Josh Allen vs Carson Wentz - Rookie Season

[John from Riverside]

41 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Did you look to find out?  

 

If you'd have bet that you'd have lost.  

 

Ertz, a TE, was his top receiver.  Jordan Matthews was his only other WR worthy of note. All in all Allen had more options.  

Tasker

 

Why do you continue to put up crap

 

When you have someone that can be considered a "top receiver" be it TE or WR....the fact is you did have a guy quality enough to be a go to guy....of which the bills had NONE BECAUSE THEY KEPT DROPPING BALLS THAT HIT THEM RIGHT IN THE HANDS

 

Ertz (and Jordan Mathews) were better then ANYTHING we had.....

 

Period

[Stank_Nasty]

42 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Did you look to find out?  

 

If you'd have bet that you'd have lost.  

 

Ertz, a TE, was his top receiver.  Jordan Matthews was his only other WR worthy of note. All in all Allen had more options.  

this has to win the award as the dumbest statement of the day. am I right, people?

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

20 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

Overall Wentz had 33 sacks on 640 dropbacks.  (5.2%) 

Allen had 28 sacks on 348 dropbacks.  (8.0%)  

Bledsoe career:  6.4%, w/ Bills 8.4%.  

 

That's problematic for a QB that's so mobile, big, strong, and athletic.  

 

Wentz was a lot more consistent in his play in his rookie season.  Allen had no consistency in his passing game other than to say he was consistent against Miami.  

 

Keep in mind that Wentz had absolutely none of Allen's mobility or rushing ability and a fraction of his athleticism.  

 

FWIW  

 

 

First off, Wentz not having Allen's mobility and athletic ability is a negative for Wentz. Not Allen. Not sure why you bring it up.

 

Allen's sack % improved greatly over his final six games. But I guess that is because he played Miami twice in your opinion and we should expect him to have a sack% over 6% again next year?

 

Allen improved as his rookie season went on. Wentz regressed from him first four games. That's a fact.

[eball]

So is @TaskersGhost another one of the "I-hate-the-Josh-Allen-draft-pick-because-completion-percentage-blah-blah-blah" crowd?  Or is he just blind?  Anybody who looks at the 2016 Philly offense and 2018 Buffalo offense and concludes Josh Allen had a better line and better options needs an optometrist.

[JohnBonhamRocks]

If this is true, then I fully expect Matt Barkley to be our Super Bowl winning MVP. 

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

God I hate it when this board has an ol' fashioned "stats-off"

[Alphadawg7]

35 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Looks good at the surface, doesn't it.  

 

Here's some additional info however.  

 

Allen put up half of his TDs in two games against a divisional opponent, he was pretty bad otherwise.  You can look at the game logs.  Miami was that team.  A tale of two QBs in terms of passing.  Very good rookie numbers in two games against Miami.  75 YPG less passing on average in the other 10 games, only 5 TDs to 9 INTs in the other ten games, which compares poorly to Wentz.  

 

Only 4 of Allen's 10 TDs (40%) were in the Red Zone.  Three of those four were vs. Miami, only 1 RZ TD otherwise.   

12 of Wentz's 16 (75%) were in the Red Zone.  

 

Wentz gave up 3 sacks in 89 attempts in the Red Zone. 

Allen gave up 3 sacks in 29 attempts.  Bledsoe territory.  

 

Wentz Yards-per-Game 236

Allen Yards-per-Game 173, ... 162 YPG in ten games not vs. Miami  

 

Overall Wentz had 33 sacks on 640 dropbacks.  (5.2%) 

Allen had 28 sacks on 348 dropbacks.  (8.0%)  

Bledsoe career:  6.4%, w/ Bills 8.4%.  

 

That's problematic for a QB that's so mobile, big, strong, and athletic.  

 

Wentz was a lot more consistent in his play in his rookie season.  Allen had no consistency in his passing game other than to say he was consistent against Miami.  

 

Keep in mind that Wentz had absolutely none of Allen's mobility or rushing ability and a fraction of his athleticism.  

 

FWIW  

 

 

 

 

 

This post has so much wrong with it that I don't know where to begin.  So I am just gonna move on like I didn't see it.  

[Ronin]

31 minutes ago, billsfan5121 said:

So what set of games can we remove from Wentz’s rookie year to make this comparable?  Perhaps his two best games?

 

Sure, if you can find two against a singular opponent.  

 

But hey, since it's probably too much for you to do I'll take 30 seconds to do it for you.  Here are the numbers with his two best games removed, neither against a divisional opponent and both against playoff teams one of which lost to NE in the CCG:  ..  

 

12 TDS, 13 INTs, all of the other data remains relatively the same.  

 

In short narly 1 TD/game to Allen's 1/2 TD/game.  

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by TaskersGhost

[John from Riverside]

18 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

this has to win the award as the dumbest statement of the day. am I right, people?

Its early....Ghost might post more

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

42 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Looks good at the surface, doesn't it.  

 

Here's some additional info however.  

 

Allen put up half of his TDs in two games against a divisional opponent, he was pretty bad otherwise.  You can look at the game logs.  Miami was that team.  A tale of two QBs in terms of passing.  Very good rookie numbers in two games against Miami.  75 YPG less passing on average in the other 10 games, only 5 TDs to 9 INTs in the other ten games, which compares poorly to Wentz.  

 

Only 4 of Allen's 10 TDs (40%) were in the Red Zone.  Three of those four were vs. Miami, only 1 RZ TD otherwise.   

12 of Wentz's 16 (75%) were in the Red Zone.  

 

Wentz gave up 3 sacks in 89 attempts in the Red Zone. 

Allen gave up 3 sacks in 29 attempts.  Bledsoe territory.  

 

Wentz Yards-per-Game 236

Allen Yards-per-Game 173, ... 162 YPG in ten games not vs. Miami  

 

Overall Wentz had 33 sacks on 640 dropbacks.  (5.2%) 

Allen had 28 sacks on 348 dropbacks.  (8.0%)  

Bledsoe career:  6.4%, w/ Bills 8.4%.  

 

That's problematic for a QB that's so mobile, big, strong, and athletic.  

 

Wentz was a lot more consistent in his play in his rookie season.  Allen had no consistency in his passing game other than to say he was consistent against Miami.  

 

Keep in mind that Wentz had absolutely none of Allen's mobility or rushing ability and a fraction of his athleticism.  

 

FWIW  

 

 

 

 

 

Wentz also had at least two competent receivers and a much better OL.

 

But we'll not take that into account, eh?
 

[GoBills808]

6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

This post has so much wrong with it that I don't know where to begin.  So I am just gonna move on like I didn't see it.  

I particularly enjoyed how much emphasis he put on red zone TDs (???) and sack percentage. 

[Stank_Nasty]

3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I particularly enjoyed how much emphasis he put on red zone TDs (???) and sack percentage. 

I hear one of the rule changes put up for a vote at the owners meeting was to make td's outside the redzone worth only 4 pts. THANKFULLY for allen it didn't pass. he would have been friggin' SCREWED!

Edited March 27, 2019 by Stank_Nasty

[Ronin]

22 minutes ago, eball said:

 

Seems you only semi-answered half of the question, and did a poor job at that.  I think Philly had Jason Peters at LT, right?  Jason Kelce at C made the Pro Bowl.  Darren Sproles made the Pro Bowl.  C'mon, dude, don't be lazy.  And "all in all" Jordan Matthews/Zach Ertz by themselves are better options than what Allen had.

 

Try harder.

 

Lazy .... LOL  

 

How many passes did Peters and Kelce make?  

 

Sproles was a RB, Allen doesn't utilize RBs in the passing game, that's part of the major issue here.  If he had he would have made more than 38 passes, or fewer than 4/game to them.  

