Heinicke Hive: The LEGEND of Taylor Heinicke Thread

[mistertim]

9 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Your Heinicke love, knows no bounds.

 

 

[Jumbo]

just as we move itno 2022, my take on the thread

 

i stayed fairly low-key  about it and didn't post on it much, but i told tk from the first flashes of th getting major buzz to watch how he will get overblown by some peeps cuz it's one of those things we do here...and remember this is not a new kid with a sample size that only started with last year's game against tampa/brady and whose individual streakiness  since then is often ignored as its own factor

 

remember he joined the league in 2015 and had full exposure with several teams and staff over that time and ended up in the xfl for a bit and that is all very relevant data (also see the article i'll attach after this for an interesting aspect of this), and a piece of why i think even his long term value/capability as a back up gets exaggerated by devout fans, which is fine and normal

 

note that it's not just qb topics that launch some folks into a perceptual/argumentative minefield, but the qb position is a consistent centerpiece for it, which should be expected for the venue

 

we have also had mass debates on whether hall and garcon were 'bums' or at least 'way overrated' or the 'betts is better than portis' megathread, or how the gregg williams takes ran from genius to has-been in a back and forth manner, not to mention how every single oc /dc we've had over a long period of time gets called a moron here by many, etc.

 

but in this case, the overpraise for th--even as a back up---has been just that, analytically speaking in full context of the matter

 

as far as peeps using the pro-heinie media hype as supporting evidence for the excessive accolades and his 'even greater potential',  as well as the way stats/comparisons were presented during the win streak, such media storylines are to keep/create interest in franchises where it's hard to find much, and isolating small sample stats and making misplaced 'comparisons', all in a vacuum, do not build a solid argument 

 

i also see a major ignoring of how out of the norm this season was in terms of rosters available to play week to week and coaching and all sorts of analytical complications unique to this season (even vs last season's covid issues)...even factoring injuries was made more complicated by how many players did not get the same level/types of conditioning and types of practices throughout the seaosn..so making major claims of a new starter, or even most team performances this year, are subject to be far more up and down than even the normal ups and downs

 

even accurately noting our other wft weaknesses that do affect the qb play in general quickly degenerates into basic 'excuse-making' for  the more devout th-boosters (keep in mind all i've posted about liking/appreciating all the real and valid positives he's offered)

 

i always posted that we should want him to succeed, that peeps should hope for the best and enjoy the good things he did, and to cheer him on, just as i did in the gameday threads... cuz any good stuff/hope is rare here  

 

i didn't want to rain that much on the parade by posting counter-arguments on the matter and i thought others were making effective points of the 'let's be more grounded on this matter' side of things anyway

 

now that that's done, i wonder how many guys i read in here that rake scott turner over the coals in service to their support of th would reconcile that take with the idea that scott is the reason th is here and that scott is the guy who knows/likes taylor and is more invested in designing a game plan that plays most knowingly to th's abilities and this is a significant factor in whatever level of success you feel th has achieved this year  

 

Quote

 

Taylor Heinicke will be 'a factor' regardless of any QB moves, per Scott Turner

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/taylor-heinicke-factor-regardless-qb-212030515.html

Peter Hailey
Thu, January 6, 2022, 1:20 PM

 

In his final weekly press conference of the season, Washington offensive coordinator Scott Turner made reference to the scientific method.

 

You remember the scientific method, right? It's that process every young student has gone through before, where they come up with a hypothesis, test the hypothesis and then draw conclusions about that hypothesis.

 

Hang on. This is going somewhere. Promise.

 

The exchange occurred on Thursday when Turner was asked if Taylor Heinicke's performance as the team's starter had changed his opinion of the quarterback. That's when Turner threw it back to the days of grade school.

 

"I wouldn't say it revealed anything, maybe it just kind of confirmed," he said. "You know, the scientific method, you form a hypothesis.

