Fine Line: holding ball too long vs. using athleticism to extend plays

[Supreme Wu]

Are Redskin receivers and RBs conditioned to keep playing and trying to get open?  That's a legitimate question, I dont watch the all-22 or break down film, so I don't know.  But I do wonder, because these quarterbacks that always find a way to extend a play successfully, they also always have teammates that keep running around trying to get open.  I see it for guys like Rodgers, Brady, and even now you can see it with Wilson, Luck.. I cant say I do with this team

 

I dont know if thats something that you can coach or if it just comes naturally with a good rapport, or if it's a fundamental question of effort.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I looked at RG3's 3rd down conversion efficiency ... expecting to find it was relatively low but its not that bad at 40% this season ... not great but could be worse. 

 

50% - Texans

0% - Jags

50% - Vikings

 

in 2012 he was surprisingly low at 34.75% ... lower half of the NFL at #19

Did he even face a 3rd down against the Jags? I thought he played one series and got hurt in that series?  And I sortof recall he completed the ball when he got hurt...

 

Not that you're wrong, I believe the numbers, but my memory is failing me. 

[darrelgreenie]

...My post is showing that it's perfectly allowed to take the bad with the good, but still hope for improvements to minimize the bad, without dealing with the backlash by posters themselves.

Okay...because I disagree with some posters statements its now 'backlash'?

 

...but I don't hear people talk about Aaron Rodgers' game as a "bad with the good" type of game even though he takes more sacks, because....

What happened to ~'not wanting to extrapolate'? You are taking a comment specifically about taking the good with the bad when it comes to holding the ball too long vs extending the play. YOU are the one trying to turn that into an over arching statement about Griffin's game.

Oh, and just because YOU haven't heard people talk about Rodgers holding the ball doesn't mean that it doesn't happen; just goggle Aaron Rodgers holds the ball....(or something similar) here I'll help straight from the man himself:

 

“I think as far as the criticism goes, I think that’s where some of the comedy comes in to me,” Rodgers said. “You have to find humor in it. Because I get criticized for holding the ball too long ......

-Aaron Rodgers

http://www.totalpackers.com/2014/10/15/aaron-rodgers-still-hears-criticism/

 

 

....dislike the backlash that current "negative" RG3 posts receive.  I of course am taking the good with the bad with an RG3 led redskins team, but I still want less "bad."  But, I'll take your quote out no problem.  

 

Similarly I dislike when different viewpoints are labeled in anyway pro/anti Griffin, especially when a disagreement is labeled as "backlash"

 

 

 

 

 

 

Off topic but to dispel the fiction that some posters, like myself, who disagree with some specific criticisms about are incapable of being critical or that we don't see any flaws in Griffin here is an old post....http://es.redskins.com/topic/380863-nflcom-cousins-outplaying-griffin/page-6#entry9889544

 

From 14 August about the previous season

 

  I can't speak for anyone else but I don't get bent out of shape with any mention of Griffin's weaknesses. Heck, I think you would know that I'm at the very least objective about position play. I was critical of Griffin's mechanics at the start of last season when everyone on the forum was telling me he was fine.

What I object to are baseless claims like the current Griffin isn't a good pocket passer claim. That's why I keep the sig I have. The idea that Griffin isn't good from the pocket is a fiction that is unsupported by the stats and history.Here's my view of Griffin's weaknesses all of which I've stated before: (many of these weaknesses are because of his talent)

 

-better decision making when he scrambles, too reckless, needs to have better awareness about when/where/how to protect himself

 

-needlessly varies his arm slot at times overhead, 3/4 quarters, side-arm; even though throwing from different arm angles is a good skill when needed

 

- doesn't always step into his throws (he can often get away with it because of arm talent), last year wasn't keeping a consistent base and wasn't keeping his front leg down nor forcefully transfering his weight from his back leg to his front leg which would cause him to miss high

 

-doesn't always maintain himself as passer when he begins to scramble, drops his throwing arm and sometimes even cradles the ball as a RB when he begins to scramble/run

 

-doesn't always keep the ball tight to his chest in a throwing position when he drops back, often drops his left arm away and holds the ball near his waist with just his right arm

 

-didn't trust his protection at times and would look to bail early (can you blame him?)

 

-didn't trust the playcalling would get the primary receiver open at times (especially off of 2-man route read option play-action) This was a major problem last year when combined with not trusting the pass protection. Griff b/c he didn't trust the playcall would come off his primary receiver too early which would throw off the timing of the play THEN he would get nervous about the pass protection and look to make a play, sometimes plays went like this: dropback--rush through the primary read--look at the secondary reads too early/before they got open, get nervous about Tyler then bail from the pocket and try to make a play

 

(a) tries to be 'thee' man, goes into hero mode to quickly (this is gonna happen when you put Baylor on the map raise the Heisman trophy and win 7 games in a row to make it to the playoffs and win rookie of the year)

 

-thinks the media is his friend and tries to explain things and in general says more then he needs to

 

(a) doesn't know how to give an empty soundbite

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

Which, from a technical aspect, can never happen as no outcome is guaranteed.

 

People can complain he holds the ball too long, and he does. But you can't complain about that and be happy about his ability to break free from a bad situation and make something happen. Can't have it both ways. Take the good with the bad and the bad with the good.

How often does he break free and actually make plays tho?? 

 

I get the potential is there but it hasn't been a common occurrence since 2012. More often than not, it seems like he gets sacked or worse. 

 

The play from the Vikings game was WORLD CLASS. I got up and yelled afterwards lol. But those are rare imo. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

Lol, so in short Griffin should only extend plays when he knows the outcome will successful.

Right.

 

Wait... man, I wish I was smart enough to understand if this is sarcasm.

[Stadium-Armory]

It isn't about knowing the outcome. Its about having consistent rhythm in the pocket as a rule. The "hold on and make a play out of nothing" should be the exception. For as bad as KC8 was, he had good rhythm in the pocket for a while. Robert could learn something from that piece of KC8s performance I think.

[gortiz]

... who did they pay off for?  His Lions had 5 losing seasons out of 10, no conference championships (lost 4 WC games and 1 Conference game).

 

The problem with all or nothing is that it doesn't consistently win games.  Look at the Skins offense and their total yards of offense and wonder ... why aren't they winning.  Because they get 70 in a huge chunk and drives end on negative plays and <2 yd carries. 

 

Look at the great Redskins offense with Riggins behind the hogs ... he was not a big chunks of yards runner but he was a sure bet to more the chains ... and keep moving them all the way to the end zone.

 Oh c'mon, you are not implying that Barry was not effective enough and part of the reason Detroit didn't win games are you? I mean, what are you saying about Barry? 

 

I think two big reasons the Skins are racking up yards and not points is because they get zero help from the Defense and zero help from special teams and our running game can't pick up a consistent 3-4 yards when we need it. 

 

The D never, ever gives the O short fields ... 29th in Turnovers. We are constanly havng to put togheter long ass drives. 

 

Let's not even get into how bad our return games are.  We have to be last in starting field position. 

 

Alfred and the RB's are helping kill drives as well. 2nd and 5 turns into 3rd and 8 way too much. 

 

I'm not going to say there are not serious issues with the O, our 3rd down conversion is dreadful.  But the three units are not complementing each other at all.  

 

Just look to Seattle to see how important a good D, running game and Specials are.   They dropped 38 points on the Giants and RW went 10-17 with zero TD's, 2 INT's and 172 yards. 

[darrelgreenie]

Off topic but to dispel the fiction that some posters, like myself, who disagree with some specific criticisms about are incapable of being critical or that we don't see any flaws in Griffin here is an old post....http://es.redskins.com/topic/380863-nflcom-cousins-outplaying-griffin/page-6#entry9889544

 

From 14 August about the previous season

 

  I can't speak for anyone else but I don't get bent out of shape with any mention of Griffin's weaknesses. Heck, I think you would know that I'm at the very least objective about position play. I was critical of Griffin's mechanics at the start of last season when everyone on the forum was telling me he was fine....(long post my assessment of Griffins weaknesses)

Same as always. The posters that claim that I or other posters aren't critical/objective about Griffin are always mum...crickets.....

[lovemaskins]

 Oh c'mon, you are not implying that Barry was not effective enough and part of the reason Detroit didn't win games are you? I mean, what are you saying about Barry? 

 

I think two big reasons the Skins are racking up yards and not points is because they get zero help from the Defense and zero help from special teams and our running game can't pick up a consistent 3-4 yards when we need it. 

 

The D never, ever gives the O short fields ... 29th in Turnovers. We are constanly havng to put togheter long ass drives. 

 

Let's not even get into how bad our return games are.  We have to be last in starting field position. 

 

Alfred and the RB's are helping kill drives as well. 2nd and 5 turns into 3rd and 8 way too much. 

 

I'm not going to say there are not serious issues with the O, our 3rd down conversion is dreadful.  But the three units are not complementing each other at all.  

 

Just look to Seattle to see how important a good D, running game and Specials are.   They dropped 38 points on the Giants and RW went 10-17 with zero TD's, 2 INT's and 172 yards. 

 

How darest thee attempt to imply that thou farest Russell Wilson, Ye O'l great Quarterback, didn't winneth thou ball of foot game alone.  RG3 shouldest consider thee lucky indeed to carryeth thy jock strap, as he continueth to stareth down receivers and holdeth thy ball of foot longer than 1.825s/s. 

[MartinC]

Well just think if the teams were reversed, Wilson would be getting crushed here for his play. 4 of his last 5 games he's thrown for under 200yds. We had fans ****ing because RG3 completed 78% of his passes.

 

To be fair there is a section of the Hawks fan base starting to turn on Wilson although I'm sure its still a minority. Doubts are out there though. 

 

The difference with Wilson of course is he is on a team thats winning more often than not and he's coming off a Super Bowl winning season. I'm not saying that should make a difference in evaluating their performances right now but we all know it does.

[MattFancy]

To be fair there is a section of the Hawks fan base starting to turn on Wilson although I'm sure its still a minority. Doubts are out there though. 

 

The difference with Wilson of course is he is on a team thats winning more often than not and he's coming off a Super Bowl winning season. I'm not saying that should make a difference in evaluating their performances right now but we all know it does.

 

The biggest thing is that his team is still winning. RG3 has been puting up better numbers lately, but we aren't winning. Are they winning because of Wilson? Doesn't appear to be so lately.

 

Yet we were all crushing RG3 after the Vikings game for his INT in the 1st half. We were still ahead at the half and were winning in the 4th qtr. It's not his fault the defense sucked. Wilson doesn't have to worry about that since his defense is better than ours. But if Wilson were here, he'd be getting crushed right now.

[darrelgreenie]

Matt-

I agree Wilson's passing performances have been up and down this year. But, his rushing numbers have been very good and have helped them win games.

[Taco Bell]

Okay...because I disagree with some posters statements its now 'backlash'?

 

What happened to ~'not wanting to extrapolate'? You are taking a comment specifically about taking the good with the bad when it comes to holding the ball too long vs extending the play. YOU are the one trying to turn that into an over arching statement about Griffin's game.

Oh, and just because YOU haven't heard people talk about Rodgers holding the ball doesn't mean that it doesn't happen; just goggle Aaron Rodgers holds the ball....(or something similar) here I'll help straight from the man himself:

 

 

Similarly I dislike when different viewpoints are labeled in anyway pro/anti Griffin, especially when a disagreement is labeled as "backlash"

 

It's funny because, if you know anything about my posts, they are always long, because I try to make sure I am saying, exactly, what I want to say, without things needed to be added by the imagination of who reads it.  I'm not saying it works out perfectly, but that's the reason why I do it at least.

 

So, you've keyed on my use of the word "extrapolate."  When I used that word I was using it in reference to people taking a post, my original post in this thread, the one that was nothing but constructive criticism, and "extrapolating" that into people thinking it was me "hating" on the guy.  Which, as all my posts are about RG3, are definitely not "hating", because I care too much about putting idiocy on the internet.  I also didn't find what I posted to be "off topic" either, because it was in line with the posts that were put up before me on that 2nd page.  Literally, there was a post right before mine that had Aaron Rodgers and Kaepernick in it, which you sort of implied was me going "off topic" in your "bull" post. 

 

You using the word "extrapolate" in terms of the aaron rodgers conversation from my 2nd post, is fine, because it's a free country and you can take words from my posts and use them thematically for your own benefit, but in no way am I implying any of the "facts"  that you stated about aaron rodgers are wrong or I "don't believe".  I didn't say he "doesn't take unnecessary and/or too many sacks," like how you're thinking I did, I said he was the "gold standard of athletic QBs" so him taking unnecessary/extra sacks is not the same situation as RG3's, where RG3 takes unnecessary sacks, maybe because he hasn't mastered reading defenses, doesn't manipulate the pocket as well as he could yet, has an injury history, and doesn't use surrounding QB rules well enough to his advantage so that you always feel like you're "just missing" that big hit.  He has a history of taking incredibly hard hits in an extremely short career thus far.  And, when he does think he is using QB rules to his advantage,  like the famous "I tried getting out of bounds but just close in enough to get the personal foul penalty" quote he had, he still screws certain things up because he stopped getting those calls quickly thereafter.  I'm talking about it from a results perspective.  Like, aaron rodgers is a HOFer, is in the running for MVP again this year, and so on, RG3 is heading into game 4 of this season because of an ankle injury, and with all the catching up he needs to do in his career based on other injuries he's had prior.

 

Aaron rodgers gives you the "good with the bad" at an all time great HOF level, so yes, I am adding my own spin on what that "quote" and essentially OP is discussing, but don't think for a second that means I don't think it exists, I'm saying that the phrase doesn't carry the same pitfalls for an RG3 than it does Aaron Rodgers because RG3 has a long way to go before I think he's truly maximizing his safety on the field.  Aaron rodgers can take a massive blind side hit too when he holds the ball too long, but I also trust aaron rodgers to throw the ball away when he can, make more evasive maneuvers in the pocket, throw the ball to outlet receivers at the last second to perhaps get a roughing the passer call, and so on and so forth.  RG3 is no where near that level so he takes "more" unnecessary hits than aaron rodgers does on a per situation basis.  Aaron Rodgers I'm sure averages more throws per game, so maybe their total "hits per game" could be closer to equal "per game," maybe, but I am going to assume RG3 also takes on average the more vicious hits, and probably still more, "per game." Also, RG3 needs to stay on the field, so taking the good with the bad also "feels" like a higher risk than with an Aaron Rodgers.  My overall concept is, RG3 needs to get better at clerical aspects of his position before people are going to "trust" him holding the ball too long like Aaron rodgers.  For me and I'm sure many others, at least.  Like, RG3 is in a situation right now where if he gets another "big" injury, just 1 more, that could drastically change the course of his career.  I feel like this topic sort of "makes light" of that weight he has on his shoulders right now, he's in a situation where just rolling with the punches and taking hits because "that's how he plays" is really dangerous if he doesn't do what he can to keep these hits to a minimum.  Aaron Rodgers clearly has built up equity in this regard.  And then a guy like Kaep, he's just bigger, and doesn't have any serious injuries yet, so even if I still wouldn't want him taking the big hits by holding the ball too long, I'm definitely not going to cringe in the same way I do when I see RG3 getting a big hit. 

 

In the story you gave about aaron rodgers as well, that's a quote of his own, and he's making light of his own haters.  So, in a way, that actually is helping my exact side of the argument, that he's the gold standard of athletic QBs so for him to be criticized in "taking the good with the bad" is nothing like an RG3 because he is clearly one of the best players in the NFL doing it, so, yea I dunno.  He hears it, and it fuels him obviously, but, I'll take aaron's opinion over his "good with the bad" in the overall sense of that is more along the lines of "asking the world of him", unlike an RG3, where he clearly has room to improve, and this is a concept that involves the "dangers of the position" because we are talking about taking extra hits, and I don't take that lightly.  

 

So, to come back to your short post, the one I referred to as condescending, if my post was criticizing aaron rodgers, then your post would have made much more valid sense to me, but then again, I never would have posted what I posted if it was aaron rodgers.

 

-------------

 

Also, I never said that you in particular don't criticize RG3 or never have, etc. I mean, thank you for showing actual proof you have, since that obviously is going out of your way to do so.  But, see, just like all other mistakes in grouping people/posters together, you might have 80% of said group figured out, but then there's a few outliers that you might have made a mistake of putting them in.  As you can see, I am fully willing to explain and go back on things I've said as well, I changed my opinion on "offseason move grades" because of a post that you made in particular, for example. 

 

But, when you post a short post like that where it's clearly directed at me, and maybe Bonez3, that is just a "attack the poster" post, so I have no choice but to group you in that category based on the situation at hand, sorry.   I mean, obviously you are going out of  your way to quantify it, so I don't care as much anymore, but that is still the type of post that myself and many other people hate seeing just because they posted something "negative" about RG3.   

[darrelgreenie]

Taco-

 

Holy wall of text.

I may have lost the specific point/s you were referring to in your post due to its length.

 

But nothing in our discourse has changed.

When it comes SPECIFICALLY as the OP addressed to holding the ball vs extending the play QBs that extend plays will take some sacks as a result. You have to take the good with the bad and it will always be that way.

And yes, this even applies to Aaron Rodgers.

[Taco Bell]

Taco-

 

Holy wall of text.

I may have lost the specific point/s you were referring to in your post due to its length.

 

But nothing in our discourse has changed.

When it comes SPECIFICALLY as the OP addressed to holding the ball vs extending the play QBs that extend plays will take some sacks as a result. You have to take the good with the bad and it will always be that way.

And yes, this even applies to Aaron Rodgers.

 

so, the concept that discussing this in relation to how good a player is has nothing to do with anything... 

 

And also, you have 17k posts on here, and read pages and pages of threads, but reading 1 post is somehow too difficult.

 

That is the biggest disappointment here.  I try to give you a thorough explanation, but then you just give the worst type of response possible.   Ok good, so I know never to value your opinion ever again.  

 

I also caught your "oh crickets" post after I posted this, so now I really value your input even less. 

 

That's fine, you're just one poster, there are many great posters on this MB. 

[darrelgreenie]

?

 

Um..okay.

[Taco Bell]

You made your little yet again, condescending post about people not responding to you after revealing your "ability" to critique RG3, that you just get crickets after... sorry that I can't post at all times of the day.  I truly apologize that you had to hear crickets before getting a response.

 

Also, the idea that Aaron Rodgers and RG3 have the EXACT same dilemma with taking the "good with the bad" is nonsense, which is what you are trying to push here, but that's just wrong.   There are additional components that RG3 has to deal with with holding the ball too long that Aaron Rodgers doesn't because Aaron Rodgers does things that RG3 can't yet.  So when it comes to injury risks, I find that RG3 has more bad with the good than rodgers has bad with the good, because injury risks are a big deal, at least to me, maybe not you, so that's what I was attempting to explain, but I guess it was too long of a response. Sorry.

 

Just because an OP started with that doesn't mean that each and every post is going to respond directly to the OP.  And also, I don't think my post is off topic of this at all anyway.  It's a secondary point to the initial discussion where I am saying that not all "good with the bad" is created equal.  Yea, so off topic. 

 

So, yea sure, you can just give your succinct point that both RG3 and Aaron rodgers carry the exact same bad, with the exact same good.  Yea sure. Ok, I guess my points have 0 validity to them whatsoever.

[Dan T.]

Taco-

 

Holy wall of text.

I may have lost the specific point/s you were referring to in your post due to its length.

 

 

An editor's favorite quote... from Mark Twain:

 

"I didn't have time to write you a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead."

[MartinC]

But if Wilson were here, he'd be getting crushed right now.

 

Agreed. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

I don't know how we got into debating Aaron Rodgers here, but eh, whatever.

 

I agree to some extent with darrellgreenie, that you have to take the good with the bad.  

 

If you have a QB who has no real escapability, he has no choice to get rid of the ball in under 3 seconds, and generally, under 2.7 seconds.  Because otherwise he's going to get crushed, repeatably.  That means that the stats will show that he gets rid of the ball very quickly. 

 

If you have a QB that has additional athletic talent, instead of throwing the ball away immediately, they'll use their athleticism to get out of trouble and try and make a play. Means that they're holding onto the ball longer.

 

I think most of us can agree on that.  

 

Here's where things get more difficult to judge: If a QB of either type either:

1. Misses a receiver being open in his progression, and takes a sack,

2. Misses a receiver being open and bails out to try and extend the play.

 

One thing that Cooley pointed out,and I honestly have no idea how to judge this, so I'll take his word for it, is that all of our QBs are seemingly doing a reasonably good job going from the "premier" receiver, or primary, to the checkdown.  But what they're not doing a great job of is going from Premier, to secondary, third, then checkdown.  

 

I think for Griffin, it's slightly modified, he goes Premier to checkdown, or premier to escape quickly.  

 

That's part of the function of learning a new offense. And with more experience and repetitions, any QB is going to get better at it. 

 

In my definition, a QB "holds the ball too long" is not necessarily only judged in seconds (that's part of it) but if he had an opportunity to get the ball to a guy, and missed that opportunity, and the ball is still in his hands.  Then he held the ball too long.  However, if he had nobody open, and then has to escape, he didn't hold the ball too long.  And that's sortof a case by case basis.  The flip side is to say, "if you can't get to the primary and checkdown, chuck it out of bounds no matter what."  That will ensure you don't hold the ball too long, but also negate some possible plays.  

The guy who I always go back to who was a master at this was Steve Young.  He was absolutely masterful at going through all of his progressions, being a real honest-to-God WCO QB, using his feet to take him through the read progressions, throwing guys open, a la Peyton and Brady, but he also knew when it was time to bail, and use his athletic gifts to get out of there and make a throw down the field or take off.

[darrelgreenie]

Also, the idea that Aaron Rodgers and RG3 have the EXACT same dilemma with taking the "good with the bad" is nonsense, which is what you are trying to push here, but that's just wrong.... So, yea sure, you can just give your succinct point that both RG3 and Aaron rodgers carry the exact same bad, with the exact same good. Yea sure. Ok, I guess my points have 0 validity to them whatsoever.

Hmmnn....Why don't you actually quote my enitre statement? Why do you always truncate it?

Is it because I am and have always been very clearly speaking specifically about taking the good with the bad in regards to holding the ball vs extending plays?

 

 

When it comes SPECIFICALLY as the OP addressed to holding the ball vs extending the play QBs that extend plays will take some sacks as a result. You have to take the good with the bad and it will always be that way.

And yes, this even applies to Aaron Rodgers.

You have to take the good with the bad when it comes to extending plays. They're gonna evade some sacks and make plays they're also going to take some sacks. It has always been thus.

....

You are taking a comment specifically about taking the good with the bad when it comes to holding the ball too long vs extending the play. YOU are the one trying to turn that into an over arching statement about Griffin's game.

 

Again YOU are the one reffering to "taking the good with the bad" in some broad based diatribe not me, that's your hang up.

You know what this feels like to me?

[MattFancy]

Question: Did anyone think he held onto the ball too long on that pass to Helu in the 1st half against the Vikings?

[Taco Bell]

I quote only parts because I try to follow the rules about not quoting long blocks of text and am just responding to your whole post, whats the problem in that?  I forgot that you didn't actually read my post so you didn't gather that... I addressed your aaron rodgers stuff, the stuff about you criticizing RG3 on your own.  I've done nothing out of line here, so, stop pretending lol..   

 

This only became what you consider a "diatribe" because of your original condescending post after my original post in this thread, right after MattFancy had the top 10 list of who takes the most sacks, and said something along the lines of "having to roll with it."

Bonez3 was giving similar concerns about RG3 that I did, so it's not like I thought any of this was off topic.

 

And don't pretend that this is some "straw man" thing because that's just dumb.  You in all your posts directed at me have had elements of condescension which has obviously irked me.

 

 You've said "oh so you can only hold the ball when he knows its going to be successful" which wasn't really a response to my post at all even though it was clearly directed at either me, bonez3, or both.

 

you've implied that what I said was "extrapolating" the OP into being off topic, even though I am clearly discussing the same topic.

 

You've made a joke that you didn't get a response fast enough which made the "crickets" comment

 

You've told me that because a post of mine was too long that you weren't going to bother with the points I had therein. 

 

So, all this boils down to you looking pretty lame in the grand scheme of things.  I have done nothing but respond to your posts and attempted to give them the time necessary to get my point across.  So, you can think what you want.  If you actually read my posts without the extra inference of me "hating," you would see I'm doing nothing but showing my concerns about a concept that sounds very dangerous when it deals with RG3 and his long term career.  No different than I would have felt if I was a falcons fan in the early-mid 2000s with Vick there.  Kap is a bigger guy, so I trust him taking hits holding the ball too long.  So is Cam.  Aaron Rodgers protects himself better.  What else is there for me to explain that I haven't already written?  

 

But yea sure, you're the one that's bringing out comics and stuff, while I am the one still arguing my point, yet I am the one that has the "strawman" issues.

[darrelgreenie]

I don't know how we got into debating Aaron Rodgers here, but eh, whatever.

Oh, because MattFancy and I mentioned that Aaron Rodgers historically is known for extending plays but he also takes sacks and is/was tweaked for holding the ball too long.

 

 

One thing that Cooley pointed out,and I honestly have no idea how to judge this, so I'll take his word for it, is that all of our QBs are seemingly doing a reasonably good job going from the "premier" receiver, or primary, to the checkdown....I think for Griffin, it's slightly modified, he goes Premier to checkdown, or premier to escape quickly.  

 

That's part of the function of learning a new offense. And with more experience and repetitions, any QB is going to get better at it.

I remembering Cooley saying this but iirc he was saying it about Cousins specifically. Cooley also said as a result that Cousins didn't see some chances for big throws. For me its a tough call because unless its 3rd down taking a checkdown isn't necessarily a negative then and we can't know whether or not Jay is telling him to get to the check down. In some parts of the field and on some plays coaches will tell the QB if ~'if the "1" isn't there get to the checkdown or in the RZ they say ~'look TD to checkdown' etc.

But, from what I've seen of Griffin under the Shanahan's even from the 1st game; Griffin showed the ability to get to his second read. (the TD to Garcon)

Last year one of my gripes with Griffin was coming off the 1st option too quickly. So I think Griffin shouldn't have a problem going through his progressions in this scheme. But right now its hard to say because he hasn't played that much in this offense. For me its not something I'm worried about.

 

 

 

The guy who I always go back to who was a master at this was Steve Young.  He was absolutely masterful at going through all of his progressions, being a real honest-to-God WCO QB....

Whenever I think about Joe Montana I remember something that Bill Walsh wrote. Its not verbatim but he was saying that a QB has to be able to go through the progressions naturally/fluid as opposed to a binary/robotic manner and Joe epitomized this for me. He was graceful.....I mean.... in a ....you know a tough football type of graceful

[darrelgreenie]

I quote only parts because I try to follow the rules about not quoting long blocks of text and am just responding to your whole post, whats the problem in that?

C'mon bro. My post wasn't long enough that your couldn't quote it and we're talking about 1 sentence. Surely you can quote one entire sentence.   

 

This only became what you consider a "diatribe" because of your original condescending post after my original post in this thread, right after MattFancy had the top 10 list of who takes the most sacks, and said something along the lines of "having to roll with it."

Bonez3 was giving similar concerns about RG3 that I did, so it's not like I thought any of this was off topic.

If you feel condescended to that's wasn't my intent but its not my issue either.

Not sure what you else you are referring to here with 'having to roll with it' (which happens when you don't fully quote people).

Not sure where you are going with off topic bit.

 

You've said "oh so you can only hold the ball when he knows its going to be successful" which wasn't really a response to my post at all even though it was clearly directed at either me, bonez3, or both.

You're right it wasn't a response to your post. If I want to address you I would quote your post and respond. That post was meant for Matt Fancy and others and it was meant to be funny.

 

you've implied that what I said was "extrapolating" the OP into being off topic, even though I am clearly discussing the same topic.

I didn't imply I stated that you were extrapolating after you accused others of extrapolating.

 

You've made a joke that you didn't get a response fast enough which made the "crickets" comment

I could care less whether you repsond at all, care even less how quickly you respond.

 

You've told me that because a post of mine was too long that you weren't going to bother with the points I had therein. 

Taco-

 

Holy wall of text.

I may have lost the specific point/s you were referring to in your post due to its length.

 

Bull. If you would simply use the quote feature it would end a lot of your mistakes.

 

So, all this boils down to you looking pretty lame in the grand scheme of things.

 Um okay sure.

 

If you actually read my posts without the extra inference of me "hating,"

Huh? So now I'm inferring that you're hating? Lol.

Actually you're the one that has been making accusations not me.

 

you would see I'm doing nothing but showing my concerns about a concept that sounds very dangerous when it deals with RG3 and his long term career.  No different than I would have felt if I was a falcons fan in the early-mid 2000s with Vick there.  Kap is a bigger guy, so I trust him taking hits holding the ball too long.  So is Cam.  Aaron Rodgers protects himself better.  What else is there for me to explain that I haven't already written?

I have never been talking about anything other then the very specific statement that QBs that extend the play have a tendency to take sacks and you have to take the good with the bad in that regard. PERIOD. I have not and did make nor argue any other points.

 

I have done nothing but respond to your posts and attempted to give them the time necessary to get my point across.

And I have responded to your posts to me and also taken the time to get my point across.

 

 

But yea sure, you're the one that's bringing out comics and stuff, while I am the one still arguing my point, yet I am the one that has the "strawman" issues.

You may be arguing your point but its got nothing to do with the point I was making. In a sense that is essence of a strawmen. Arguing a point different from the actually point I was making to which you responded.

 

Cheers-

You can have the last word if you like.