Pat Mahomes couldn’t read defenses

[Chiefs_5627]

This thread did not disappoint, Mahomey lives rent free in this dude's head. 😂😂

[Bearerofnews]

23 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

 No, they aren’t. Pretty much every NFL offense uses those concepts. You might as well google “NFL offenses for dummies” and just about all of that will come up. 

Literally not a single offense uses all those concepts, formations, have the route spacing and presnap shifts and alignments.  Just isnt true, no matter how much you say otherwise. Variations of some of the formations, schemes, alignments, etc.. yes, sure. All of it, no way. Which is what makes KC'S offense so efficient.

Quote

You said greatest, not me.

That’s like saying “Brett Favre is the greatest QB of all time, literally everyone says so. Here’s an article saying Favre is great as proof.” Those are not one in the same. If you want to backtrack and just say “Reid is a great QB whisperer”, no one would push back on that. 

He is the greatest, becausr he is the qb whisperer. The article implied that was well. "THE qb whisperer" not "A qb whisperer"

Quote

It said “most QB friendly system ever”? Where?

Again, it's all in the context of the article and many other articles you can google, or watch NFL shows with former players or experts echoing the same sentiment.

Quote

Quote where I said you’re wrong, because I didn’t. I said you haven’t posted proof specific to what you claimed, which you haven’t. Your goal thus far has been to make a statement, not back it up, and call anyone that disagrees with you ignorant. If you’re not here to discuss a topic while also refusing to post evidence of a claim, why post at all? To give insight, no. To discuss, no. To make your opinion known, that horse is dead. What’s the point?

I'm stating nearly a given fact that everyone knows to be true, but some of you are either playing dumb or what a "ahhh haaa moment" for some self gratifying reason. If you dont think im wrong, then why do i need to post proof. What exactly is satisfactory level proof. Because next gen stats dont seem to be proof, video evidence will be spun, articles. We all know im right, you all just want to argue to argue. If i was a Cardinals fan, no one would bat an eye at what im saying. 

The point is to add some levity to this typical hysteria that happens every couple of years when fans want to indugle in absurd levels of hyperbole over a player. By pointing out what should be pretty obvious. But apparently some of you want to over complicate the uncomplicated.

Quote

And no, that’s not how the world works. You make a claim, you provide substance. So for the final time, I’ll ask: do you have anything specific to back up what you’ve said?

That is 100% how the world works. Someone makes a statement... if you say they are wrong, the onus is on you to prove they are wrong. "Innocent until proven guilty" our judicial system operates under the same rules.

Edited March 8, 2020 by Bearerofnews

[Bearerofnews]

14 minutes ago, kingseanjohn said:

You are aware that VIck was a good player before Andy? He took the Falcons to the playoffs in 2002 and then again in 2004 reaching the NFC Championship game. Alex Smith led the 49ers to the NFC Championship in 2011 only to lose because of two special teams fumbles and then led them to a 6-2 record the next year before being injured/losing his job. He never led the Chiefs to the AFC Championship. It's not like he came to KC without any accomplishments. Both players were good before Andy worked with them.

Vick never had higher than an 81 passer rating with the Falcons. First year with Reid he had 100 passer rating. 

Alex avged a 79.1 passer rating with SF

He avged a 94.8 passer rating with Reid. 

 

[Bearerofnews]

More of the same stuff ive been saying..

 

"The Chiefs were one of the NFL’s most innovative offenses last year, embracing what had traditionally been considered college concepts. Coach Andy Reid, who is a direct influencer of many of the league’s leading offensive minds, succeeded by combining things like run-pass options and jet sweeps with traditional West Coast concepts. "

this is with Alex Smith and before Hill became a more rounded option.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/sports/every-nfl-teams-best-offensive-play/

[Soko]

Just now, Bearerofnews said:

Literally not a single offenses uses all those concepts, formations, have the route spacing and presnap shifts and alignments.  Just isnt true, no matter how much you say otherwise.

Again with the literally’s. 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2024638-nfl-101-introducing-the-basic-route-combinations

First page of google. 

Just now, Bearerofnews said:

He is the greatest, becausr he is the qb whisperer. The article implied that was well. "THE qb whisperer" not "A qb whisperer"

If “literally everyone” believes what you say, then I don’t see why it’s hard to get evidence that specifically backs what you said. 

Just now, Bearerofnews said:

Again, it's all in the context of the article and many other articles you can google, or watch NFL shows with former players or experts echoing the same sentiment.

So...it doesn’t say specifically then. 

Just now, Bearerofnews said:

I'm stating nearly a given fact that everyone knows to be true, but some of you are either playing dumb or what a "ahhh haaa moment" for some self gratifying reason. If you dont think im wrong, then why do i need to post proof. What exactly is satisfactory level proof. Because next gen stats dont seem to be proof, video evidence will be spun, articles. We all know im right, you all just want to argue to argue. If i was a Cardinals fan, no one would bat an eye at what im saying. 

Your statements would be as baseless as they are, regardless of your team affiliation. 

Just now, Bearerofnews said:

The point is to add some levity to this typical hysteria that happens every couple of years when fans want to indugle in absurd levels of hyperbole over a player. By pointing out what should be pretty obvious. But apparently some of you want to over complicate the uncomplicated.

It’s very uncomplicated. You made claims and can’t back them.

Just now, Bearerofnews said:

That is 100% how the world works. Someone makes a statement... if you say they are wrong, the onus is on you to prove they are wrong. "Innocent until proven guilty" pur judicial system operates under the same prefaces. 

I never said you were wrong. I said prove it. You haven’t. 

In court, prosecution claims someone committed a crime. It is their job to prove their claim with evidence. It is the duty of those making the claim to do so. In medicine, if you claim your drug does x, it is the pharmacy’s duty to provide studies that prove such. In science, theories and laws must be substantiated by those making the claim. You are the one with a claim, and all I have done is ask for proof specific to what you’ve said. And there has been none.

[SmittyBacall]

Man, this argument is stupid.

Mahomes isn’t the consensus best QB in the NFL because people drool at his inflated box scores. He’s perceived that way because the guy is generationally talented, makes unbelievably spectacular plays on the regular, and has the production to warrant the label. He’s the total package. It’s the plays he makes outside of Reid’s system that garners the respect and attention. All you have to do is watch him play. He drops your jaw nearly every week. It’s pretty self-evident if you’re willing to look.

 

[Bearerofnews]

17 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Again with the literally’s. 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2024638-nfl-101-introducing-the-basic-route-combinations

First page of google. 

Virtually nothing about what i typed about Reid's system and how those concepts are integrated in everyone else's offense, as you claimed in that article. In fact, if you look at the breakdown in your own article. They are using CHIEFS in the demonstration picture. 

17 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

If “literally everyone” believes what you say, then I don’t see why it’s hard to get evidence that specifically backs what you said. 

But they are saying it. Just using different language. You are hung up on greatest, or best and not reading the context that basically says that without using those superlatives.

17 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

So...it doesn’t say specifically then. 

Your statements would be as baseless as they are, regardless of your team affiliation. 

That's a lie.

17 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

It’s very uncomplicated. You made claims and can’t back them.

Ive backed them, you have yet to refute them.

17 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

I never said you were wrong. I said prove it. You haven’t. 

Which i did. You said im not wrong, so what more proof do you need if you dont disagree. 

17 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

In court, prosecution claims someone committed a crime. It is their job to prove their claim with evidence. It is the duty of those making the claim to do so. In medicine, if you claim your drug does x, it is the pharmacy’s duty to provide studies that prove such. In science, theories and laws must be substantiated by those making the claim. You are the one with a claim, and all I have done is ask for proof specific to what you’ve said. And there has been none.

There has been plenty. I made the statement, if you dont disagree, why do i need further proof. Say you disagree and then prove why i am wrong. Otherwise this is all petty semantics. Its obvious no matter what what proof i provide, it is just not going to be sufficient for you. Tell me what proof exactly you want, because this is becoming an annoying circle of futility.

[kingseanjohn]

1 hour ago, Bearerofnews said:

Alex avged a 79.1 passer rating with SF

He also had a different offensive coordinator/offense every year for his first 5 years. What was it once there was stability?

[Bearerofnews]

4 minutes ago, kingseanjohn said:

He also had a different offensive coordinator/offense every year for his first 5 years. What was it once there was stability?

Full season it was 90. Following year only 9 starts it was 104. 

[Chiefs_5627]

1 hour ago, SmittyBacall said:

Man, this argument is stupid.

Mahomes isn’t the consensus best QB in the NFL because people drool at his inflated box scores. He’s perceived that way because the guy is generationally talented, makes unbelievably spectacular plays on the regular, and has the production to warrant the label. He’s the total package. It’s the plays he makes outside of Reid’s system that garners the respect and attention. All you have to do is watch him play. He drops your jaw nearly every week. It’s pretty self-evident if you’re willing to look.

 

Nope, no good. Conley needed to be covered by 4 guys within a foot. Stinking Reid and his play designs...

[Bearerofnews]

 

Generationally talented, total package, jaw dropping, goat, amazing, perfect....

 

Oh wait, that's just Matthew Stafford.. top 10ish active qb.

[Chiefer]

1 hour ago, Bearerofnews said:

 

Generationally talented, total package, jaw dropping, goat, amazing, perfect....

 

Oh wait, that's just Matthew Stafford.. top 10ish active qb.

Stanford is underrated

[Bearerofnews]

7 minutes ago, Chiefer said:

Stanford is underrated

I prefer Berkeley.

[Jakuvious]

8 hours ago, Bearerofnews said:

That is 100% how the world works. Someone makes a statement... if you say they are wrong, the onus is on you to prove they are wrong. "Innocent until proven guilty" our judicial system operates under the same rules.

This isn't a court of law, though. In a court of law, burden of proof lies with the accuser because they're making a claim regarding what the accused did. In this case, you're making a claim. That Mahomes is a system QB. The burden of proof is then on you to prove that claim once questioned on it. Otherwise you're making what's called an argument of ignorance. It implies that you can say basically whatever you want, and it's true until someone comes around and proves you wrong. And that's not how logic or debate works.

Especially given that you're making a claim that runs counter to the almost universally accepted view regarding Mahomes.

[Bearerofnews]

15 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

This isn't a court of law, though. In a court of law, burden of proof lies with the accuser because they're making a claim regarding what the accused did. In this case, you're making a claim. That Mahomes is a system QB. The burden of proof is then on you to prove that claim once questioned on it. Otherwise you're making what's called an argument of ignorance. It implies that you can say basically whatever you want, and it's true until someone comes around and proves you wrong. And that's not how logic or debate works.

Especially given that you're making a claim that runs counter to the almost universally accepted view regarding Mahomes.

The onus is never on the one who makes the initial statement. A statement ive proven as much as possibly can be proven with the amount of tangible data that can be used to prove a hypotheses; such as Mahomes greatly benefits, as do his stats from being with Reid and being in KC's system. I dont think Mahomes is a system qb per say. But i know, as much as possible, without actually examining results from him playing in all 32 offenses... that he wouldn't produce the level he does without Reid and outside KC's offense. 

Someone tell me, what would be sufficient proof... outside the stuff i provided and the basic prowess of the current landscape of the NFL, the logical ability to know that Reid makes QBs better and as a byproduct of better, that means greater statistics. That Reid has built a machine in that offense with very specific personnel, a offense that didnt skip a beat with Matt Moore... Matt freeekin Moore. An offense that greatly benefits qb's production. I think we all know this.  So either you guys are being ignorant by proxy, trending in a childish mob mentality to stake a stance in something you guys have no real conviction in, or just dislike me enough to keep up these tireless charades. 

 

 I believe without an all time statistical start to his career, Mahomes wouldnt be as revered as he is, stature wise. If he had lessor stats, with the same exceptional off design adhoc plays... he'd be viewed as Stafford or slightly better.

But with those all wordly stats, with the level of play and now the team results, it creates a blind level of credit that allll goes to Mahomes. When thats just not an accurate assessment. Also Mahomes is not void of criticism, so lets stop acting like he is. No player is, unless you can say with a straight face they are perfect.

 

 

Edited March 9, 2020 by Bearerofnews