Watson and NFL settle on 11 game suspension, $5M fine

[ET80]

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

How many 4 seconds of Watson in the pocket led to big plays? It’s a secret.

Never said it was always bad.

7 hours ago, ET80 said:

So - given that, and given the (already admitted and agreed upon) tendency to hold onto the ball flaw/strength we covered by Watson

I even acknowledge it's a strength. But in the context of the offensive line, it's a factor of why so many sacks are given up - which is the point I'm making, saying "The OL sucks" (which you alluded to) is blatantly ignoring who they're blocking for and how his style of play leads to more opportunities to give up sacks.

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

You can’t find a stat that says the Texans 2017-2021 lines were good because they kinda sucked.

I found a stat that literally said they were middle of the pack - 16th in pass block win rate. In a league consisting of 32 teams, 16 is dead center (check my math of you must). Is it great? No. Is it horrible? No. It's mediocre, and the circumstances of blocking for a guy like Watson exacerbates that, making it look worse. With a QB such as Tom Brady (who is a master of pre snap looks and probably gets rid of the ball within 2.5 seconds on a very slow developing play by his standard) the effort and win rate of that OL would probably make it look better than it actually is - simply because pressure and sacks would drop. The ball is out decisively, pressure isn't breaking the pass protection, sacks aren't happening. (Please tell me if you don't get that - it's pretty much accepted as fact, via the ambiguous eye test, empirical study of the sport as well as advanced stats).

QB/OL is symbiotic in nature. No QB is getting a 5-6 second pocket, a QB needs to bail their OL out of holding their pass pro as much as an OL needs to buy time for a QB. (It's the mirror of the symbiotic relationship between a pass rush and pass coverage - better pass rush gets coverage to be easier, better coverage enhances a pass rush).

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

You don’t like Watson. That does not mean you have to pretend bad football players are good.

I also can't disregard tangible data that says that unit performed better at dead center of the NFL in respect to pass protection. If you want to refute the pass block win metric as a reliable metric, go ahead. 

It's not the end all be all, but it takes the QBs impact out of the equation and looks at the unit as a sum of its parts and not as the parts on their own. Yes, Laremy Tunsil is good and Max Scharping is bad - you don't need stats to evaluate that in a vacuum. But collectively, from Tunsil to Howard - this line bought enough time for a QB to let a play develop and make a decision. If the QBs decision is to hold onto the ball and wait for a WR to double out of his route, is that on the OL? 

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

They were 29th last year and Watson had nothing to do with it.

They were breaking in three new starters (none of which were even NFL quality at this point) moving a returning starter to a position he wasn't able to play (LG) and lost their best OL by week 3. 

What exactly were you expecting?

(Interesting sidenote - the 2021 OL gave up 44 sacks to Davis Mills/Tyrod Taylor over 17 games. 2020 OL? 50 for Watson over 16 games. Sort of tells us that a QB holding onto a ball is going to lead to more sacks/pressures... Whoda thunkit? Me. Ida thunkit).

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

In 3 years as a full time starter (2018-2020) Watson was 13th 12th and 3rd in ANY/A. This is a statistic that includes sacks. The boogeyman of running around Russell Wilson was 8th 7th and 16th Rodgers was 10th 11th and 1st in those years. Both Watson and Wilson reside in the 30s for sack % ranking but its a combo of bad lines and them trying to make plays.

Somewhere in my posts, you've determined that I've said Deshaun Watson isn't a good QB. 

Go ahead and take notes for what I'm about to say next: Deshaun Watson is a great QB. It's BECAUSE he's a great QB that he's not being punished as much as he should be. It is literally the only reason he's getting another chance in the NFL.

If this was Jacoby Brissett or Josh Dobbs with these allegations? They'd be released with extreme prejudice, they'd probably not be able keep a lawyer such as Rusty Hardin on retainer and would be serving actual jail time, and would be largely forgotten (outside of a few cautionary tales in NFL circles of why teams need to lock down who can provide services for their players). Citing his ANY/A doesn't really change our discussion, I never tried to say Watson was anything less than a great QB.

If you pay attention to the actual words I used - I said he has flaws on the field that will manifest, and those flaws will lead to losses at times. There are going to be game like the Indy playoff loss in 2019 (59% 235, 1/1) or NE in 2018 (50% 176, 1/1) or Tampa Bay in '19 (59% 184, 0/1). These games were games where he had the best WR in football at the time at his disposal - a WR SIGNIFICANTLY better than anyone Cleveland has lined up at the position right now or in the foreseeable future. So ...now suddenly he's not going to have these games... because he's in Cleveland? Those flaws that were apparent in Houston have gone away... while he SAT OUT a full year?

