors outside of a quarterback’s control, our study shows there is some value in considering a quarterback’s accuracy in college, especially on short throws, when projecting how accurate he may be at the same distances in the NFL.

Separately, we found that accuracy on intermediate throws had the strongest correlation with a quarterback’s overall performance, with short throw accuracy coming in second. Deep accuracy had a significantly weaker correlation, presumably due to deep throws inherently being more volatile, at least in part. While dropping a 60 yard bomb right into a receiver’s hands may draw the most applause, a quarterback’s accuracy at shallower depths may prove to be more insightful when projecting how he might perform in the NFL.

Source Link.  

Having read through this site a little further though, I am a little disappointed they do not include their P-values and t-statistics and residual graphs which could be used to validate the null-hypothesis, independent variable, etc.  Also on the first table they present on that page, is pretty indicative that the model for intermediate/longer passes are a very poor (again though, not enough information is included here as well). 

 Statistics and regression analysis without the qualifiers is something I would be very skeptical about.   I have seen others run regression analysis and not be able to rule out the null-hypothesis just run with it.

 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Nivek said:

This is interesting.  Thank you for bringing this up, and bring up a source that I could link to.   

Since you are more familiar with it, can you elaborate on the on-target rate vs. completion rate and explain the meaning between the differential?  For example, CK's 20+ yard differential is ~12% where as SL's and QE's are about 18% differential.   Is there a metric which shows how QE was performing this year pre-oblique injury and post injury return, and one from last year and the year before?  I think one of the scouting reports I read stated QE had trouble with intermediate passes to his right side, and I was curious if that was present pre-injury data. 

Source Link.  

Having read through this site a little further though, I am a little disappointed they do not include their P-values and t-statistics and residual graphs which could be used to validate the null-hypothesis, independent variable, etc.  Also on the first table they present on that page, is pretty indicative that the model for intermediate/longer passes are a very poor (again though, not enough information is included here as well). 

 Statistics and regression analysis without the qualifiers is something I would be very skeptical about.   I have seen others run regression analysis and not be able to rule out the null-hypothesis just run with it.

 

I wish that the website had Tyler Shough and they might but my work computer does not allow Twitter so I can't scour their twitter. To me these two QB's given their history of injuries is the most interesting part in comparison. 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
15 minutes ago, Levi said:

On the flip side, here is JT O’Sullivan’s opinion on the play. (I hope the sound works)

 

 

i’ll take his word for it, he certainly knows better than i do. still, it’s hard to know (for a layperson like me) given QE’s propensity for a)lifting every pass and b)generally being inaccurate downfield if you’re watching a great back shoulder fade or a could-have-been td that was thrown short and wide.

Posted
1 hour ago, Derka said:

and i could argue that im skinny and mentally stable, but that wouldn’t be true either, would it?

TIme out for a second. 

I really wish you wouldn't post like this.  Look, you have been open and honest about your struggles, but you should also treat yourself with some dignity and respect.   Self-deprecation is fine if there is self-respect. 

Time in.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Nivek said:

TIme out for a second. 

I really wish you wouldn't post like this.  Look, you have been open and honest about your struggles, but you should also treat yourself with some dignity and respect.   Self-deprecation is fine if there is self-respect. 

Time in.

 

  • Haha 1
Posted

lol nah in all seriousness i appreciate the post. fwiw, while i know that i’ve got a few screws loose, i do have plenty of dignity and self respect, but thank you, nonetheless. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I don't think you can say he was nails on any deep portion of the field, he may have hit a handful over his three years but that doesn't mean he was nails.

He was pretty good.  These are a few examples.  I don't know if he had an easier time judging the depth because he's throwing at an angle, but he really struggles with his judgment when he goes more vertical.

I mean he missed EVERY throw against Kentucky.  Every single one.

Here's a great throw versus aggy:

Here is one that isn't as good, but he gives his guy a chance by putting it in a spot where he can make a play:

Good throw down the sideline to Golden:

Here's another good one from that game:

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, AnotherLawyer said:

Saying it doesn't make him an accurate QB overall is not the same thing as saying he's inaccurate.

