Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

Koolblue13

By Koolblue13
in The Stadium

 Share

Recommended Posts

MartinC

MartinC

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

So I didn't listen to the latest Paulsen-Hoffman episode, but Keim had Paulsen on  his podcast a month, maybe a month a half ago and they discussed.   Paulsen said to the extent there is a downside, it changes the reads for the QB.  If a WR on one side then he is on the other, it does change the reads and leverages of the play and maybe you don't want to overwhlem a first year starter.  But at the time I don't think he fully agreed with not using more motion, but Keim explicitly asked him what the downsides are and he said the downsides is it puts more on the QB's plates because he has know his reads if the WR is here and a different set of reads and leverages if the WR is there.

Not sure I buy that. The QB knows where the WR is going to end with the motion. So he knows what side/progression/concept he’s working based on where the motion ends not where it starts. 


The motion helps disguise formation (and from that gives the D less time to process what is possibly coming based on down and distance and tendency) and also gives some man/zone tells based on how the D reacts.

 

It also helps you get a receiver a cleaner release if he’s on the move - harder to jam.

 

Edit - I guess the only downside I can see for a young QB is motion adds more verbiage to the play call - and a WCO if very wordy to start with. But I can’t see that being the reason to limit its use.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
philibusters

philibusters

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, MartinC said:

Not sure I buy that. The QB knows where the WR is going to end with the motion. So he knows what side/progression/concept he’s working based on where the motion ends not where it starts. 


The motion helps disguise formation (and from that gives the D less time to process what is possibly coming based on down and distance and tendency) and also gives some man/zone tells based on how the D reacts.

 

It also helps you get a receiver a cleaner release if he’s on the move - harder to jam.

 

Edit - I guess the only downside I can see for a young QB is motion adds more verbiage to the play call - and a WCO if very wordy to start with. But I can’t see that being the reason to limit its use.

 

I don't know how it works.  Are motions pre-determined so you always run motions on the same play or they added to existing plays as the OC and QB determine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MartinC

MartinC

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I don't know how it works.  Are motions pre-determined so you always run motions on the same play or they added to existing plays as the OC and QB determine?

They can be added to any play to disguise formation etc. But they are always pre determined in that weeks game plan. But mainly it’s part of play design.
 

The QBs calling it in the huddle as called by the OC from that weeks play sheet - the QB is not adding motions to plays on the fly. The language to call them is part of the teams playbook. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, MartinC said:

Not sure I buy that. The QB knows where the WR is going to end with the motion. So he knows what side/progression/concept he’s working based on where the motion ends not where it starts. 


The motion helps disguise formation (and from that gives the D less time to process what is possibly coming based on down and distance and tendency) and also gives some man/zone tells based on how the D reacts.

 

It also helps you get a receiver a cleaner release if he’s on the move - harder to jam.

 

Edit - I guess the only downside I can see for a young QB is motion adds more verbiage to the play call - and a WCO if very wordy to start with. But I can’t see that being the reason to limit its use.

You limit the use of motion when you’re afraid the receivers don’t know it/aren’t good at it or it’s just not a part of what you want to do. Paulsen says a lot of strange things.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MartinC

MartinC

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, KDawg said:

You limit the use of motion when you’re afraid the receivers don’t know it/aren’t good at it or it’s just not a part of what you want to do. Paulsen says a lot of strange things.

 

I know Peyton Manning didn't like to use motion. He like to get to the line get set and use that time to look over how the defense set up - he wanted then the time to check to something based on that alignment or stay with what was called. He felt motion gave him less time to do that because he had to wait for the defense to adjust to the motion. But then the Colts rarely even huddled - everything was called at the line.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stone Cold

Stone Cold

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

I know Peyton Manning didn't like to use motion. He like to get to the line get set and use that time to look over how the defense set up - he wanted then the time to check to something based on that alignment or stay with what was called. He felt motion gave him less time to do that because he had to wait for the defense to adjust to the motion. But then the Colts rarely even huddled - everything was called at the line.

A couple things about this:

1.  Peyton, Edge, Harrison, Wayne…that’s 3 HOFers and 1 possible.  We don’t have a pro bowler.  😕
2.  this is not the 90s.  It’s a copy cat league and RPO offenses utilizing motion can mask a lot of weaknesses and capitalize easier on mismatches when used appropriately.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MartinC

MartinC

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Stone Cold said:

A couple things about this:

1.  Peyton, Edge, Harrison, Wayne…that’s 3 HOFers and 1 possible.  We don’t have a pro bowler.  😕
2.  this is not the 90s.  It’s a copy cat league and RPO offenses utilizing motion can mask a lot of weaknesses and capitalize easier on mismatches when used appropriately.  


I wasn’t suggesting not using motion was a blueprint we’d want to follow! Peyton was something of an outlier in his preference - not many QBs then, now or ever did as much as at the line (or sometimes pretended to …) as Peyton.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stone Cold

Stone Cold

Posted
Posted
Just now, MartinC said:


I wasn’t suggesting not using motion was a blueprint we’d want to follow! Peyton was something of an outlier in his preference - not many QBs then, now or ever did as much as at the line (or sometimes pretended to …) as Peyton.

Gotcha.  Peyton was a rare breed of qb…one entirely capable of calling a game himself with no oc help.  Not too many of those cerebral types with the talent to match.  He was definitely an example of top tier pocket qbing 

  • Like 2
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dunfer

dunfer

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Yeah its obvious our offensive scheme is trash. We don't maximize our best players or strategize/gameplan to get them the ball in optimal situations.

 

Can't believe EB is actually WORSE than Scott Turner. How the heck do we downgrade from that garbage...

We think Andy is really cool and we want him to be our friend and his ideas for helping us out sound awesome when he says it

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
zCommander

zCommander

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

this is another topic from Paulsen-Hoffman the lack of motion.  they've talked about how motion for various reasons made some of their opponents harder to defend

 

 

 

 

So sad to see that the top 3 are ex-Redskins asst. coaches.. :( 

 

Edited by zCommander
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted (edited)

The O line isn't that bad and PFF has their back on this crowd.... 

 

Now the 26th ranked unit from the outfit that supposedly loves it the most. 

 

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-week-14-2023

 

26. WASHINGTON COMMANDERS (DOWN 2)

Projected starters entering bye:

LT Charles Leno Jr.
LG Chris Paul
C Tyler Larsen
RG Sam Cosmi
RT Andrew Wylie

  • Giving up 14 total pressures — including three sacks — on 29 dropbacks, the Washington offensive line ranked just 24th out of 26 teams in pass-blocking efficiency in Week 13.
  • Chris Paul’s 29.6 pass-blocking grade this season ranks just 72nd out of 76 guards in the NFL.
Best player: Sam Cosmi
  • Cosmi earned an 88.4 pass-blocking grade against the Dolphins, which led all offensive linemen — regardless of position — in Week 13.
Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skinny21

skinny21

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, MartinC said:


Hope. Which is seldom a sound strategy. 

No doubt.  Feel like we also heard last year that the DT’s thought he was the toughest IOL to beat, or something to that effect.  In Training camp I think?  I could be misremembering, but that was my where my sliver of hope stemmed from.  Well, that and him not being Norwell.  Or Charles.  Alas…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YouLikeThat

YouLikeThat

Posted
Posted

The way i look at this is answering a question of "Do I (you) think Sam Howell is better than or will be better than Baker Mayfield. My answer is no. You dont have a top 3-5 pick that often even if you really suck like we did the last 4 years. You have to swing for the QB if you dont have one that is automatically a potential elite qb. I bring up Mayfield bc to me the look and play similar AND Tampa will be in the market to draft a QB in the teens. If we let them land a potential MVP qb and we stuck with a Mayfield type then chalk that up as another team that we fall behind.

  • Like 1
  • Thumb down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted

Again, I think most agree that if there is an eliteQB prospect that the team feels is a can’t miss guy, you take him.

 

The debate here isn’t really centered on that.

 

It’s 1) is there a guy that IS an elite prospect? The media sure thinks so. I think maybe Jayden Daniels. I’m not sold on Caleb Williams or Drake Maye.

 

2) What is the best usage of assets for this team’s growth?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWJ

RWJ

Posted
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Again, I think most agree that if there is an eliteQB prospect that the team feels is a can’t miss guy, you take him.

 

The debate here isn’t really centered on that.

 

It’s 1) is there a guy that IS an elite prospect? The media sure thinks so. I think maybe Jayden Daniels. I’m not sold on Caleb Williams or Drake Maye.

 

2) What is the best usage of assets for this team’s growth?

 

 

It’s 1) is there a guy that IS an elite prospect? The media sure thinks so. I think maybe Jayden Daniels. I’m not sold on Caleb Williams or Drake Maye. 

Answer:  Totally agree.  Jayden Daniels if they draft is the best of the lot.

 

 

2) What is the best usage of assets for this team’s growth?

 

Answer:  Draft Jayden Daniels, if you can.  We still have Howell on the roster for 2024 & 2025 as backup or a trading chip, if Jayden works out.  Then use 2 or 3 of your next 4 picks on OL, one of those picks on an EDGE or LB.  FA will allow you to fill a couple of holes too. 

 

 

Edited by RWJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bird_1972

bird_1972

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Again, I think most agree that if there is an eliteQB prospect that the team feels is a can’t miss guy, you take him.

 

The debate here isn’t really centered on that.

 

It’s 1) is there a guy that IS an elite prospect? The media sure thinks so. I think maybe Jayden Daniels. I’m not sold on Caleb Williams or Drake Maye.

 

2) What is the best usage of assets for this team’s growth?

 

 

 

Guys like Jayden Daniels that come out of nowhere and shoot up draft boards based on one season of results give me pause.

 

Didn't that happen with another LSU QB a few years ago (Jamarcus Russell)?

 

No thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bird_1972

bird_1972

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, CommanderDOOM said:


Burrow??

 

Exception rather than the rule. 

 

Others who shot up out of nowhere, got taken early and then flamed out include Zack Wilson, Trey Lance off the top of my head. There are countless others - I'll do more research when I have more time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DiscoBob

DiscoBob

Posted
Posted (edited)

I truly have no idea how they will approach Howell for next year if we have a high pick.  My question is whether or not y'all think we could trade Howell for something decent in the off-season.  What do you think we could get?

 

Please don't respond with "why would you be so stupid".... I'm not advocating that we trade him, just curious what his value would be...

 

 

Edited by DiscoBob
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...