The official Hurts/Minshew/Stinnett/Strong/EJ Perry containment thread

[eglz1]

I think the concern with Strong is whether his knee condition is degenerative and will it progress or will the surgery he had stop or dramatically slow the progress of the disease. I'm pulling for Strong because I like quarterbacks who are - you know - good passers. Plus I think he was calling some of his own plays at Nevada. How many college quarterbacks are any good at that?

[ndelaware]

On 7/20/2022 at 8:38 PM, CouchKing said:

For all you Carson Strong haters.

Joe Willie Namath injured his knee in the 4th game of his senior year at Alabama.

Limped through the Orange Bowl and to a National Title.

Drafted 12th overall by St Louis of the NFL. And 1st overall by the NY Jets of the AFL.

Started his career in 1965 with Jets.

Had knee surgery in 1966.

Played 13 years.

Had 4 knee surgeries throughout his career.

Won SuperBowl III.

So, don't write off Carson Strong just yet.

Namath's career - 50.1 % completions, 173 TDs, 220 INTs

[Shalodeep]

7 hours ago, ndelaware said:

Namath's career - 50.1 % completions, 173 TDs, 220 INTs

Guessing you don't understand football back then

[brkmsn]

Yeah ... but where's the outrage? We can't even compare a dual-threat NFL QB (Hurts) to a more modern, but also dual-threat NFL QB that played for the same team (McNabb) in this millennium. But now we're comparing an undrafted rookie that hasn't even had a training camp or played a preseason game to an old school HOFer that wore pantyhose, fur coats,  and had an acting career playing a woman. 

[ManchesterEagle]

On 7/21/2022 at 1:38 AM, CouchKing said:

For all you Carson Strong haters.

Joe Willie Namath injured his knee in the 4th game of his senior year at Alabama.

Limped through the Orange Bowl and to a National Title.

Drafted 12th overall by St Louis of the NFL. And 1st overall by the NY Jets of the AFL.

Started his career in 1965 with Jets.

Had knee surgery in 1966.

Played 13 years.

Had 4 knee surgeries throughout his career.

Won SuperBowl III.

So, don't write off Carson Strong just yet.

I’m not sure there are any Carson Strong haters. I’m rooting for him, but there are clearly some major red flags regarding his health and/or skills, otherwise he would not have gone undrafted.

[Shalodeep]

49 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Yeah ... but where's the outrage? We can't even compare a dual-threat NFL QB (Hurts) to a more modern, but also dual-threat NFL QB that played for the same team (McNabb) in this millennium. But now we're comparing an undrafted rookie that hasn't even had a training camp or played a preseason game to an old school HOFer that wore pantyhose, fur coats,  and had an acting career playing a woman. 

Carson definitely isn't Namath. He hasn't made a team yet, been a starter, and definitely done nothing to be worthy of a hall of famer.  The comparison is definitely silly. A little more silly than comparing McNabb and Hurts because it shows a lack of understanding between generations of football. 2000 football and 2020 football isn't the same thing. I know it feels like since you've been watching and alive the whole time it has to be, but it's not. Rule changes lean to much easier passing. Now 8qb a year put up MVP numbers from a few decades ago

Example. 2004 there was 1 QB who passed for 40 TDS and 4QBs who threw for 30+

2021 2qb threw 40tds and 9qbs 30+

Five more a year just 17 years apart. Completion percentages are completely out of wack as well

Cut off to 65% in 04 was the 19th QB, it cut off at the 8th. That's 11 more QBs who break 65% completion in 17 years.

8qbs threw 15+ints in 04, 2qbs in 2021

[CouchKing]

Namath and Strong both have knee issues. End of comparison.

My point was that Namath had a knee issue and a long career.

[Shalodeep]

13 minutes ago, CouchKing said:

Namath and Strong both have knee issues. End of comparison.

My point was that Namath had a knee issue and a long career.

He knows what you meant. This is how he argues. Finds one thing to fixate on and ignores everything else. It's why for the most part I stopped dealing with him. 

[brkmsn]

9 hours ago, Shalodeep said:

He knows what you meant. This is how he argues. Finds one thing to fixate on and ignores everything else. It's why for the most part I stopped dealing with him. 

Actually, I was being facetious in that reply. I thought it was rather obvious by my description of Namath. 

 

10 hours ago, Shalodeep said:

Carson definitely isn't Namath. He hasn't made a team yet, been a starter, and definitely done nothing to be worthy of a hall of famer.  The comparison is definitely silly. A little more silly than comparing McNabb and Hurts because it shows a lack of understanding between generations of football. 2000 football and 2020 football isn't the same thing. I know it feels like since you've been watching and alive the whole time it has to be, but it's not. Rule changes lean to much easier passing. Now 8qb a year put up MVP numbers from a few decades ago

Example. 2004 there was 1 QB who passed for 40 TDS and 4QBs who threw for 30+

2021 2qb threw 40tds and 9qbs 30+

Five more a year just 17 years apart. Completion percentages are completely out of wack as well

Cut off to 65% in 04 was the 19th QB, it cut off at the 8th. That's 11 more QBs who break 65% completion in 17 years.

8qbs threw 15+ints in 04, 2qbs in 2021

Here's a very good piece posted in December last season: https://www.the33rdteam.com/how-the-short-passing-game-has-changed-the-nfl. You can read it yourself because I don't want to be accused of cherry picking.  Ron Jaworski and Rich Gannon talk about how the biggest change to the passing game and stats in their opinions has been the increased reliance on screen passes. When Andy Reid was coaching the Eagles, he called it an extension of the run game (along with shovel passes). They treat these plays like they are runs, but obviously statistically they are passes. So QBs' completion percentages, yards, and other stats reflect the philosophical change. 

How does this relate to comparing Hurts to McNabb, two players whose careers began about 20 years apart? Well, McNabb played for the first coach to really champion the idea that these short passes were an extension of the run game. Over McNabb's career, RBs were his leading position group catching passes. When McNabb was in his 2nd season, here's what Jeff Fisher said comparing McNabb to Cunningham (two QBs from different eras):

"I think he’s probably a little ahead of where Randall was at this point in his career, because of the plays he’s making, the variety of plays he’s making,” Fisher said. "He’s probably a little more accurate and productive as a passer, maybe, than Randall was very early.”

Anyway, I believe you have to take into account the similarities between McNabb and Hurts and what they did and were asked to do early in their careers. The differences between the offenses these two QBs ran in their second year is bigger than the changes to the NFL passing game over the past two decades. McNabb was babied by Reid in Reid's WCO and was tasked with dinking and dunking a majority of the time while he learned the complexities of the WCO. Hurts  saw an offense that was redesigned around what he was comfortable doing. McNabb hated being labeled as a "Running QB." Hurts appears to have no problem with the perception. Regardless, both QBs used their legs often on pass plays when they didn't like what they saw. When it came to passing, McNabb's offense was more cautious and his completion percentage should have been higher and may have very well been if he had Smith and Watkins that year. For Hurts, those two were bright spots and and better than any WR duo McNabb had early in his career. 

There is a lot to talk about and, IMO, the comparisons are valid --- especially when you are talking about their growth and/or maturity as passers. It's strange to me that people think it's so taboo. 

[eglz1]

There's one more similarity between McNabb's era and Hurts' era. The NFC was generally regarded as the weaker conference. Yes there are some good NFC teams but the conferences as a whole I think the AFC is regarded as stronger right now.

[Shalodeep]

25 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Actually, I was being facetious in that reply. I thought it was rather obvious by my description of Namath. 

 

Here's a very good piece posted in December last season: https://www.the33rdteam.com/how-the-short-passing-game-has-changed-the-nfl. You can read it yourself because I don't want to be accused of cherry picking.  Ron Jaworski and Rich Gannon talk about how the biggest change to the passing game and stats in their opinions has been the increased reliance on screen passes. When Andy Reid was coaching the Eagles, he called it an extension of the run game (along with shovel passes). They treat these plays like they are runs, but obviously statistically they are passes. So QBs' completion percentages, yards, and other stats reflect the philosophical change. 

How does this relate to comparing Hurts to McNabb, two players whose careers began about 20 years apart? Well, McNabb played for the first coach to really champion the idea that these short passes were an extension of the run game. Over McNabb's career, RBs were his leading position group catching passes. When McNabb was in his 2nd season, here's what Jeff Fisher said comparing McNabb to Cunningham (two QBs from different eras):

"I think he’s probably a little ahead of where Randall was at this point in his career, because of the plays he’s making, the variety of plays he’s making,” Fisher said. "He’s probably a little more accurate and productive as a passer, maybe, than Randall was very early.”

Anyway, I believe you have to take into account the similarities between McNabb and Hurts and what they did and were asked to do early in their careers. The differences between the offenses these two QBs ran in their second year is bigger than the changes to the NFL passing game over the past two decades. McNabb was babied by Reid in Reid's WCO and was tasked with dinking and dunking a majority of the time while he learned the complexities of the WCO. Hurts  saw an offense that was redesigned around what he was comfortable doing. McNabb hated being labeled as a "Running QB." Hurts appears to have no problem with the perception. Regardless, both QBs used their legs often on pass plays when they didn't like what they saw. When it came to passing, McNabb's offense was more cautious and his completion percentage should have been higher and may have very well been if he had Smith and Watkins that year. For Hurts, those two were bright spots and and better than any WR duo McNabb had early in his career. 

There is a lot to talk about and, IMO, the comparisons are valid --- especially when you are talking about their growth and/or maturity as passers. It's strange to me that people think it's so taboo. 

Actually a decent answer overall. The problem for me is ignoring (them discussing it) is that the short passing game has flourished under the rules being in favor of the offense. You can bump the guy the first five yards, but a lot of corners don't use that in their tool box because you have to know where the five yards is at all times and that level of distraction can get you burned in a heartbeat. So the corners are playing back allowing the offense to attack instead of being attacked over and over again.  McNabb after a few years ran closer to an air coryell offense than the traditional west coast offense to take advantage of the speed we always seem to get (pinkston, Curtis, stallworth, Jackson). My issue with the comparison up to this point is 2 things. 1) the era numbers prove it's easier now than ever 2) mcnabbs physical traits were far superior. McNabb also won so so so many games to start his career. I won't lie there is some bias to McNabb. He's super5 and always will be. Hurts has a mountain to climb with less tools. 

 

[brkmsn]

1 minute ago, Shalodeep said:

Actually a decent answer overall. The problem for me is ignoring (them discussing it) is that the short passing game has flourished under the rules being in favor of the offense. You can bump the guy the first five yards, but a lot of corners don't use that in their tool box because you have to know where the five yards is at all times and that level of distraction can get you burned in a heartbeat. So the corners are playing back allowing the offense to attack instead of being attacked over and over again.  McNabb after a few years ran closer to an air coryell offense than the traditional west coast offense to take advantage of the speed we always seem to get (pinkston, Curtis, stallworth, Jackson). My issue with the comparison up to this point is 2 things. 1) the era numbers prove it's easier now than ever 2) mcnabbs physical traits were far superior. McNabb also won so so so many games to start his career. I won't lie there is some bias to McNabb. He's super5 and always will be. Hurts has a mountain to climb with less tools. 

 

Well another issue is that defensively, teams are prioritizing coverage skills over tackling / physicality in CBs. That's why they are playing farther back. They also aren't rushing in to make a hit when they read the play. I think some DCs are noticing the problem and looking for bigger, more physical coverage guys. How valuable would a guy like Sheldon Brown be today? He wasn't a shutdown CB, but he could cover and never backed away from contact. 

McNabb changed a lot once Reid let him open things up. I always felt McNabb's Achilles was repeated (pass) pressure. The one thing he never really overcame was that once he started feeling the pass rush, his mechanics broke down, his foot work was off and we started seeing the worm-burners. Still, Hurts could learn things from watching McNabb film. McNabb was pretty good at progressions and after his first couple seasons, didn't bail on the pass and take off running too early all that much. He extended plays and suckered defenders into committing to him while he found an open guy. He also spread the ball around very well to the different targets. Based on Hurts' rookie season, I thought he would spread the ball around more, but that was in Doug's offense. He needs to take these steps this year in Sirianni's offense and get everybody involved so defenses will be on their heels. Hurts has the WRs and a great TE. That's an advantage he has over McNabb. McNabb had some great pass-catching HBs. If Sanders can become the receiver he looked like he would become as a rookie or if Gainwell becomes that guy, Hurts will have everything he needs to be successful. 

The other thing with McNabb that kind of gets overlooked because of the era he played is that he appears to have had a textbook anxiety problem. Back then, fans were less aware of anxiety issues and less forgiving. They ridiculed him for "puking" here and there. He tried to pretend things "never happened," but it was happening. Too bad the stigma of that time probably dissuaded him from getting help. He always played through it, but it had to affect his play somewhat. 

[eagle45]

On 7/22/2022 at 7:52 AM, brkmsn said:

Yeah ... but where's the outrage? We can't even compare a dual-threat NFL QB (Hurts) to a more modern, but also dual-threat NFL QB that played for the same team (McNabb) in this millennium. But now we're comparing an undrafted rookie that hasn't even had a training camp or played a preseason game to an old school HOFer that wore pantyhose, fur coats,  and had an acting career playing a woman. 

Hurts has already sucked as a passer for 2 years in the NFL.  I'm ready to pin some false hopes on someone new.

[brkmsn]

28 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Hurts has already sucked as a passer for 2 years in the NFL.  I'm ready to pin some false hopes on someone new.

Tired of complaining about the same old guy?

[eagle45]

2 hours ago, brkmsn said:

Tired of complaining about the same old guy?

Yes.  

[PackerNation]

Every post from Shalodeep summed up:

"If you don't agree with my opinions you are a hater."

[CouchKing]

EJ Perry released by Jaguars. 

Adam Schefter provides details on ESPN Insider.

Keeps his $200k signing bonus and is free to ply his skills elsewhere.

[Shalodeep]

1 hour ago, PackerNation said:

Every post from Shalodeep summed up:

"If you don't agree with my opinions you are a hater."

Hey RTK

[PackerNation]

1 minute ago, Shalodeep said:

Hey RTK

Yeah, delusionally pretend I'm someone else as a way to cope with the pain.

[Shalodeep]

3 minutes ago, PackerNation said:

Yeah, delusionally pretend I'm someone else as a way to cope with the pain.

I've seen you talk about Jordan Love. Calling someone delusional is cute 

[PackerNation]

26 minutes ago, Shalodeep said:

I've seen you talk about Jordan Love. Calling someone delusional is cute 

Wait, I thought you were claiming I was this "RTK" person. Now I really am a Packers fan. Wow, your whole world is caving in. Haha.

And on J-Love, you wish the Eagles had the QB room and QB situation the Packers have.

Good luck this season..

[Shalodeep]

38 minutes ago, PackerNation said:

Wait, I thought you were claiming I was this "RTK" person. Now I really am a Packers fan. Wow, your whole world is caving in. Haha.

And on J-Love, you wish the Eagles had the QB room and QB situation the Packers have.

Good luck this season..

You're a troll and not a very good one at that. Meme game is dry and you had to go out of your way to provoke me in here because you were getting zero attention. The only reason your team is relevant is because they keep paying Rodgers. The reason we won't be relevant in the playoffs is because of hurts. The only reason they pay Rodgers is because they don't trust Love to take over yet. I wouldnt blame the pack if they drafted another QB this year because Love sucks 

[PackerNation]

32 minutes ago, Shalodeep said:

You're a troll and not a very good one at that. Meme game is dry and you had to go out of your way to provoke me in here because you were getting zero attention. The only reason your team is relevant is because they keep paying Rodgers. The reason we won't be relevant in the playoffs is because of hurts. The only reason they pay Rodgers is because they don't trust Love to take over yet. I wouldnt blame the pack if they drafted another QB this year because Love sucks 

Oh darn, Eagles fan is claiming the Packers are only good because of Aaron Rodgers.

It has nothing to do with Matt LaFleur or a roster that is now stacked. The Packers were 6-9-1 WITH Aaron Rodgers the year before LaFleur was hired. They have won more games in the 3 years since in the history of the league. No coach has ever had more wins in his first 3 years than Matt LaFleur.

Just a few on the roster that Aaron is the only good player on:

Jaire Alexander

David Bakhtiari

Kenny Clark

Aaron Jones

Elgton Jenkins

Adrian Amos

Preston Smith

AJ Dillon

De'Vondre Campbell

Rashan Gary

Eric Stokes

Rasul Douglas

Darnell Savage

Making a fool of you doesn't make one a "troll." Keep crying about me all you want.

Oh, and by the way...keep dreaming if you think the Eagles are getting to the playoffs. I Iied when I said I think you clowns are better than the Cowboys. 

[Kwahu]

On 7/22/2022 at 5:04 AM, ManchesterEagle said:

I’m not sure there are any Carson Strong haters. I’m rooting for him, but there are clearly some major red flags regarding his health and/or skills, otherwise he would not have gone undrafted.

There is also a reason the Birds apparently gave Strong near the max you can give a UDFA, which implies they both value him enough AND they were competing with other teams. The injury history definitely pushed him down, but not to the extent teams wrote him off for good. Otherwise he’d just be trying to make practice squads on a prayer.

 All 32 teams have their reasons for not drafting guys. It doesn’t mean they de facto value UDFAs less or as afterthoughts. It’s more likely part of their draft boards and strategy. Change one or two things in a season for any team (injury, losing player to free agency, off field or contract drama, etc) and a guy they might normally sign as a UDFA probably ends up being taken during the draft and vice versa.

Just checking stats… in 2016, 20% of UDFAs ended up making rosters. That’s probably even higher with the pandemic seasons now.

[brkmsn]

14 minutes ago, Kwahu said:

There is also a reason the Birds apparently gave Strong near the max you can give a UDFA, which implies they both value him enough AND they were competing with other teams.

 All 32 teams have their reasons for not drafting guys. It doesn’t mean they de facto value UDFAs less or as afterthoughts. It’s more likely part of their draft boards and strategy. Change one or two things in a season for any team (injury, losing player to free agency, off field or contract drama, etc) and a guy they might normally sign as a UDFA probably ends up being taken during the draft and vice versa.

Just checking stats… in 2016, 20% of UDFAs ended up making rosters. That’s probably even higher with the pandemic seasons now.

Since they put up offers to both Strong and Perry, it was clear they didn't expect to have both agree. I'm not sure who the other teams swaying him were, but he must have liked the situation here since we haven't committed long term to anybody contractually yet. Strong will definitely make preseason games worth watching (just to see if he lives up to the hype). If he can impress and make Minshew expendable, we might be able to deal Minshew for a net gain.