Ok then. You learn something new everyday here.

Not accurate /= inaccurate. The more you know.

Posted
2 hours ago, Park Gothic said:

This is good analysis, very helpful. But as others have pointed out, it doesn't tell the whole story. My first thoughts are (1) who is Shough throwing to vs. who is Ewers throwing to? I assume that Texas had a significant advantage in the receiver department over Louisville. (2) Who is blocking for these guys and what does their run game look like? It's easier to complete passes when the threat of a run game is holding the defense back, or when the o-line can give the QB more time. Not sure who has the edge here overall, but I'm fairly confident that Texas has the better o-line. (3) What defenses are they going up against? Not to indulge the SEC circlejerk, but I'm pretty sure SEC defenses are going to make a QB look worse than he does against ACC defenses. 

I just don't think there's a meaningful system for parsing through these data points. Statistics require context, and context relies on overall picture. You can explain away bad numbers and argue why those numbers are the real story depending on whatever your bias happens to be. It's still a useful endeavor, but I just don't think there are definitive answers to be gleaned from stats and narrative alone. 

I’ll hit on a few points here.  Stats do not tell the entirety of the story and have said as such.

But they put the entirety of every play out there.  It’s not a focus on the best game or the worst game either.  Any QB that has ever made 1,000 throws has some good and some bad.  It does highlight some consistency or lack of consistency if you prefer to look at it that way from the stats.

It being an imperfect science is why NFL QBs fail but in my opinion an underappreciated aspect is the entirety of the environment that fails in support of that QB.  If you can’t pass block for shit, it’s over in most cases, for example.

As for opponent defenses, that does matter.  What is more important is the individual matchups of your offense versus their defense.  Can a Worthy beat Kool Aid and Arnold?  Can a Banks handle Dallas Turner?  Texas rates very favorably in those comparisons over the past 3 years.

From a statistical standpoint, I can’t say there was a discernible difference between Ewers and Shough.  But, yes, statistically Dart separated himself.  You also can say he played SEC defenses.  You also can draw a line and say there’s a difference in offensive skill between Ole Miss and Texas.  Harris good but slower than any WR we’ve had the past two years.  I do not recall any drafted Ole Miss Oline.  Their TE was a free agent.

Texas pass pro grade was ranked #2.  Ole Miss was not #1.  For the past two years, Ole Miss had a better OFEI ranking than Texas.  

In that example of Dart versus Ewers, they started off the draft process in similar draft projections then some separation began being created.  It’s reflective in the data so then drill down and does that tape match the data.
 

From the NFL perspective, I’d watch every play of every game from any QB I were interested in drafting.  Then I’d do it again.  I’d also look at all this data to go along with it.  Then I’d quiz the hell out of them in an attempt to see what they know and how hard they’re willing to work to learn what they don’t.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

So... the thing about this kind of analysis is that it appears to tell you something while telling you nothing at all.

The reason I like Warner's analysis of quarterbacks so much, and weigh it so much more highly than others, is that it's not about statistics; it's about "Here are the skills I think you need to have to succeed in the NFL; here's how well this quarterback executes those various skills."  Percentages, success rates, etc are meaningless; he doesn't even consider them. What matters is: What are you doing in this situation, and is it what you're supposed to be doing? What do you need to do to get at that level?

Percentages and success rates are meaningless? No way.

Warners thoughts are valuable, but he’s also not trying to tear people down.  Gruden isnt trying to either, but I’d bet he’d chew his QBs butt for many a mistake.

If a QB, or any player, can make a particular throw or play, it is about how often they can repeat it.  Obviously, footwork is a part of that preferred repetition. Then 3 years of data is much better support than watching 3 games out of 30.

That is not to refute anything Warner says is inaccurate or untrue.  And whether Ewers was a 1st rounder or a 7th rounder, all those things can be true in either case.

Posted
1 minute ago, Had Enough said:

Percentages and success rates are meaningless? No way.

Way.

Because you're taking these and treating them as if they're meaningful outside of the context of everything else.

It's not that using statistics is wrong. It's that you're using meaningless statistics in an invalid way.

