FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[GOATFrerotte]

5 hours ago, MartinC said:

That’s literally how pass plays are designed. Now sometimes the intended play is taken away and the QB tries to extend the play and create something outside the design (which might be what Haskins should have attempted here) - but pass play design is for the ball to come out on time at the top of the drop.

 

Not true at all, 4th and long, 3rd and long plays they take longer to develop. You can even see in the film the guy running the deep crossing route to find a soft spot in the zone hadn't even turned his head yet. I promise you that play was not designed to be thrown so quickly. There might be one read that he's looking at that is quick, but it's a play designed to find soft spots in the zone. You see qbs all the time stepping up in the pocket and waiting for a tight end to cross the field or a deep in to develop. There's no written rule that plays are literally designed to be thrown immediately when you finish your drop, especially long distance plays.

[MartinC]

15 minutes ago, httr2020dynasty said:

 

Not true at all, 4th and long, 3rd and long plays they take longer to develop.

 

 

So that would be a critique of the play call in that situation. Because I promise you that play is designed to have Haskins throw the ball to Terry McLaurin as his foot hits the top of his drop. In a normal situation if Terry is covered then you come to the underneath receiver as the second read. Its a simple high/low combination. Great of its 2nd and 10 at midfield - less than ideal if its 4th and goal from what the 15?

 

Quote

 

You can even see in the film the guy running the deep crossing route to find a soft spot in the zone hadn't even turned his head yet.

 

 

So on timing throws down the field it's almost always the case that the ball is intended to be thrown before the receiver gets out of his break. If you wait until the receiver gets out of his break I don't care how strong your arm is the receiver will have to slow down to give you a target and there will be a crowd around him by the time the ball arrives.

 

Quote

I promise you that play was not designed to be thrown so quickly.

 

 

I promise you you are wrong 🙂

 

Quote

You see qbs all the time stepping up in the pocket and waiting for a tight end to cross the field or a deep in to develop. There's no written rule that plays are literally designed to be thrown immediately when you finish your drop, especially long distance plays.

 

Right. But thats about extending the play when the defense does its job and takes away the intended first read. And it was pretty obvious that the Ravens were going to key on terry and protect the end zone by flooding defenders. So the decision to go for it is questionable and is the play call. But Haskins should of either tried to fit it into Terry on time and hope he makes a great catch or draws a PI call OR tried to extend the play and create something outside the play design and timing.

[GOATFrerotte]

Just now, MartinC said:

 

So that would be a critique of the play call in that situation. Because I promise you that play is designed to have Haskins throw the ball to Terry McLauirn as his foot hits the top of his drop. In a normal situation if Terry is covered then you come to the under neath receiver as the second read. Its a simple high/low combination. Great of its 2nd and 10 at midfield - less than ideal if its 4th and goal from what the 15?

 

 

So on timing throws down the field it's almost always the case that the ball is intended to be thrown before the receiver gets out of his break. If you wait until the receiver gets out of his break I don't care how strong your arm is the receiver will have to slow down to give you a target and there will be a crowd around him by the time the ball arrives.

 

 

I promise you you are wrong 🙂

 

 

Right. But thats about extending the play when the defense does its job and takes away the intended first read. And it was pretty obvious that the Ravens were going to key on terry and protect the end zone by flooding defenders. So the decision to go for it is questionable and is the play call. But Haskins should of either tried to fit it into Terry on time and hope he makes a great catch or draws a PI call OR tried to extend the play and create something outside the play design and timing.

 

Nah, I promise you, you are wrong. There is literally zero truth to the fact that plays are literally designed to be thrown at the end of your drop or be immediate timing plays. The first read might be, "hey if this safety does this, then throw that". But if the defense doesn't do what you initially want then you have to wait for other routes to develop. I played qb for 7 years, at a pretty big hs and college. We had plenty of practice on 3rd and long and 4th and long plays, and plenty of the routes were designed to develop after you reach your drop. A deep in crossing multiple windows, and tight end running across the field, deep outs, finding soft spots in zones. So not sure what you guys are talking about, because it's definitely not true. 

[Malapropismic Depository]

 

[MartinC]

6 minutes ago, httr2020dynasty said:

 

Nah, I promise you, you are wrong. There is literally zero truth to the fact that plays are literally designed to be thrown at the end of your drop or be immediate timing plays. 

 

I guess I was doing it wrong then.

[Thinking Skins]

1 minute ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

24 first downs for us, vs 18 for them. 