 

"In my head, I had an idea of what it was going to be like or how he would respond to certain things. I think, for the most part, he confirmed that."

 

Turner has long supported Heinicke, dating back to when he was the only NFL coach to attend Heinicke's pro day at Old Dominion. That support, plus three different overlaps with Heinicke for three different franchises, has created a deep understanding for Turner of what the passer brings to the field.

 

Due to Ryan Fitzpatrick's opening-day injury in September, others have since gotten the chance to see in Heinicke what Turner's always seen. And while Turner admitted Thursday that the 28-year-old has experienced an "up-and-down" campaign — a statement that can't be debated — Heinicke has delivered in a few areas that the coordinator confidently expected him to.

 

"Whatever people wanna say about him, I think no one can deny his toughness, his fight," Turner told reporters. "The players on the team, they love him, they respect him. All those guys play hard and play hard for him and battle for him. Those are the kind of things that I felt like we would see."

 

Heinicke's production in Fitzpatrick's place has proven that he undeniably deserves a spot in the sport, which is a significant achievement for a signal caller who wasn't getting many signals that his services were needed until Washington called him about 13 months ago.  

 

"I've wanted to start in this league since I was born," Heinicke said Wednesday. "This season's been a dream come true."

 

However, as Heinicke established himself, he also displayed the weaknesses that will likely continue to cap his overall potential. Therefore, Washington will once more seek to acquire a true difference-making quarterback this offseason.

 

"We're gonna try to get it as good as we can at every position, but especially at that position," Turner explained.

 

That doesn't mean Heinicke is no longer valuable, of course. Like many other organizations did during this pandemic-influenced schedule, Washington learned the importance of rostering multiple capable QBs.

 

Fortunately for the club, Heinicke is under contract for 2022 at a very affordable rate.

 

So, no matter who Ron Rivera and Turner are able to land — whether it's a stud veteran, a mid-tier stopgap, a tantalizing rookie or even a combination of those options — Heinicke figures to be leaned on in some respect next fall.

 

That's just what Turner wants, too.

 

"Taylor's definitely going to be a factor," he said. "If we do bring a guy in, if that happens and however that happens, Taylor's gonna be here. I know what his makeup is. I know he's gonna be ready to compete and he isn’t gonna give anybody anything."

 

As Turner again prepares for the mad science that is the hunt for a star quarterback, at least he has one person whom he feels like he can rely on in Heinicke.

 

 

so is turner part of the problem with th showing his best or more a major reason he's looked as good as he has and even got the opportunity to come here?

 

any one here will hopefully want nothing but the best for th and the team, even while trying to be objective in analysis if that's their thing ,as it is one of mine... now since my first days on es i made it clear that i think few things dumb down a discussion more than the 'fanboy-hater' shticks, and i don't just mean the actual behavior when it really does occur, but also even just calling others out by those terms usually dumbs things down...i won't say it's been a case of 'both sides' showing up in force  in this thread, as i have seen maybe 'one 'hater' who didn't post that much, while there has been a few folks that lean towards the fanboy role (which is not a slam in this case, i'm just coming at this from the analytical perspective, not the emo side)

 

anyhoo, **** all this stuff and let's beat dallas 

 

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

40 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

but in this case, the overpraise for th--even as a back up---has been just that, analytically speaking in full context of the matter

I mean, he's fine as you don't expect your backup to be great - but it's not as if he's a lock to keep the wheels from falling off a season.  To be fair, there aren't many backups like that.  Generally, I agree though - I think it's overplayed to suggest he's a bottom tier starter, top backup.  

 

40 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

now that that's done, i wonder how many guys i read in here that rake scott turner over the coals in service to their support of th would reconcile that take with the idea that scott is the reason th is here and that scott is the guy who knows/likes taylor and is more invested in designing a game plan that plays most knowingly to th's abilities and this is a significant factor in whatever level of success you feel th has achieved this year  

I've made mention of this more times than I can count and I'm sure it comes across like I'm a Scott Turner "fanboy" 😛 to the Scott Turner "haters".  