 

In other old hate news, Allen had more Time-to-Throw, which is a measure of how quickly a passer releases a pass, than ANY other QB in the entire league, by a country mile relatively speaking, according to NFL.com's Next Gen Stats.  

 

You did know that after looking at that and consider that, right?  Right?  

 

Additionally, despite the narrative Allen was around average in protection time by the line.  So this notion that he had the worst pass-proteting line in the league or even close is also a false narrative.  

 

Queue the excuses. 

 

Anything else?  

34 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

how about we keep in mind that wentz also had a probowler at center and LT as well..... your statements "look good on the surface"

 

Just throwin' some additional info out there.  

 

Everyone seems to think that it's irrelevant.  So be it.  It's hardly for me to decide for everyone. 

 

I would suggest that an astute observer that wasn't more concerned about laying out excuses to justify his opinion should and would be highly concerned about that data.  

 

As you were.  

[Stank_Nasty]

2 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Lazy .... LOL  

 

How many passes did Peters and Kelce make?  

 

Sproles was a RB, Allen doesn't utilize RBs in the passing game, that's part of the major issue here.  If he had he would have made more than 38 passes, or fewer than 4/game to them.  

 

In other old hate news, Allen had more Time-to-Throw, which is a measure of how quickly a passer releases a pass, than ANY other QB in the entire league, by a country mile relatively speaking, according to NFL.com's Next Gen Stats.  

 

You did know that after looking at that and consider that, right?  Right?  

 

Additionally, despite the narrative Allen was around average in protection time by the line.  So this notion that he had the worst pass-proteting line in the league or even close is also a false narrative.  

 

Queue the excuses. 

 

Anything else?  

 

Just throwin' some additional info out there.  

 

Everyone seems to think that it's irrelevant.  So be it.  It's hardly for me to decide for everyone. 

 

I would suggest that an astute observer that wasn't more concerned about laying out excuses to justify his opinion should and would be highly concerned about that data.  

 

As you were.  

the data AND astute observation shows me a larger more athletic qb was routinely getting bum rushed behind one of the worst lines in football while waiting for one of the worst supporting casts in football to try and get open. SMH.

[GimmeSomeProcess]

3 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Lazy .... LOL  

 

How many passes did Peters and Kelce make?  

 

Sproles was a RB, Allen doesn't utilize RBs in the passing game, that's part of the major issue here.  If he had he would have made more than 38 passes, or fewer than 4/game to them.  

 

In other old hate news, Allen had more Time-to-Throw, which is a measure of how quickly a passer releases a pass, than ANY other QB in the entire league, by a country mile relatively speaking, according to NFL.com's Next Gen Stats.  

 

You did know that after looking at that and consider that, right?  Right?  

 

Additionally, despite the narrative Allen was around average in protection time by the line.  So this notion that he had the worst pass-proteting line in the league or even close is also a false narrative.  

 

Queue the excuses. 

 

Anything else?  

 

Just throwin' some additional info out there.  

 

Everyone seems to think that it's irrelevant.  So be it.  It's hardly for me to decide for everyone. 

 

I would suggest that an astute observer that wasn't more concerned about laying out excuses to justify his opinion should and would be highly concerned about that data.  

 

As you were.  

For someone who comes across who thinks they know a lot about football, you clearly fall short in understanding the importance of an oline. Allen literally had nothing to work at reciever and had zero run game to speak of. That puts a rookie qb at a huge disadvantage. But sure cherry pick your stats to prove your point. 

[Ronin]

36 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Tasker

 

Why do you continue to put up crap

 

When you have someone that can be considered a "top receiver" be it TE or WR....the fact is you did have a guy quality enough to be a go to guy....of which the bills had NONE BECAUSE THEY KEPT DROPPING BALLS THAT HIT THEM RIGHT IN THE HANDS

 

Ertz (and Jordan Mathews) were better then ANYTHING we had.....

