Week 13 Jets vs. Titans

[Andrei01]

2 hours ago, dtait93 said:

How does, “could never move the ball until late in the game” mean we are talking about anything other than yesterday’s game when we’re in a thread specifically dedicated to talking about yesterday’s game?

So, going back to yesterday, the run game was not opening up the deep passes. Marcus made 2 really good throws to Taywan in 1 on 1 coverage and the other deep ball was just awful coverage on the Jets part and an excellent route by Taywan. As for the o-line and not giving Marcus enough time, I don’t have the pressure stat, but he was only sacked once in the first half when we weren’t opening up the playbook. So I disagree that the line wasn’t giving him enough time to throw anything deep unless you or someone else can provide me a stat with the rate at which he was being pressured to prove otherwise in the first half. The second half is not even an argument because he clearly did give have enough time to take deep shots. Marcus has been really good at the deep ball so far this year and yesterday’s game is the only game I can remember him just completely whiffing. The other one that comes to mind is the one against Baltimore but it looked like the ref got in Taywan’s way. So again, I disagree he isn’t suited for an offense that opens up the field.

Also how can you say our personnel is not suited for an offense that opens things up when it clearly performs so much better when it does? Or do you honestly believe the offense that only throws <10 yard passes and can barely run the ball for 3 yards that scored 0 points up until the last drive of the 1st half is what we’re best suited for?

"I don’t understand how we move the ball so easily at the end, why can’t we do that all game!", "It's because LaFleur refuses to dial up anything deep. Everything is undernearth or a run", those are direct quotes. Maybe the fact that I'm not a native English speaker is failing me here, but I never before in my life encountered another case in which the person speaking is using the present simple instead of the past tense to talk about specifically an event that just took place and finished.

Yeah, no **** they can block better when the ball is coming out of the quarterback's hands faster. That's pretty common sense. Sorry I don't have or care enough to look up numbers to back this up, but the eye test as well as their sack rate for the year is clearly indicating they are not pass protecting well enough for a deep ball offense to work at a higher usage rate. Even in the second half of yesterday, he was sacked, forced to make off platform throws, had to rush passes due to pressure and also scramble. Both deep throws to Taywan came on 1st down. No **** that when you run at a higher rate on 1st down, DL will expect to have to play the run so the pass rushers are not coming right off the snap which means the OL has a better chance at holding up their blocks, plus CBs and safeties are looking to cheat and play the run or the short routes as well, so busts in coverage tend to happen. Despite your refusal to see this, the efficiency at which they have been able to throw deep doesn't mean this will translate as good if they were to run it more, it just means that LaFleur and the coaching staff have done a damn good job at picking the shots to take, using the trends they're setting against the defense and making a supporting cast that is not fit to operate in that type of offense run it so effectively.

[Justin615$]

 

[renndawg37]

1 hour ago, TitanLegend said:

 

Evans and Brown could be a great duo for years to come. I love Woodyard but he is obviously getting older. 

[dtait93]

27 minutes ago, Andrei01 said:

"I don’t understand how we move the ball so easily at the end, why can’t we do that all game!", "It's because LaFleur refuses to dial up anything deep. Everything is undernearth or a run", those are direct quotes. Maybe the fact that I'm not a native English speaker is failing me here, but I never before in my life encountered another case in which the person speaking is using the present simple instead of the past tense to talk about specifically an event that just took place and finished.

My response to him was in regards to yesterdays game. Sorry if that confused you.

 

44 minutes ago, Andrei01 said:

Yeah, no **** they can block better when the ball is coming out of the quarterback's hands faster. That's pretty common sense.

Uhh no, it just means they don't have to for as long.

 

44 minutes ago, Andrei01 said:

Sorry I don't have or care enough to look up numbers to back this up, but the eye test as well as their sack rate for the year is clearly indicating they are not pass protecting well enough for a deep ball offense to work at a higher usage rate.

Your eye test failed you in the 2nd half.

 

47 minutes ago, Andrei01 said:

Even in the second half of yesterday, he was sacked, forced to make off platform throws, had to rush passes due to pressure and also scramble.

Yes...and all those things were also true when we kept everything less than 10 yards in the 1st half.

 

49 minutes ago, Andrei01 said:

No **** that when you run at a higher rate on 1st down, DL will expect to have to play the run so the pass rushers are not coming right off the snap which means the OL has a better chance at holding up their blocks, plus CBs and safeties are looking to cheat and play the run or the short routes as well, so busts in coverage tend to happen.

None of the 3 deep balls to Taywan were results of busted coverages/the secondary cheating to the line of scrimmage and getting burned. Two were great throws and catches and one was just a great route. 

 

58 minutes ago, Andrei01 said:

the efficiency at which they have been able to throw deep doesn't mean this will translate as good if they were to run it more, it just means that LaFleur and the coaching staff have done a damn good job at picking the shots to take, using the trends they're setting against the defense and making a supporting cast that is not fit to operate in that type of offense run it so effectively.

I don't disagree they've done a good job picking their shots. What I'm saying and have been saying is stop running on 1st down and 2nd and long as often, and open up the passing attack beyond 10 yards. We've proved beyond just the 2nd half of yesterday's game that we're capable of it. There's no denying in the 1st half LaFleur was over-conservative.

[Andrei01]

6 minutes ago, dtait93 said:

A, My response to him was in regards to yesterdays game. Sorry if that confused you.

 

B. Uhh no, it just means they don't have to for as long.

 

C. Your eye test failed you in the 2nd half.

 

D. Yes...and all those things were also true when we kept everything less than 10 yards in the 1st half.

 

E. None of the 3 deep balls to Taywan were results of busted coverages/the secondary cheating to the line of scrimmage and getting burned. Two were great throws and catches and one was just a great route. 

 

I don't disagree they've done a good job picking their shots. What I'm saying and have been saying is stop running on 1st down and 2nd and long as often, and open up the passing attack beyond 10 yards. We've proved beyond just the 2nd half of yesterday's game that we're capable of it. There's no denying in the 1st half LaFleur was over-conservative.

A. That's cool, I guess, but can we stop pretending after all this back and forth that was somehow worded to sound like it was about yesterday's game? Because it's clearly not. Not his original question and definitely not your response.

B. Yeah, no ****, that's the whole point, it's nice to finally admit it, it'd be nicer if you stopped ignoring it. Just because they are able to handle blocking for a short and quick 3-step throw or whatever, doesn't mean they can handle blocking for a deep ball to work, constantly. On the second completion to Taywan, they go play action, Dion helps with a chip on a DE plus they keep a TE in to block. That's 7 blockers against the 4 the Jets were rushing and yet Marcus still has to move off his spot to make the throw. 

C and D. Dude, you're arguing against your original point. Either the line was blocking better in the 1st half (because, again, they weren't asking them to block for as long), or not. Pick a side of the argument and stick with it.

E. On one play, all Taywan has to do is outrun a S crossing over the middle of the field. On the other, there is 0 safety help because the Jets drop 9 people near the LOS expecting run, and Claiborne is trying to take away any in-breaking routes, not expecting it deep. All that context matters, even if you can't or refuse to understand it. It doesn't take anything away from Marcus delivering great throws and Taywan running good routes, it just made it a whole lot easier.

[AteBoxx]

Jacksonville shutting out the Colts yesterday is not good news for us. If their defense is starting to get it together again, I mean the Colts offense is obviously way better than ours.... Then again we did beat them with 9 points.I think that's going to be an ugly game Thursday night, not the kind of thing anyones going to want to watch or be entertained by. I think we beat them though honestly just cause it's a home game. Say what you want about the consistency of this team but just look at the home versus away games and you see a pretty consistent pattern there, which is good news because we only have to play one more game on the road @ the giants. Four more wins to close out the year is completely possible.

Really though I think next year will be exciting for us. To me this was mostly a transition year and honestly with the talent we have I think we're overachieving at 6-6 and in the playoff hunt. The coaches are establishing themselves, Mariota needs Walker back and we're stupid as hell if we don't go out and get another quality receiver. 

[-Hope-]

know a couple folks were speculating about this earlier- i don't have a subscription to PK's website but it looks like vrabel actually did take that 12 men penalty on purpose. interesting move.

[KingTitan]

2 hours ago, -Hope- said:

know a couple folks were speculating about this earlier- i don't have a subscription to PK's website but it looks like vrabel actually did take that 12 men penalty on purpose. interesting move.

Sly dog?

[titans0021]

2 hours ago, -Hope- said:

know a couple folks were speculating about this earlier- i don't have a subscription to PK's website but it looks like vrabel actually did take that 12 men penalty on purpose. interesting move.

If it’s true, it was a great call. No way we were stopping them from getting two yards in two plays.

[dtait93]

3 hours ago, Andrei01 said:

That's cool, I guess, but can we stop pretending after all this back and forth that was somehow worded to sound like it was about yesterday's game? Because it's clearly not. Not his original question and definitely not your response.

Don't know if you have comprehension issues or what man but, "I don't understand how we move the ball so easily at the end, why can't we do that all game!" right after we won is 100% in reference to yesterday's game. If it wasn't, then instead of saying, "why can't we do that all game" he would have said something along the lines of, "why can't we do that in all of our games." Therefor my response was to do with yesterday's game. Like I said, sorry if that confuses you or you can't comprehend that. Not my problem and I'm done breaking it down for you Barney style.

 

4 hours ago, Andrei01 said:

Yeah, no ****, that's the whole point, it's nice to finally admit it, it'd be nicer if you stopped ignoring it. Just because they are able to handle blocking for a short and quick 3-step throw or whatever, doesn't mean they can handle blocking for a deep ball to work, constantly. On the second completion to Taywan, they go play action, Dion helps with a chip on a DE plus they keep a TE in to block. That's 7 blockers against the 4 the Jets were rushing and yet Marcus still has to move off his spot to make the throw.

I didn't admit anything or ignore anything either. Your statement, "they can block better when the ball is coming out of the quarterbacks hand's faster" is false because they aren't blocking better they're just not blocking as long. Just so happens I called you on it. Secondly, when did I ever say the o-line can, "constantly" hold up for the deep ball to work? I said we should go to it more than what we have been. Try not to make stuff up. My stance has always been, and this is my direct quote, "stop running on 1st down and 2nd and long as often, and open up the passing attack beyond 10 yards." That does not mean abandon the run, call long developing fly routes, and launch 50 yard bombs every drive or whatever your implying, "constantly" to mean.

And so what if they have to keep more blockers? It worked. Or are you not ok with 50 yard gains?

 

4 hours ago, Andrei01 said:

Dude, you're arguing against your original point. Either the line was blocking better in the 1st half (because, again, they weren't asking them to block for as long), or not. Pick a side of the argument and stick with it.

Not even close. Could you even tell me my original point or do you just like making stuff up? You aren't even able to tell me what side I picked because I never said the o-line was blocking better in one half or the other. I said that everything you said about the first half - the sacks, off platform throws, pressure, and scrambling - was also true about the second half. In other words, I didn't see much of a difference (which I said like 5 posts ago) and you still have no evidence to prove otherwise.

 

4 hours ago, Andrei01 said:

On one play, all Taywan has to do is outrun a S crossing over the middle of the field. On the other, there is 0 safety help because the Jets drop 9 people near the LOS expecting run, and Claiborne is trying to take away any in-breaking routes, not expecting it deep. All that context matters, even if you can't or refuse to understand it. It doesn't take anything away from Marcus delivering great throws and Taywan running good routes, it just made it a whole lot easier.

And? Even if he was trying to take away an in-breaking route, he didn't, "bust" his coverage. He was within 1 step of Taywan. It was a good route and a good pass. It wasn't a busted coverage, he just got beat. The high run rate on 1st down caused them to play closer to the line, but it still doesn't mean you have to run as much as you have been on 1st down in order to get the defense to do that.

[TitanSS]

So Firkser was an H-back in college and a WR in high school. I can't find any tape on him, but none of the reviews act like he offered a lot as a lead blocker.

It would be absolutely outstanding if he could manage to be a good enough lead blocker out of the backfield to take on an H-back role for us. Not only would that remove Stocker from the backfield, but our FB would be a legitimate weapon to line up anywhere on the field. \

Wishful thinking. He doesn't look like he has a lead blocker build.

[TitanLegend]

3 hours ago, -Hope- said:

know a couple folks were speculating about this earlier- i don't have a subscription to PK's website but it looks like vrabel actually did take that 12 men penalty on purpose. interesting move.

It baffles me how our coaching staff can use analytics and display flashes of cunning, aggression and brilliance at times, and run it on 2nd and 10(or 15..or 20..or 36....) at others...

7 minutes ago, TitanSS said:

So Firkser was an H-back in college and a WR in high school. I can't find any tape on him, but none of the reviews act like he offered a lot as a lead blocker.

It would be absolutely outstanding if he could manage to be a good enough lead blocker out of the backfield to take on an H-back role for us. Not only would that remove Stocker from the backfield, but our FB would be a legitimate weapon to line up anywhere on the field. \

Wishful thinking. He doesn't look like he has a lead blocker build.

Of his 93 snaps for the team this season, only 15 have been snaps where he's blocked. 5 pass blocks, 10 run blocks. For whatever little it's worth, PFF has him with an 81.1 pass block grade and a 53.6 run block grade. Again, that's PFF so take it with a grain of salt, and even for someone who might like PFF grading, it's just over a sample size of 5 and 10 plays respectively.

[TitanSS]

2 minutes ago, TitanLegend said:

Of his 93 snaps for the team this season, only 15 have been snaps where he's blocked. 5 pass blocks, 10 run blocks. For whatever little it's worth, PFF has him with an 81.1 pass block grade and a 53.6 run block grade. Again, that's PFF so take it with a grain of salt, and even for someone who might like PFF grading, it's just over a sample size of 5 and 10 plays respectively.

I can see why. He just looks like a natural receiver. Last year I joked that Eric Decker is a FB, but I'm not too sure Firkser isn't quicker than Decker lol.

Teams will treat him as a slot WR if he continues to be one dimensional. I think he has a better chance to be a move blocker out of the backfield than to line up in-line.

[-Hope-]

37 minutes ago, TitanLegend said:

It baffles me how our coaching staff can use analytics and display flashes of cunning, aggression and brilliance at times, and run it on 2nd and 10(or 15..or 20..or 36....) at others...

if i were feeling optimistic, i'd chalk it up to a rookie head coach and a rookie offensive playcaller who are still figuring it all out, with the hope that they'd come back next season dialed in and ready for a deep playoff push. but who really ever knows with this team, lol.

[TitanSS]

I'm not that angry about sometimes running it on 2nd and 10 if we get a very favorable front. Otherwise everytime we have an incompletion on first down the D knows we're following it up with a pass.  Running it on 2nd and 20 is different.