 

It's probably my biggest peeve as far as gripes about offensive coordinators go.  Heineke is here solely because of his relationship and familiarity with Scott Turner and all that unfolded with Covid last year.  There is nobody in the NFL with a better grasp of what Heineke can and cannot do than him.  He's on record along with Ron talking about how they'd like Heineke to use his legs more, yet we constantly see posters saying that Scott is trying to make Heineke something he's not, doesn't want him to run, etc.  We constantly see posters say that we need to run more rollouts and bootlegs, as if that's some magic pill that makes Heineke better.  As if Turner is a complete numbskull for not calling that stuff, and our beloved posters here who watch from home and don't even watch the All22, have a better grasp about what's going to work for Taylor.  Nevermind the fact that those plays cut the field in half and Taylor's not great or very accurate when he can't throw from his base. 

 

Basically, yeah - all that criticism drives me crazy.  It's not just with Heineke either, we tend to do this a lot here.  Where the same poster will rant and rave about our complete lack of talent on the roster and the very next post ranting and raving about how our coordinators are idiots who can't utilize all the talent.  It's like which one is it, exactly? 

Edited January 7, 2022 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[Califan007 The Constipated]

For whatever reason, I cared less about what sports media was saying about Heinicke and cared more about what his teammates were saying. He got a lot of praise from a lot of players, both on the team and on other teams. When I saw the good I would think "Damn, that's impressive...maybe he can..." and when I saw the bad I thought "Damn, that was really ugly...backup at best." Praise from teammates and other players in the NFL allowed a "best case scenario" to remain on my Football Hopes list. I didn't look at the year he was drafted as much as I looked at the amount of in-game experience he had, which was next to none. I'd look at someone with obvious physical limitations like Flutie and his insanely long career in football (over three different leagues lol) and think "Eh, you never know"...or the multitude of QBs who pretty much sucked their first 2/3/4 seasons and then became--at the very least--serviceable starters who could get you enough wins to compete for a playoff spot each year and think "Eh, you never know" lol...

 

What I did know was that it was fun rooting for him. It was fun watching those times he made a play nobody even slightly saw coming, especially when it was late in the 4th with the game on the line. Was his arm strength an issue? Yeah...but dammit, did you see that TD throw to Seals-Jones? That was more fun and more entertaining to watch and talk about with other WFT fans than focusing on why throws like that don't matter.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

What I did know was that it was fun rooting for him. It was fun watching those times he made a play nobody even slightly saw coming, especially when it was late in the 4th with the game on the line. Was his arm strength an issue? Yeah...but dammit, did you see that TD throw to Seals-Jones? That was more fun and more entertaining to watch and talk about with other WFT fans than focusing on why throws like that don't matter.

I don't think there's any doubt that he's made some games fun for us, even dating back to the Tampa playoff game, that I think most of us expected to be an atrocity.  That throw to Seals Jones was awesome and it's not the only awesome play he made for us.  He absolutely added some excitement to some games and totally outplayed the expectations.  The skepticism never was based on  'can he do X once or twice', it was that he just didn't appear to have the size, accuracy or arm strength to regularly produce those exciting outcomes.

 

What got annoying though was being told by some of his biggest fans that I and others like me were not rooting for him and "want to see him fail", "hate him", "obsessed with arm strength", etc.  As if we were literally rooting against the guys success.  As if my own opinions on this message board, of which I know nobody in real life, mean so much to me that I care more about 'being right' than I would having this god forsaken franchise have finally found a legit QB, at a massive bargain to boot.  It just makes no sense.  There is nothing I would have liked more than to be wrong about TH and have him do things that I didn't believe he was capable of.  And he did to some extent, not just for me but pretty much everyone here minus the few ODU fanatics.  But as time wore on, even in victories, it became abundantly clear that success was not going to be sustainable due to the criticisms we rightfully had in the beginning.