343 total yards for us 350 for them. 

drives of length 22, 16, 6, 46, 75TD, 8, 12FG, 14, 82, 20 and 42TD yards. 

 

Not the worse playbook

[ILikeBilly]

40 minutes ago, dyst said:

Some of these tweets always come up with an obscure stat to support the argument that Haskins isn't that bad, meanwhile the tape and eye test always say otherwise. That Dan Orlovsky tweet is another example. There is a reason why Tampa is 3-1 right now and it has a lot to do with Tom Brady. Put Tom Brady on this team and we are very possibly 3-1 also, even at his age.

Or his career is over because of injury.  Tampa is stacked on offense.

[KDawg]

The play design is a levels play designed to hit McLaurin and then check down. That is 100% accurate.

 

But situational football says you go to the end zone there regardless of design intent. 
 

Was it the best call? Probably not. 
 

Did Haskins play it smart and/or listen to his coach? No. 
 

Multiple things can be true at the same time

[GOATFrerotte]

4 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

What's hard? I want to develop a QB. I want to see what his ceiling is and what we can do to help him reach it. Rivera has filp flopped on what he wants. It was development and now is win now, at the sake of developing his QB. Its not my patience that's wearing thin its Rivera's. 

 

Is Haskins stunting the growth of players? 7 guys on offense got targeted. He made 3 critical mistakes - the overthrow, the sack and the 4th down. But otherwise it was a decent game and a game that provided a platform to see that we have talent on offense that needs to DEVELOP. So why is this the game that is getting the change in talk from Rivera about Haskins being benched? Its frustrating that we're at this point with another QB who is not playing badly. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's why I think he calls it a "unique situation". They are in a terrible division with a chance to win it. If the Cowboys were 4-0 I bet he'd have a longer leash. But I would not be shocked at all that he views the Rams game as do or die for Haskins unless he plays incredible hitting numerous throws downfield. Him calling the deep pass to McLaurin "inconsequential" just shows where his mind is at. That's not a statement one would make if he was just evaluating a player. He expects Haskins to make plays to win football games. 

[Thinking Skins]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Maybe later I'll try to dig it up but yes there is a stronger correlation for how high you are picked including the QB spot and your likelihood of success.  It's playing the odds.  The outliers are outliers not the rule.   Exceptions exist for everything.  I recall us debating this same point about other players.

 

I explained to you why I bring this up and that is some dudes are raw with insane talent.  Josh Allen and Mahomes would be good examples of that.  Their raw skils were ballyhooed before the draft.  They were seen as the types that demanded patience because if they worked out (which was far from a given) the payoff would be big. 

There's certainly a correlation and that's why first rounders are given more opportunities than UDFAs but that doesn't mean is a steadfast rule. Before this salary structure of rookies I was in favor of signing a lower draft pick for a QB because you wouldn't be stuck with a salary cap devoted to an unproven rookie. Now though its more of the opposite. If you think a QB is talented, you want to draft them in the first to get the 5th year option. That has little to do with scouting and all to do with controllability and not having the Dak Prescott / Kirk Cousins situation. 

 

But the point we always talk about is that there are always gems found late in the draft and teams like the Eagles / Ravens / Steelers and some of the consistent winners find a way to make those players count so that if they swing and miss on a first rounder then so what. I didn't mind the RG3 trade for that reason (not knowing that Wilson and Cousins would be this good), I thought that if Bruce could trade back and get more picks later in the draft we could make up for the lost picks. We did get Murphy and Moses and a few others, but missed on Lawrence with this trade - I devote that to our scouts not being too good then (something I readily admit in hindsight). But I think there's always value in having more picks. And If I've got enough picks, and I like a player enough then I have no problem using an early pick on a Christian if I think he could become an elite LT and drafting him early to make sure I get him. 

[Burgundy Yoda]

The slant pass to Terry is unguardable. That has to be our bread and butter, it doesn't matter how boring it would be if it works time and time again you have to run that play until teams prove they can stop it.

[Thinking Skins]

3 minutes ago, httr2020dynasty said:

That's why I think he calls it a "unique situation". They are in a terrible division with a chance to win it. If the Cowboys were 4-0 I bet he'd have a longer leash.

Then as Vizzini says in Princess Bride, "We are at an impasse". Its asking a lot to demand that a young QB just learning the offense put the team on his back to win games, especially when everybody is still making mistakes (him included). And is he going to be judged poorly for Rivera's poor clock management? Or if he throws a screen / checkdown and Gibson makes a guy miss and takes it to the house, is that a bad play for Haskins? Because that's what he had against Baltimore and people are acting like he threw an Int, and the pass to TMac was meh? 

