3 minutes ago, WentzFan11 said:

Who is responsible for QBs in KC? 

Look, Andy isn't some freaking QB whisperer.The kid went in the first 20 picks, so he had massive talent coming into the pros. Truth is nobody knows how players will turnout until they are there or so many top picks wouldn't be blown. It's a roll of the dice not the coach turning them into something amazing. Sure, it plays a part, but it's on the player.

2 hours ago, downundermike said:

So we can finally determine after week 11 of this season whether or not Mahomes is a franchise QB.

I know it’s early but I got a good feeling he’s gonna be a franchise QB….Don’t quote me on that though

Just now, Diehardfan said:

Look, Andy isn't some freaking QB whisperer.The kid went in the first 20 picks, so he had massive talent coming into the pros. Truth is nobody knows how players will turnout until they are there or so many top picks wouldn't be blown. It's a roll of the dice not the coach turning them into something amazing.

Sure he is.....

 

 

 

 

 

...if you ignore all of the signs showing why he isnt.

What is a QB whisperer anyway?  Does he simply whisper when he's teaching QBs?

1 hour ago, austinfan said:

My point is if you're gonna judge a QB on statistics, the most important number is the points scored by the team, not the raw stats of the QB.

Of course statistics have to be taken in context, how good the team, what the situation is, etc.

But to focus on a QB's numbers and ignore whether he lead the offense and scored points is silly. You can pick up a lot of cheap yards against prevent defenses these days between the 20s yet not put points on the board. Conversely, a smart veteran QB will sell pass on draws, throw the ball away, and do other little things that don't pad the stats but lead to TDs.

So I'll take an efficient caretaker who commands a balanced offense that generate points over a fireballer who throws beautiful passes and racks up yards but takes key sacks.

I am not arguing that.  So, now I see why you said what you said.  It is a silly question to ask, what stats do you want to see from Hurts to claim it is a successful year from him.  The answer is how he arrives at those numbers... 

3 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

You actually think I know who the f that is?

He was a guest artist on a Katy Perry song.  I know you listed to Katy Perry, and by listen, I mean turn the sound off and stare at her rack.

Yes, Andy Reid is a bumbling walrus who hasn't been the best offensive coach the last 20 years. He simply lucked into McNabb and Mahomes being good QBs already, he had nothing to do with their success in the NFL. Some of you are like jilted ex-lovers. 

Andy has a lot of faults as a coach (maybe the worst gameday coach out there). But he clearly knows how to build an offense for QBs to succeed. 

47 minutes ago, justrelax said:

I was joking. What he has doesn't qualify as footwork. Here are two consecutive plays to make the point. His set at the snap is the same for both so I only include it once. 

In the first, he takes one step and turns. You don't turn, you slide, but no. You can see his right foot isn't planted and he's given up his outside shoulder. That's pretty bad but the second play is worse. He's turned again but this time his back is to the DE. A spin move by the OT!

Agreed.   I believe the term used by Mayock would fit pretty well for Pryor... heavy-legged waist-bender.  He just can't seem to pick up and move his feet.  And so he leans with his upper body and leaves his feet behind and ends up off-balance routinely.

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

Agreed.   I believe the term used by Mayock would fit pretty well for Pryor... heavy-legged waist-bender.  He just can't seem to pick up and move his feet.  And so he leans with his upper body and leaves his feet behind and ends up off-balance routinely.

I guess the question I have is....can't they find somebody...else? I don't necessarily want to say better, but maybe take a stab at an UDFA who maybe has an injury history but can actually move. We know what Pyror is, and it isn't good. 

I'm not following along with the argument much but I do think their is a difference between developing a QB and developing an offense to get the most out of a certain QB. 

18 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Only in your mind.

I never argued it ws the only stat that mattered, rather, if you're gonna point to one stat, it's the most important stat. And far more important than a QBs' individual stats.

Oh, you didn't? My mistake. I'm so embarrassed, because I went back a few pages to look and everything.

3 hours ago, austinfan said:

Which is why I've learned to ignore QB stats.

Huh, that's....funny. Maybe you can clarify. You never said it was the only stat that mattered, yet openly said you ignored all other QB stats in favor of it. It's right there for you.

So, which is it?

25 minutes ago, downundermike said:

So tell me about the progression of Kafka, Feely, Kolb.