Edited January 7, 2022 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[Darrell Green Fan]

6 hours ago, zskins said:

 

Didn't know that the QB position was gay.

 

What on Earth is this supposed to mean?  

[mistertim]

13 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

What on Earth is this supposed to mean?  

 

Not sure, but sometimes with zskins you just gotta go with it

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

What got annoying though was being told by some of his biggest fans that I and others like me were not rooting for him and "want to see him fail", "hate him", "obsessed with arm strength", etc.  As if we were literally rooting against the guys success. 

 

I'm not gonna contemplate the chicken-egg aspect of which side over-exaggerated the other side first lol...I'll just say that over-exaggeration of each side's viewpoint was taking place simultaneously without those doing the over-exaggeration owning up to it. I think for some who are like me, that part was the most annoying on this thread.

[MrJL]

I'd be perfectly happy with him starting next year.  And not to tank

[Califan007 The Constipated]

41 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

What on Earth is this supposed to mean?  

 

I think it had to do with someone having said the "QB comes first" lol...

 

[zCommander]

3 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

I think it had to do with someone having said the "QB comes first" lol...

 

 

 

Actually he said "Every GM coach openly admit this"...lol

mistertim apparently thinks no one knows this and it was a secret and now has come out of the closet that QB comes first....lol

[skinny21]

21 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

@skinny21I guess where we differ is that I feel like the past 4 games have been bad not just because we’ve lost horses but also Taylor instills no fear in the opposing defense.  They know the throws he can’t make and it allows them to be more aggressive.  There are parts of the field they simply don’t have to cover.  I don’t think the Oline looks so terrible if the QB is one that can make them pay.  

Don’t think we actually differ on that front actually - he’s not a qb that will keep coordinators up at night.  On the other hand, I do think if he ran more (successfully)) it would be pretty demoralizing to defenses.

Maybe it’s the way you phrased it, but I’m not sure I agree that defenses don’t have to cover part of the field.

 

More importantly though, do you agree with my list of the host of issues the team has faced?

If so, would you agree that it’s a lot to expect a qb, particularly an inexperienced one (and team) to overcome?

20 hours ago, mistertim said:

@skinny21I'm guessing the whole "figured him out" thing is a bit more than just figuring out what Heinicke can or can't do...pretty much everyone can see that stuff and as you noted, DCs get paid a lot of money to know it. I think it was a bit of a combination of things with regards to Dallas: knowing Heinicke's tendencies and limitations, having the horses to run the defense they want, figuring out how Turner would play things, and then putting all of that together. 

 

I know Turner is a bit of a whipping boy at times on here, and I make no bones about having some issues with his play calling at times, but I also think he gets a bit of a bad rap in general. He had to game plan around a QB who is smart but physically limited and deal with shuffling things around due to plenty of injuries. I remember many times after many games where tweets or videos were posted showing guys getting open plenty, but we couldn't or didn't get the ball to them.

 

He also was able to adapt his game plans after the bye due to injuries and Heinicke's limitations into more of a run first ball control oriented offense and it was relatively successful, even though I don't think those offenses are very practical in the modern NFL...but you do what you can with what you have, and that's what Turner did.

Regarding Turner - I’m still on the fence overall, but I haven’t put the blame on him for offensive issues - as you say, he’s had to deal with a limited qb, offensive line injuries, and injuries to some of our top weapons.  Of course, you’d expect those same issues to also affect Heinicke’s play, which has sort of been my point all along - yes, Heinicke is limited, but he’s also faced a great deal of adversity.  

That’s why I made the list outlining the issues with the team as a whole separate from Heinicke.  It’s seemed to me that the people on the other side of the Heinicke debate (from me) mostly gloss over the adversity.

 

Back to Turner, as I’ve said before, I have questions about him… for example, the number of times receivers were in the same area, the number of negative (cutesy) plays, the poor execution on screen plays, going pass happy early in the season with an inexperienced qb, etc. overall though, I think he’s done well with the hand he was dealt?

 

As to the idea of a ball control/run first offense, I actually think the offense, and Heinicke, mostly performed better when he was able to throw on first down more often (see the 2nd Eagles game).  

 

When Turner committed to the run more often after the bye I’m not so sure it was as simple as wanting to protect Heinicke.  IMO, with Roullier out and other oline issues, along with Bates starting in place of Thomas, it made sense to lean on the ground game (along with PA passing).  Of course by balancing the offense (we’re still mostly passing way more than running) I think we improved in TOP and therefore allowed the defense more rest.  

Interestingly, this change coincided with our defense having fewer gaffes in the secondary (ie allowing - I think - fewer quick scoring drives.  Not suggesting one caused the other!) and therefore meant offenses generally had to hold the ball longer to score.  So maybe it gave our defenses more chances at causing negative plays while still being able to rest more often with our offense holding the ball for longer?  Kind of a weird… dichotomy?

 

 

Overall, I guess this is a question I’d pose to those on the other side of the debate…

 

What do people most often reference as a rookie qb’s (and I think this should mostly apply to any inexperienced qbs) best friend?

 

I’ve heard some say TE.  Heinicke certainly made good use of his I think, and Thomas was probably his best red zone threat (and was missed for much of the year).

Some might say the run game.  I think our oline did a great job run blocking for much of the year, but Gibson was banged up, had his fumbling issues, and his vision looked suspect fairly often.  Add to that our oline shuffling and having to play the inexperienced Ismael and Charles, well, I think our ground game was decent, but far from great.

Others might say the defense.  Gives your qb the confidence to take some risks, while also allowing them to live to fight another day.  Ours was pretty rocky at first, and then up and down.  Had some good games, some solid games, and some bad games.  I think Heinicke’s frequent 1-2 turnovers a game and lack of success in the red zone hurt them, but at the same time, the offense’s sustained drives and contribution to the field position battle helped them (at times).

 

Is Heinicke a qb that can consistently carry the team on his back?  Nope.  I think can do it a bit though - NYG and ATL games, and to an extent the GB game come to mind.  Can he be a cog in the machine, a qb that can succeed with complementary pieces?  We’ve seen some evidence he can, but I can’t definitively say, and that’s in large part because of the adversity I keep mentioning.  Because I can’t say, and because he isn’t the type that can carry the team, I badly want to find a guy that can.  But… if we can’t find that guy (obviously we should keep trying until we do), I’d be curious to see what Heinicke can do with less adversity (and a better supporting cast) surrounding him… because I’m not entirely sure the book is written on him (despite his clear limitations).  What might have happened if the defense had gelled earlier, or had a good MLB?  What if he hadn’t lost his top 2 weapons for a large chunk of the year?  What if we had had a better back to carry the load?  What if we didn’t have 5 blocked kicks?

 

 

Edited January 7, 2022 by skinny21

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

28 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

I'm not gonna contemplate the chicken-egg aspect of which side over-exaggerated the other side first lol...I'll just say that over-exaggeration of each side's viewpoint was taking place simultaneously without those doing the over-exaggeration owning up to it. I think for some who are like me, that part was the most annoying on this thread.

To this day, I can think of one, maybe two posters who were overboard about Heineke being trash.  Sure, several of us had a laugh at coming up with new ways to make fun of those floaters - turkey, beach balls, hot air balloons, etc. - but it was all in fun, and not far from the truth.  I've never seen more posters like myself having to quantify that we don't hate a guy, we like him, etc. than with Taylor Heineke and it's like it always fell on deaf ears.  Taylor was in the friend zone, we like having him around, but he just never did enough to warrant considering him dating or marriage material.

10 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

More importantly though, do you agree with my list of the host of issues the team has faced?

If so, would you agree that it’s a lot to expect a qb, particularly an inexperienced one (and team) to overcome?

I do, but I can't help but add the caveat, that his natural inability to stretch the field only makes those matters worse.  Which also ties back to why I just don't think it's worth entertaining the idea of him starting for us moving forward, even if as a placeholder for a rookie being developed.

Edited January 7, 2022 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[mistertim]

@skinny21 I'm not going to respond point by point, but you had plenty of well thought out views there. Some I disagree with somewhat, some I agree with somewhat.

 

But at the end of the day, the main thing that matters is what the coaches think of Heinicke. From what we've heard recently (from Ron directly in a new interview and from "insiders" earlier on), Ron is pretty openly (yes @zskinsI said "openly" again; feel free to insert a gay joke here) gunning for a QB and acknowledges that Heinicke isn't the guy.

 

So I'm guessing by the time the 2022 season rolls around, this debate will all be academic, as Heinicke will be the backup most likely.

[dunfer]

the annual, 12 month long QB competition adds new competitors! Hurrah!

[skinny21]

2 hours ago, mistertim said:

@skinny21 I'm not going to respond point by point, but you had plenty of well thought out views there. Some I disagree with somewhat, some I agree with somewhat.

 

But at the end of the day, the main thing that matters is what the coaches think of Heinicke. From what we've heard recently (from Ron directly in a new interview and from "insiders" earlier on), Ron is pretty openly (yes @zskinsI said "openly" again; feel free to insert a gay joke here) gunning for a QB and acknowledges that Heinicke isn't the guy.

 

So I'm guessing by the time the 2022 season rolls around, this debate will all be academic, as Heinicke will be the backup most likely.

Thanks.  Yeah, I kind of feel like I’m beating a dead horse because who cares - he almost certainly won’t be the starter next year.  On the flip side, it is the Heinicke thread

I can’t remember how long ago exactly, but around mid season I made the point that if the staff (mainly Turner of course) felt Heinicke was limiting the offense (due to arm limitations), they should move on, even if Heinicke performed well.  So while I can appreciate how he played this year, and I can wonder how much better his play (and our record) might have been if he didn’t have so much against him, I believe they absolutely need to try to find their franchise guy that can set the team up for years to come.  
 

I meant to clarify in my last post that when I said Heinicke lost his top 2 weapons (for a chunk of the year), I said that because I think he had some trouble utilizing McLaurin and because I think Thomas and McKissick were more important targets for TH, even though Terry is obviously the best of the bunch.  Here’s hoping we can land a guy that helps Terry show off his true potential.  

3 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

I do, but I can't help but add the caveat, that his natural inability to stretch the field only makes those matters worse.  Which also ties back to why I just don't think it's worth entertaining the idea of him starting for us moving forward, even if as a placeholder for a rookie being developed.

I can see that - someone with a negative view of Heinicke (in respects to his ability as a starting qb) could point to defensive issues, Gibson’s vision issues, oline and receiving injuries, etc as all being exacerbated by Heinicke.  With me having a slightly positive outlook on him, I tend to be skeptical that’s the case.  But I get it.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

15 hours ago, skinny21 said:

18 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

I can see that - someone with a negative view of Heinicke (in respects to his ability as a starting qb) could point to defensive issues, Gibson’s vision issues, oline and receiving injuries, etc as all being exacerbated by Heinicke.  With me having a slightly positive outlook on him, I tend to be skeptical that’s the case.  But I get it.

I’ll say this, I like him more than any other QB I’ve watched play with similar height and arm strength.  He gets more out of what he has than anyone I can think of off the top of my head.  Which is why I’ve always said that I do like him despite being firm that he’s not what I want as a starter in any capacity.  I am firm that you need a guy that can throw it on a rope to the sidelines, stretch the field and tuck it into tight places in the red zone.  That’s not to say I need a guy with the strongest arm but there is a minimum of which Heineke simply doesn’t meet.