 

Yeah this is going to be a fun season; 

[Skinsinparadise]

4 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

There's certainly a correlation and that's why first rounders are given more opportunities than UDFAs but that doesn't mean is a steadfast rule. Before this salary structure of rookies I was in favor of signing a lower draft pick for a QB because you wouldn't be stuck with a salary cap devoted to an unproven rookie. Now though its more of the opposite. If you think a QB is talented, you want to draft them in the first to get the 5th year option. That has little to do with scouting and all to do with controllability and not having the Dak Prescott / Kirk Cousins situation. 

 

But the point we always talk about is that there are always gems found late in the draft and teams like the Eagles / Ravens / Steelers and some of the consistent winners find a way to make those players count so that if they swing and miss on a first rounder then so what. I didn't mind the RG3 trade for that reason (not knowing that Wilson and Cousins would be this good), I thought that if Bruce could trade back and get more picks later in the draft we could make up for the lost picks. We did get Murphy and Moses and a few others, but missed on Lawrence with this trade - I devote that to our scouts not being too good then (something I readily admit in hindsight). But I think there's always value in having more picks. And If I've got enough picks, and I like a player enough then I have no problem using an early pick on a Christian if I think he could become an elite LT and drafting him early to make sure I get him. 

 

 

I recall your stance on patience with just about every young player, fondess for UDFA's among other things.  You are talking to a dude that loves the draft almost as much as the NFL season.  I love college football, i try to see some games live every year.  I try to to dive deep into the draft and watch at least 100 players. So I am all into young players.   I also recall our many debates about Bruce who you trusted for a longish spell.

 

But for this conversation sake, it sounds like you don't trust Rivera the way for awhile as an example you trusted Bruce back then in the position Rivera's at which is at the helm?  That seems to be what you were saying at least in the context of Haskins?  I'd give Rivera some time. 

 

 

[Llevron]

4 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

The slant pass to Terry is unguardable. That has to be our bread and butter, it doesn't matter how boring it would be if it works time and time again you have to run that play until teams prove they can stop it.

 

I feel like that often but there has to be a smart reason why they dont do it. 

[Malapropismic Depository]

20 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

24 first downs for us, vs 18 for them. 

343 total yards for us 350 for them. 

drives of length 22, 16, 6, 46, 75TD, 8, 12FG, 14, 82, 20 and 42TD yards. 

 

Not the worse playbook

 

In our aggregate first halves this year, we have been outscored 75-24, through 4 games. Our average halftime score throughout the whole year, has us down 19-6 at the Half.

That is abysmal.

So most of those offensive stats were in garbage time when we were way behind.

Bottom line is something has to change on offense.

We can't keep starting up our offense when we're down by about 17 points.

[mhd24]

Bullock with his latest Haskins analysis (subscribers only)

 

https://theathletic.com/2118254/2020/10/06/inside-view-examining-dwayne-haskins-missed-opportunities-against-the-ravens/?source=emp_shared_article

 

To summarize...

 

Game plan was a ton of easy throws.  The opportunities he did have, he still didn't deliver.  Case in point is the first drive of the 2nd half.  After a first down, Scott Turner calls for a play-action pass designed to get Terry open.  It succeeds.  Terry is open, but Haskins doesn't throw and goes to his check down of Barber (who is also WIDE OPEN).  Haskins throws an unwatchable ball.  If he hits Terry in stride, its 12-15 yards easy (potentially more if Terry gets some RAC).  If he hits Barber, its an easy 7 yards.

 

Gives some props to the late Terry throw, but says he needs ALOT of work.

[Thinking Skins]

1 minute ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

So most of those offensive stats were in garbage time when we were way behind.

 

Not true. We weren't scoring but we had drives of 22, 16, 6, 46 and 75 TD 8, and 12FG in the first half. At halftime we were ahead in TOP 18 minutes to 12 minutes. This wasn't an inept offense. We had a fumble on the 16 yard drive and a missed FG on the 46 yard drive that could have made us look much better. 

 

We had 1 3 and out all game. 

[MartinC]

20 minutes ago, KDawg said:

The play design is a levels play designed to hit McLaurin and then check down. That is 100% accurate.

 

But situational football says you go to the end zone there regardless of design intent. 
 

Was it the best call? Probably not. 
 

Did Haskins play it smart and/or listen to his coach? No. 
 