Later round draft choices meant to be back ups, except maybe Kolb.  Let’s look at that.  
Kafka, fourth round choice, 5 years in the league, albeit mostly on PS.  Pretty average for a third day QB pick.  Think they liked his smarts.  QB coach for KC and passing game coordinator.  Sounds like his progression turned out to be coaching.  Reid had him as a QB for two years.  Suspect it was his understanding of the game that attracted them to him. 
Feeley, a fifth round choice, 10 years in the league as a backup.  Good longevity as a back up QB for a third day choice.  Enjoyed some success.  Reid had him four of the ten years.  But traded him for a second from Miami the first stint of two years.  Reid did have a slinger on his hands.  A bit too Favre like though in protection of the ball.  Pretty decent value for a fifth rounder and you don’t stick as a backup QB for ten years without progressing. 
Just how much concentration do you think is given to a backup.
Kolb, second round choice out of UH.  Problem with Kolb was he stared down WRs.  Reid was curing him of that when he got concussed and never was the same.  Parlayed into a second round choice and a starting CB.  Reid had him four years but after tha concussion he was Carred. Gun shy.  Retired with post concussion syndrome after his second concussion. Think he was a transitional QB and once Vick got acclimated, the team went with him.  For the record, UH fan that I am, I didn’t like the pick.  Hardest thing to break as a QB habit, IMHO, is the staring down of WRs.  Could get away with that against Conference USA DBs but not against NFL DBs. Reid was making progress with that but the concussion destroyed Cobb.  

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I'm not following along with the argument much but I do think their is a difference between developing a QB and developing an offense to get the most out of a certain QB. 

This.  He put the best scheme around McNabb to get the most out of who he was, he did not turn him into something at the end that he was not in the beginning.

2000, year 2, 58%, 21 TD's, 13 picks

2003, year 5, 57.5%, 16 TD's, 11 picks

2009, year 11, 60.3%, 22 TD's, 10 picks

And before you guys bring up 2004, remember Jeff Garcia completed 63 percent of his passes and had 63 TD's vs 22 picks with TO.

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I'm not following along with the argument much but I do think their is a difference between developing a QB and developing an offense to get the most out of a certain QB. 

Isn't the goal to put your players in a position to succeed? Play to their strengths? You know, scheme it up so that WRs can be open for the QB to make easier throws and reads? It all goes hand in hand with developing. 

McNabb's rookie year had a TD to pass attempt ratio of 3.7%. INT to attempt ratio of 3.2%.

His career average with the Eagles ended with 4.4% and 2.1%, respectively. But naw, his completion percentage didn't change so he didn't develop. 

1 minute ago, TorontoEagle said:

Isn't the goal to put your players in a position to succeed? Play to their strengths? You know, scheme it up so that WRs can be open for the QB to make easier throws and reads? It all goes hand in hand with developing. 

McNabb's rookie year had a TD to pass attempt ratio of 3.7%. INT to attempt ratio of 3.2%.

His career average with the Eagles ended with 4.4% and 2.1%, respectively. But naw, his completion percentage didn't change so he didn't develop. 

I don't think anyone is suggesting Andy was a terrible coach or completely inept at doing his job. 

More so suggesting that his prowess as a QB whisper is exaggerated.

1 minute ago, Swoop said:

I don't think anyone is suggesting Andy was a terrible coach or completely inept at doing his job. 

More so suggesting that his prowess as a QB whisper is exaggerated.

If you were a young QB coming into the league, and had your choice on which coach to go to.....I'd bet a lot of money nearly all would choose Andy Reid. That says a lot more than some angry Eagles nerds upset he couldn't win the Super Bowl here. 

57 minutes ago, austinfan said:

My point is if you're gonna judge a QB on statistics, the most important number is the points scored by the team, not the raw stats of the QB.

Of course statistics have to be taken in context, how good the team, what the situation is, etc.

But to focus on a QB's numbers and ignore whether he lead the offense and scored points is silly. You can pick up a lot of cheap yards against prevent defenses these days between the 20s yet not put points on the board. Conversely, a smart veteran QB will sell pass on draws, throw the ball away, and do other little things that don't pad the stats but lead to TDs.

So I'll take an efficient caretaker who commands a balanced offense that generate points over a fireballer who throws beautiful passes and racks up yards but takes key sacks.

I don't know how true that is because you could have an average QB that plays on a running team that scores a lot of points.  For example, Lamar Jackson passed for just over 2700 yards on a top five scoring offense last season.  I do think you are right that if you have a QB that looks good from a stats standpoint it could be misleading if the team cannot score.  I will say, however, the Chargers were 19th in scoring last year.  No one would say Hebert wasn't very good as a rookie QB.  

43 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Mahomes, really, a once in a generation QB talent.  He could do what he is doing under any coach, he is a unicorn.

Why was Mahommes the third QB taken and last until the tenth pick if he was clearly a generational pick?  He was a bit of a loose cannon in college.  Reid and Kafka slowed him down on that and helped him achieve some discipline while tailoring an offense to meet his skill set.  

And having a TE receiver of Kelce’s ability really helps.  You saw what happened when Tampa’s LBs covered Kelce enough for their defensive ends to take advantage of the loss of the starting OTs and pressure Mahommes. 

4 minutes ago, Swoop said:

I don't think anyone is suggesting Andy was a terrible coach or completely inept at doing his job. 

More so suggesting that his prowess as a QB whisper is exaggerated.

Also, the poster was arguing McNabb didn't progress in the NFL. Those numbers clearly show that's not true. 

1 minute ago, TorontoEagle said:

Isn't the goal to put your players in a position to succeed? Play to their strengths? You know, scheme it up so that WRs can be open for the QB to make easier throws and reads? It all goes hand in hand with developing. 

McNabb's rookie year had a TD to pass attempt ratio of 3.7%. INT to attempt ratio of 3.2%.

His career average with the Eagles ended with 4.4% and 2.1%, respectively. But naw, his completion percentage didn't change so he didn't develop. 

Eh. to an extent. But to me, it's still two completely different things.

I see Jeff Garcia's name brought up and AR in no way "developed" a 36 year old journeymen QB. He helped him by calling plays to his strengths, scheming up play calls, etc. He didn't overhaul his throwing motion, mechanics and footwork. 

 I have to give Andy credit for mcnabb and Mahomes. Mcnabb was definitely better from the time he was a rookie until the end of his time in Philly. I think the injuries, lesser WRs at the start of his career and just some of Andy’s game plans effected him. He also had his flaws and warts but considering Tim couch, akili smith sandwiched mcnabb and were complete busts, mcnabb easily could have went that way but reid did a good job developing him. He might not have been a consistent passer like brady and Manning but he was definitely one of the better QBs for a nice stretch of time. 

as for mahomes, I remember the day he was drafted and saying he’s going to be the second quarterback taken in the draft. And people thought that was crazy at the time because they didn’t think he would go before Deshaun Watson or Mitchell Trubisky. There were people on here that thought reid made a mistake by not taking watson and choosing mahomes. I like both of them but I still thought Andy was going to take Deshaun Watson and when he took mahomes it was kind of a shock to me. And at that point in time people didn’t know Patrick Mahomes was going to be nearly as good. He had things you really loved about him such as arm strength and athleticism but there were also a bunch of question marks coming out of Texas tech. I think the smartest thing Andy Reid did was make him sit practically the entire first year and learn under Alex Smith and learning the position with Kafka. I think leaning on your Alex Smith and Kafka and having that entire year to adjust helped accelerate him so that he was truly ready when he stepped in. Definitely is a unicorn but give Andy Reid credit for making the decision to take him over Deshaun Watson and then getting him to be where he is now. You can’t just take it away because he’s a great player. he still had to learn at some point how to be an NFL quarterback and work on his flaws he had at Texas tech 

4 hours ago, austinfan said:

The two years after the SB, with Wentz at QB, Eagles scored 23 and 24 ppg. Last year down to 21 ppg, but that was a mess.

So if under Hurts, they match or exceed those numbers, he's doing fine - because that's the only stat that really matters for a QB.

 

39 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Only in your mind.

I never argued it ws the only stat that mattered, rather, if you're gonna point to one stat, it's the most important stat. And far more important than a QBs' individual stats.

Well, that may not have been your meaning, but it is pretty close to a word for word statement.   Unfortunately, that is now taking on a life of its own.  

19 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I guess the question I have is....can't they find somebody...else? I don't necessarily want to say better, but maybe take a stab at an UDFA who maybe has an injury history but can actually move. We know what Pyror is, and it isn't good. 

I think they have. Driscoll.     They just need to get Driscoll some work at G. 

6 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Why was Mahommes the third QB taken and last until the tenth pick if he was clearly a generational pick?  He was a bit of a loose cannon in college.  Reid and Kafka slowed him down on that and helped him achieve some discipline while tailoring an offense to meet his skill set.  

And having a TE receiver of Kelce’s ability really helps.  You saw what happened when Tampa’s LBs covered Kelce enough for their defensive ends to take advantage of the loss of the starting OTs and pressure Mahommes. 

Was actually the second QB taken. Most thought when the chiefs traded up it was gonna be deshaun watson and reid went mahomes. Which is a feather in his cap because mahomes has been a superstar even though watson has been really good. 

that said agreed with the rest of what you said. 

22 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I guess the question I have is....can't they find somebody...else? I don't necessarily want to say better, but maybe take a stab at an UDFA who maybe has an injury history but can actually move. We know what Pyror is, and it isn't good. 

They are trying... Driscoll, Toth, LaRaven Clark, and now the UDFA Awosika.  

Just for giggles... this is what the pe.com website has for the depth chart.