[skinny21]

32 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I’ll say this, I like him more than any other QB I’ve watched play with similar height and arm strength.  He gets more out of what he has than anyone I can think of off the top of my head.  Which is why I’ve always said that I do like him despite being firm that he’s not what I want as a starter in any capacity.  I am firm that you need a guy that can throw it on a rope to the sidelines, stretch the field and tuck it into tight places in the red zone.  That’s not to say I need a guy with the strongest arm but there is a minimum of which Heineke simply doesn’t meet.

I think that’s totally fair.  For me, it’s funny, because there was one game that I had a fairly negative view of but that after more and more consideration, it became (to me) an indicator of what we might be able to get out of Heinicke (despite his limitations).  I say funny both because of how my mind has changed, and because other posters mostly view it in a negative light - this was the game @Koolblue13decided he’d like to feed TH to his rescue dogs - the game against GB.

 

He passed the ball well, ran for almost a 100, and the offense never punted.  I’ve seen people use it as an example of our defense holding an offense under their season total, but I think our offensive consistency (in terms of sustained drives) played a bigger part.  Easy to look at the 10 points scored, or his premature dive and see it as a bad day for Heinicke - I fully understand people having a negative view of that game.  To me though, the dive was a flukey play, Terry not securing the ball in the end zone was unlike him, and we had the “Blewitt special” blocked kick.  Those things go our way and we’re looking at going toe to toe with the Packers (24-24, who knows what happens next) in a game we leaned heavily on Heinicke as opposed to relying on stout defense or leaning into the ground game (or both, as many - understandably - say Heinicke needs for success).  I’ll also add that his interception came in the final 8 or 9 minutes I believe when we were down 2 tds and he was pressing.

 

Again, easy to look at the game in a negative light.  

For example, TH threw a ball to RSJ in the end zone that would have hit outstretched hands - a really nicely thrown ball - but someone could make the argument that he should have known the defender could have made up ground and gotten a finger on it.  Or that he should have looked elsewhere.

The ball to Terry - easy to say it could have been thrown better and Terry would have had an easy catch, rather than have to try to make a somewhat difficult one.

The dive play - TH makes terrible decisions and isn’t a smart qb.

The Lambeau Leap - he looked like an idiot.

His interception was once again a product of him pressing.

10 points scored is pretty dreadful.

Etc.

 

[mistertim]

Honestly, I think it's theoretically possible to take almost any game and find some way to make a case they want to make for almost any player, mostly because of those "what if's"

 

"If this didn't happen, this didn't happen, this went better, and this changed, then it would have been different"

 

Yes, but those things didn't change.

 

And we're not the only team that has "what if's"...the other team does as well. So if the Packers somehow got rid of most of their negative plays as well then they likely would have put up 40+ points on us.

 

They were the better team. Our offense moved the ball ok but was still pretty stagnant overall and scored 10 points, which is enough to win almost no games...especially vs a potent offense helmed by Rodgers.

 

Our defense wasn't great, but they held a team that was averaging 30+ per game to 24. Our offense scored 10 points against a defense that was allowing an average of 20+ at the time.

[tomwvr]

On 1/7/2022 at 1:32 PM, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I don't think there's any doubt that he's made some games fun for us, even dating back to the Tampa playoff game, that I think most of us expected to be an atrocity.  That throw to Seals Jones was awesome and it's not the only awesome play he made for us.  He absolutely added some excitement to some games and totally outplayed the expectations.  The skepticism never was based on  'can he do X once or twice', it was that he just didn't appear to have the size, accuracy or arm strength to regularly produce those exciting outcomes.

 

What got annoying though was being told by some of his biggest fans that I and others like me were not rooting for him and "want to see him fail", "hate him", "obsessed with arm strength", etc.  As if we were literally rooting against the guys success.  As if my own opinions on this message board, of which I know nobody in real life, mean so much to me that I care more about 'being right' than I would having this god forsaken franchise have finally found a legit QB, at a massive bargain to boot.  It just makes no sense.  There is nothing I would have liked more than to be wrong about TH and have him do things that I didn't believe he was capable of.  And he did to some extent, not just for me but pretty much everyone here minus the few ODU fanatics.  But as time wore on, even in victories, it became abundantly clear that success was not going to be sustainable due to the criticisms we rightfully had in the beginning.

There were several people

here Openly rooting for him to fail.

but many games before the Dallas disaster I had said it’s time for Allen to play.

and I am a huge fan of Taylor . 
 

One thing i will Say is every year there are members who want someone on the team to fail. 

[Zim489]

Im not sure how anyone could give Turner a fair evaluation. His starter lasted what 16 snaps and his back up has arguably the weakest arm in the entire league. The playbook was pruned so far back to allow Taylor to have a fighting chance. Deep outs were gone. Come backs gone. Deeps in gone. Hell we couldnt even throw quick slants over the middle because of Taylors height.

 

I honestly dont think Taylor is even being a capable back up in the league. You have to change the entire offense way too much to accommodate his physical limitations. I think he's best played a spark plug guy that goes in off the street in emergency situation and runs around with his hair on fire for a game. For a guy his size thats not a sustainable way to play. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

26 minutes ago, tomwvr said:

There were several people

here Openly rooting for him to fail.

but many games before the Dallas disaster I had said it’s time for Allen to play.

and I am a huge fan of Taylor . 
 

One thing i will Say is every year there are members who want someone on the team to fail. 

Define ‘several’ and/or provide receipts.

 

As an active participant in these discussions, I never saw anyone root against him.  Not even @Koolblue13 who is perhaps his harshest critic.

 

What I saw was folks drunk on Heineke, confusing the non-believers with people who wanted him to fail.  Still is and always was BS.

 

Like I said, if you can find any post with folks openly rooting for him to fail - please point me to it.  I won’t hold my breath.

Edited January 8, 2022 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[Voice_of_Reason]

9 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Define ‘several’ and/or provide receipts.

 

As an active participant in these discussions, I never saw anyone root against him.  Not even @Koolblue13 who is perhaps his harshest critic.

 

What I saw was folks drunk on Heineke, confusing the non-believers with people who wanted him to fail.  Still is and always was BS.

 

Like I said, if you can find any post with folks openly rooting for him to fail - please point me to it.  I won’t hold my breath.

I think you can lump me in with maybe the "harsher side" of the critics. Because I just don't believe he has the physical tools to be an every-week starting NFL QB. His lack of arm talent shrinks the field, makes it easier for defenses, limits the play-book, and puts his receivers in harms way because of high, floating passes, or underthrown deep balls.  

 

As I've said, I would love to play Power Forward for the Lakers.  But as a slow, 6-foot 190lb guy, I don't think that dream is really ever going to come to reality.

 

Taylor is clearly closer to being an NFL QB (because, well, he is one) than I am to being an NBA player. 

 

However, I have NEVER, EVER rooted for him to fail.  He has miles of heart, plays to win, seems like a great guy, and is easy to root for. I WISH he had the arm to be successful. He just doesn't. He's the type of player you want on  your team.  Just not starting.  (And I would argue, not really even the primary backup.  But I could be convinced otherwise depending on who else is in the QB room.  If it's Russ Wilson, then TH as your backup is fine.  If it's a rookie, I think you want a better Vet as the primary backup.)

[clskinsfan]

Hold on. This thread is still going? Heinike is A/our backup QB. Nothing more. Never will be anything more than that. He is a backup. 

[zCommander]

4 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

Hold on. This thread is still going? Heinike is A/our backup QB. Nothing more. Never will be anything more than that. He is a backup. 

 

Okay coach. 👍