Multiple things can be true at the same time

 

100%. Which is why I said

 

42 minutes ago, MartinC said:

But Haskins should of either tried to fit it into Terry on time and hope he makes a great catch or draws a PI call OR tried to extend the play and create something outside the play design and timing.

 

No argument from me that Haskins made the right decision to go to the underneath route as the second option. If it seems thats what I am arguing, I am not.

[Conn]

That’s my problem with the Orlovsky tweet. He (probably reliably) breaks down the throws he made, sure. But the larger problem is the throws he’s not making that are there. 

[GOATFrerotte]

5 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Then as Vizzini says in Princess Bride, "We are at an impasse". Its asking a lot to demand that a young QB just learning the offense put the team on his back to win games, especially when everybody is still making mistakes (him included). And is he going to be judged poorly for Rivera's poor clock management? Or if he throws a screen / checkdown and Gibson makes a guy miss and takes it to the house, is that a bad play for Haskins? Because that's what he had against Baltimore and people are acting like he threw an Int, and the pass to TMac was meh? 

 

Yeah this is going to be a fun season; 

 

I just think Ron has a completely different mindset and his comments, other than couple early, have been right in line with my thinking of him. He's giving Haskins a shot to prove he's the guy, he's not attached to him, he's not giving him the whole year to develop, either Haskins performs or he's going to try his guy. Someone like Herbert comes to mind as a guy who comes right in to a situation and as a coach makes it hard to take him off the field. And thrown in the mix that Ron has a chance to win the division in his first season with a team that was expected to be one of the worst, what coach wouldn't want that on their resume? What Ron sees, is Haskins checking down, taking very few shots downfield, and leading the team to 10 points and the other team bringing in their backup qb to end the game. 

 

Based on his comments, Ron sees the NFC east up for grabs and if Haskins doesn't lead us to victory against the Rams, I'd be shocked if he doesn't put Allen in to see if he can run the offense better. I just don't believe Ron is attached to Haskins development like some of his supporters. 

[Malapropismic Depository]

3 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Not true. We weren't scoring but we had drives of 22, 16, 6, 46 and 75 TD 8, and 12FG in the first half. At halftime we were ahead in TOP 18 minutes to 12 minutes. This wasn't an inept offense. We had a fumble on the 16 yard drive and a missed FG on the 46 yard drive that could have made us look much better. 

 

We had 1 3 and out all game. 

 

Depends on how you describe "inept" and how low you set the bar.

An offense that consistently cannot punch it in at the end of a drive, and convert it to points, may or may not be inept, but it still has severe issues.

[Thinking Skins]

1 minute ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Depends on how you describe "inept" and how low you set the bar.

An offense that consistently cannot punch it in at the end of a drive, and convert it to points, may or may not be inept, but it still has severe issues.

Sure but do you blame the missed FG or the fumble on Haskins or Turner's playcalling? Thats at least 6 points we gave up right there when the game is competitive. 

[Mooka]

It doesn't matter how that play was drawn up.

 

It didn't work and any starting QB in football would've extended that play on 4th and long goal with the game on the line.

 

Dwayne throwing that checkdown was as bizzarre as the decision to go for it on 4th and 13 with this offense.

 

As for Dwayne overall, he's a perfectly fine prospect and obviously if he were on a different team he'd look much better. Our offense won't be able to surround Haskins with what he needs paying 25mil in dead cap to Alex Smith.

 

He will have a better chance to become an elite QB then RG3 ever did btw because Robert can't protect his body. He's fundamentally flawed in that way. (couldn't even slide) First rule in contact sports. Robert was a bust from day 1. Lamar Jackson and Robert are actually the same size. Notice how hard it is to get a a clean hit on Lamar? Ryan Anderson might be the only defender in football ive seen get a clean hit on Jackson. RG3 gets absolutely BLOWN UP.

 

Dwayne won't be elite around here though. He's in the wrong offense. We'll have a new QB next year IMO. Or we'll use Kyle Allen as a stopgap until we get over Alex Smith's cap situation.

[ILikeBilly]

13 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Sure but do you blame the missed FG or the fumble on Haskins or Turner's playcalling? Thats at least 6 points we gave up right there when the game is competitive. 

Don't forget the Raven's defense that has been pretty good this year.

[ExoDus84]

I guess this season Haskins has technically improved. Below are his ESPN QBR rankings for 2019 vs. this season so far. He was 45th last season, and only 32 this year. His QBR is a whole 2.6 points higher.

 

Looking to the future, at this rate it'll only be 4 seasons until he matches Jeff Driskel.

 

2019:

 

2020: