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

[RandyHolt]

9 minutes ago, method man said:

Stromberg is not a guard. The guy is a center and deserves a shot at some point this season

 

Don't worry I am sure Travelle Wharton has him ready to go at all positions. /s

 

I wonder how much it hurts a young OL perfecting a single position by having to learn multiple spots that seem to be a big deal for Wharton Ron and especially offensive quality control specialist Luke Del Rio. 

Edited October 24, 2023 by RandyHolt

[Chris 44]

57 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Could be. But the amount of literal whiffs we have aren't on bad protection calls, either. 

This, plus no running game just leads to Howell trying to make plays that may not be there resulting in miscues. Perfect **** storm.

[JSSkinz]

14 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

there zero WRs running short/quick routes

This is what I don't get, where are those short options or are the WR/TEs not getting open. I don't study the game like some do but if anyone is watching the All 22 I would be interested to hear what they are seeing.

[method man]

3 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

Don't worry I am sure Travelle Wharton has him ready to go at all positions. /s

 

I wonder how much it hurts a young OL perfecting a single position by having to learn multiple spots that seem to be a big deal for Wharton Ron and especially offensive quality control specialist Luke Del Rio. 

I don’t worry about this with Stromberg. He can handle the mental load, he is highly intelligent. Rookie centers should be able to play guard too. Look at Jurgens and Dickerson - both guys are guards who were college centers.

 

The issue with Stromberg playing guard is he doesn’t have the physical strength yet to play it at an NFL level

[MrJL]

21 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

Don't worry I am sure Travelle Wharton has him ready to go at all positions. /s

 

I wonder how much it hurts a young OL perfecting a single position by having to learn multiple spots that seem to be a big deal for Wharton Ron and especially offensive quality control specialist Luke Del Rio. 

Considering it been sop for OL for decades and he did spend a little time at guard in college it shouldn't hurt

[philibusters]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

More than 16 of the sacks are on the offensive line. This is silly.

 

I think the reality is that some sacks a bit of this and a bit of that.   I think PFF tries to assign every sack to one thing and thats where maybe their stats don't quite mirror reality.  That said from listening to all the beat reporters after they watch the film, they do tend to revise their assessment to put less blame on the O-Line.   I do think as fans we probably assign all sacks where there was pressure quickly to the O-Line whereas maybe one fourth to one third of those sacks upon further review end of being on a TE who instantly lost a block or a RB held in for protection who failed to pick up a blitz.

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I think the reality is that some sacks a bit of this and a bit of that.   I think PFF tries to assign every sack to one thing and thats where maybe their stats don't quite mirror reality.  That said from listening to all the beat reporters after they watch the film, they do tend to revise their assessment to put less blame on the O-Line.   I do think as fans we probably assign all sacks where there was pressure quickly to the O-Line whereas maybe one fourth to one third of those sacks upon further review end of being on a TE who instantly lost a block or a RB held in for protection who failed to pick up a blitz.

The TE counts as OL when addressing protections. 
 

But it’s fairly obvious a good portion of them are on the OL. They legit whiff and chase in many scenarios. Of the 6 sacks on Sunday, none were on Howell. 
 

they attributed four to the OL, apparently. So you’re telling me in the previous six games the offensive line averaged two sacks allowed per game?

 

Not a chance. PFF is not a good resource for OL grading. 

I read something @Skinsinparadise posted (I think) that PFF had Gates rated at a 29 for pass protection this week? But his overall grade was a 52? 
 

Sorry. I just don’t buy it.

 

I do agree there are multiple factors. Including Howell at times. But the OL is the single biggest one.

 

I’d listen to the argument that Howell could do more to mitigate the OL with pre-snap read and coverage reads. There is some merit there for sure.

 

But the OL is bad and I don’t accept that less than 50% of our sacks are on them. 

[philibusters]

16 minutes ago, KDawg said:

The TE counts as OL when addressing protections. 
 

But it’s fairly obvious a good portion of them are on the OL. They legit whiff and chase in many scenarios. Of the 6 sacks on Sunday, none were on Howell. 
 

they attributed four to the OL, apparently. So you’re telling me in the previous six games the offensive line averaged two sacks allowed per game?

 

Not a chance. PFF is not a good resource for OL grading. 

I read something @Skinsinparadise posted (I think) that PFF had Gates rated at a 29 for pass protection this week? But his overall grade was a 52? 
 

Sorry. I just don’t buy it.

 

I do agree there are multiple factors. Including Howell at times. But the OL is the single biggest one.

 

I’d listen to the argument that Howell could do more to mitigate the OL with pre-snap read and coverage reads. There is some merit there for sure.

 

But the OL is bad and I don’t accept that less than 50% of our sacks are on them. 

 

If say Taylor Heincke was the QB this year how many sacks do you think they would have given up to this point.  Or to use a more extreme sample, if Alex Smith were the QB for this team (assuming he is in say his 2018 form), how many sacks do you think the team would have given up at this point.  Just guessing Heincke maybe 24 (or 16 less than Sam) and Smith maybe 16 or 24 less than Sam Howell.  Its not all on Sam, but I do think if you put in a QB who was good at avoiding sacks, the O-Line would instantly look better.

[GoDeep81]

13 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

If say Taylor Heincke or Alex Smith was the QB this year how many sacks do you think they would have given up to this point.  

I think Smith would be racking up lots of incompletions into the dirt. Heini would look almost exactly like Sam, imo, but get rid of a few more. Probably also have 2x the interceptions. 

[CjSuAvE22]

32 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

If say Taylor Heincke was the QB this year how many sacks do you think they would have given up to this point.  Or to use a more extreme sample, if Alex Smith were the QB for this team (assuming he is in say his 2018 form), how many sacks do you think the team would have given up at this point.  Just guessing Heincke maybe 24 (or 16 less than Sam) and Smith maybe 16 or 24 less than Sam Howell.  Its not all on Sam, but I do think if you put in a QB who was good at avoiding sacks, the O-Line would instantly look better.

Cousins would look better than all of em…

[Skinsinparadise]

40 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

 

Not a chance. PFF is not a good resource for OL grading. 

I read something @Skinsinparadise posted (I think) that PFF had Gates rated at a 29 for pass protection this week? But his overall grade was a 52? 
 

Sorry. I just don’t buy it.

 

I do agree there are multiple factors. Including Howell at times. But the OL is the single biggest one.

 

I’d listen to the argument that Howell could do more to mitigate the OL with pre-snap read and coverage reads. There is some merit there for sure.

 

But the OL is bad and I don’t accept that less than 50% of our sacks are on them. 

 

If I recall it was a 26 for pass protect which is beyond abysmal.  So he had a few good blocks in the run game and then raises his score to a bad but no too bad of a score in the 50s.  They have to fix their aggregate score methods because they don't make sense even with their own metrics.  I've made the same point on the draft thread, I like looking at their sub scores because they somtimes but not always give a window into the players strengths and weaknesses but their over score doesn't move me. 

 

The weird thing is even PFF own anaylsts don't take their their outfits grades that seriously because when I watch their draft shows their favs and players they don't like often don't correspond to their scores.  That's why I like to say I like PFF when I know what i am looking at and can bring my own context to their scores.  But as to looking at their scores blindly they don't move me.

 

I was just listening to Keim on Sheehan and I like to cite him because so many here see him as someone with a cool head who is clincal, not a flame thrower.  He again doesn't think much of this O line and doesn't think the play calling has helped Howell of late.  He also has been hinting that some in that locker room are also unsure about the playcalling on offense.  He said on his podcast that when Terry hints at critiquing playcalling it means something because he by a mile is the biggest leader in that locker room.

[KDawg]

56 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

If say Taylor Heincke was the QB this year how many sacks do you think they would have given up to this point.  Or to use a more extreme sample, if Alex Smith were the QB for this team (assuming he is in say his 2018 form), how many sacks do you think the team would have given up at this point.  Just guessing Heincke maybe 24 (or 16 less than Sam) and Smith maybe 16 or 24 less than Sam Howell.  Its not all on Sam, but I do think if you put in a QB who was good at avoiding sacks, the O-Line would instantly look better.

Let’s say Sam is responsible for 15. That’s 25 sacks given up WITHOUT the QB being responsible. You think Smith, who couldn’t move, and the other guy would be able to go without a single sack credited against them?

 

That doesn’t make sense. 

[Skinsinparadise]

All the Heinicke, Alex Smith comparisons IMO aren't apt.    They often favor the checkdown especially Alex.   Heck Football Outsiders coined the term checkdowns on 3rd and long the "Alex" as a sarcastic tribute. 

 

Beiniemy has Sam going 5 step drops a lot -- that's not about encouraging the check down.  Howell is playing to the scheme

Edited October 24, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[MrJL]

1 hour ago, method man said:

I don’t worry about this with Stromberg. He can handle the mental load, he is highly intelligent. Rookie centers should be able to play guard too. Look at Jurgens and Dickerson - both guys are guards who were college centers.

