Jump to content

Shaw66

Members
  • Content Count

    4,254
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,201 Excellent

11 Followers

About Shaw66

  • Rank
    Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

3,863 profile views
  1. Thanks. Allen is a player who is improving. When he stops improving I will be more interested in discussions like this article provides. Everyone talks about him as though he's a finished product. He isn't.
  2. here's a better link: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29376046/make-break-year-josh-allen-progress-report-bills-qb-ahead-2020
  3. It's baseball or something. All three that you mention are naturally accurate. Brady seems to be disciplined accuracy. He has learned to do everything right mechanically, so he makes accurate throws when he's in sync. The other three are naturally accurate - they are exceptional athlete's who are always able to get some necessary part of their bodies in position to make the right throw. Hips open, hips closed, off the wrong foot, whatever, they get arm motion and release that makes for an accurate throw. Allen doesn't have that. I think Allen is a better natural thrower than Brady, but not on the same level as the other three. Allen needs to learn to be in sync more often - in sync, meaning understanding where the play is going so he has time to get his body in at least a decent throwing position. He doesn't always do that. Brady doesn't do it only when he doesn't have time. Maybe put another way, it's almost as though Mahomes, Wilson and Rodgers don't need any time to get ready to throw - they're always ready. Brady and Allen need time to get ready, and Brady buys the time by making quick decisions, deciding earlier than Allen allows him time to get ready.
  4. That's an interesting point. There were an unusual number of high-wind games at New Era last year. That's another factor in QB maturation. Every time a young QB throws in that wind, he learns something. Over time, literally over years, he learns how to make throws under different conditions in the stadium. A veteran QB in his wind-challenged home stadium develops a real home-field advantage on windy days. Eli was tougher at home than away, because the wind in the old and the new stadium is tough, but he had learned it.
  5. Another article mired in data analysis that, in my mind, is unwarranted. Using data the author concludes that Allen's deep balls are a key element to making him, perhaps, the top fantasy quarterback in the league. Now, maybe for fantasy purposes you can get there, but even I will admit that based on last season, ANY analysis that suggests the deep ball is one of Allen's strengths is suspect. Still, as the OP says, it's interesting to read an article that is thoughtful AND optimistic about Allen. The author doesn't get caught up in the conventional wisdom about Allen (he's "raw," he's a "project," he isn't accurate, he can't throw the deep ball, he has a long way to go) and instead sees what a lot of Bills fans see - a really talented quarterback who has made a lot of plays in two years and who seems to be improving significantly and continuously. For example, he admits to being surprised when he first saw that someone said Allen was an MVP darkhouse, but when he considered the idea, he realized the idea wasn't as absurd as national fans (and Bills fans who don't believe in Allen) seem to think. Thanks for posting.
  6. This is all right on on the money. Belichick may have a top 10 offense with Newton. He may cut Newton and have a top 10 offense with Hoyer. Or anything in between. The only thing I'm confident of is that with Brady at QB, they were liable to do anything at any time. Newton does offer different options, but the offense will be more limited with him at the helm. He is not and never will be the master quarterback Brady is.
  7. I agree. However, the Patriots have Belichick, and Belichick always finds a way.
  8. The to the AFC East title, to any division title, is always hard. I don't care how good it Cam Newton is physically (and that assumes he's healthy). The combination of Brady's brains, determination, and perfectionism (all traits that Newton doesn't score well in) and the brilliance of his head coach and offensive coordinator put the Patriots offense in the top 10 every season in the last ten years, almost always in the top 5. In most years, that was with receivers (other than Gronk) who succeeded because of their QB and the system, with mediocre running backs. Over the same period, Newton's ability put Carolina in the top 10 twice. New England is a system team. They demand that their players fit the system. Brady fit the system perfectly. Newton never will play like Brady, especially in his first season in New England. Belichick can tweak the system and install some plays for Cam, and that will cause problems for defenses, to be sure. But on 80% of the plays, they're going to expect Cam to come to the line and make the kind of decisions Brady made. I don't see that happening. Brady may be the best pure thinking quarterback in the history of the league. He understood everything. And yet, he had his worst passing days against the McDermott's Bills' pass defense. He admitted that when he comes to the line of scrimmage he can't tell what the Bills are going to do. If McDermott can do that Brady, what do you think he will be able to do with Cam, a guy McDermott knows well. How's Cam going to like throwing to those fearsome Patriots receivers against a defense he can't understand? There's a reason Cam Newton wasn't signed until June 28, and the reason is no one who needed a QB thought he was a good bet to win. The league had to wait until June 28th until Cam and some team were desperate enough to agree to give it a try. It's a story made in heaven for the sports media. They have nothing to talk about, and all of a sudden their favorite team signs a larger-than-life player with a big smile and the Superman reputation. So the press is all over this. The actual story is that a QB that league views as past his prime, a QB who has never been good at running complex NFL offenses, just signed with the team that lost the best QB in history and has no legitimate candidate to replace him. They still don't.
  9. I generally don't spend too much time thinking about who the opponent has. For me, it's all about the Bills, and the Bills are just as good this morning as they were on Friday. So I can't get too excited about Cam going to New England. Having said that, I do have some thoughts about this, mostly that I doubt Cam will have a big impact on the Pats: 1. I've never liked Cam. He doesn't have his emotions under control. The game is all about him and not so much about the team. He's never impressed me as a good decision maker. All of those things are 180 degrees opposite of Tom Brady is. The Pats have a complicated offense that changes from week to week and that relies on a fifteen-year playbook. Newton's has missed the spring and will have a short, weird camp. There's no way he runs the offense like Brady did, and that makes the Pats offense weaker, not stronger. 2. Belichick is a genius and he knows that Newton will never do what Brady did. Beliechick already has who knows how many creative ideas about how to put Newton's legs and arm to work. But to do that, he has to significantly retool the offense. He has to make it look more like Carolina's offense looked. The league knows how to stop the Newton-oriented Carolina offense. Hoyer knows how to run the Brady-oriented offense and can do it pretty well. Retooling the offense to fit Newton makes Hoyer a lot less valuable. 3. Newton has had a passer rating ABOVE 90 twice in his pro career. During the years Newton has been in the league, Brady had a passer rating BELOW 90 twice. Anybody who has watched pro football for the last ten years knows Cam Newton is not Tom Brady. 4. None of that even considers what seems to be true: Newton's body is pretty worn out. Relying on his legs to create a dynamic offense is probably a bad bet. 5. I never count Belichick out.
  10. That's not my recollection of Spikes at all. He rarely was the super-stud in Buffalo that he had been in his first five seasons in Cincinnati. After five straight 100-tackle seasons in Cincy, he had one in Buffalo, got close his second season, then start having injuries. My recollection is that even his best years he wasn't the standout guy he had been - looking back at the stats, I gotta say that that recollection is a little clouded - he was All-Pro in 2004, with five INTs. Eventually he was just ordinary, but clearly the decline started after 2004. Did he tear his achilles in 2005? I had no trouble when management let him go. I see looking back at the stats that he had a couple 100 tackle seasons late in his career. Fletcher, on the other hand, was a big mistake, and I thought so at the time. Thanks for the comment and correction. This coaching comparison shines an interesting light on McDermott. He gets credit for figuring out how to get his team to the playoffs twice in three years, while Mularkey failed in his first season as HC and didn't make it until his fifth season. On the other hand, Mularkey has a playoff win and McDermott is 0-2. Puts in pretty clear perspective what McDermott's next hurdle is.
  11. You're right. I didn't read the stats carefully enough. As Gunner said, he made the playoffs once, in his last season as head coach, went 1-1 in the playoffs and got fired.
  12. I came , to this thread prepared to argue that 2019 was the best and I think I still will, but the OP makes some solid points. In particular, 2004 had an impressive roster, even if some past their prime (like Spikes and Bledsoe). I don't remember plays and games like some of you do, but I can remember how I felt about that team. I felt they were overachievers. I didn't believe they were a good team that deserved to be in the playoffs; I thought they were a flawed team that went on a run and was in position to make the playoffs. I thought 2019 was a good team that wasn't yet complete but nevertheless deserved to be in the playoffs. It isn't the entire explanation, but my feeling in 2004 was that the Bills had a loser at quarterback who sometimes won, and I'm my feeling in 2019 was that they had a winner at quarterback who sometime lost. And I think part of the explanation was coaching. In 2004, Mularkey was a rookie coach, and he didn't get his team to win the game it needed to make the playoffs. He never got to the playoffs in five seasons as a head coach. In 2017, McDermott was a rookie coach, and he did get his team to the playoffs, and he's been to the playoffs in two of his first three seasons. I think 2019 was the best of the era.
  13. Thurm, this is excellent. There's so much hate for the Pats and Belichick around here, and few people give him the credit he deserves. You're absolutely correct that he wouldn't have rehired Lombardi is Lombardi wasn't really good at what Belichick needed him to do. And you're absolutely correct about what he says about his upcoming opponents. It isn't just that he knows that if he starts believing his team is better than the opponent, he'll fall into the trap of preparing less well (although I'm sure he understands that). He has respect for his opponents because he knows that they deserve it. I realized a few years ago that Belichick lives at the very core of football. He spends his time thinking about how 11 men, working together, can push 11 other men across the goal line they are defending, and how his 11 men, working together, can stop the other 11 from doing the same. He is constantly aware of the one-on-one battles and how they can be combined to push the ball the right way. When you view the game from that perspective, it becomes easy to have genuine respect for your opponent. Your opponent is putting 11 of the biggest, best trained, most athletic men in the world on the field. These guys are beasts with Ph.Ds in football, all across the league. If you don't respect all that they can do, they will beat you. Belichick knows that, he lives in it, and that's why in his Wednesday press conferences he always shows respect for his opponent.
  14. I agree. A QB who is regularly in the top 12 is a legitimate starter. May fall out once in a while, but generally in to the top 12 and occasionally in the top 5, that's a legit starter. Might never win a Super Bowl. If Allen is one of those and Mahomes goes to the Hall of Fame, yeah, some people might remember that, but if Allen's been a legit starter, nobody will bet all that excited about it. I'm sure there are some Falcons fans who cherry pick drafts and talk about what the Falcons might have done if they hadn't taken Ryan. Stafford in Detroit. If Allen turns out like that, I'm happy. I'm expecting more, both because I want more and because I think actually is a HOF candidate, but legit starter I'm not going to be complaining about. Whoops. Actually I meant Mahomes and Jackson, but Watson is the third to go on the list. If any of those guys can have ten years like they've started, those are HOF players. All of them make it Allen turns into an average, then the Bills did some bad QB drafting. But pull those guys down a rung and move Allen up a little. Say one makes the HOF and the others are solid guys, I'm not whining that the Bills missed the HOF guy.
  15. I think you are prejudging the situation you create. You seem to be giving Mahomes and Allen HOF status right now, and they both are very far from the HOF right now. Let's see how they progress. All three may have very nice careers, similar stats, win a Super Bowl or even two. If that happens, people might complain that the Bills took the wrong guy, but no one will be listening.
×
×
  • Create New...