VW82

Wow what a gift on that holding penalty. Titans have a very stout Oline. Mariota stood back there forever on on those throws with no pressure.

Based on their start to the season I think you can say the same about the Titans. These look like two evenly matched teams to me. Should be a good one.

Of course our linemen get beat. I think you guys are getting too caught up in the 2nd overall ranking. The number is 63%, as in 37% of the time our linemen get beat one on one within 2.5 seconds of the ball being snapped (i.e. the average time it takes an NFL QB to throw the ball).

True but that's because everyone's been underestimating Frank Gore. We're getting to the point where Gore needs help. He's 36 after all. Bet it looks a lot like last year's game. This is just a tough match up for Josh. Hopefully he's up to the mental challenge with pre-snap reads and getting the ball out quickly.

No Singletary? This feels like a game where we might really need him. Lots of butterflies heading into this one.

The one thing I will say against Daboll, and this is entirely based on John Brown's comment, but pairing a sophisticated offense with an unsophisticated QB feels like a recipe for disaster. Our biggest problem as an offense is probably Josh's inability to decipher blitz and coverage schemes. Could that be related to the fact that he's having to process so much already within our offense?

As I understand it the INC evaluates the injured player after participation in the first practice back in addition to reviewing whatever diagnostics performed by the team, including baseline measurements. In the case of QBs who typically aren’t taking hits at practice, how do they know whether the injured player is fully recovered? Do they put QBs through some special set of drills (e.g. practicing ball security while taking sacks) that they wouldn’t normally do in order to simulate contact? I feel like it would be a lot easier to game the system with a QB than say a LBer. Anyways, glad Josh got through it. If nothing else this means he isn’t experiencing headaches or other concussion symptoms anymore. Hopefully he’s able to bounce back from his performance last week.

No doubt you guys eye balling from the upper deck have a much better read than paid employees pouring through game film with software ? Part of the problem is Josh is holding the ball too long, not always but too often. I think the bigger issue is he's still having trouble identifying where rushers are coming from and so we're not in the right protections a lot of the time. I will admit he's getting better at that though. That SI article did a nice job pointing out ways Daboll has helped the issue with pre-snap motions which force the defense to show coverage schemes but you can't do that every down. I agree that there have been issues on the right side but for the most part we've looked so much better than last year it's night and day. Credit Beane and Bobby J for bringing in help and coaching them up.

My personal view is that if you get knocked out or have your bell rung in a car wreck type of hit you shouldn't play the next week (at least). I get that isn't very scientific but the optics of rushing a player through protocol so he can play next game just isn't great, to say nothing of what's best for the player. To answer your question, the results absolutely matter. I'm not suggesting that the whole process is corrupt -- it's certainly better than it used to be. It's possible that Josh would truly be 100% once he's through protocol. I just don't believe that doctors, even neurologists, know for sure when it comes to head injuries. That opinion is based at least in part from a discussion I had with a local neurologist (former client of mine). Look, it was a really big hit. I just don't want to see Josh come back too soon, get tagged again, and be out for extended time. I feel like that's a reasonable concern given the way he plays, and I'd be hard pressed to believe that he wouldn't benefit from 3x the recovery length. Anyways, I've said all I can on this subject.

Yes, I'm assuming he was grade 3. No, just because his legs were moving post hit that does not mean wasn't unconscious either prior or during. So now we're back to the discussion of whether it's appropriate or smart to play your concussed QB seven days after the incident (regardless of passing tests from NFL paid doctors), and whether there's any additional benefit to waiting until three weeks (i.e. after the bye). I'm suggesting there's likely both a medical benefit, however minor that might be, and developmental benefit by allowing Josh to watch Matt for a week and gain another perspective. Feels like we're going around in circles here.

It's a great question. I'd also like to know the answer definitively, as I might change my opinion if that's the case. I'm assuming yes. I think he's out cold when his legs are moving or at least had his bell rung hard enough that he isn't fully conscious during that 5-10 second period. I've witnessed people IRL who got knocked out and had similar involuntary movements with their arms/legs so I don't think that by itself proves he was conscious the whole time. It doesn't prove he was unconscious either.

Clearly you have again missed the point. I am not a neurologist; I am, however, reasonably capable of having conversations with doctors who have treated patients for concussions as well as performing basic google searches on the subject. Although this does not make me an expert in the field, it allows me to gather enough information to at least ask some good questions, like why would we want to rush our QB back after sustaining what appeared to be a somewhat serious head injury before the typical time frame for recovery would suggest? https://brighamhealthhub.org/prevention/when-is-it-safe-to-return-to-play-after-sports-related-injuries

I will admit you have a point. Take last week for example. My employer paid for me to see a doctor to see if it was ok to return to work. We chatted for two mins then he signed the slip. Then he somehow managed to sew my hand to my face. I was going to complain but then I remembered I'm not a doctor so I shouldn't have opinions on such things. Edit: RE that expression I believe both forms are deemed acceptable.

I think you're missing the forest for the trees here. First of all I'm not saying anything yet. We don't know whether Josh will be cleared. But yes, if he gets cleared and plays Sunday I'd have some questions. And yes, I'm not saying anything for certain because I don't know but I can't imagine it'd be helpful to get hit again so soon after being knocked out like that. Just my opinion.

Yes I am. Given the history with the NFL and concussions, and really sports medicine and the inherent conflicts of interest in general, I don't think it's unreasonable to be skeptical. As for the leg tremors, and whether they were involuntary or not, it's hard to say. I'm not a doctor. Josh's legs flapping around immediately after the hit didn't look good.

I suspect this is probably the logic football people used for decades when it came to head injuries. I disagree that just because football is a violent sport we shouldn't be doing everything possible to ensure players are fully recovered from head injuries before returning to the field, and if "everything possible" includes letting QBs play within a week of being knocked unconscious then I think we need to re-visit the definition.

If he gets cleared to play less than a week after laying on the turf unconscious, exhibiting post-traumatic leg tremors then I highly question what these doctors are doing/saying. The difference between getting hit again one week after vs. three weeks after could very likely be the difference between sustaining a second concussion or not.

Maybe you have to take out the part about being honest that he sucked on Sunday -- lol that a little harsh -- but putting the kid's long-term health first isn't a pig move, it's the right move.

This makes it sound like fans want him to have a timeout in the corner. Who's saying this exactly? To clarify -- in case this was directed at me -- I think there might be a hidden opportunity for development by allowing Allen sit and watch Barkley for a week. He's been learning by doing for two straight months. There's more than one way to learn. Hard to argue that there was anything but dramatic improvement after sitting out and getting to watch a different perspective last year. More importantly, Allen got knocked the F out. I'm low key surprised that more people on here aren't putting our QB's long-term health above everything else. Isn't that more important than one NFL game, albeit one against a legitimate threat for wild card? I'd argue yes. Ask Kevin Durant and the Warriors whether they'd like a re-do. Just because Josh might clear concussion protocol that doesn't mean he's 100% healed. It means he passed the tests. A little conservatism here might be beneficial in more ways than one. Edit: RE your post about Barkley and the Bears, I agree. But in this one game and against this specific opponent, I think there's a credible argument that Barkley is just as good of an option. Over the course of a season and for our future, Josh is obviously the answer (unless/until he proves otherwise). Anyone who watched that Titans v Browns game to start the year knows we need someone who gets the ball out quickly this week. Food for thought.

Yeah I can't tell if Hawks have a good offense this year or if Rams' D just sucks (besides Donald who's ridiculous). Edit: Oh man that didn't look good. Cooks's head got turned around in an unnatural way at the end there.

Gotcha. I was looking at committed $$. It's incredible how much the cap has risen over the last ten years. Doubled basically. It's a pretty huge built in advantage for good teams. You can pay everyone and it doesn't matter because the cap keeps rising.

Looks to me like it's 132M in 2021. Am I missing something? https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/los-angeles-rams/yearly/cap/ Rams are also going to need to do something about their Oline, and half their defense will become UFAs over the next two years. Think it's going to be tough. Maybe they can trade Cooks or Woods to open up some space.

We'll see. They just paid Gurley, Goff, and Donald biiiiig $$. I'd be surprised if they didn't explore trading him next year. Will they even have the room to franchise him??

PSA: Cooper Kupp is set to be a free agent in 2021. How good would he look in our offense right now? I can't think of a better receiver for Josh. He just knows how to get open.

This isn't exactly true. https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/10/03/buffalo-bills-offense-josh-allen I agree that the overall tone of the article is that of a hatchet job. This makes sense given that the thesis is the Bills offense under Allen hasn't been very reliable. Think of it from this perspective: who would you say is the worst starting QB in the NFL? Based on passer rating it's Josh Rosen. Well even Josh Rosen does more good things than bad in an NFL game -- these guys are professionals after all. Does that mean NFL writers should have to equally focus on all the good things Rosen does as well as the bad when they're writing about how he's the worst QB in the league? I'd argue that would just confuse the point (and the reader). FWIW among QBs who have played all four weeks to date, Allen ranks second last in passer rating and third last in QBR which takes into account his running and clutch play in the 4th quarter. Focusing more on the negative isn't exactly being disingenuous.