Thinking Skins

Just now, Voice_of_Reason said:

I agree, but I think I'm almost 100% sold on Howell being the guy for next year, barring a complete and total collapse. (Hence the "almost 100% sure). Let's say I'm 94.539% sure he's the guy for next year.  

 

This is where I was with Kirk after 2015 as well:  You have no other options for 2016 and 2017.  You're not going to be drafting high enough to pick a top 2 QB, and even if you do, Kirk will be the best you could have over the next few years even if you draft a guy to take over. So, sign him now.  

 

Same with Howell.  I don't think they're going to be drafting high enough to grab one of the top 2 QBs. And I don't think they should trade 3 first round pick + to move up and get a QB.  Maybe they will if everything falls apart, they land up with a top 3 pick, I just don't see that. I see somewhere around 6 and 7 wins now, based on how abysmal the defense is.  And that's goingto be outside of the top 5, probably just inside or outside the top 10.  

 

Even if they draft a guy, there is now no rush to get them on the field.  They have Howell for 2 more years under contract.  They don't have to do anything. He's just there no matter what.  

 

At ABSOLUTE worst he's a great backup.  He could also be a trade piece if they want to move up to grab Caleb.  Or he could be the starter. 

 

Anybody who looks at him and goes, "yeah, he's not worthy of one of the 32 starting jobs in the NFL" has absolutely no earthly idea what they're looking at.  

This is the situation we're in. And people like Kevin Sheehan (who I really respect because I grew up listening to him and he was the calm and rational one on 980) who tries to take this tone of middle ground while all the while airing nothing but negaive stats (these sack rates, calling them final and acting like other QBs haven't had sack problems and I've done research he refuses to do to show other Elite and average QBs who have had high sack rates in their FIRST 8 - 10 games and gone on to correct it, but he's calling it a fatal stat, and he's been having guests (respected data scientists) on his show calling him at best a career backup so now he can go with that and use it as a lead in with Jay Gruden.  

But We're about to be in QB purgatory. We have Sam right now. We either trade up for some elite QB like SD did when they had Drew cause they thought he wasn't the one (Narrator's voice: he was, Also Narrator's Voice: the one they traded for, Rivers wasn't). Do we want that to be us?

I mean we have somebody who is looking really good right now we can trade him for a maybe in college who looks good against division 2 competition and hope he translates. 

1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

He’s played 9 games, everyone should want to see more before proclaiming him “the guy”.  As in the “the guy” you build a franchise around.

 

But I think it’s abundantly clear already that he can play in this league and will, be it here or elsewhere.  
 

I get folks want the best of the best, an elite QB to build around, not wanting to put all the chips in on Sam.  But I ask those folks, what are the other options?  Dump Sam and trade the farm to move up for Maye?  No thanks.  

So, the problem is that this is what a lot of the draft hounds want. What a lot of us want is to build an OL and go into next year with a solid OL and sam and a solid Offense and a new coach and GM (who approves of Howell after he balls out the rest of the year), kinda like Philly did with Hurts. 

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Usually teams that can pick marquee QBs in the draft don't trade away their picks.  If the draft happened today, the top 6 teams in the draft, I think zero chance they'd deal the pick.   I think their only fighting chance to find a team willing to deal a pick is if the Bears end up with the first and 2nd pick.

 

But right now, I think the lets consider trading for Maybe camp is maybe not quite pie in the sky but close to that -- feels far fetched at a minimum.

This is what we've known all year. He can compete with the big dogs (if not for the sacks). Its been frustrating listening to the radio (except for Hoffman and EB of the junkies and to an extent Chris Russell) because they're always bringing up the sacks and nothing else. I'm like talk about the yards, talk about the other QBs in his class, talk about the QBs in this class, They're all struggling. He's putting up numbers comparable or better than all of them. I used to say minus Purdy but now he's on par with Purdy in a lot of categories. 

I won't post the whole article but its a nice read

https://sumersports.com/the-zone/average-depth-of-target-carries-less-weight-than-it-used-to/

Often considered the best quarterback in the league, Patrick Mahomes was first in Expected Points Added (EPA) per pass attempt while having the 26th highest ADoT. Continuing the trend of success despite a lower ADoT, Kyle Shanahan’s offense was ranked 2nd in EPA per pass while Brock Purdy and Jimmy Garoppolo had the 22nd and 29th highest ADoT respectively.  

In the current NFL, the path to having an efficient passing attack does not need to stem from throwing deep shots excessively. 

This doesn't use Sam Howell's name, but I'm indirectly asking about him. This is basically me and a ChatGPT talking about some stuff that I thought people may find interesting. Or not. 

Quote

How often do rookie QBs struggle with reading defenses

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

Rookie quarterbacks often face challenges when it comes to reading defenses in the NFL. The transition from college football to the professional level presents a significant jump in defensive complexity and speed. As a result, many rookie quarterbacks experience difficulties in deciphering defensive schemes and making quick, accurate decisions.

Here are a few reasons why rookie quarterbacks can struggle with reading defenses:

1. Increased Complexity: NFL defenses employ a wide range of sophisticated schemes, coverages, and blitz packages. Rookie quarterbacks must quickly learn to recognize and understand these various defensive concepts, which can be overwhelming at first.

2. Speed of the Game: The speed of the NFL game is considerably faster than in college. Defenses react more quickly, close passing windows faster, and disguise their intentions more effectively. This increased speed can make it challenging for rookies to process information and make accurate reads within the limited time available.

3. Limited Pre-snap Experience: College offenses often rely on simplified playbooks and rely heavily on predetermined reads or simplified progressions. In the NFL, quarterbacks must make more complex pre-snap reads, identify defensive alignments, and adjust plays accordingly. The lack of pre-snap experience can hinder rookies' ability to anticipate defensive movements and make optimal decisions.

4. Lack of Familiarity: Rookie quarterbacks are often unfamiliar with the specific defensive schemes and tendencies of NFL teams. They may have limited exposure to the defensive concepts employed by professional teams, making it more difficult to anticipate and react to various defensive strategies.

5. Adaptation to Defensive Adjustments: Defensive coordinators in the NFL are skilled at making adjustments throughout a game to exploit a rookie quarterback's weaknesses. They may disguise coverages, send unexpected blitzes, and employ other tactics to confuse and disrupt a rookie's ability to read the defense effectively.

It's important to note that while many rookie quarterbacks initially struggle with reading defenses, this is a skill that can improve with experience, coaching, and film study. As they gain more game time and exposure to different defensive schemes, rookie quarterbacks typically become more adept at recognizing and reacting to the complexities of NFL defenses.

 

 

If you can quantify it, how would you order the things rookie QBs struggle with

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

Quantifying the exact order of the things rookie quarterbacks struggle with can be challenging, as it can vary depending on the individual and their specific circumstances. However, based on common observations and general trends, here's a rough ordering of the challenges rookie quarterbacks often face:

1. Reading Defenses: Understanding and quickly deciphering complex defensive schemes and coverages can be one of the most significant challenges for rookie quarterbacks. This includes recognizing different formations, identifying potential blitzes, and making accurate pre- and post-snap reads.

2. Speed of the Game: Adjusting to the increased speed and intensity of the NFL game is crucial. Rookie quarterbacks need to process information rapidly, make quick decisions, and execute plays under pressure.

3. Decision-Making: Making sound decisions under duress is another area where rookies may struggle. This includes determining when to throw the ball, when to scramble, and when to take a sack, all while considering factors such as coverage, pass rush, and open receivers.

4. Pocket Presence: Developing a sense of pocket awareness and the ability to navigate the pocket effectively is essential. Rookie quarterbacks often need to learn how to feel pressure, step up in the pocket, and find passing lanes while maintaining proper mechanics.

5. Anticipation and Timing: Developing the ability to anticipate receiver routes and throw with timing is crucial for success in the NFL. This includes developing chemistry with receivers, understanding their tendencies, and accurately placing the ball in tight windows.

6. Adjusting to NFL Playbooks: Learning and adapting to the more complex offensive systems in the NFL can be a significant challenge for rookie quarterbacks. They must grasp new terminology, route concepts, audibles, and other intricacies of their team's playbook.

7. Handling Pressure: Dealing with the pressure and expectations that come with being an NFL quarterback can be mentally challenging. Rookie quarterbacks must learn to manage the stress, handle criticism, and stay composed in high-pressure situations.

It's important to note that this ordering is not absolute and can vary for different quarterbacks based on their individual skills, coaching, and team situations. Additionally, each quarterback's progress and development will differ, and they may overcome these challenges at different rates.

 

 

And what do these rookie QBs do generally? Throw interceptions? take sacks? scramble? something else?

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

Rookie quarterbacks can exhibit a variety of tendencies as they adjust to the NFL. While individual styles and strategies may vary, here are some common actions and behaviors observed in rookie quarterbacks:

1. Interceptions: Rookie quarterbacks tend to have higher interception rates compared to more experienced players. They may struggle with recognizing complex coverages, misreading defenses, or forcing throws into tight windows. In an effort to make plays, rookies can be more prone to turnovers.

2. Sacks: Rookie quarterbacks may take more sacks due to several factors. They may still be adapting to the speed of the game and have less refined pocket awareness, leading to a higher likelihood of being caught behind the line of scrimmage. Additionally, rookies may hold onto the ball longer while trying to make decisions or waiting for receivers to get open.

3. Scrambling: Some rookie quarterbacks, particularly those with mobility and athleticism, may rely on their legs to escape pressure. When faced with a collapsing pocket or a breakdown in pass protection, they may choose to scramble and extend plays with their feet. This can be an effective way to buy time, create opportunities, and avoid sacks.

4. Check Downs: In an effort to mitigate risk and make safer throws, rookie quarterbacks often lean towards shorter, easier passes. They may opt for check-downs to running backs or tight ends instead of attempting more challenging deep throws. This conservative approach can help minimize turnovers and gain confidence.

5. Learning from Mistakes: Rookie quarterbacks will make mistakes as they learn and adjust to the complexities of the NFL. However, successful rookies tend to be resilient and use these mistakes as learning opportunities. They analyze film, work with coaches, and make adjustments to improve their decision-making and overall performance.

6. Growing Confidence: As rookie quarterbacks gain experience and become more comfortable with the speed and demands of the NFL, they often exhibit growth in confidence. This can lead to more assertive decision-making, improved accuracy, and the ability to make plays under pressure.

It's important to remember that each rookie quarterback is unique, and their style of play will vary based on their individual strengths, coaching systems, and team dynamics. Additionally, as rookies gain experience and develop their skills, they can evolve and refine their approach to the game.

 

 

Analyze film is a complex term that seems to have a lot in it. Can you break it doen

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

Certainly! When we talk about analyzing film in the context of a rookie quarterback, it refers to the process of studying game footage to gain a deeper understanding of their performance, opponents' defensive strategies, and areas for improvement. Here's a breakdown of the components involved in film analysis for a rookie quarterback:

1. Game Film Review: The quarterback and their coaches review game footage, typically from both practice sessions and actual game scenarios. This involves closely examining each play, analyzing the quarterback's decision-making, mechanics, footwork, and overall execution. They assess the effectiveness of their throws, the accuracy of their passes, and the decision-making process behind their choices.

2. Defensive Film Study: Film analysis also includes studying the defensive schemes and tendencies of upcoming opponents. The quarterback and their coaches analyze how opposing defenses align, their coverage strategies, blitz packages, and any patterns or weaknesses that can be exploited. This allows the quarterback to anticipate defensive movements and make more informed decisions during games.

3. Self-Assessment and Feedback: The quarterback critically evaluates their own performance, identifying strengths and weaknesses. They assess their decision-making skills, accuracy, timing, and ability to read defenses. This self-reflection helps them recognize areas that need improvement and work on refining their skills.

4. Identifying Patterns and Trends: By watching game film, the quarterback looks for patterns and trends in their opponents' defensive strategies. They identify recurring formations, coverages, and blitzes that can help them anticipate and react more effectively during games. This knowledge allows the quarterback to make quicker and more accurate reads, improving their overall performance.

5. Collaborating with Coaches: Film analysis is a collaborative process between the quarterback and their coaching staff. Coaches provide guidance, insights, and feedback based on their extensive experience and knowledge. They help the quarterback interpret the film, identify areas of improvement, and develop strategies to enhance their performance.

6. Adjusting Game Plan: Based on the analysis of film, the quarterback and their coaches make adjustments to the game plan. They may identify specific plays or concepts that have been successful against the upcoming opponent's defensive schemes. They also work on refining the quarterback's reads, progressions, and audibles based on the film analysis.

Film analysis is an ongoing and iterative process throughout a quarterback's career. It helps them gain a deeper understanding of their own performance, opponents' strategies, and the nuances of the game, ultimately leading to better decision-making, improved execution, and enhanced overall performance on the field.

 

 

what would you say is the most complex defense for a rookie QB to understand

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

The most complex defense for a rookie quarterback to understand can vary based on multiple factors, including the individual quarterback's experience, the coaching they receive, and the defensive schemes employed by different teams. However, there are a few defensive systems that are often considered more intricate and challenging for rookie quarterbacks to decipher:

1. Multiple Variations of Coverages: Defenses that employ a wide range of coverage variations can pose significant challenges for rookie quarterbacks. These defenses may use different combinations of man-to-man, zone, and hybrid coverages, often with disguised pre-snap alignments. Recognizing and accurately reading these complex coverage schemes can be difficult, especially for quarterbacks with limited experience facing such diversity.

2. Exotic Blitz Packages: Defenses known for their aggressive and creative blitz packages can confuse and overwhelm rookie quarterbacks. These schemes involve sending additional pass rushers from unexpected angles, using stunts, delayed blitzes, or zone blitz concepts. Identifying the blitzers, adjusting protection, and making quick decisions under pressure become more challenging against these complex blitz packages.

3. Hybrid and Multiple Fronts: Defenses that frequently shift between different fronts, such as a 3-4 and 4-3 alignment or employ hybrid schemes, can cause confusion for rookie quarterbacks. These defenses often prioritize versatility and disguise their intentions pre-snap, making it harder for quarterbacks to identify the alignment, potential rushers, and coverage responsibilities.

4. Pre-snap Disguises and Rotations: Defenses that excel at disguising coverages and rotating their defensive backs pre-snap can make it challenging for rookie quarterbacks to accurately read and anticipate defensive movements. These defenses aim to confuse the quarterback's pre-snap read and force them into making incorrect decisions or misreading the coverage post-snap.

5. Complex Man-to-Man Matchup Schemes: Defenses that employ intricate man-to-man coverage schemes, such as pattern-matching or matchup zone concepts, can make it difficult for rookie quarterbacks to find open receivers. These defenses use a combination of zone principles within man-to-man assignments, requiring quarterbacks to recognize and exploit the coverage voids effectively.

It's important to note that every quarterback is unique, and what may be complex for one rookie quarterback might be easier for another, depending on their football IQ, adaptability, and coaching support. Additionally, as quarterbacks gain experience and exposure to different defensive schemes, they become more adept at handling complex defenses and making quicker, more accurate reads.

 

 

How different is a QB analyzing film from other positions anayzing film

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

While the process of analyzing film is similar across different positions in football, there are specific nuances and focuses that vary based on the position. Here are some key differences in how quarterbacks analyze film compared to other positions:

1. Perspective and Decision-Making: Quarterbacks have a unique vantage point on the field and are responsible for making split-second decisions. When analyzing film, they closely examine their decision-making process, such as reading defenses, identifying open receivers, and choosing the appropriate throws. Other positions may focus more on technique, execution, and their specific assignments within the play.

2. Reading Defenses: Quarterbacks spend significant time studying opposing defenses to understand their coverages, blitz packages, and tendencies. They analyze pre-snap alignments, post-snap rotations, and the movement of defensive players to make accurate reads. Other positions may focus more on understanding their specific assignments or studying the techniques and tendencies of the players they'll face.

3. Offensive Game Plan: Quarterbacks work closely with coaches to understand the offensive game plan and how specific plays are designed to exploit defensive weaknesses. They analyze film to identify potential mismatches, tendencies, or vulnerabilities in the opposing defense. Other positions may focus more on understanding their role within the play and executing their assignments effectively.

4. Timing and Chemistry: Quarterbacks rely heavily on timing and chemistry with their receivers. They study film to understand the route-running abilities, tendencies, and preferences of their receivers. This helps them anticipate breaks, make accurate throws, and develop a cohesive passing game. Other positions may analyze film to evaluate their own technique, footwork, or blocking assignments.

5. Leadership and Communication: Quarterbacks are often the leaders on the field, responsible for communicating the play call, audibles, and adjustments to the rest of the offense. When analyzing film, they may pay attention to their communication, command of the huddle, and ability to make quick decisions based on what they see on film. Other positions may focus more on their individual performance and technique.

While these differences exist, there are also commonalities in film analysis across positions, such as studying opponents, self-assessment, recognizing patterns, and collaborating with coaches. Ultimately, the specific focus and emphasis in film analysis will depend on the responsibilities and intricacies of each position on the field.

 

 

How often do rookies have a say in audibles

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

The level of involvement that rookies have in audibles can vary depending on several factors, including the coaching staff, the rookie's experience and understanding of the offensive system, and their ability to process information on the field. Here are a few points to consider:

1. Offensive System and Coaching Philosophy: Some offensive systems, particularly those with more complex or rigid play-calling structures, may limit the autonomy of rookies when it comes to audibles. In these cases, the coaching staff might prefer to control the play-calling decisions to ensure consistency and minimize potential mistakes. Other systems, especially those that prioritize quarterback autonomy and decision-making, may grant rookies more freedom to audible and make adjustments at the line of scrimmage.

2. Experience and Understanding: Rookies typically have limited experience and may still be in the process of learning the nuances of the offensive system. Their understanding of defensive concepts, recognition of pre-snap cues, and ability to make quick decisions might be less developed compared to more experienced quarterbacks. As rookies gain experience and demonstrate proficiency in these areas, coaches might gradually expand their responsibilities in audibles.

3. Communication Skills and Field Command: Audibling involves effectively communicating changes in the play call to the rest of the offense. This requires strong communication skills and command of the huddle. While some rookies may possess these qualities, others might need more time to develop them. Coaches may consider a rookie quarterback's communication abilities when determining their involvement in audibles.

4. Trust and Confidence: Coaches need to have confidence in a rookie quarterback's decision-making abilities before granting them more control over audibles. Trust is built over time through practice, film study, and on-field performance. As rookies consistently demonstrate good judgment and success in making audibles, coaches may expand their responsibilities in this area.

It's important to note that the level of involvement in audibles can evolve throughout a rookie quarterback's career. As they become more experienced, gain a deeper understanding of the offensive system, and earn the trust of coaches, their influence in audibles is likely to increase. However, it ultimately depends on the specific circumstances and the coaching philosophy of the team.

 

 

what about a checkdown

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

A checkdown refers to a short, lower-risk pass option that a quarterback can utilize when their primary receiving options are covered or when they face pressure from the defense. The decision to check down typically rests with the quarterback, and rookies can be involved in this aspect of the game. Here's how rookies may be involved in checkdowns:

1. Progression Read: Quarterbacks are often taught to go through their progressions when scanning the field for open receivers. This involves looking at multiple passing options, typically starting with their primary target and progressing to secondary and tertiary options. Rookies learn to recognize when their primary options are covered and quickly transition to checkdown options as part of their progression read.

2. Pre-snap and Post-snap Recognition: Rookies develop the ability to identify potential checkdown options both before the snap and after the play begins. They learn to recognize defensive alignments, blitzes, and coverage schemes that may indicate the need for a checkdown pass. Additionally, rookies must process information quickly after the snap to determine if a checkdown is the best option based on the unfolding play.

3. Understanding Offensive Concepts: Rookies must understand the offensive concepts and the role of each player in the passing game. This includes recognizing the routes and responsibilities of running backs, tight ends, and checkdown options within the offensive system. By understanding the purpose and positioning of these options, rookies can effectively utilize checkdowns when necessary.

4. Decision-Making: Ultimately, the decision to check down rests with the quarterback, regardless of their experience level. Rookies must learn to make quick and accurate decisions based on the information available to them. They need to assess the risk-reward of attempting a more challenging throw versus taking the safer option of a checkdown pass.

It's worth noting that the involvement of rookies in checkdowns may also depend on the offensive system and the coaching philosophy. Some systems may emphasize checkdowns as a primary option, while others may prioritize downfield throws. Additionally, the development of a rookie quarterback's decision-making and ability to read defenses will influence their effectiveness in executing checkdown passes.

 

 

Particularly for a rookie, how do things like drops by a WR early in a game, misthrows, pressures allowed by the OL and big hits by the DL impact them?

 

ChatGPT

Poe

 

Drops by receivers, misthrows, pressures allowed by the offensive line, and big hits by the defensive line can have various impacts on a rookie quarterback, both in the short term and long term. Here's how these factors can affect rookies:

1. Confidence and Trust: Drops by receivers or misthrows can shake a rookie quarterback's confidence and trust in his teammates. If a receiver consistently drops catchable passes or the quarterback struggles with accuracy, it can lead to hesitancy and a lack of trust in throwing to certain targets. This can impact the overall chemistry and timing between the quarterback and the receivers, making it more challenging for the rookie to develop rapport with his pass-catchers.

2. Decision-Making: Misthrows, pressures, and big hits from the defensive line can create a sense of urgency or panic for a rookie quarterback. They may feel pressured to make quick decisions or rush their throws, leading to poor decision-making or inaccurate passes. The fear of getting hit or the lack of time in the pocket can affect their ability to go through progressions and properly read the defense.

3. Pocket Presence and Awareness: If the offensive line allows consistent pressure or if the rookie experiences big hits from the defensive line, it can impact their pocket presence and overall awareness. They may become more skittish in the pocket, leading to a tendency to bail out prematurely or struggle to keep their eyes downfield while under pressure. This can hinder their ability to effectively navigate the pocket and make accurate throws.

4. Development and Growth: The cumulative effect of these factors can impact a rookie quarterback's development and growth. If they consistently face drops, misthrows, and pressures, it may take longer for them to develop confidence, timing, and decision-making skills. It could also impact their mechanics and overall understanding of the game as they try to adjust to the challenges presented by these factors.

It's crucial for coaches and teammates to support and provide guidance to rookie quarterbacks during these situations. Through proper coaching, film study, and experience, rookies can learn to overcome these challenges, improve their performance, and develop the mental and physical resilience needed to succeed in the long term.

22 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

PFF has this unit ranked 21st in pass blocking eficiency.   That's the metric they highlight on their own site.  They actually ranked this unit gloablly right now as the 21st best in the NFL so far against a weak schedule, and its dropping over time.  By the time we are through I bet even on the PFF metrics it would end up near the bottom.

 

The idea that PFF ranks its as "good" is BS.  They don't rank it well.  If people want to say they rank the unit as below average but not awful, that's true.  If they want to say on some metrics the O line is ranked well, that's true.  But the idea that PFF thinks this is a good O line isn't true.

I don't subscribe to PFF so I depend on others to determine the rankings. I'm seeing that they're 11th in pass blocking and 3rd in run blocking.  

But it doesn't matter to me if we're ranked good right now. Historically we've had good linemen who have been ranked good by them and we have been able to see with our own eyes that they are bad. Remember Stephon Heyer? Wasn't he always ranked really high on PFF and I used to scratch my head. 

29 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Anaylics isn’t about PFF. if it were why bother? Just subscribe to PFF and call it a day. 
 

It’s like saying I’d rather not do a survey to gauge consumer behavior and prefer to wing it because I am afraid they’d rely on the consumer poll too much. 
 

It’s like anything in life the more tools you have typically the better. You don’t want less because you are afraid a tool will be mishandled. 
 

A good GM. Not Bruce or Cerrato and the other dolts who have been here is hired to understand how to use tools like analytics.

 

I use data in my job all the time but I don’t handle it robotically. It’s a tool I factor it’s part of my job to understand context and how to use data. If I were bad at that I’d be bad at my job. Similar thing I’d gather for a GM.

Its not about PFF, but its about understanding the complexity of the sport. 

Your third line is what I'm trying to say. I have been trying to talk to radio hosts about analytics and its really difficult because they swear by one analytic and thats what I'm using as my to argue against. These radio hosts though are very intelligent people and generally understand the analytic very well, just dont understand its blind spots and don't want to be told its blind spots. So as somebody who is trained to look for blind spots (in a matter of speaking) its hard to talk to them about it. 

I'm saying that I hope that the analytics guys we're hiring don't have this mentailty. Honestly its something I've see with employees at a company as well, people at Microsoft are loyal, people at Google are loyal, peole at FB, people at all those companies, maybe they talk about it in house but not to the general public and thats cool. But I'm gonna need for people to act like Windows does not have problems. Microsoft Office has problems. Facebook has problems Twitter has problems. And we're going to discuss them, and when we discuss them, it doesn't mean that the world hates your product, we're just pointing out some of the areas that need to be addressed or that were not addressed properly. 

And then the next thing, the more complicated thing for guys like me, is how do you communicate this stuff. PFF says that we have a good OL (using pass block win rate), but PFF isn't a great ranking in itself. How do you tell that to your coaches / GM / whoever and ensure that they aren't too full of themselves going into the next week. That first comment is going to get them excited, right but the second is going to be like ?? What if I follow up and say that another PFF stat (using number of pressures allowed) says that we have a bad OL. Well, what use is that now. I've just confused the entire staff, right. And we dont want them to just go back to their eyes. 

This guy has been at it

He's playing the what if game with SH and Seeing what he needs to change to get a better career

46 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

It's like a GM has scouts who report back about player analysis and who will work best for the Coach

 

A coach has position coaches to watch film of up coming teams and help prepare plays

 

Shen will be the one figuring out how to fit all these pieces together and how and when to best use them.

 

If you were playing chess and had a guy in your ear that was running simulations about what could and will happen in the next few plays, that would be this department.

 

If Shen was to say to Ron, we should go for two here and get the win. We have momentum and a higher percentage of success to win the game. It's still on Ron if he thinks his guys are too tired to get two yards on one last play and lose the game, but at least he's making that decision knowing it's stupid.

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

It's a tool for the coaches and GM to use.  the anayltics guy isn't in charge.  Some of the best run organizations use it heavily especially in roster construction.  For example, I doubt an anayltics guy would say focus your draft and cap on defense over offense.  But if the GM decides to do it anyway, its fine.  the anayltics guy is typically there to give input.

 

You likely need synergy though.  there are many examples to show that Ron isn't a numbers guy.  But apparently guys like John Harbaugh are.   

Yeah, but if they depend too heavily on only one. I'd like to believe that the analytics guy isn't as easily fooled by PFF or other analytics as some of the community. The same way that I didn't want Bruce to only go to Alabama to get talent, I don't want to only depend on certain cites for analytics. 

Now I realize that Harris is a business guy and he'll do deals some of which are business analytics deals. But I just hope that they don't get sold fools gold. 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am not really down on PFF but as I've explained before you need to factor context in how to use their site and you got to take their stuff with a grain of salt.   I do it all the time on the draft thread.  Where I like this but not that.  I tend to value their sub scores more than their overall scores.   Also them or really anyone else aren't the definitive word about anything.   What players I like and don't like often don't jive with their scores.

 

Even their anaylsts aren't tied to their scores either when you watch their takes especially about college players.  So that's telling to me as heck that even they take their own grades with a grain of salt.  Also its so easy to cherry pick whatever you want from their metrics to serve an agenda.  I gave the example of them evaluating Gates. If you look at his subscores, he was a disaster against the Giants in pass protect but if you look at his overall score, he wasn't that bad at all.  So if you want to sell we are just haters here and Gates isn't as bad as we think he is, there is a score to match that thought.  If you want to think he sucks, there is a score to match that, too.  That's why you got to watch these players and make your own judgments and THEN sometimes PFF scores can be interesting as an addition to that.,  But I never find PFF as a good metric if all I do is look at their scores without watching the player.

 

Ironically even though the favorite metric some like to use to defend the O line is PFF, you can actually trash the O line by using the PFF numbers and use their narratives to boot to do it.  They actually ranked this O line holistically poorly.  Their anaylsts have hyped pressure as the better guage to judge O line, and this O line didn't fare well on that front.

 

But instead some hype that they put sacks more on the QB so since they've put a lot of these sacks on Howell, then heck then PFF thinks this O line is good.  Well on that front yeah in those specific terms but on the front that they judge the O line the most, this O line fares poorly.

 

So in short, if you cherry pick some of their metrics the O line looks good.  If you cherry pick other metrics this O looks bad.  Their own definitive ranking -- ironically ranks this unit as bad.  But we hear very little of that.  So stats can be used to serve an agenda.  Often the stats they have are used to parade a contradictory point since it makes it more interesting and gets more attention.

 

But anyway PFF doesn't summarize anayltics.   Anaytics means many things.  It's using stats in games.  Building rosters.  Stuff that PFF often doesn't dive into much.  Warren Sharp ironically does or at least used to before becoming gambiling obsessed.  And Sharp who is also an anayltics guys has ironically as i pointed out has criticized PFF mode of grading the O line.

 

Think of PFF, Sharp, all these guys as their own chefs.  Teams likes to hire their own chefs and departments to cook.  They aren't all equally good cooks just because they are in the same profession.   A Harvard educated mathametician who has worked in the sport for years who they hired isn't the same as a dude who loves football watching the sport from Ireland like Sam Monson.  Not saying Sam doesn't have some good takes.  He's hit and miss for me.  But its apples to oragnes.  Some of the smarter teams in the NFL are obsessed with anayltics ala the Eagles and Ravens.  

One thing I am always interested in is how receptive they are to 'criticism' or feedback. We know that no anlaytic is going to perfectly analyze the entire game of football because it is too complex of a sport. So the question is where do these analytics fall short. I dont mind that being a job for the users, you wouldn't want to tell me why I';m a bad guy to date. But when I question you about it, Don't act like its not true. 

Cause we're in this hype fest right now where everyone has their favorite analytics without knowing the flaws or limitations of that analytic. And when I try to speak on it, I get labeled as a hater, no I'm just saying that as a mathematician you can't prove your claims so be careful with what your saying. 

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

No doubt they think they can turn this around.  Keim said they are internally shocked about the poor start because they thought they build a really good roster and they think they had a good camp.  So I don't think internally they've threw in the towell.

 

Rivera with his public comments comes off schizophrenic about this team.  So i'd guess he harbored some internal doubts, too and I bet he has them now.  But I gather they think they will turn this ship around still. 

 

It's glaring I gather even to Rivera at this point about how bad their off season was.  Forbes is on the bench.  Gates is now on the bench.  Barton was struggiling until ther last game.  No other rookie is making an impact. 

 

The Giants are an interesing juxtapostion and I gather Rivera has to notice.  While he's watching Walller put 100 yards and a TD against them.  Hyatt make key catches.  Deonte Banks gave Terry a fight in the secondary.  Okereke having a really good season.  The Giants outcopaching this team again -- coaching around their porous O line against this team while this team struggiling to do the same.   

 

I still hate the Giants O line even when Andrew Thomas and JMS comes back for them so I don't think they will have a good season.  But their schedule up to now was harder than Washington's.  So if I had to guess now, I think Washington ends up last.  As Sam Fortier from the WP said on Keim's podcast, in the frame of 2023, this draft class looks like a disaster at this given time.

 

 

 

So its hard to do, but I'm  going to try to remove myself and my optimism from this post, 

But what we see, especially from a players perspevtive are now 3 games theyve lost they could've won late. (Philly, Chi. NY}. This is all while installing an offense and developing a QB, There is blame to go around, but I think they really believe (or want to believe) the Ron speeches about 10 games left; They have played far from their best ball and have been in a lot of these games late in the 4th largely due to the QB and the defense. Thats something to build on. 

But its something that Craig Hoffman and EB and others have hinted at its like 9 people pulling the rope in one direction and 2 in the other direction, leads to mistakes. Sometimes those 2 are OL. Sometimes its the QB. Sometimes its a RB or a TEor a WR. But late in games they have 11 guys pulling the same direction. How do they get that same energy to start games? 

You mention the Giants, but truth is I was looking at our schedule and outside of SF and Miami (any given sunday) I didn't see any games I'd expect to lose by double digits. This league is struggling on offense, outside of KC and SF. And once we get the sacks issue under control we will be a force to be reckoned with. 

A key think about the Elway comparison is that right around now (game 7) is when his sack rate started to go down. 

Can't say it will be the same here, but at are seeing changes in the OL, so his hopes are high. 

36 minutes ago, Conn said:

Okay we’ll set aside how much the game and rules have changed (though much of why I think that’s important isn’t because of how the game is played—it’s because the rookie wage scale and salary cap effect how patient teams can afford to be with young QBs now compared to in the 80’s—not at all).

 

But why do you see this as useful. What are you trying to glean, is I guess my question. Cherry-picking Elway in 1983, one of the most talented QB prospects of all time. Prototypical size, HOF arm and pocket movement. Why does seeing how this specimen of a QB grew out of his sack issues 40 years ago apply to Sam Howell in 2023 at all. 
 

What is your goal with the comparison? Brees and Big Ben, also drafted 20+ years ago before the rookie wage scale era, before tons of rules changes. Both HOF types anyways. What can you gain in relation to Howell from looking at how eventual HOF QB’s in a different era developed? The guys you’re looking at are all by their nature outliers, I have to repeat that. 
 

So what are you looking for? Hope? 

So I was looking to discuss the last paragraph. The Brady stuff was extra, but I think they play the game very similar. I don't think Howell plays the game at all close to Brees or Wilson who he's been compared to because to his size. He's (Howell)had that pocket escapability, but it wasn't something that Elway always had. He learned or over time. 

That was my main point of the point, just that these two are similar. 

1 minute ago, Conn said:

You need to be looking at modern data of modern QBs who were more recently young and developing. All QBs of all pedigrees. A wide sample of a representative grouping of players within the same context Howell is operating within—the modern NFL. 

Edited just now by Conn

This gets into the discussion I was having with some analysts on twitter. The NFL is changing too much too fast to only consider data relevant that is recent. There are modern QBs that remind me of Howell from a numbers perspective (Big Ben) and old school OBs (Elway). The problem is that each counterexample I try to bring up is met with something like this "well that one is too old school" or "his style of game is too different from Howell" or "he has a running game though" and so they don't allow for a fair fight. I posted this here because normally people here are tamer, but I got the same reaction. 

meh. 

The game of football has not changed that much since Elway. Yes there is FA. Yes there is a rookie cap. Yes there are much different offenses and defenses and schemes are much different and players are much different. But football is still football.

But I like the Elway comparison as opposed to say Brees because if you look at most of our games (Arizona, Denver, Philly, heck even Chicago, Giants) there was a comeback element to them, there was that we're not out of it no matter how much we're down. 

That's why I'm big on seeing that Elway started with a big sack rate too. Because he held onto the ball too. He has that same gene too. And PFF wasn't around then, but I bet he didn't have the all pro OL he had later in life (he was THE top draft pick). 

Just now, Conn said:

There is nothing valuable about research like this FYI. If it’s fun for you that’s fine, but how Elway handled pressure literally 40 years ago has no relevance to today’s game. The rules are different, athletes are different, the way teams can build rosters is different due to the Free Agency salary cap era, NFL roster composition/strategy is different due to the rookie wage scale, the game as a whole is different due to the total and complete takeover in importance of QB’s, the passing game, pass rushers, etc. 

 

You can’t learn anything from stuff like this. Especially when you’re cherry-picking guys who are by their very nature outliers in any data set (incredible top of the draft freak prospects like Elway and incredible underdog GOAT miracles like Brady). 

Thanks. Valuable information from one person. 

But there was a question a while back that asked and another statement made that Howell whether there were any QBs who had ever recovered from a sack rate like Howell's. I understand if its not your cup of tea and i'm not here to ruffle feathers. So if you want me to go on a hiatus for a while just say the word. 

Honestly, if you go through the PFR passing leaders page and go through their early years, you'd be surprised how many of them struggled early on. I mean they act like just because we're in a new era Howell isn't supposed to struggle. 

I was doing some research in my spare time. One is my favorite QB of all time and the guy I like to compare Sam to (Elway) and the other is a guy who I didn't think struggled early but looking at his numbers he did seem to have somewhat of a higher than normal sack rate that's worth investigating. 

John Elway 1983
4    4 sacks in 8 attemps 50 %
3    7 in (21) 29, 24%
3    10 in (33) 62, 16%
2    12 in (11) 73, 16%
3    15 in (10) 83, 18%
2    17 in (15) 98, 17%
2    19 in (31) 129, 15%
4    23 in (28) 157, 15%
0    23 in (24) 181, 12.7%
5    28 in (44) 225, 10.8%
0    28 in (34) 259, 10.8%

Sam Howell 2023
6    6 in (31), 19%
4    10 in (39) 70,  14.2 
9    19 in (29) 99, 19.2
5    24 in (41) 140, 17
5    29 in (51) 191, 15
5    33 in (23) 214, 15.4
6    39 in (42) 256, 15.2

Tom Brady 2001
0    0 (10) 10 0%
1    1(23) 33 3%
4    5(24) 57 7%
3    8(54) 111 7%
0    8(20) 131 6%
2    10(38) 169 5.9
3    13(31) 200 6.5%
7    20(21) 221 9%
2    22(27) 248 8.9%
4    26(26) 274 9.5%
3    29(28) 302 9.6%
3    32(28) 330 10.6%
5    37(35) 365 10.1%
3    40(19) 384 10.4%
1    41(29) 413 9%
    
Now the Brady numbers are not near the Howell numbers, but the Elway nubners? C'mon. He turned it around but those sack numbers are crazy. Another QB that had bad sack numbers early in their career and turned it around was Big Ben (for a number of years). 

so now that I've had breakfast, this number is simply the pressures allowed number, which is not widely available but I think is available through different sites. 

But I have not seen OLs ranked by number of pressures allowed. I guess that's only offered at PFF right now. I can't find it anywhere else. 

3 minutes ago, Conn said:

Those kinds of things don’t always work well as a counting stat. Like drops, they aren’t sticky year to year for good players and tend to follow high target players, just due to volume. So you can say “T.O. had 11 drops that year” and nobody cares because he has 170 targets and 100 catches or whatever. 
 

Fumbles are the same. 8 fumbles for a COP back who gets a dozen touches a week is devastating compared to 8 fumbles for a bellcow guy who gets 380 touches in a season. They are not equally bad outcomes at all. 

That's why it would cause us to look further into it.

The thing is a rating system should rate bad players bad and good players good. 

The COP back and the and the bellcow (under my system) would be rated both very badly because they both had 8 fumbles. But if you look into it and see the numbers and then look further at it and see the why, they'd rank the COP worse because he did it on fewer carries. The Bellcow would not be seen as a "good" back but its more understandable because he took more snaps. I still wouldn't trust him holding the ball though. 

And that's the thing though. When 15 pressures allowed gets just diluted by the pass heavy system we run, and then all the other pressures of the other linemen are just the same way, so that we have a "high" grade (so that they become 60s and 70s) , so much so that Craig Hoffman who is an intelligent man on radio, but is hanging up on callers who try to point out flaws in this system. So that now we rank as a top 10-12 unit. So that now it can't be the OL's fault? Really? Sorry, but your system is bad. 

18 minutes ago, Conn said:

Those kinds of things don’t always work well as a counting stat. Like drops, they aren’t sticky year to year for good players and tend to follow high target players, just due to volume. So you can say “T.O. had 11 drops that year” and nobody cares because he has 170 targets and 100 catches or whatever. 
 

Fumbles are the same. 8 fumbles for a COP back who gets a dozen touches a week is devastating compared to 8 fumbles for a bellcow guy who gets 380 touches in a season. They are not equally bad outcomes at all. 

I will comment that I love having these type of discussions, and its even better when it can be almost all ball. 

So this was a long discussion but basically PFF grades are a ratio and MAM is saying that they should be a counting stat like fumbles. 

The person he's taking to disagrees. But the example at the head of the discussion is a Commanders OL who has the same number of failures of more reps. So yes like a RB with 15 fumbles on 400 carries vs 15 fumbles on 100 carries. One is better. But they're both bad. Both have 15 fumbles. 

12 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

I think the Cowboys are going to release Tyler Smith, because he's 30, has an injury history and they already have his back up on the roster.

 

I don't love the injury history, but he'd be a huge and affordable upgrade at LT, which we can still address in the draft.

This brings up another perspective, who will be released. But he's 30. I guess thats better than we have though. 

I don't see a threat for this but I'm thinking of who I want in free agency. 

I'm looking at

Connor Williams

Jonah Williams

There are some other names that I like but they're backups so I don't want to put too much weight in them. 

14 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

To doubledown @Thinking Skins as to why we don't want the Martys back.

 

Look at yesterday.  Would the Giants have won that game without Darren Waller, Jalin Hyatt, Banks and Okereke?  Heck even Isaiah Simmons made a big play for them.  How novel off season additions actually helping right away?

 

Guys from the off season that actually contribute to wins.  Who did we get?  Nada right now.  And I am not so sure the Giants aren't now just an outright better team than this team.  Giants have had the harder schedule.  Only bad teams they've played was the Cardiinals and the Commanders and they beat them both.  We played the Bears and Denver while they played SF and Dallas and Miami.  They played the Bills much tougher than we did.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So I've updated my position. I'm not back in the Kyle Smith board. He was let go by Ron so he's not team Ron. But I think he's respected. Question is what's his opinion on QBs and Howell and this roster.