1 minute ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

image.thumb.png.a051f4053b56d3f99337422795711a9d.pngimage.thumb.png.0d2f0096fc14e00ddb0041ec0b79190a.png

now that's fuckin funny 🤣🤣🤣

  • Haha 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Way.

Because you're taking these and treating them as if they're meaningful outside of the context of everything else.

It's not that using statistics is wrong. It's that you're using meaningless statistics in an invalid way.

now that's fuckin funny 🤣🤣🤣 I’ve never said they’re the end all, be all.  I actually had subsequent posts that referenced many other factors.

meaningless stats.  Guess I’m not sure what stats would be meaningful.

Particularly since I did not say these were the end all, be all.

Posted
25 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Way.

Because you're taking these and treating them as if they're meaningful outside of the context of everything else.

It's not that using statistics is wrong. It's that you're using meaningless statistics in an invalid way.

now that's fuckin funny 🤣🤣🤣

So take what we know from the analytics and put on the Quinn film. Watching Quinn this year the numbers seem to support what you see on tape from the guy. Does he make occasional throws and hit occasional passes that go against the numbers, sure. But he doesn’t do it consistently. The numbers say he’s good 0-9 yards from LOS, average at intermediate, below average outside the numbers and bad at deep. The film supports that from this year. His analysis and breakdowns from nfl scouts seem to support the numbers as well when you look at all the weaknesses listed from them as well as his positives. 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Had Enough said:

Percentages and success rates are meaningless? No way.

I wouldn't say they are meaningless, but too much is read into them without some skepticism, but sometimes too little is thought of them as well.  I am sure the NFL has guys that look at all of the percentages from all over the field to determine the velocity and completion percentages/attempts so they can better inform their defense.   It possibly could also clue one into an unreported injury or the impact of a new receiver if there is a percentage deviation.   

Posted
6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So take what we know from the analytics and put on the Quinn film. Watching Quinn this year the numbers seem to support what you see on tape from the guy. Does he make occasional throws and hit occasional passes that go against the numbers, sure. But he doesn’t do it consistently. The numbers say he’s good 0-9 yards from LOS, average at intermediate, below average outside the numbers and bad at deep. The film supports that from this year. His analysis and breakdowns from nfl scouts seem to support the numbers as well when you look at all the weaknesses listed from them as well as his positives. 

That link also seems to concludes by saying 0-9 yard completion percentage seems to be a more prolific indicator of NFL success than does the intermediate or deep ball.  But again, they leave out so much of the details it is worth some skepticism about their interpretation and conclusions.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Nivek said:

That link also seems to concludes by saying 0-9 yard completion percentage seems to be a more prolific indicator of NFL success than does the intermediate or deep ball.  But again, they leave out so much of the details it is worth some skepticism about their interpretation and conclusions.  

IMO and what I’ve seen watching NFL football the intermediate is the most important and being able to drive the football to the boundaries are the two most important things that really good NFL QBs do the best. Which basically means that QBs ability to hit those spots opens up the whole field….

 

I can’t think of a team that has won a Super Bowl with a dolphins style underneath offense except for maybe the chiefs a few years ago but Mahomes is the great equalizer because of his ability 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted
30 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

IMO and what I’ve seen watching NFL football the intermediate is the most important and being able to drive the football to the boundaries are the two most important things that really good NFL QBs do the best. Which basically means that QBs ability to hit those spots opens up the whole field….

 

I can’t think of a team that has won a Super Bowl with a dolphins style underneath offense except for maybe the chiefs a few years ago but Mahomes is the great equalizer because of his ability 

The Patriots.......6 times.

Posted
3 hours ago, Derka said:

i’ll take his word for it, he certainly knows better than i do. still, it’s hard to know (for a layperson like me) given QE’s propensity for a)lifting every pass and b)generally being inaccurate downfield if you’re watching a great back shoulder fade or a could-have-been td that was thrown short and wide.

Its a fade. The receiver is supposed get vertical while leaving a few yards to his outside and not allow the DB to walk him to the sideline. QB is supposed to hit the receiver on the outside shoulder, guiding him away from the defender so he cannot break up the pass. Where the defender is determines where the throw should be. If the defender is on top of the receiver then the QB should throw the fade to the back shoulder. If the defender is on his hip you throw it upfield and to the outside shoulder. Literally a perfect throw.

Posted
4 hours ago, AnotherLawyer said:

You make a good point. As physical concepts I mostly think of accuracy and precision as interchangeable and receiver-relative, like placing the ball over the outside shoulder rather than the inside shoulder, for example. Ewers threw to the same spot regardless of where the receiver was. From a field-relative standpoint, he's accurate. From a receiver-relative standpoint, he's accurate on certain routes and not others. A lot of these guys who trained with the same small groups of private coaches have outstanding field-relative accuracy. 

Yep. A huge chunk of Ewers missed downfield throws were on the same route combo where the deep guy is running a big post. He threw it vertical every. damn. time. He was very good with true verticals on his right side, and missed quite a few true verticals on his left.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Levi said:

On the flip side, here is JT O’Sullivan’s opinion on the play. (I hope the sound works)

 

 

This looks similar to that dumbass defensive call on 4th and 13 except 3 x 1 to the left here.  Notice the guy running down the middle wide open.

Makes that call even dumber as they got no pressure here, and they showed they couldn’t cover 2 different guys.  Yet you go back to it.  On the most important play of the game. 

Posted
I'm not sure if this applies to football, but in shooting "accuracy" refers to how close your shots are to your target. If you're aiming for the bullseye, how close are you getting to the bullseye? In contrast, "precision" refers to how consistently are you putting shots in the same place, i.e., how tight are your groupings? Here is a helpful chart:
1400x778-blog-graphic-acc-prec.jpg
Please stop hooting at each other like a pack of retards squabbling about the meaning of already well-defined terms.

Top right just means you need to adjust your sights.
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted

QE definitely had some WTF throws, but I'm not going to totally blame him on some of those deep 40+-yd throws that landed 3-6 feet to the side of the receiver. A lot of times you hear about a QB "throwing a guy open" because of the defender's position. You have a WR running down the field with a CB on his right hip. Sure, a perfect throw COULD land right in his hands, but it's better to throw it to the left and let your WR adjust to the open area of the field and catch it. Worthy was terrible at making adjustments and tracking the ball. I don't put all of that on Quinn.

Now, when he overthrows or underthrows a wide open receiver, that's definitely on him.

Posted
35 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

image.png.8979ed487d1a0ae21324c95a8d2dcefa.png

 

 

 

 

Lol. You guys HAVE TO lay off the stats. You know damn well outside of the Moss era Brady made his money in the short to intermediate passing game. There are 1000 ways to get to 8.6 yards per attempt.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

Lol. You guys HAVE TO lay off the stats. You know damn well outside of the Moss era Brady made his money in the short to intermediate passing game. There are 1000 ways to get to 8.6 yards per attempt.

Lay off the stats yet you and others like to throw out this:  “A huge chunk of Ewers missed downfield throws were on the same route combo where the deep guy is running a big post.”

With no support or context.  So we’re to take this as gospel because you said so.

The original quote says “average depth of target” which is different than yards per attempt.  There are myriad ways you can get to yards per attempt but less so depth of target.  
 

There are reasons I quote from PFF.  It’s data (less subjective) paired with grades (more subjective).  It’s not available because I said it’s useful either.

And like it or not in the past two years all 1st round QBs were in the top 13 each year in their grading.

As I age, I see why people get more bitter.

Posted

You know I rewatched the Kentucky game and I was wrong about his passes.  The worst one was to Bond on the post because it was late.  However, every fucking deep shot had our guy being interfered with.  If the DB isn’t allowed to prison rape our guys they would have had a chance to make a play on the ball.  There was another throw in the end zone to Bond that he almost caught but he was interfered with on that play.  Then, the shot to Wingo we missed is because Wingo gets shoved by the Kentucky DB.  SEC officials do not call pass interference very much.  

Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

Lol. You guys HAVE TO lay off the stats. You know damn well outside of the Moss era Brady made his money in the short to intermediate passing game. There are 1000 ways to get to 8.6 yards per attempt.

the 2024 dolphins vs brady’s last super bowl team in NE:

IMG_2377.thumb.jpeg.50874d8a7893a7508d6111f977e77453.jpeg

vs

IMG_2378.thumb.jpeg.b5076e72798268207e707e2b44af34fd.jpeg

bottom of the league vs middle of the pack. 7.8 vs 6.3. it’s not even close.

Edited by Derka
Posted
35 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

You know I rewatched the Kentucky game and I was wrong about his passes.  The worst one was to Bond on the post because it was late.  However, every fucking deep shot had our guy being interfered with.  If the DB isn’t allowed to prison rape our guys they would have had a chance to make a play on the ball.  There was another throw in the end zone to Bond that he almost caught but he was interfered with on that play.  Then, the shot to Wingo we missed is because Wingo gets shoved by the Kentucky DB.  SEC officials do not call pass interference very much.  

Bond was open and got interfered with because Quinn underthrew the ball and Bond had to slow down giving the defender time to jump and interfere. Bond had a step on the defender and would’ve had the TD but the deep ball was underthrown/floated by Quinn.

IMG_5649.thumb.jpeg.da6ac71ee34445283e9df65b352589e3.jpegIMG_5650.thumb.jpeg.33c31de49588fbbf17f1bdf0924b4cca.jpegIMG_5648.thumb.jpeg.b8b3451b39b4ed67e388031c91a97de7.jpegIMG_5646.thumb.jpeg.05f1d77bb07527b0d0823701c1ee1f79.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Bond was open and got interfered with because Quinn underthrew the ball and Bond had to slow down giving the defender time to jump and interfere. Bond had a step on the defender and would’ve had the TD but the deep ball was underthrown/floated by Quinn.

IMG_5649.thumb.jpeg.da6ac71ee34445283e9df65b352589e3.jpegIMG_5650.thumb.jpeg.33c31de49588fbbf17f1bdf0924b4cca.jpegIMG_5648.thumb.jpeg.b8b3451b39b4ed67e388031c91a97de7.jpegIMG_5646.thumb.jpeg.05f1d77bb07527b0d0823701c1ee1f79.jpeg

Are you under the impression that I’m disagreeing with you on this pass?

The other pass to the end zone was on a go route on the other side of the field, buddy.

Edited by Fondren & Main
Posted
2 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

Are you under the impression that I’m disagreeing with you on this pass?

The other pass to the end zone was on a go route on the other side of the field, buddy.

I’m just saying a lot of the interference on our WRs are because they have to slow down for Quinn’s underthrows.

It seems like Golden is the only one who has the ability to catch anything relatively deep from Quinn because Golden has the ability to anticipate the underthrows by slowing down or launch himself into the air to catch the overthrows. 

Posted
26 minutes ago, Jkwellborn said:


I feel like the defense should get a fair amount of credit on 2 or 3 of those.

Absolutely. But they had a unique recipe that worked. TEs worked the seams. A small, quick guy working the LOS, and some rando for the intermediate.

 

12 hours ago, Had Enough said:

Lay off the stats yet you and others like to throw out this:  “A huge chunk of Ewers missed downfield throws were on the same route combo where the deep guy is running a big post.”

With no support or context.  So we’re to take this as gospel because you said so.

The original quote says “average depth of target” which is different than yards per attempt.  There are myriad ways you can get to yards per attempt but less so depth of target.  
 

There are reasons I quote from PFF.  It’s data (less subjective) paired with grades (more subjective).  It’s not available because I said it’s useful either.

And like it or not in the past two years all 1st round QBs were in the top 13 each year in their grading.

As I age, I see why people get more bitter.

So let me get this straight. Are you going to come here and tell us that the Patriots, outside of the Moss years, were a downfield passing team? Is that the business you are going to stand on?

  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, MrBig said:

It seems like Golden is the only one who has the ability to catch anything relatively deep from Quinn because Golden has the ability to anticipate the underthrows by slowing down or launch himself into the air to catch the overthrows. 

So a QB is helped by an elite receiver, of which we had only one in 2024?  Huh.