 

The issue with Stromberg playing guard is he doesn’t have the physical strength yet to play it at an NFL level

I remember  hearing  this but with him seemingly the top backup guard did it turn out to actually be true?

[method man]

26 minutes ago, MrJL said:

I remember  hearing  this but with him seemingly the top backup guard did it turn out to actually be true?

Paul and Larsen are inactive on game days. Larsen because Stromberg has passed him and Paul because he lacks “position flex”

[The Consigliere]

17 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

It really does feel like Ron is trying to hypnotize the media and new ownership by continuing to answer every question with yadda yadda Sam yadda young QB yadda yadda.  They could ask him what color uniform they intend to wear Sunday and he’d respond “the thing about Sam is he’s young and developing and we’re building around that”.

 

It is a sad state of affairs listening to this guy.  There’s not much you can say when it’s your 4th season in the 3-4 range again, having dropped 4 of the last 5, and only won squeakers against other dregs of the league.  But to hear him say he believes in and likes what they are doing offensively, and pretends his team was actually competitive just makes him look senile.
 

I am certain that Harris and Co. see right through it all as they likely have numerous people in the know in their ears.

 

 

Ron himself was a retread, he brought in an incompetent DC, they brought in meh guys to run the front office, and they ignored the cardinal rule of modern football, get your QB or your screwed. Everything else that happened is largely details to me.

 

It's possible he pulls off a miracle and holds on beyond this year, but I seriously doubt it. The schedule is scary, and if it plays out rationally with all teams going full bore at least until our 17th game when Dallas may rest guys pending results and standings, but I still tend to think all of this is immaterial. 

 

New ownership will want their coach, their gm, and possibly their QB unless Howell produces a really good 2nd half of the season. I'm not gonna fret over any of this, as I tend to think the team will finish 5-12 or 6-11, and that body of work for Ron aint going to merit a new, especially w/the team getting tangibly worse, and older, rather than better over the last several years. 

[MrJL]

17 minutes ago, method man said:

Paul and Larsen are inactive on game days. Larsen because Stromberg has passed him and Paul because he lacks “position flex”

Scott's the 10th man not Larsen and Paul is a G/T

[Koolblue13]

After this season, I don't ever want to hear the term "position flex" again when it comes to the offensive line. 

 

You don't pull that **** on the DL. Not for a ****ing starter.

 

Get tackles who are good tackles. Get a center that's a good center. If back ups can have flex, super duper.

[Skinsinparadise]

8 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

After this season, I don't ever want to hear the term "position flex" again when it comes to the offensive line. 

 

You don't pull that **** on the DL. Not for a ****ing starter.

 

Get tackles who are good tackles. Get a center that's a good center. If back ups can have flex, super duper.

 

It's one of Mitch Tischler who does the Finlay podcast and played O line in college likes to say -- Ron seems to care more about position flex than quality.

[MrJL]

10 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

After this season, I don't ever want to hear the term "position flex" again when it comes to the offensive line. 

 

You don't pull that **** on the DL. Not for a ****ing starter.

 

Get tackles who are good tackles. Get a center that's a good center. If back ups can have flex, super duper.

Sorry man but in our best eras even our starters played multiple positions with few exceptions(Bostic, Starke for the early Hogs, Schlereth for the later, Raymer closer to today)

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, MrJL said:

Sorry man but in our best eras even our starters played multiple positions with few exceptions(Bostic, Starke for the early Hogs, Schlereth for the later, Raymer closer to today)

Yes but they were centers, guards and tackles who you could move. Our current position flex means linemen without a real position playing any position.

[Koolblue13]

1 minute ago, MrJL said:

Sorry man but in our best eras even our starters played multiple positions with few exceptions(Bostic, Starke for the early Hogs, Schlereth for the later, Raymer closer to today)

No they didn't. They played their position and were good enough to play other spots if needed or when guys got older or a younger better player replaced them.

[Warhead36]

17 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

After this season, I don't ever want to hear the term "position flex" again when it comes to the offensive line. 

 

You don't pull that **** on the DL. Not for a ****ing starter.

 

Get tackles who are good tackles. Get a center that's a good center. If back ups can have flex, super duper.

Agreed. I'd rather have starters who are really good at one position.

 

Now for guys who are clearly backups, yeah I'd say position flex can matter.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Chris 44]

31 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

It's one of Mitch Tischler who does the Finlay podcast and played O line in college likes to say -- Ron seems to care more about position flex than quality.

Only person I want to see with position flex is...oh, never mind.