BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93

Yeah I kinda want the NFL to ban any further games between these teams. They’ve been consistently disgusting for years now 

St Juste is ****ing horrid 

Yeah…not feeling this one. They never blow teams out under Rivera and we rarely win in NYG. Honestly feels like an ugly, gross loss. Hope I’m wrong of course 

Since Daniel Jones is out, I think we win but it’s really ugly again. 
 

WSH 20

NYG 18

JT O’Sullivan does QB breakdowns every week on his channel. Really good analysis from an ex NFL QB

4 hours ago, zCommander said:

 

From his high school report....

 

Thick, stocky build carrying over 220 pounds on a 6-foot-1 frame. Sturdy base and converts power from his lower body into his passes. Has a plus arm with ability to drive the ball downfield with zip. Highly creative player who thrives making improvisational plays outside of structure with the skill to make difficult off-platform throws. Presents a run threat that compliments his downfield passing ability. Tough and plays with an edge. Not overly fast but has good instincts and feel to go with solid power as a runner. An all-state baseball player and all around talented athlete who also plays linebacker at times. 

Ok guys 

Let’s be sure to grab a 6’1, 220 lb LB next April. I’m sure that’ll solve our problems lol 

You got it. This thread is a trip sometimes. I surrender this entire debate lol 

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Dyami is dissapointing in case where he has to dive for the ball or make a contested catch.  He comes off a bit soft to me.  Many of his miss opportunities are balls that I think Terry would catch

I think Dyami is a really poor WR. Doesn’t seem like a natural catcher of the football. 

1 hour ago, oraphus said:

Related to taking too many sacks... I've been thinking that taking a sack might not be what it once was...especially if your qb is built like a linebacker. If you notice most of the sacks Sam takes are wrap up style sacks at low speed, so a low chance of getting hurt. Ultimately i hope he learns to process the field faster, gets a better feel for blitzes and learns to throw the ball away. I want to see the kid succeed.. he does have an NFL arm and accuracy. 

Wash might very well beat the single season sac record and still have Sam mostly healthy for the season... obviously not a goal we want to achieve, but it could happen

Are you implying Sam is built like a linebacker ? 

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I spent a lot of time on Howell on the draft thread before that draft.  I reread that thread recently and I cited pocket presence as my #1 concern.  I've mentioned here a bunch of times he's part of the problem indeed for sacks.

 

But there are OTHER problems, too.  That's my point.  I don't think its some wild coincidence that the one pedigreed O lineman on this unit has given up zero sacks or that Lucas who IMO is a better pass protector than Wylie gave up no sacks and no pressure.

 

You seem to hit Howell very quickly on the game thread when something goes wrong.  For a young QB, you don't seem to have much patience for him.  That's cool. Clearly you don't think he's it.  For me, I lean positive, I want to see more but on the aggregate I've liked more than I haven't liked. 

 

And as for other problems with pass protection.  You said to me previously, The O line is fine and as much as you aren't a Howell guy, you endorse Ron's approach of not investing more in the O line because you'd rather it invested elsewhere.  So I gather you aren't buying the unit is a problem at all.

 

Since I answered your question, answer mine.

 

What do you think of Keim's point (he's far from the only one who has made it) of if you have a QB whose weaknesses is holding on to the ball -- you spend on the O line and factor that when buidling your roster?  Agree with that or not so much?

They definitely could have done more. I wanted the first pick to be a lineman. They did address it and it’s been a middling Oline. It definitely could be better but as I’ve stated before, you could literally put 3-4 pro bowler/All Pros in front of a sack prone QB and you’d still be seeing sacks at a high level. Sacks are a QB driven stat. 
 

Also, I’ve stated many times that Sam has already exceeded all my expectations and I’d wager he’ll end up being a top 16/ top 12-ish QB in a few years. I talk about him a lot bc he’s the QB and the QB is essentially the engine of the team. Rookie or not, I’m going to analyze him and give him credit where he deserves credit and criticize him when he deserves to be criticized. He’s earned a ton of credit from me to this point and the only glaring issue I see is the sacks. Honestly if it wasn’t for him, I’d be rooting for them to lose every game so we get Rivera out quicker. 

1 hour ago, zCommander said:

 

A QB should be able to move around the pocket. Yes. What pocket though? When Sam does have a pocket he does makes plays. Do you want Sam to create his own pocket somehow? Also when you say on plays there is zero chance a QB can do anything but isn't that issue we have right now? There are a lot more zero chances than not. That would be because of our OL is not creating a safe space for Sam to throw from. Sam is not finding a pocket to climb into as it crumbles faster than a cookie. 

 

As for 10 years ago, I posted it even back then, the OL actually said (via the media) they like run plays over pass plays because RG3 would immediately start running around behind the LOS and it was hard to protect him for that long. It had nothing to do with RG3 holding on to the ball too long because RG3 had a hard time reading the defenses and would not know what to do (compared to before his knee got destroyed he would just take off running instead). Throwing from a pocket was not RG3 greatest strength. But since you didn't know what the OL actually said back then about RG3 you are assuming the sacks were on him because he was holding on to the ball too long. That was not the case. 

Regarding the RG3 part and honestly Sam as well, the “holding the ball too long” piece is oversimplifying the issue. Moving around in a pocket is a feel thing. A slight step to the side here or a slight step up there. The idea of 5 linemen just standing up every blocker like you’re playing Madden on rookie is unrealistic. What you can’t do is bail out of the pocket and run around into defenders. That’s what RG3 constantly did and that’s what Sam really started to do on Sunday and that was concerning. 

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

@BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93

 

Given your theory that in modern football, sacks are primarily on the QB - why do good teams spend so much money and draft resources on offensive lineman?

 

Seems like a waste when in your mind all the QB has to do is just buy time in the pocket and get rid of the ball.

 

 

 

 

It’s not a waste at all. I’d love to have an elite OLine. But if the QB can’t manipulate a pocket, it won’t matter and he’ll still take a ton of sacks and the perception from fans will be that the OLine is overrated/bad. Case in point, Carson Wentz with Philadelphia. In 2020 for example, they had basically had the same elite OLine they had now but Wentz still took a crap ton of sucks despite the fact he had Kelce, Johnson, and Jordan M blocking for him. Why? Because he had the sack gene. PFF analysts would constantly bring up how Iggles fans hated them bc they would grade out their line pretty well despite the amount of sacks. Similar conversation here. Then Wentz went to Indy and then here and had the same issue. Meanwhile, the Iggles put Hurts in and all of a sudden, the sacks dramatically drop. 
 

QBs with the sack gene make Olines look way way worse than what they are. For years, the narrative in Seattle was that they were negligent for not doing more to build their line (and tbf, they didn’t do a lot) but looking back on what we know about Russell Wilson, he was likely the main driver bc he’s had that issue every year of his career basically. 
 

Perfect timing with this tweet btw. Sums up this entire debate quite well. Fan has no idea what he’s seeing and blames PFF:

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You are making my point.  dudes that habitually give up sacks, gave up more sacks.  How about that?  While a dude that some of us me included thought after watching camp is better at pass protection than Wylie and said so BEFORE the season, not only did not give up a sack but didn't even give up a pressure.

 

I know you don't think much of Sam, that's clear in your posts.   Every now and then you back off but otherwise its hard to miss.   If has some bad moments we hear from you quickly in the game thread -- its Sam, Sam, Sam, Sam, Sam is the problem. 

 

And I know from your discussion with me when I asked you about the O line, that though while you aren't a Ron guy, you think we are giving him a hard time for no reason on the O line -- you think the O line is good enough and supported the idea of not putting more resources than they did for the O line.  At least that's how you felt a couple of weeks ago when me and you debated the point. 

 

And you have the right to think that of course.

 

But for me, I've mostly liked what I've seen from Howell.  I think we'd be in mucn deeper trouble if we had last years Qbs.  For a dude with 7 starts I am intrigued.  I think Ron did a piss poor job upgrading the O line.  and yeah is Howell partly responsible for these sacks, of course.  But is the crap O line immaterial to this IMO and others no way.  Keim who rarely gives his opinion on things has actually beaten this point like a drum for weeks now, they knew he holds on to the ball more than most.  So for that reason you do MORE to give the team an actually good offensive line.  And this team didn't do that.

 

I know at least from one of your posts to me, you believe Ron made mistakes and among them is this season running it with Howell this season, but you felt the O line wasn't one of his mistakes.  Plenty of people who cover the team disagree with you.  Again to each their own.  But those who disagree with you aren't actually on any island to say the least.  You got the outlier take on the subject at least for now.  There are some who agree with you but most don't.  But will see.

 

 

Can you answer my point about his college numbers ? Do you think he’s just been sabotaged with poor Oline play for pretty much his entire career, pro and college and there’s no way he’s the common denominator?

5 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

There is no doubt that Howell holds the ball too long and a large portion of the sacks are on him.

 

The questions that must be answered are:

 

1. Can Howell improve in this area? He's still a guy only in his second NFL season and having made only six meaningful starts. It's not completely out of the realm of possibility that he gets better in this area. 

 

2. If he doesn't improve, or improves but not by enough, can he still be a viable starting QB despite taking an above average amount of sacks? Meaning he'll have to ball out and be responsible for a lot more touchdown drives and big plays to make up for the drives he kills by taking unnecessary sacks.

 

At the very least, he's earned the entirety of this season to see if he develops.

I’m probably oversimplifying it but man if he just got to “bad” levels like Watson or Russ, that alone would be huge. I feel like that can’t be impossible 
 

14 minutes ago, zCommander said:

 

Ron. Ron is the answer to this. He knew we had a bad OL TWO years ago and yet still went with getting more players for the D instead. The odds were against Howell. His bad luck I guess. 

 

What if you switched Purdy with Howell. Do you really think Purdy would be doing things any better here like he is in San Fran? I know not all teams have a great OL but you know what it helps a young QB a bit. You can't argue with that though. Not absolving Howell of all the sacks as some are on him. That is evident. But some can be less off with better OL help though. 

We’re on the same team, man. I like Sam. This is really an old school v new school philosophical debate more than anything. The new school thinking is that sacks are mainly driven by the QB. Even if the protection isn’t ideal, a QB should theoretically be able to move around in the pocket and avoid sacks. That’s why analysts say that sack rates are sticky. It’s an inherent trait for QBs regardless of circumstance. Sure there are times when they have zero chance on a play but those instances are way rarer than we want to admit. It’s like throwing picks or even pass accuracy, either you get it or you don’t. And no the OLine isn’t top 10 but by almost every quantifiable metric, they are average/slightly below average so when I see that we’re headed towards record breaking sacks levels, I’m gonna point most of my blame pie towards the piece of the offense that always seems to get sacked at an extraordinary rate. 
 

The sack thing is the only issue I have with Sam. He’s blown away every expectation I’ve had for him. Completely blown them away. But I wish we could have better discussions when it comes to sacks because we literally had this same debate on this very site with some of the same posters 10 years ago lol. That’s all it is for me. 

1 minute ago, zCommander said:

 

 

Their OL gave up a sack on 11.4% of all offensive snaps, which ranked 126th in the FBS.

……..you’re almost there lol 

seriously what are the odds of a guy ending up behind all time terrible O lines in 2 separate situations?

7 minutes ago, zCommander said:

 

All he wanted was an extra 3 mil per year for 3 years. But Dan had other plans. Building himself a $100 mil yacht instead. 

 

 

Don't know where you are getting this from but everyone here knows that at times Sam doesn't throw away the ball when he should. Pretty much everyone has said that. Not sure who said he doesn't. Can you quote them to let us all know who that bad person is lol.

 

He likes to hold on to it longer in effort to make a play. His OL can't hold the defenders for an extra .3 milliseconds. Sam needs to process things faster. He will/should improve in this area. 

 

 

Yeah, that was crazy. Kirk knew he was better than Osweiler and that's why he wanted the extra $3mil. But Scot and Bruce were not willing to give him that as it was too early to know if he was really good or not. They bet on themselves and lost. 

 

 

He actually did have a really bad OL during his last year of college. Then he comes here and you can't even deny that our OL is not that great. So the common denominator is the OL. But, still he need to throw the ball away quicker or find his guy quicker as well. 

Looks like he had 3/5s of that Oline get drafted to the NFL but ok. Agree to disagree. 

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

If Sam is a pure sack magnet and the O line has nothing to do with it, how did this happen?

 

 

He was still sacked 5 times and at least 3 were him walking directly into the sacks??? What is this this proving?

ATL couldn’t buy a sack prior to Sunday 

https://omny.fm/shows/grant-and-danny/grant-reacts-to-eagers-backup-qb-claim-on-howell
 

I don’t agree with the analyst’s point that Sam is a “good backup” but his points about sack rates and their stickiness year over year are valid and are food for thought. 
 

Wentz was sacked a **** ton in Philly. Came here and got sacked a **** ton. That’s just his game. Didn’t matter if he was behind a good OL or bad OL. Also I find it strange that he got no benefit of the doubt on this specific issue from fans last season. 

Matt Ryan has got sacked a bunch through multiple OLs in ATL and supposedly good unit in Indy last year.

I mean Russell Wilson has been the poster boy of “is it him or the line” his entire career. After last season in a new city, I think it’s safe to say it’s him. 
 

Obviously he’s a POS but I wish Deshaun Watson would get healthy solely so I can see if his sack problem will follow him to Cleveland. 
 

Sometimes this stuff is just ingrained in a guy’s style and we as fans have to dig deeper than surface level analysis. 

21 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I really don’t get this line of thinking. 
 

Are we basically saying that Sam is the most unlucky QB in recent NFL history because not only does he have the worst OL in the NFL but he also had the worst OL in college as well? To me, if a guy struggles at something in college and then gets in the league and does the same thing, I’m going to look at him as the common denominator. Some guys are just sack magnets. Sure you can hypothetically draft/acquire 5 studs and put them in front of him but if he can’t maneuver a pocket, will it matter? I really don’t know at this point. 

I don’t think there’s a ton of precedent for guys fixing the sack problem but going from 5 to 3 a game would help. 

You’re gonna pay up for that game regardless. I use SeatGeek for pretty much everything nowadays and have never had an issue. They show you the total price upfront and show you the best deals. But yeah you’re going to get gouged on the price no matter what. 

44 minutes ago, Tyler Spiers said:

Sam Howell is the best QB this team has had since Mark Rypien. And he's only 23 and has much more upside and skill than Rypien. Surround him with the right team and coaches and I think he can win a couple of Super Bowls before his career is over and get us to the playoffs on a yearly basis. He is a total winner and he is the QB Washington has been waiting for.

Lol 

You from Chapel Hill?

11 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

 

He’s tied for 5th in Big Time Throws according to PFF. Definitely a big talent in there that needs nurturing

Very encouraging 

2 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

It’d be helpful to have some explanation of what this visualization is depicting. I’m assuming that the number of sacks is what drives the size of the circle, but that is a guess, but there’s no indication of what the x and y axes represent, or where other QBs land.

Wrong thread