 

Period

 

OK, if you say so.  

 

As I see it Matthews is and always has been a very average 2/3 WR, little else. 

 

Ertz for cryin' out loud is a TE and their leading WR that season with 800-some yards and a mere 4 TDs.  

 

It's funny, when the narrative fits Foster's on the cusp of being elite, Jones is great but takes a few seasons to develop, and Benjamin, whose career trajectory has been better than Matthews is irrelevant.  

 

LOL 

 

Now we have Brown, so the problem's been resolved. 

[BuffaloBill]

3 hours ago, ProcessAccepted said:

 

He will be with an improved set of receivers

 

 

 

 

Not all of those are the fault of the receivers but man some were right on hands or numbers and dropped.  In many cases the ball seemed to be coming in hot but that should not matter to an NFL receiver.  Kelvin Benjamin truly had hands of stone.

[John from Riverside]

6 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

OK, if you say so.  

 

As I see it Matthews is and always has been a very average 2/3 WR, little else. 

 

Ertz for cryin' out loud is a TE and their leading WR that season with 800-some yards and a mere 4 TDs.  

 

It's funny, when the narrative fits Foster's on the cusp of being elite, Jones is great but takes a few seasons to develop, and Benjamin, whose career trajectory has been better than Matthews is irrelevant.  

 

LOL 

 

Now we have Brown, so the problem's been resolved. 

LOL.....just LOL

[Ronin]

42 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

this has to win the award as the dumbest statement of the day. am I right, people?

 

Really? 

 

Jones, McCoy, Foster,, Benjamin, Croom, Clay, McKenzie, Ivory, and Holmes.  Almost all of whom underachieved in their receiving games from their annual averages.  

 

Of course that couldn't have had anything to do with the QB play, despite the notion that I've already proven that our secondary receiver like RBs caught more passes on average for more yards without Allen under Center.  But that's irrelevant, right?  

27 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Wentz also had at least two competent receivers and a much better OL.

 

But we'll not take that into account, eh?
 

 

Allen had more time-to-throw.  Does that factor in?  

 

Allow me to ask tho, does ANY of this fall onto Allen as you see it?  

 

Based on everything I'm reading here Allen's poop doesn't stink in the overall analysis.  

[John from Riverside]

2 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Really? 

 

Jones, McCoy, Foster,, Benjamin, Croom, Clay, McKenzie, Ivory, and Holmes.  Almost all of whom underachieved in their receiving games from their annual averages.  

 

Of course that couldn't have had anything to do with the QB play, despite the notion that I've already proven that our secondary receiver like RBs caught more passes on average for more yards without Allen under Center.  But that's irrelevant, right?  

 

Allen had more time-to-throw.  Does that factor in?  

 

Allow me to ask tho, does ANY of this fall onto Allen as you see it?  

 

Based on everything I'm reading here Allen's poop doesn't stink in the overall analysis.  

I suppose that you do need to be reminded that Allen MAKES HIS OWN extra time with the way he moves in the pocket right?

 

Jesus...please just stop

[Ronin]

10 minutes ago, GimmeSomeProcess said:

For someone who comes across who thinks they know a lot about football, you clearly fall short in understanding the importance of an oline. Allen literally had nothing to work at reciever and had zero run game to speak of. That puts a rookie qb at a huge disadvantage. But sure cherry pick your stats to prove your point. 

 

So please, for me, factor in two things.  

 

First, that Allen often missed wide open receivers, so much so that on replays you could actually see the visible frustrations on the receivers' parts.  This was a frequent occurrence and something admitted to by McD even.  

 

Secondly, please reconcile Allen's league-leading time-to-throw of 3.22 seconds, which is enormous, against the backdrop of what you just said.  

 

I'll  respond to that, nothing else.  

 

Funny how everyone just thinks what they want to think and sucks up all the rainbows and unicorns narratives despite the flaws.  

[eball]

@TaskersGhost are you insane?  The only thing anyone has opined in this thread is that it warrants optimism Allen was able to put up comparable -- and better in some cases -- stats behind a terrible OL and with awful targets to what the Wunderkind Carson Wentz did in his rookie season.

 

Give your crusade a rest.

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by eball

[Ronin]

4 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

LOL.....just LOL

 

So you're on record saying that Jordan Matthews is what, a top-rated impact WR then?  

 

Help me out here.  

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

4 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

Allen had more time-to-throw.  Does that factor in?  

 

Allow me to ask tho, does ANY of this fall onto Allen as you see it?  

 

Based on everything I'm reading here Allen's poop doesn't stink in the overall analysis.  

 

Better mobility, longer times for receivers to open.

We get it, you're not on board with Allen.

 

 

[John from Riverside]

Just now, TaskersGhost said:

 

So you're on record saying that Jordan Matthews is what, a top-rated impact WR then?  

 

Help me out here.  

There is a LOOOOOT of room in between "should not be on the field because they hurt you" types and "good but not great types"

 

Last year Jordan Matthews would have been our BEST receiver (barring the time where Foster made his huge turn around in production later in the year.

[Ronin]

Just now, eball said:

@TaskersGhost are you insane?  The only thing anyone has opined in this thread is that it warrants optimism Allen was able to put up comparable -- and better in some cases -- stats behind a terrible OL and with awful targets as the Wunderkind Carson Wentz did in his rookie season.

 

Give your crusade a rest.

 

LOL 

 

And all I did was shed some light on some of the key differences.  All I did was post the numbers.  Otherwise I'm simply reacting to the posts off of that.  Meanwhile, I haven't heard anyone say that Red Zone performance is key and that data is troubling, or that Wentz' far greater consistency, which is obvious except to those blinded with whatever it is they're blinded by that disenables them to see the reality therein.  All I see is excuses, except of course that Allen has anything whatsoever to do with his own passing prowess.  

 

So I get it, you and everyone else seems to think that how a QB performs in the Red Zone is meaningless.  I do get it, I really do.  .  

 

To me that's what's insane.  But hey, everyone's entitled to believe what they want.  

 

Funny thing is that everyone opining as such will likely support the narrative about what a great job McBeane are doing correcting the O in FAcy, without considering that they made quite a few moves last season too that simply didn't work out.  But hey, John Brown's our solution.  

 

So we''re all set then, one or two linemen, Gore and Shady, we're good to go and off to the races.  

 

You really believe that?  

[Hebert19]

Throw goff in here too and then you realize the plan.  Or trubinski.

[Ronin]

5 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Better mobility, longer times for receivers to open.

We get it, you're not on board with Allen.

 

 

 

No, I don't think that you do get it.  I love Allen, he's got quite a few intangible rare assets.  I can't even begin to tell how badly I hope he works out. 

 

Here's where almost everyone else doesn't get it, despite the fact that I've posted this probably 20 times and I know as a fact that most of the people having tantrums related to my direct responses, TO THEIRS, have read it before.  

 

But there isn't a QB in the league in recent history that has become a franchise QB w/o having perfected his short-medium game.  That's a verifiable fact. 

 

Yet, that's Allen's single biggest weakness and in spades.  Getting him "deep threat options" doesn't help that, at all.  If he doesn't learn to find and hit receivers, like Beasley as a case-in-point, as well as RBs that are open, he will never become a franchise QB, ever.  He can run all he wants.  Rushing won't contribute to his franchise status at all, it'll only shorten his career.  

 

As to not being on board, frankly, it doesn't matter who's on board or who isn't.  Myself, you, or anyone else.  Allen's either going to correct himself or he isn't.  I'd love for Allen to work out, but I have yet to see a QB that lacks a short-medium prowess to such an extent correct it in the NFL to the extent that they become a franchise QB.  It's a tall order. 

 

Can you name one?  

 

Everyone here seems to think, based on their own statements, that few if any of Allen's issues fall back onto him.  That's my only point of disagreement.  That's an absurd proposition but the most popular one by a country mile.  

 

I'd love to discuss that.  

[Jay_Fixit]

2 hours ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Did you look to find out?  

 

If you'd have bet that you'd have lost.  

 

Ertz, a TE, was his top receiver.  Jordan Matthews was his only other WR worthy of note. All in all Allen had more options.  

Not even close. 

 

Ertz’s backup, Trey Burton would have been 2nd on Buffalo in receptions this year. Plus He had Sproles who was still a weapon out of the backfield.

 

Allen had...McCoy (sometimes) and Zay Jones with rookie Robert Foster sprinkled in. JAG’s outside of that.

[freddyjj]

3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Of course, this data is cherry picked.  Wentz had a completion percentage of 62.4; Allen was 52.8.   That's a very important difference.  

 

The result is that their passer ratings were very different:  79.3 vs. 67.9.   A passer rating in the high 70s is pretty good; many good rookies finish there, and some not so good (EJ Manuel, for example).   A rookie passer rating in the high 60s is not good.  

 

Personally, I think Josh will have a completion percentage over 60% this season, because the Bills will stress to him the importance of throwing shorter passes to increase his completion percentage.  But what I think and what actually happens often are two dramatically different things.  

 

Josh needs to be better to be effective.   

When he returned  from injury, Josh had 4 games over 70 in passer rating with 2 duds (Jets and NE).  His passer rating in last 6 games averaged 76.  Selective yes, but the Bills offense was different then too with Foster etc.

[billsrul120]

3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Of course, this data is cherry picked.  Wentz had a completion percentage of 62.4; Allen was 52.8.   That's a very important difference.  

 

The result is that their passer ratings were very different:  79.3 vs. 67.9.   A passer rating in the high 70s is pretty good; many good rookies finish there, and some not so good (EJ Manuel, for example).   A rookie passer rating in the high 60s is not good.  

 

Personally, I think Josh will have a completion percentage over 60% this season, because the Bills will stress to him the importance of throwing shorter passes to increase his completion percentage.  But what I think and what actually happens often are two dramatically different things.  

 

Josh needs to be better to be effective.   

 

Josh Allen

first 6 starts average passer rating: 63.42

last 6 starts average passer rating: 77.12

over 20% improvement after coming back from injury

 

Carson Wentz

first 8 starts average passer rating: 87.79 (91.07 over first 6)

last 8 starts average passer rating: 73.1 (72.92 over 2nd 6)

Nearly 17% worse

 

Josh Allen showed significant improvement in his passer rating after the injury.  Right on par with pretty good.  And that's with passer rating not giving much weight to his running skills.

Edited March 27, 2019 by billsrul120

[Stank_Nasty]

50 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Really? 

 

Jones, McCoy, Foster,, Benjamin, Croom, Clay, McKenzie, Ivory, and Holmes.  Almost all of whom underachieved in their receiving games from their annual averages.  

 

Of course that couldn't have had anything to do with the QB play, despite the notion that I've already proven that our secondary receiver like RBs caught more passes on average for more yards without Allen under Center.  But that's irrelevant, right?  

 

Allen had more time-to-throw.  Does that factor in?  

 

Allow me to ask tho, does ANY of this fall onto Allen as you see it?  

 

Based on everything I'm reading here Allen's poop doesn't stink in the overall analysis.  

bro..... holmes and Benjamin were part of our top 3 wr's the first half of the season. holmes got claimed by the broncos and promptly got cut. KB couldn't freaking crack the top 5 in KC by the end of the year. a healthy scratch.... THESE WERE SOME OF ALLENS PRIMARY WEAPONS FOR OVER A HALF A SEASON. they cant even hang on to spots on other teams rosters.

