Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,079 Backup

About austinfan

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Team
  • First Name

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't take anything Hurts did last year seriously, I mean compare to Wentz as a rookie in terms of preparation to start. He was just thrown in there, without a real off-season or pre-season to prepare, didn't practice with the 1s, and was running some bizarro scheme with the most deep routes of any NFL team behind a shaky OL. Good that he got a chance to experience NFL speed, but otherwise pretty useless for evaluation purposes. Watching the college breakdown posted, there weren't major flaws, there were a lot of little things that could be improved, his recognition, speed up his decision making, tweak his mechanics - exactly the kind of thing a good coaching staff does. We have the right coaching staff, we've added weapons and rebuilt the OL. It's up to Hurts to seize the opportunity - but until we see him on the field this fall no of us have any idea whether he'll succeed. Hurts does have the "right stuff," work ethic, leadership, competitiveness, but it means nothing if he can't produce on a consistent basis. The Reich scheme is QB friendly, got a good season out of broken down Luck and ready for the glue factory Rivers, even got a respectable season out of JAG Brisset. And Wentz had an all pro caliber season under Reich. So either Hurts will step up or they'll develop another QB. But I'm not trading the house for overrated Watson and his padded stats (same with Wilson, QBs who hold the ball too long actually look better under the conventional rating system). He'll look good in this offense, but so will any capable NFL QB. Because the offense is designed to generate easy throws and protect the QB (both through reliance on the running game and the pass blocking schemes which are integrated with the play design).
  2. In some ways Reagor - Jefferson is similar to Waddle - Smith. The more explosive WR v the more reliable and NFL ready WR.
  3. Probably reflects Gannon's preferences for bigger DEs than Schwartz.
  4. There's an in-between. You have core starters like Cox, who are the position. Then you have "package" players, I mean nickel backs are specialist "tweeners," Stevens will not be a 3 down starter at LB as a tweener, he'll have to show he can handle both run down responsibilities and pass coverage - but he may play in a package where he's a hybrid 3rd safety/LB who moves around and creates issues for a QB trying to read a pass defense. Williams can backup at LDE (reducing Graham's run down snaps) and be a pass rush specialist at DT while he gets stronger and improves his technique. Avery, Johnson and Ostman may be used in blitz packages, but they won't start at SLB unless they can read plays and be at least respectable in coverage against TEs. And so on. Tweener packages give the coaches a chance to put deep backups on the field in certain situations, as well as playing them on special teams. If they learn and grow, they get more responsibilities, if they are exceptional tweeners the defense gets tweaked to give them a bigger "tweener" role. Today's defenses probably run their base defense less than 50%, the rest are packages, some to matchup against offensive formations, some to dictate to the offense (crap, who is the free safety in this formation? Where's my read?).
  5. Go try to find one elite athletic quality with Wayne Gretzky. A bit undersized, good but not great skater, good shot, good hands. Bobby Clarke was probably one of the least impressive looking athletes I can remember, all he did was win. Tom Brady was a skinny kid with an average arm and below average athleticism. Some athletes are just better than the sum of their parts, maybe due to unmeasurables like body control, spatial awareness, instincts, work ethic, competitiveness, etc. Smith seems to be one of those guys, not going to run a 4.3, undersized, but all he does is get open and catch the ball. Big guys can't press him, fast guys can't keep up with him, athletic guys can't out jump him.
  6. Not sure if it's 3-4 or more going back to Jimmy Johnson, who took Emmons from the Steeler 3-4 and turned him into a first rate SLB who could play 3 downs. A lot of 4-3 teams will line the SLB on the LOS at times in what is almost a 5-2, have him jam the TE.
  7. Let's wait and see. Hurts is an elite runner, he doesn't have the breakaway speed of some running QBs, but he's built like a RB with RB open field moves (elusive and powerful). So he doesn't have to be a great pocket QB, if he's merely "good" he'll be a top ten QB. The key with top running QBs is playing QB well enough to make their ability to run an extra weapon, but not one defenses can key on. Reason I hate the RPO is that it encourages young running QBs to focus on the run, when they should be reined in and forced to learn how to play in the pocket, then expand their game. Johnson developed both Dak and Trask, so he knows how to work with different styles of QB, we'll see what he can do with Hurts and Newman. And Sirianni comes from the Reich school of balanced offense, using the run game, using RBs as receivers for easy completions against defenses that drop deep, using the whole field to scheme receivers open at different levels. That's a much better approach than Doug's 2020 offense, based on speed to attack cover 3. It should give Hurts a lot of quick, easy throws.
  8. Top ten is not elite, in fact I'd say guys like Dak, Watson, Wentz (before last season) are pretty fungible. That is, they'll put up good numbers, win with good teams, struggle to carry bad teams. Elite are the top 3-5 who can carry teams, Watson puts up great counting numbers (partially b/c he holds the ball too long instead of throwing it away, which inflates stats but hurts your team), but Dak has been just as good. You don't ransom your future for QBs like Watson, you build around them and hope the team is good enough for them to be the difference, but he isn't prime time Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Peyton, et al. You gamble on "elite", you wait for "good" to fall into your lap.
  9. What is successful? I expect Wentz to be around 10th or so among starting QBs, good but not elite. Basically what he was in 2018-2019.
  10. Watson has great counting stats, but something is missing. 2020: 12th in QBR 2019: 7th in QBR 2018: 15th in QBR I like QBR much better than QB rating, because you can put up nice stats by holding the ball too long and taking needless sacks (i.e., you'll complete more passes for more yards per attempt, b/c sacks aren't included in attempts). Given he has an all pro LT the last two years, and a number of other high draft picks on that OL, the high sack rate is more on him than his OL. Watson isn't an elite QB: Mahomes, ranking 1, 2, 5 Brees, 2, 3, 6 Jackson 22, 1, 7 (not much of a QB, but makes things happen) Brady 6, 17, 9 Wilson 11, 5, 8 Rodgers, 17, 20, 1 Ryan, 9, 14, 16 Ben 4, ---, 22 Allen 25, 25, 3 Dak 18, 4, --- Wentz, 12, 11, 28 Carr 28, 10, 11 Cousins, 15, 13, 18 Stafford 23, 6, 15 Goff 10, 23, 23 Jones ---, 18, 20 Trubisky, 3, 30, 21 Darnold, 29, 26, 33 Dalton 16, 29, 25 Newton 20, ---, 30 Winston 8, 16, --- Flacco, 19, 22, --- Rivers 7, 24, 19
  11. What college QB is a pro style passer? Stanford produced them, ND State (except Lance needed another season of college), who else runs a pro style offense with LOS reads, pro routes, etc. Most college QBs these days run some mix of spread and RPO, whether it's Auburn or Oklahoma. Basically one or two reads and run. QBs are getting drafted based on size, athleticism and arm strength, not their readiness to run a NFL offense. So intangibles are really important, b/c you're going to have to teach a lot of concepts from scratch, and you need a kid who is smart, has great instincts and an off the chart work ethic.
  12. The year before Smith, the Chiefs had Cassell at QB and scored 212 and 211 points. Smith then put up 430 points, in his five years as starter, 6, 16, 9, 13, 6 in points, with Mahomes 1, 5, 6. Smith made the pro bowl 3 of his 5 years at starter. Smith wasn't good enough to get them over the hump, but he was pretty beat up when he got to KC and broken down at 34 when he went to Washington. Still showed what you can do if you have talent and a good scheme around a QB with a limited skill package. He is an example where QBR is more revealing than the conventional QB rating system, 45.0, 51.7, 61.1, 60.8, 65.1 in those 5 KC seasons.
  13. KC made the playoffs 4 of the 5 years Smith started.
  14. If Devonta had the exact same college career but weighed 190 lbs, he'd be considered a hands down blue chip prospect. Yet it's doubtul that at 190 lbs he'd been any better as a player, certainly not more durable, or more YAC. Basically it comes down to whether you trust the film or the measurements. I've given a list of small WRs (180 lbs or less) who thrived in the "headhunter" days, probably 15% or so of the career top 100 yardage guys. So it's not like it can't be done. And it's easier for a small WR to thrive in today's NFL with the rules against targeting and spearing.
  15. Kurt Coleman actually had a pretty good career, ended up starting 83 games, including for the 2015 Panthers who went 15-1 and lost the SB. 3rd on tackles for that team behind Kuechly and Davis.
  • Create New...