And before anyone accuses me of saying Ewers = Brady, let me reiterate for the eleventy billionth time that I believe Ewers bears significant responsibility for our inability to get past the semifinals two years running.  So do a bunch of other guys, some of whom have a permanent spot on the sideline or in the booth.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

 

 

So let me get this straight. Are you going to come here and tell us that the Patriots, outside of the Moss years, were a downfield passing team? Is that the business you are going to stand on?

I merely pointed out the potential point of confusion.

I mean why would I argue such a point with someone who wouldn’t support that conclusion or entertain the idea of evidence to the contrary.  And it’s certainly not possible to counter some definition of downfield passing team in  your mind that’s not known to others.

Posted
11 hours ago, MrBig said:

Bond was open and got interfered with because Quinn underthrew the ball and Bond had to slow down giving the defender time to jump and interfere. Bond had a step on the defender and would’ve had the TD but the deep ball was underthrown/floated by Quinn.

IMG_5649.thumb.jpeg.da6ac71ee34445283e9df65b352589e3.jpegIMG_5650.thumb.jpeg.33c31de49588fbbf17f1bdf0924b4cca.jpegIMG_5648.thumb.jpeg.b8b3451b39b4ed67e388031c91a97de7.jpegIMG_5646.thumb.jpeg.05f1d77bb07527b0d0823701c1ee1f79.jpeg

This is a post that was thrown vertically instead of out in front. You know, the route that I said that Quinn struggles throwing and then @Had Enough said "With no support or context.  So we’re to take this as gospel because you said so". Quinn misses this route A LOT. The throw to Worthy in the game at Bama was a post that Quinn threw vertically just Worthy adjusted to it. It's crazy to me that he misses that route to the level he does while being really good at throwing a deep dig which is much harder.

  • Haha 1
Posted

Are you referring to the “great” throw to Worthy for a TD versus Bama in ‘23?

Deep passes are incomplete A LOT.  All QBs. Generally because the throw isn’t great.  There are a number of deep balls caught that are not great throws.  Ewers has thrown over 1,000 passes at Texas.  You can find examples of just about every throw.

You go with examples to show that they exist.  I do not dispute that they exist.  The numbers play more into the frequency with which things occur to which you can compare relative to their peers.

And by the way I don’t necessarily disagree with your statement on the Patriots; however, I can be persuaded otherwise. If the numbers show they went downfield more than anyone else, then I wouldn’t argue.

Posted
Just now, Had Enough said:

I merely pointed out the potential point of confusion.

I mean why would I argue such a point with someone who wouldn’t support that conclusion or entertain the idea of evidence to the contrary.  And it’s certainly not possible to counter some definition of downfield passing team in  your mind that’s not known to others.

NO ONE is going to listen to you if your stance is that the Patriots' offense was based around airing it out. No one. Tom Brady was in the 6th round for two reasons. Lack of mobility and lack of arm strength.

A 15 yard out from the opposite hash is a big time, 40 yard, NFL throw, but it still only counts as 15 yards, same as a 15 yard throw straight up the hash mark that you as the QB are standing on. In the stat book they both count the same but on the field they are very different. One is "airing it out". The other is "dink and dunk".  Gronk averaged 15 yrds for his career catching balls up the seam. STATS DON'T TELL THE WHOLE STORY.

Posted
Just now, Thatguy said:

NO ONE is going to listen to you if your stance is that the Patriots' offense was based around airing it out. No one. Tom Brady was in the 6th round for two reasons. Lack of mobility and lack of arm strength.

A 15 yard out from the opposite hash is a big time, 40 yard, NFL throw, but it still only counts as 15 yards, same as a 15 yard throw straight up the hash mark that you as the QB are standing on. In the stat book they both count the same but on the field they are very different. One is "airing it out". The other is "dink and dunk".  Gronk averaged 15 yrds for his career catching balls up the seam. STATS DON'T TELL THE WHOLE STORY.

Not one time have I said the stats tell the whole story.  And many times I put them out there for informational purposes.

I know we don’t talk about this shit but as a youth thru high school - participated in 4 varsity sports, two way starter, two year starter basketball, on the relays.  QB. And I wasn’t some passive S sitting 15 yards off the ball on defense. Now, I am old, bitter dude that’s reflected on successes and failures. That’s watched as a parent, youth coach, observant fan.  4A to 6A. Have seen 4 and 5 star players competing not just in those sports but others and from a reasonably close view.  I’ve seen my high school produce an NFL QB, a state player of the year. Girl sports, boy sports.  I was not a casual participant.  I’m not a casual fan.  I watch your Longhorns live and in person.  Then I watch the recording. I was in position athletically to see how impactful failures can be on a personal athletic achievement level because of successes.  So when you think I’m a dumbass, when you think I’m full of it, know that’s the backdrop and there’s a hint of that in every post.  Even those that include the stats.
 

I know your kid plays some volleyball. I believe you played some football.  Maybe you played it much longer than I did.  Maybe your experiences are more unique and varied.

I haven’t put a cap on your boy Quinn.  I don’t give a general damn that his balls get knocked down occasionally.  I don’t care that his footwork isn’t perfect. I don’t care that he can “make all the throws.”  I don’t believe his deep ball is as bad as most make it out.  I don’t believe his intermediate ball is as good people make it, which doesn’t mean he’s not capable.  Whatever results he’s produced to date don’t matter.  What matters most is that he has the opportunity.  He needs consistency of effort.  Repeat the good more often; the bad less often.  

Posted

Arm strength can be improved with QBs the easiest I think...but coming out Tom was thought of to be an accurate and efficient QB. We can't say the same about Quinn outside of 0-9 yards...It goes back to what I said a page or so ago....no one can really truly judge the mental side of the QB position and that is why bust rates are so high IMO. No one knows the tenacity of which a player approaches the game mentally...

 

From New Englands own website

image.png.43e056424d35c8b295ea9ddbcc2b8b81.png

 

Kiper's Scouting Report

Quote

 

Smart, experienced big-game signal-caller, getting very high grades in the efficiency department this past season. Brady cut his interception total from '98 in half, tossing 20 TD passes compared to just six interceptions. He threw for 2,586 yards, completing an impressive 62.8% of his aerials. For his efforts, Brady was named team MVP. After working as Brian Griese's backup in '97, Brady went on to start 25 straight games with the Wolverines.

He's a straight dropback passer who stands tall in the pocket, doesn't show nervous feet, and does a nice job working through his progressions. He's not going to try to force the action, rarely trying to perform beyond his capability. He threw a TD pass in all 16 games he started against Big Ten opposition, while tossing 15 straight completions during the second half of action this past season against Michigan State. He's accurate, throws a very catchable ball, and also knows when to take a little off the pass.

 

 

vs Ewers

 

image.png.2a3d08596916bff69bef9f07ec9e2cab.png

image.png.f0c228e343f754b8afd4d4c470d388e4.png

image.png.2b7fe2bd248e492a1206b965d14e1112.png

image.png.7c20ced62e41bc5c8d95ba2ea2caed7c.png

image.png.4b9d11d57c5d72cfdef17d5089f29557.png

Posted
21 hours ago, Derka said:

what does this mean?

21 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

It’s nonsense 

There are field-relative throwing drills and receiver-relative throwing drills. The problem with a lot of younger guys is that they and their private coaches focus a lot on stationary or field-relative throwing drills. For example, throwing over a stationary net into a big bucket or onto a matt or tarp placed on a spot on the field to try to teach things like arc and touch passing, or knocking down stationary targets like cones. Those help with certain routes where you're trying to throw to an open place on the field to let the receiver go get it. That's relative to the field.

There are other drills to help coach young QBs how to lead a receiver, which shoulder to choose, high or low, knowing how the route is run and throwing to where you expect the receiver to be, etc. Those are relative to the receiver. It's not always easy to run receiver-relative drills in private coaching. You have to have access to receivers.

Most, but not all, receiver-relative drills lean towards precision. Most, but not all, field-relative drills lean towards accuracy. Since the guy who taught me used the terms interchangeably, I've always used them interchangeably. That's wrong.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...