 

you need to stop. its embarrassing.

[freddyjj]

32 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

No, I don't think that you do get it.  I love Allen, he's got quite a few intangible rare assets.  I can't even begin to tell how badly I hope he works out. 

 

Here's where almost everyone else doesn't get it, despite the fact that I've posted this probably 20 times and I know as a fact that most of the people having tantrums related to my direct responses, TO THEIRS, have read it before.  

 

But there isn't a QB in the league in recent history that has become a franchise QB w/o having perfected his short-medium game.  That's a verifiable fact. 

 

Yet, that's Allen's single biggest weakness and in spades.  Getting him "deep threat options" doesn't help that, at all.  If he doesn't learn to find and hit receivers, like Beasley as a case-in-point, as well as RBs that are open, he will never become a franchise QB, ever.  He can run all he wants.  Rushing won't contribute to his franchise status at all, it'll only shorten his career.  

 

As to not being on board, frankly, it doesn't matter who's on board or who isn't.  Myself, you, or anyone else.  Allen's either going to correct himself or he isn't.  I'd love for Allen to work out, but I have yet to see a QB that lacks a short-medium prowess to such an extent correct it in the NFL to the extent that they become a franchise QB.  It's a tall order. 

 

Can you name one?  

 

Everyone here seems to think, based on their own statements, that few if any of Allen's issues fall back onto him.  That's my only point of disagreement.  That's an absurd proposition but the most popular one by a country mile.  

 

I'd love to discuss that.  

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/StafMa00/gamelog/2009/  Matthew Stafford

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RyanMa00/gamelog/2008/  Matt Ryan

 

While Ryan started out hotter, both these players were collegiate players with sub 60% accuracy who improved as pros. Ryan had a better rookie year but hovered around 60% and was 58% in year 3.  

 

Stafford took 5-6 years to get to mid 60%.  

 

Not sure these are franchise QBs but they are very close to Allen in college performance and as an early pro - without the mobility upside.

 

Want the Mobility factor added, there's always this guy - Cam Newton - and he was a 67% completion rate QB with a 94 QB rating last year.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/N/NewtCa00.htm  Might be why Dorsey was brought in.

Edited March 27, 2019 by freddyjj

[MJS]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

Some of us did say at the time Carson's rookie year was way overrated. He was very good for 4 games and then pretty much sucked from there. After week 4 Wentz was:

 

Played: 12

Total TDs: 11

Total Turnovers: 16

1.9% TD % (Pass)

Completion %: 61%

9.6 yards per completion

5.8 yards per attempt

 

Wentz rookie year was a classic case of narrative. He came out hot, played 4 good games and the narrative became "Wentz is fantastic" despite the fact that after that hot start he really struggled.

 

Great point. Allen struggled early and then got better and better as the season went on, capped off with a stellar week 17 game where he put up established franchise QB numbers. I'd take that over a hot start and fizzling out.

[HappyDays]

TaskersGhost recently compared Andre Holmes to Marquise Goodwin. Not worth anyone's time. This thread should be set on fire.

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

1 hour ago, TaskersGhost said:

It's funny, when the narrative fits Foster's on the cusp of being elite, Jones is great but takes a few seasons to develop, and Benjamin, whose career trajectory has been better than Matthews is irrelevant.  

 

 

What did Benjamin do when he went to the Cheifs and got to play with the league MVP? Tell me again how he is not washed up. I don't care what he did in 2013-2014. What did he do last year? Or even the year before?

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

1 hour ago, TaskersGhost said:

But there isn't a QB in the league in recent history that has become a franchise QB w/o having perfected his short-medium game.  That's a verifiable fact. 

 

Yet, that's Allen's single biggest weakness and in spades.  Getting him "deep threat options" doesn't help that, at all.  If he doesn't learn to find and hit receivers, like Beasley as a case-in-point, as well as RBs that are open, he will never become a franchise QB, ever.  He can run all he wants.  Rushing won't contribute to his franchise status at all, it'll only shorten his career.  

