Jump to content

The QB Thread: Everything Carr, Mariota and beyond


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, drfrey13 said:

Frankie you do not need to see a player for an entire season to know if they are a good scheme or style fit.  Just like certain RB and linemen are good fits for certain types of schemes.  We knew MM was more aggressive with the ball in his hands and he was able to extend plays when they broke down in ways Carr does not.  Carr cuts his loses quickly and comes back for the next play.  Sometimes that is a good thing but if you do it to much you can stall the offense.  Just the same way that every time MM extends plays beyond what Carr does you increase the risk for negative plays and TOs.  I did not say he was a better QB just that I think Carr is not the ideal QB for Gruden.  If Carr was more decisive with the ball in his hands and had better ball security he would be a good fit.  I am not saying Carr needs to be Wilson, Jackson, or Allen but Carr had 140 rushing yards in 15.25 games and Mariota had 88 yards in .75.  This does not make MM better but it opened things up for the offense and the Chargers defense was on its heels.

More aggressive?  MM averaged 10TD's and 8.5 INT over his last three years in Ten.  The guy was a flat out bum....

He was available this offseason for trade and had such little interest he was forced to take a massive pay cut or be released.  That is what NFL GM's think of him, including our own GM. 

Is he more mobile than Carr, sure but to say he is a better scheme fit just based off of mobility is about as foolish as a take as one can have.  

Edited by Frankie2Gunz
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

More aggressive?  MM averaged 10TD's and 8.5 INT over his last three years in Ten.  The guy was a flat out bum....

He was available this offseason for trade and had such little interest he was forced to take a massive pay cut or be release.  That is what NFL GM's think of him, including our own GM. 

Is he more mobile than Carr, sure but to say he is a better scheme fit just based off of mobility is about as foolish as a comment as one can have.  

I just can't believe we live in a world where a team casts off a 1st round QB bust, trades for a former WR turned QB who pushes them into playoff football almost instantaneously, he then gets signed by a team to be a back up/trade bait, only to find out our 4,000 yard a year, 25+/-, 28 year old QB isn't a fit and this guy is.   

 

GtFOOH.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

More aggressive?  MM averaged 10TD's and 8.5 INT over his last three years in Ten.  The guy was a flat out bum....

He was available this offseason for trade and had such little interest he was forced to take a massive pay cut or be released.  That is what NFL GM's think of him, including our own GM. 

Is he more mobile than Carr, sure but to say he is a better scheme fit just based off of mobility is about as foolish as a take as one can have.  

The Titans offense went from boo boo to elite as soon as Tannehill replaced Mariota. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

More aggressive?  MM averaged 10TD's and 8.5 INT over his last three years in Ten.  The guy was a flat out bum....

He was available this offseason for trade and had such little interest he was forced to take a massive pay cut or be released.  That is what NFL GM's think of him, including our own GM. 

Is he more mobile than Carr, sure but to say he is a better scheme fit just based off of mobility is about as foolish as a take as one can have.  

Spot on. 

I've always had a soft spot for Mariota, and nothing would please me more than to see him find success. Even better if he was somehow able to become the franchise guy for the NFL team I live and die by. And I'm excited at the prospect of possibly seeing him get some packaged plays. 

But is he better than Carr? No way. He had one reasonably impressive performance coming off the bench against a decent team. That's it. It was fun and exciting, but that was such a small sample. It'll take way more than that for his value to rise or a decision to be made to give him the reigns. If not, he would've been sought after via trade or we would've traded Carr, who actually probably nets at least 1, of not 2,  first round picks riight now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

But is he better than Carr? No way. He had one reasonably impressive performance coming off the bench against a decent team. That's it. It was fun and exciting, but that was such a small sample. It'll take way more than that for his value to rise or a decision to be made to give him the reigns. If not, he would've been sought after via trade or we would've traded Carr, who actually probably nets at least 1, of not 2,  first round picks riight now. 

Who on earth thinks Mariota is better than Carr? lol

And IIRC there was a decent amount of trade interest in Mariota and when he restructured his deal he added a no-trade clause. I think we were set on keeping him because if Carr gets hurt at least we have a decent backup. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

Spot on. 

I've always had a soft spot for Mariota, and nothing would please me more than to see him find success. Even better if he was somehow able to become the franchise guy for the NFL team I live and die by. And I'm excited at the prospect of possibly seeing him get some packaged plays. 

But is he better than Carr? No way. He had one reasonably impressive performance coming off the bench against a decent team. That's it. It was fun and exciting, but that was such a small sample. It'll take way more than that for his value to rise or a decision to be made to give him the reigns. If not, he would've been sought after via trade or we would've traded Carr, who actually probably nets at least 1, of not 2,  first round picks riight now. 

Meh they way we conduct trades I’m not surprised mm didn’t get moved. What’s the best trade mike has made so far? 
after the draft trade thing I’m legit curious to what other trades we’ve declined.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

More aggressive?  MM averaged 10TD's and 8.5 INT over his last three years in Ten.  The guy was a flat out bum....

He was available this offseason for trade and had such little interest he was forced to take a massive pay cut or be released.  That is what NFL GM's think of him, including our own GM. 

Is he more mobile than Carr, sure but to say he is a better scheme fit just based off of mobility is about as foolish as a take as one can have.  