I understand that I have a bias on the subject, and I can own that. But go ahead and try to refute anything I'm saying right now without resorting to "oh, it's the Texans, they suck, Jack Easterby, poverty franchise, lol" because last I checked, Cleveland hasn't been a culture of Ws either (if anything, enabling him as Haslem is will probably make him worse).

Looking at the objective facts to his career to this point, there's nothing refuting anything I'm saying right now.

- Deshaun Watson is a great QB, and he will win games.

- Deshaun Watson has some noticable flaws at QB, and he'll lose games.

Both are true. And that's been my position since I brought this particular topic up.

[Deadpulse]

11 hours ago, ET80 said:

Never said it was always bad.

I even acknowledge it's a strength. But in the context of the offensive line, it's a factor of why so many sacks are given up - which is the point I'm making, saying "The OL sucks" (which you alluded to) is blatantly ignoring who they're blocking for and how his style of play leads to more opportunities to give up sacks.

I found a stat that literally said they were middle of the pack - 16th in pass block win rate. In a league consisting of 32 teams, 16 is dead center (check my math of you must). Is it great? No. Is it horrible? No. It's mediocre, and the circumstances of blocking for a guy like Watson exacerbates that, making it look worse. With a QB such as Tom Brady (who is a master of pre snap looks and probably gets rid of the ball within 2.5 seconds on a very slow developing play by his standard) the effort and win rate of that OL would probably make it look better than it actually is - simply because pressure and sacks would drop. The ball is out decisively, pressure isn't breaking the pass protection, sacks aren't happening. (Please tell me if you don't get that - it's pretty much accepted as fact, via the ambiguous eye test, empirical study of the sport as well as advanced stats).

QB/OL is symbiotic in nature. No QB is getting a 5-6 second pocket, a QB needs to bail their OL out of holding their pass pro as much as an OL needs to buy time for a QB. (It's the mirror of the symbiotic relationship between a pass rush and pass coverage - better pass rush gets coverage to be easier, better coverage enhances a pass rush).

I also can't disregard tangible data that says that unit performed better at dead center of the NFL in respect to pass protection. If you want to refute the pass block win metric as a reliable metric, go ahead. 

It's not the end all be all, but it takes the QBs impact out of the equation and looks at the unit as a sum of its parts and not as the parts on their own. Yes, Laremy Tunsil is good and Max Scharping is bad - you don't need stats to evaluate that in a vacuum. But collectively, from Tunsil to Howard - this line bought enough time for a QB to let a play develop and make a decision. If the QBs decision is to hold onto the ball and wait for a WR to double out of his route, is that on the OL? 

They were breaking in three new starters (none of which were even NFL quality at this point) moving a returning starter to a position he wasn't able to play (LG) and lost their best OL by week 3. 

What exactly were you expecting?

(Interesting sidenote - the 2021 OL gave up 44 sacks to Davis Mills/Tyrod Taylor over 17 games. 2020 OL? 50 for Watson over 16 games. Sort of tells us that a QB holding onto a ball is going to lead to more sacks/pressures... Whoda thunkit? Me. Ida thunkit).

Somewhere in my posts, you've determined that I've said Deshaun Watson isn't a good QB. 

Go ahead and take notes for what I'm about to say next: Deshaun Watson is a great QB. It's BECAUSE he's a great QB that he's not being punished as much as he should be. It is literally the only reason he's getting another chance in the NFL.

If this was Jacoby Brissett or Josh Dobbs with these allegations? They'd be released with extreme prejudice, they'd probably not be able keep a lawyer such as Rusty Hardin on retainer and would be serving actual jail time, and would be largely forgotten (outside of a few cautionary tales in NFL circles of why teams need to lock down who can provide services for their players). Citing his ANY/A doesn't really change our discussion, I never tried to say Watson was anything less than a great QB.

If you pay attention to the actual words I used - I said he has flaws on the field that will manifest, and those flaws will lead to losses at times. There are going to be game like the Indy playoff loss in 2019 (59% 235, 1/1) or NE in 2018 (50% 176, 1/1) or Tampa Bay in '19 (59% 184, 0/1). These games were games where he had the best WR in football at the time at his disposal - a WR SIGNIFICANTLY better than anyone Cleveland has lined up at the position right now or in the foreseeable future. So ...now suddenly he's not going to have these games... because he's in Cleveland? Those flaws that were apparent in Houston have gone away... while he SAT OUT a full year?

I understand that I have a bias on the subject, and I can own that. But go ahead and try to refute anything I'm saying right now without resorting to "oh, it's the Texans, they suck, Jack Easterby, poverty franchise, lol" because last I checked, Cleveland hasn't been a culture of Ws either (if anything, enabling him as Haslem is will probably make him worse).

Looking at the objective facts to his career to this point, there's nothing refuting anything I'm saying right now.

- