Jump to content

Albert Breer (MMQB) on the Dan Patrick Show


Mike in Horseheads
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Bruffalo said:

The rookie year Allen stuff is so silly.  The national media was filled to the brim with poor takes.  That might have been the worst WR core in football, ever, coupled with one of the worst O-Lines in football at the time.  Tom Brady would have looked like garbage with that cast. 

I'll jump in here, too.  Silly is just an understatement.   People weren't watching him and thinking about what they were seeing then.   And now, they aren't going back to videos of his rookie year and evaluating him; they're looking at his stats.   So, all of this "who could have seen his happening" crap is just that, crap.   

 

The facts are pretty simple:  The rational analysts of the draft all agreed - Allen had the highest ceiling, had what was almost an unlimited ceiling.  Everyone knew that.   Watching him as a rookie confirmed the upside, for sure, but it also confirmed that he could play in the league.  We all saw it.   Yes, he had to get better, but by the end of his rookie season Bills fans couldn't wait for the next season to start. 

 

It's a sad commentary on the quality of what passes for journalism.   Chris Simms was screaming as loud as he could about Allen by Allen's second season, and I'm sure there were a few others, too, but most of the media simply weren't paying attention.   It's pitiful.   

34 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

 

There was a great before the season panel where Mel Kiper bangs the drum I think for Josh being the best AFC East QB with Brady gone, he explains himself saying he watched every one of his snaps and another member of the panel mocks the idea that he watched every snap.

Oh, yeah.  I'm not a Kiper fan at all, but seeing him talk about Allen back then gave me a new perspective on him.  He actually looked at film and understood how Allen would translate to the NFL.  

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BUFFALOTONE said:

Yeah I get it, but the standard for reporting has dropped severely and its not just them. ESPN is unwatchable, with the exception of Clarke and Bart Scott IMO. 

It's not that the standard of reporting has dropped. You are just watching shows that are opinion based shows, which is what most of what is on TV. That's not reporting. You can't report news 24 hours a day, not that much happens. There is the reporting what happened with 23.5 hours of talking about what was reported and extrapolating that into other things. Again, not reporting. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BUFFALOTONE said:

The best is Mina Kimes, and Bomani Jones...had the two worst takes in relation to Allen and yet stood on the same hill for three years. How do these people get to keep their jobs when they are so piss poor at it.

 

This just made me think of recent video by Veritasium where he showcased how your average Joe off the street has a better chance at predicting outcomes than all the so called TV pundits and experts.  

 

https://youtu.be/5eW6Eagr9XA?t=318

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shaw66 said:

I'll jump in here, too.  Silly is just an understatement.   People weren't watching him and thinking about what they were seeing then.   And now, they aren't going back to videos of his rookie year and evaluating him; they're looking at his stats.   So, all of this "who could have seen his happening" crap is just that, crap.   

 

The facts are pretty simple:  The rational analysts of the draft all agreed - Allen had the highest ceiling, had what was almost an unlimited ceiling.  Everyone knew that.   Watching him as a rookie confirmed the upside, for sure, but it also confirmed that he could play in the league.  We all saw it.   Yes, he had to get better, but by the end of his rookie season Bills fans couldn't wait for the next season to start. 

 

It's a sad commentary on the quality of what passes for journalism.   Chris Simms was screaming as loud as he could about Allen by Allen's second season, and I'm sure there were a few others, too, but most of the media simply weren't paying attention.   It's pitiful.   

Bingo. I am not saying you have to be positive about Allen, or any other player for that matter. Lamar Jackson gets the same rap, and these journalists bash from up high with zero integrity. They don't have to be right just get clicks, its a sad state. Even articles written online - how many words are miss-spelled and or used bad punctuation. I realize this is nit picky but its rampant and on major news sites.  

Just now, That's No Moon said:

It's not that the standard of reporting has dropped. You are just watching shows that are opinion based shows, which is what most of what is on TV. That's not reporting. You can't report news 24 hours a day, not that much happens. There is the reporting what happened with 23.5 hours of talking about what was reported and extrapolating that into other things. Again, not reporting. 

I don't watch the news for sports, I read or listen to podcasts - ex ball players and front office people to me are the best listens and follows. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, BUFFALOTONE said:

Its not one thing, they are consistently wrong in their takes. And yes I want accountability for being piss poor at your job. 

I like to think I want accountability, too, but then I remember that the problem is us - we don't understand what their job is.  

 

Their job is to produce content.   The worst of them aren't journalists at all - they are, as we say, talking heads.   The best of them are true journalists, trying to adhere to journalistic principles while dealing with the pressure of producing content.   The best are wrong sometimes, but we're all wrong sometimes.   

 

The real problem is that the ratio of talking heads to journalists is out of whack.  

Edited by Shaw66
  • Like (+1) 4
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I'll jump in here, too.  Silly is just an understatement.   People weren't watching him and thinking about what they were seeing then.   And now, they aren't going back to videos of his rookie year and evaluating him; they're looking at his stats.   So, all of this "who could have seen his happening" crap is just that, crap.   

 

The facts are pretty simple:  The rational analysts of the draft all agreed - Allen had the highest ceiling, had what was almost an unlimited ceiling.  Everyone knew that.   Watching him as a rookie confirmed the upside, for sure, but it also confirmed that he could play in the league.  We all saw it.   Yes, he had to get better, but by the end of his rookie season Bills fans couldn't wait for the next season to start. 

 

It's a sad commentary on the quality of what passes for journalism.   Chris Simms was screaming as loud as he could about Allen by Allen's second season, and I'm sure there were a few others, too, but most of the media simply weren't paying attention.   It's pitiful.   

The idea that Franchise QB Josh Allen fell out of the sky and no one could have predicted it annoys the crap out of me. Beane did his ***** job is what happened. Was it a big gamble, sure but what 1st round QB isn't. Looking at Allen pre draft there were plenty of signs that he could follow the path he did. He had the physical talent, hell he was probably one of the most physically talented QBs in NFL history. His biggest issues were accuracy and decision making, looking at his accuracy when his mechanics were right the ball went where he wanted when they weren't not so much, decision making is honestly something rookie QBs have to work on pretty much always.

 

So the biggest thing was Allen needed to be coachable to improve his mechanics and decision making, and guess who was talked about as the player who improved the most at the senior bowl. There were plenty of signs, it honestly felt like people got stuck/caught on this analytics kick/bandwagon and refused to take Allen seriously because of it.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to add one key fact. All of these pundits that panned Josh as a likely failure achieved their major goal. They got clicks and we are still talking about it today four years later. Were they right? No, absolutely not. But, they are media and they are doing media things to achieve media goals.

Edited by MiltonWaddams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bigduke6 said:

ive heard this about Allens first few seasons before.    people did doubt him in the media,  alot.     the fans,  coaches and his fellow players didnt.   sure he was rough around the edges,  made mistakes,  but we all saw more than enough WoW plays to know we had something.

The Vikings hurdle,  The Jaguars heave, the Miami Crush...those were wonderful !

9 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

The idea that Franchise QB Josh Allen fell out of the sky and no one could have predicted it annoys the crap out of me. Beane did his ***** job is what happened. Was it a big gamble, sure but what 1st round QB isn't. Looking at Allen pre draft there were plenty of signs that he could follow the path he did. He had the physical talent, hell he was probably one of the most physically talented QBs in NFL history. His biggest issues were accuracy and decision making, looking at his accuracy when his mechanics were right the ball went where he wanted when they weren't not so much, decision making is honestly something rookie QBs have to work on pretty much always.

 

So the biggest thing was Allen needed to be coachable to improve his mechanics and decision making, and guess who was talked about as the player who improved the most at the senior bowl. There were plenty of signs, it honestly felt like people got stuck/caught on this analytics kick/bandwagon and refused to take Allen seriously because of it.

Also Mel Kiper had a great point during the draft.... Allen did not have enough throws per game in college to consistently evaluate his accuracy.  What he saw was a guy who wanted to win at all costs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bruffalo said:

The rookie year Allen stuff is so silly.  The national media was filled to the brim with poor takes.  That might have been the worst WR core in football, ever, coupled with one of the worst O-Lines in football at the time.  Tom Brady would have looked like garbage with that cast. 

 

 

I totally understand the urge to jump in and protect Allen, and it's true that the supporting cast wasn't good.

 

But no, Brady would not have looked like garbage. And part of the problem is that Allen's throwing just didn't look good most of the time. You could see he was competitive as hell, you could see he was a terrific athlete, but he absolutely needed to get a ton better at throwing the ball accurately in a consistent manner.

 

Thing is, he did.

 

He had already improved visibly and obviously through the draft process, but his fundamentals and his mechanics still needed a lot of work during that first year. And people are right when they say that it's fairly rare to make major improvements in accuracy and in mechanics. It's absolutely not impossible, and I among many others was screaming that at the time. But if his mechanics and the consistency of his accuracy had not improved vastly, he might not have made it. It was not at all a sure thing.

 

But the thing that sets Allen apart is his ability to change whatever part of his game he aims at not just on a surface level but to make deep major improvements with time. He did that, and it has made all the difference.

 

 

Edited by Thurman#1
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny thing about Allen is that although he has certainly tidied up some mechanical issues that caused his accuracy as a passer to be inconsistent, he’s basically the exact same player he was at Wyoming. Looking at his WYO highlight reel you could think you were looking at tape of some of his best plays as a Bill. Rather than the pro game changing the way he plays, he has changed the way the pro game is being played. Every QB needy team dreams of having a guy just like him. He is to QBs what LT was to outside linebackers. In both cases the secret sauce is other worldly athleticism.

  • Agree 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bruffalo said:

The rookie year Allen stuff is so silly.  The national media was filled to the brim with poor takes.  That might have been the worst WR core in football, ever, coupled with one of the worst O-Lines in football at the time.  Tom Brady would have looked like garbage with that cast. 

 

 

All facts.  

