Trent Edwards' Arm Strength

[Bill from NYC]

Because he was talking in general terms. He is not supposed to or expected to list every possible scenario.

 

I was agreeing with you...

[RI Bills Fan]

Oh I get it. You say WTF and I hope it's a typo -- then say you know exactly what he meant -- and THEN make a post that's not anything what he meant -- even though it was just explained to you and you said you know exactly what he meant.

 

Keep trying to defend the indefensable there Kelly.

 

What he posted IS: "I'd rather see him wait and toss a 12 yard incomplete pass on 3rd and 9 instead of dumping it off to the RB or TE in the flat who then needs to run for the first down."

 

What you claim he meant IS: "He means, say, if there are ten passing downs of 3rd and 9, he wants his quarterback to try to make a pass that gains at least nine yards 10 out of 10 times rather than just dump the ball off too quickly with no chance of getting the first downs. He'll accept the incompletions on a few or several of those ten plays because at least the QB is trying to get the first and has a chance of getting the first. Otherwise, it's just giving up and punting 9 out of 10 times or even 10 out of 10 times because there is very little chance of that kind of dump off gaining the first down."

 

What I'm saying IS: I completely disagree with both of the statements posted above. It is totally ASININE to think that an incomplete pass that lands beyond the first down marker is preferable to a completed pass which is caught caught short of the first down marker and gives one of the team's playmakers the opportunity to make a play and gain the first down. It is totally ASININE to force any QB to throw ill advised passes just because they travel a specified distance in the air. It is totally ASININE to refuse to put the ball into the hands of your playmakers and ask them to make a play just because they might have to beat a defender to make that play. It is totally ASININE to hamstring your offense.

 

Is a 10 yards catch and emmediate tackle on 3rd and nine a better option than a 5 yard catch and 35 yard run on 3rd and nine? And if it isn't than why take away the possibility by forcing the 10 yard throws? (Yes the possibility of the 10 yard catch and 50 yard run exists, but it's outside the perameters you guys set.)

[Kelly the Dog]

Keep trying to defend the indefensable there Kelly.

 

What he posted IS: "I'd rather see him wait and toss a 12 yard incomplete pass on 3rd and 9 instead of dumping it off to the RB or TE in the flat who then needs to run for the first down."

 

What you claim he meant IS: "He means, say, if there are ten passing downs of 3rd and 9, he wants his quarterback to try to make a pass that gains at least nine yards 10 out of 10 times rather than just dump the ball off too quickly with no chance of getting the first downs. He'll accept the incompletions on a few or several of those ten plays because at least the QB is trying to get the first and has a chance of getting the first. Otherwise, it's just giving up and punting 9 out of 10 times or even 10 out of 10 times because there is very little chance of that kind of dump off gaining the first down."

 

What I'm saying IS: I completely disagree with both of the statements posted above. It is totally ASININE to think that an incomplete pass that lands beyond the first down marker is preferable to a completed pass which is caught caught short of the first down marker and gives one of the team's playmakers the opportunity to make a play and gain the first down. It is totally ASININE to force any QB to throw ill advised passes just because they travel a specified distance in the air. It is totally ASININE to refuse to put the ball into the hands of your playmakers and ask them to make a play just because they might have to beat a defender to make that play. It is totally ASININE to hamstring your offense.

 

Is a 10 yards catch and emmediate tackle on 3rd and nine a better option than a 5 yard catch and 35 yard run on 3rd and nine? And if it isn't than why take away the possibility by forcing the 10 yard throws? (Yes the possibility of the 10 yard catch and 50 yard run exists, but it's outside the perameters you guys set.)

So what you're saying is, you cannot read.

 

Let me say it again. Slowly.

 

He. Is. Not. Saying. He. Prefers. Incompletions. To. Dumpoffs. For. Yards. On. Single. Isolated. Plays. In. Retrospect. Like. You. Are. Saying. He. Is. Saying.

[RI Bills Fan]

Oh I get it. You say WTF and I hope it's a typo -- then say you know exactly what he meant -- and THEN make a post that's not anything what he meant -- even though it was just explained to you and you said you know exactly what he meant.

 

He was saying, in general, on 3rd and 9, after say two seconds in the pocket, he would rather have a quarterback hold the ball an extra second or two to try to make a play downfield, even if it were eventually an incomplete pass. Because sometimes, if not often, a player will come open or an option will become apparent in seconds three and four, and the QB needs to try to make the play rather than dump the ball off too quickly after two seconds where the dump off player is highly unlikely to make 9 yards. He is NOT saying he likes 9 yard incompletions or prefers them to five yard gains on 3rd and 9.

 

Nice job of changing your post after I replied to it. But sorry, He very specifically said exactly what you claim he didn't say.

 

Also nice job of removing your statement about the shorter completions being "just giving up."

[RI Bills Fan]

So what you're saying is, you cannot read.

 

Let me say it again. Slowly.

 

He. Is. Not. Saying. He. Prefers. Incompletions. To. Dumpoffs. For. Yards. On. Single. Isolated. Plays. In. Retrospect. Like. You. Are. Saying. He. Is. Saying.

 

 

I'd rather see him wait and toss a 12 yard incomplete pass on 3rd and 9 instead of dumping it off to the RB or TE in the flat who then needs to run for the first down.

 

That statement doesn't seem very ambiguous to me...

 

Please tell me how those words can be interpreted differently.

[Kelly the Dog]

Nice job of changing your post after I replied to it. But sorry, He very specifically said exactly what you claim he didn't say.

 

Also nice job of removing your statement about the shorter completions being "just giving up."

He said it literally. But it's obvious, in my opinion obvious to everyone with any reading comprehension skills, that it wasn't meant to be taken literally. It was meant in general terms. No one, including Ramius, believes that a single 12 yard pass incompletion is preferable to a 5 yard gain on that single play when you look at it in retrospect, like you are.

 

People do believe, including Ramius and myself, and others, that we want our QBs to look to make plays downfield on 3rd and 9, even if some of those plays are incompletions. Because in the long run, it's preferable to dumping off too quick.

 

What statement about "just giving up", I don't recall making one although I may have.

 

My now three out of three explanations of his comments are the exact same concept.

[Kelly the Dog]

That statement doesn't seem very ambiguous to me...

 

Please tell me how those words can be interpreted differently.

See above.

[berndogg]

He said it literally. But it's obvious, in my opinion obvious to everyone with any reading comprehension skills, that it wasn't meant to be taken literally. It was meant in general terms. No one, including Ramius, believes that a single 9 yard pass incompletion is preferable to a 5 yard gain on that single play when you look at it in retrospect, like you are.

 

People do believe, including Ramius and myself, and others, that we want our QBs to look to make plays downfield on 3rd and 9, even if some of those plays are incompletions. Because in the long run, it's preferable to dumping off too quick.

 

What statement about "just giving up", I don't recall making one although I may have.

 

My now three out of three explanations of his comments are the exact same concept.

 

I think on 3rd and long we should just use the same play that everyone uses against us in those situations. It seems to be pretty effective.

[RI Bills Fan]

You know what he meant. If you took two seconds to think.

 

He means, say, if there are ten passing downs of 3rd and 9, he wants his quarterback to try to make a pass that gains at least nine yards 10 out of 10 times rather than just dump the ball off too quickly with no chance of getting the first downs. He'll accept the incompletions on a few or several of those ten plays because at least the QB is trying to get the first and has a chance of getting the first. Otherwise, it's just giving up and punting 9 out of 10 times or even 10 out of 10 times because there is very little chance of that kind of dump off gaining the first down.

 

Sorry, my bad, your just giving up statement was still there when I looked for it.

 

I have bad reading comprehension? You wrote it. How else can it be interpreted?

[Kelly the Dog]

I think on 3rd and long we should just use the same play that everyone uses against us in those situations. It seems to be pretty effective.

It does seem to work quite well. Where is our quality control coach breaking down team tendencies against us?

[Kelly the Dog]

Sorry, my bad, your just giving up statement was still there when I looked for it.

 

I have bad reading comprehension? You wrote it. How else can it be interpreted?

My bad. But I think what I said was obvious.

 

If you dump the ball off immediately on 3rd and 9, there is a 90% chance you won't get a first down by the player breaking tackles and gaining 9+ yards. That IS giving up on the chance of getting that first down nine out of ten times. That MAY be a slight exaggeration but I think not. It's probably nine out of ten or close to it.

 

If you don't dump the ball off immediately on 3rd and 9, but rather look down field and try to make a play to a WR more than 9 yards down the field, or across the LOS and on the run into the opposing team's secondary, there is a far greater chance of getting that first down. That is what good QBs and good offenses and good teams do. That is NOT giving up on the play or series and just punting, that is taking a bigger risk. There is also a greater chance for a sack and an incompletion and a turnover, and yet it is still the preferable method.

 

That is what Ramius is saying and that is what I am saying. If you want to argue that point, please do.

[Ramius]

My bad. But I think what I said was obvious.

 

If you dump the ball off immediately on 3rd and 9, there is a 90% chance you won't get a first down by the player breaking tackles and gaining 9+ yards. That IS giving up on the chance of getting that first down nine out of ten times. That MAY be a slight exaggeration but I think not. It's probably nine out of ten or close to it.

 

If you don't dump the ball off immediately on 3rd and 9, but rather look down field and try to make a play to a WR more than 9 yards down the field, or across the LOS and on the run into the opposing team's secondary, there is a far greater chance of getting that first down. That is what good QBs and good offenses and good teams do. That is NOT giving up on the play or series and just punting, that is taking a bigger risk. There is also a greater chance for a sack and an incompletion and a turnover, and yet it is still the preferable method.

 

That is what Ramius is saying and that is what I am saying. If you want to argue that point, please do.

 

Thanks. you just saved me a ton of typing.

[Bill from NYC]

Thanks. you just saved me a ton of typing.

 

You're welcome.

[RI Bills Fan]

My bad. But I think what I said was obvious.

 

If you dump the ball off immediately on 3rd and 9, there is a 90% chance you won't get a first down by the player breaking tackles and gaining 9+ yards. That IS giving up on the chance of getting that first down nine out of ten times. That MAY be a slight exaggeration but I think not. It's probably nine out of ten or close to it.

 

If you don't dump the ball off immediately on 3rd and 9, but rather look down field and try to make a play to a WR more than 9 yards down the field, or across the LOS and on the run into the opposing team's secondary, there is a far greater chance of getting that first down. That is what good QBs and good offenses and good teams do. That is NOT giving up on the play or series and just punting, that is taking a bigger risk. There is also a greater chance for a sack and an incompletion and a turnover, and yet it is still the preferable method.

 

That is what Ramius is saying and that is what I am saying. If you want to argue that point, please do.

 

That may be what you meant but it is very definately not what either of you said.

 

Look, I didn't graduate from the Karnak School of Mind Reading. I can't reply to what you think, I can only go by what you type. And neither of the statements I quoted were in any way ambiguous.

 

In the end I think we all agree, Make the First Down whichever way we can.

[GG]

That may be what you meant but it is very definately not what either of you said.

 

Look, I didn't graduate from the Karnak School of Mind Reading. I can't reply to what you think, I can only go by what you type. And neither of the statements I quoted were in any way ambiguous.

 

In the end I think we all agree, Make the First Down whichever way we can.

 

I thought the point was rather clear, especially since this has been the major area of concern about Edwards' play and in light of Holcomb's tenure here.

[KRC]

That may be what you meant but it is very definately not what either of you said.

 

Seemed pretty clear to me.

[Kelly the Dog]

That may be what you meant but it is very definately not what either of you said.

 

Look, I didn't graduate from the Karnak School of Mind Reading. I can't reply to what you think, I can only go by what you type. And neither of the statements I quoted were in any way ambiguous.

 

In the end I think we all agree, Make the First Down whichever way we can.

And I don't know you well as a poster here, and perhaps I shouldn't have jumped all over you.

 

This is another pet peeve of mine on these message boards however. Posters taking other posters literally when it's impossible to believe they meant it to be taken literally. Your first response to Ramius was "WTF?" and "Tell me it's a typo". In order for what he said to be taken literally, and the way you interpreted his remarks, you would have to actually believe that if faced with the question:

 

QUIZMASTER: "Ramius, on 3rd and 9, which would you prefer, a 12 yard incompletion or a 5 yard gain?"

 

Ramius would respond:

 

RAMIUS: "The 12 yard incompletion."

 

See how dumb that is? A lot of people here think Ramius is dumb, don't get me wrong. And even more think he is insane. But no one in their right mind, thinking fair, would believe Ramius, or anyone here would answer that question with "The 12 yard incompletion".

 

So, in other words, it was obvious, after very short thought, without being Karnac, that it wasn't to be taken literally.

[Ramius]

And I don't know you well as a poster here, and perhaps I shouldn't have jumped all over you.

 

This is another pet peeve of mine on these message boards however. Posters taking other posters literally when it's impossible to believe they meant it to be taken literally. Your first response to Ramius was "WTF?" and "Tell me it's a typo". In order for what he said to be taken literally, and the way you interpreted his remarks, you would have to actually believe that if faced with the question:

 

QUIZMASTER: "Ramius, on 3rd and 9, which would you prefer, a 12 yard incompletion or a 5 yard gain?"

 

Ramius would respond:

 

RAMIUS: "The 12 yard incompletion."

 

See how dumb that is? A lot of people here think Ramius is dumb, don't get me wrong. And even more think he is insane. But no one in their right mind, thinking fair, would believe Ramius, or anyone here would answer that question with "The 12 yard incompletion".

 

So, in other words, it was obvious, after very short thought, without being Karnac, that it wasn't to be taken literally.

 

If we weren't crazy we'd all go insane.

[ieatcrayonz]

And I don't know you well as a poster here, and perhaps I shouldn't have jumped all over you.

 

This is another pet peeve of mine on these message boards however. Posters taking other posters literally when it's impossible to believe they meant it to be taken literally. Your first response to Ramius was "WTF?" and "Tell me it's a typo". In order for what he said to be taken literally, and the way you interpreted his remarks, you would have to actually believe that if faced with the question:

 

QUIZMASTER: "Ramius, on 3rd and 9, which would you prefer, a 12 yard incompletion or a 5 yard gain?"

I don't recall anyone in this thread called Quizmaster. Why do you keep changing things to get around facts? You love JP and hate Trent. Who cares? Just own up to it. Don't make up people and then put words in their mouth.