I think you do not understand what I am trying to say.  Each player has a certain skill level and their ability to maximize their production is dependent on on factors such as surrounding players, coaches, schemes, era, etc....  Our system will help MM play at a higher level relative to his skill set than will Carr.  Does not mean he will play at a higher absolute level.  If you go back and watch Carr fail at the same play over and over again we start to wonder why does Gruden keep making the same call.  Then we see MM run the same play but his skills allow him to run it differently and you see how the play can work.  Not to say he will have more success overall because Carr is a better QB overall.  MMs level of play will be elevated while Carr might be held back relative to their baseline level of talent.

Remember Tannehill was a trash QB before he got to Tennessee.  Is Tannehill a better QB than MM?  He was in the Titan system but maybe not the QB that was in Miami.

Edited by drfrey13
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

I think you do not understand what I am trying to say.  Each player has a certain skill level and their ability to maximize their production is dependent on on factors such as surrounding players, coaches, schemes, era, etc....  Our system will help MM play at a higher level relative to his skill set than will Carr.  Does not mean he will play at a higher absolute level.  If you go back and watch Carr fail at the same play over and over again we start to wonder why does Gruden keep making the same call.  Then we see MM run the same play but his skills allow him to run it differently and you see how the play can work.  Not to say he will have more success overall because Carr is a better QB overall.  MMs level of play will be elevated while Carr might be held back relative to their baseline level of talent.  

I guess I don't understand.  MM is a bum no matter what team you put him on.  He had a playoff caliber roster in Ten. played terribly and was clearly holding that team back.  Henry wasn't able to find a hole when MM was behind center because no D feared MM and his noodle arm beating them.  MM was absolute trash.

Are you saying you believe MM will push Carr for the starting spot because I have no clue what your point is? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frankie2Gunz said:

I guess I don't understand.  MM is a bum no matter what team you put him on.  He had a playoff caliber roster in Ten. played terribly and was clearly holding that team back.  Henry wasn't able to find a hole when MM was behind center because no D feared MM and his noodle arm beating them.  MM was absolute trash.

Are you saying you believe MM will push Carr for the starting spot because I have no clue what your point is? 

I have not once said MM is better than Carr.  In fact I have said nothing but the opposite.  Carr is a far superior talent but Carr will get less out of those talents than MM will get out of his on this team.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

I have not once said MM is better than Carr.  In fact I have said nothing but the opposite.  Carr is a far superior talent but Carr will get less out of those talents than MM will get out of his on this team.  

You're basing this on what?  I have no clue what you're talking about  

Did MM get anything out of the talent he had around him in Ten?  A 10 TD's and 8.5 INT average over his last three years in Ten. reiterates exactly what I am saying and that he is worthless backup trash. 

Edited by Frankie2Gunz
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NCOUGHMAN said:

Meh they way we conduct trades I’m not surprised mm didn’t get moved. What’s the best trade mike has made so far? 
after the draft trade thing I’m legit curious to what other trades we’ve declined.

Best of a bunch of awful ones? Take your pick lol.

I'm with you though. My bet is we could get perfectly reasonable offers or counter offers and he'll turn them down because has no clue what he's doing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NCOUGHMAN said:

Meh they way we conduct trades I’m not surprised mm didn’t get moved. What’s the best trade mike has made so far? 

We were in a weird spot because teams thought we were going to cut him because he didn't want to restructure his contract so they were hesitant to give up assets for a player who they assumed would be a free agent anyways.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Best of a bunch of awful ones? Take your pick lol.

I'm with you though. My bet is we could get perfectly reasonable offers or counter offers and he'll turn them down because has no clue what he's doing. 

1 hour ago, NCOUGHMAN said:

Meh they way we conduct trades I’m not surprised mm didn’t get moved. What’s the best trade mike has made so far? 
after the draft trade thing I’m legit curious to what other trades we’ve declined.

Best trade we've made was Lynn Bowden

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

You're basing this on what?  I have no clue what you're talking about  

Did MM get anything out of the talent he had around him in Ten?  A 10 TD's and 8.5 INT average over his last three years in Ten. reiterates exactly what I am saying and that he is worthless backup trash. 

I am basing it off of how MM's physical ability allowed him to run aspects of this offense the way it is suppose to.  There were multiple plays where you could see his physical ability put the team in a better position to succeed.  Now this does not mean that over a season or even a few games he would find more success.  Think of it like a math problem.  These will be arbitrary numbers but I hope you get the point.  Let's say the maximum score a player can have is 100.

Carr's ceiling is a 90

MM's ceiling is a 70

To figure out a schemes effect you have a factor that represents the a QB's ability to function within a specific scheme.  So if they player is a perfect fit the factor would be 1.  Multiply the numbers and Carr is still a 90.  In Gruden's system Carr has a factor of .8 and MM has a score of .9.  Ceilings are now:

Carr - 90*.8= 72

MM - 70*.9= 63

So Carr has a higher generalized talent level but a lower fit.  

MM has a lower generalized talent level but a higher fit.

The outcome is still Carr being a better QB and better choice but MM is still a better fit.  If MM was ranked as an 80 or higher he would be a better choice at QB for the team.  I hope that makes it a little more clear but quantifying it makes it a little to much like Madden.  I was trying to stay away from that.

Edited by drfrey13
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NYRaider said:

Best trade we've made was Lynn Bowden

 

I'd say it was a wash, myself. 

It was indeed probably a good thing we traded him. At the same time, we spent a 3rd rounder on him just months beforehand, and he actually produced a bit for Miami.

Try as I might, I can't give Mayock credit for anything Bowden related.

  • Like 1
Link to post
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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.


×
×
  • Create New...