 

I still consider his rookie year to be 2019 because he wasn't really ready his actual rookie year - but maybe it was for the best he did play most of 2018 in the long term.  

 

Mahomes sat his entire rookie season.  I'm willing to bet (especially with Allen's cast not the KC offense) Mahomes rookie season looks a lot like Allen's to.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

The real problem the way I see it is, people can't tell the difference or even worse they refuse to care that there is one.

Yes, a lot of people can't tell the difference, and a lot don't care.  Absolutely.   And, at the risk of getting the thread shut down, it's also the problem with people and political journalism.  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

I totally understand the urge to jump in and protect Allen, and it's true that the supporting cast wasn't good.

 

But no, Brady would not have looked like garbage. And part of the problem is that Allen's throwing just didn't look good most of the time. You could see he was competitive as hell, you could see he was a terrific athlete, but he absolutely needed to get a ton better at throwing the ball accurately in a consistent manner.

 

Thing is, he did.

 

He had already improved visibly and obviously through the draft process, but his fundamentals and his mechanics still needed a lot of work during that first year. And people are right when they say that it's fairly rare to make major improvements in accuracy and in mechanics. It's absolutely not impossible, and I among many others was screaming that at the time. But if his mechanics and the consistency of his accuracy had not improved vastly, he might not have made it. It was not at all a sure thing.

 

But the thing that sets Allen apart is his ability to change whatever part of his game he aims at not just on a surface level but to make deep major improvements with time. He did that, and it has made all the difference.

 

 

Well, Thurm, to split hairs a little, I never thought there was anything wrong with his mechanics or his fundamentals.    He just needed to get his game under control.   He needed some discipline in his game.

 

I believe that ordinarily when someone says that a guy's mechanics are bad, that means that when he's throwing in a controlled environment, something is wrong.   It's easier to talk about in the case of a baseball pitcher.   He stands on the mound, winds up, or goes to the stretch, and delivers the ball.  All the circumstances are in his control.   If he consistently throws the ball poorly in that controlled environment, sometimes you can see that he has a mechanical problem - that is, over and over, he throws it the same way, and that way is not the optimal motion.  

 

Allen didn't have that problem.   In an ordinary environment, he threw the ball with accuracy, pace or not, distance or not.   He was mechanically sound.    His problem was that he wasn't mechanically consistent, especially if he was on the move or hurried.  When he made a bad throw, yes, sometimes the mechanics were wrong, but that wasn't because he had a mechanical problem.  It was because he had a consistency problem, or a problem under pressure.   He needed to get his game under control so that he could be more consistent throwing the ball the way he already knew how.  

 

Sure, Palmer and the Bills have tinkered with Allen's mechanics from year to year, but coaches tinker with the mechanics of skill position players all the time.   Diggs is still working on his mechanics.   Brady worked on his mechanics year after year.    When they came into the league, they both had solid mechanics that they could build on, and the same is true for Allen.  Is Allen mechanically better than he was?  Sure, but so is Diggs.  Diggs is a much, much better receiver today than when he came out of Maryland.  As a rookie, he had 52 catches, 720 yards, four touchdowns, but no one was saying he had a problem with his mechanics.   Diggs had natural talent that he had to refine to become who he is.   The same is true for Allen.  

Edited by Shaw66
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ganesh said:

Also Mel Kiper had a great point during the draft.... Allen did not have enough throws per game in college to consistently evaluate his accuracy.  What he saw was a guy who wanted to win at all costs.  

 

Yeah, I can't remember if Mel himself said it or if I heard it on a radio show/podcast or read it somewhere but I do remember someone pointing out that Baker Mayfield had taken something like 10,000 more reps than Josh prior to their pro careers. Mayfield was afforded far greater opportunity to hone his muscle memory and refine his game for the NFL. Josh was a giant piece of valuable clay waiting to be molded into a work of art.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Allen was drafted, it was clear he had amazing raw talent and insane measurables.  Of course, it was always a question of the accuracy and the things he didn't do well.  Conventional wisdom in the league has always been that QBs can't outgrow inaccuracy issues.  I always wondered about that in Josh's case.  The reason was Josh's incredible rawness.  I never had anywhere near the level of coaching that is typical of highly drafted QBs.  In terms of his development, he was a lot closer to a high school QB than most QBs coming out of college hoping for a shot in the NFL.  To me, that meant he had a lot less time for bad habits to become ingrained.  The other issue with Josh Allen is his internal make up.  Internal makeup ("heart,"  "drive") or what ever you want to call it is impossible to objectively measure or quantify.  Scouts and evaluators do their best to try and figure out what's happening inside of a player, but they can't know for sure.  I'm sure Brandon Beane would tell you they thought they might have a gem in Josh Allen, but even he was probably pleasantly surprised at just how "right" Josh's mental makeup and heart seems to be.

 

Lots of people place great stock in their own ability to evaluate young talent, and even when they prove to be wrong, they hold on to their perceptions for an inappropriate amount of time, looking for every scrap they can to justify their preconceptions.  I just don't think they matter any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...