 

As to not being on board, frankly, it doesn't matter who's on board or who isn't.  Myself, you, or anyone else.  Allen's either going to correct himself or he isn't.  I'd love for Allen to work out, but I have yet to see a QB that lacks a short-medium prowess to such an extent correct it in the NFL to the extent that they become a franchise QB.  It's a tall order. 

 

Can you name one?  

 

Cam Newton?

[Stank_Nasty]

12 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

What did Benjamin do when he went to the Cheifs and got to play with the league MVP? Tell me again how he is not washed up. I don't care what he did in 2013-2014. What did he do last year? Or even the year before?

i'll say it because he wont...…. HE COULDNT EVEN CRACK THE ACTIVE ROSTER!!!

 

our #1 wr through midseason couldn't even crack a playoff squads top 5 wr's. let that soak in people!!!

[mushypeaches]

But, but, but...... the national narrative is that Josh Allen sucks and will never get better

 

I'm still liking him as early career John Elway

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, JESSEFEFFER said:

 

 

I do not have the same respect for passer rating as you.  Avoid a sack, escape the pocket and throw the ball away?  A good play that hurts passer rating.  Score a TD on a sneak or a 15+ yard scramble where several tackles are broke?  Good/great plays that passer rating does not care about.  Take a sack by holding the ball too long or running out-of-bounds behind the line?  Bad plays that passer rating does not measure.  Failing to secure the ball while being hit and fumble?  Another bad play ignored by passer rating.  Throw and complete a pass for 6 yards on 3rd and 11?  Inconsequential but passer rating loves it and gives it a 92.

 

I do not think Josh will ever max out on passer rating.  He will tend to score more TDs running than most because he is good at it and it's low hanging fruit, avoid sacks, and throw to the sticks on 3rd down.  Thus, passing TD% is lower and completion % is lower.

 

I tend to respect tQBR more because it tries to evaluate every play in it's context but it is a mystery how Allen got a tQBR of 19.4 for the game vs. the Lions (passer rating 89.3) where Stafford got an 83.3(106.7) in a game won by the Bills 14-13.  That is a head scratcher and good counter evidence for those that do not like it.

 

 

I think your reliance on QBR is misplaced.   I think you bought what ESPN was selling, which was that QBR was somehow a better all-round measure of QB performance.   I don't think it is.  

 

I took a look at the 50 best QB seasons based on passer rating and on QBR.   You know which names dominate BOTH lists?  Brady, Manning, Rodgers.  Rodgers is the only one who arguably should get a QBR boost from his running ability.  Guess what?  He has four of the top 50 passer rating seasons, and only three of the top 50 QBR seasons.  How about the most successful running QB, Russell Wilson?  He has exactly two of the top 50 QBR seasons, and he also has exactly two of the top 50 passer rating seasons.  Interestingly, they are different seasons.   

 

How Cam Newton?  Not on either list.   

 

So I looked at the list of best rushing seasons by quarterbacks.   Guess what?   The list is full of exciting names, but not winners.   Russell Wilson is the one exception.   The names are Vick, Cunningham, Culpepper, Newton, RGIII, Tyrod Taylor.  Josh Allen has the 16th best rushing season of all time, but he still was only 25th in QBR.  

 

Running is not the name of game for winning QBs.   Passing is.   And the passer rating is a good measure of passing success, without cluttering it up with a lot of other stuff that doesn't change the fundamental conclusion.   The best QBs rate high in both, and running doesn't have any significant impact on the QBR. 

 

On top of that, Josh Allen's future is passing, not running.   It's true for every QB.    

26 minutes ago, mushypeaches said:

But, but, but...... the national narrative is that Josh Allen sucks and will never get better

 

I'm still liking him as early career John Elway

I've thought for a long time that Elway is the guy Allen is most like.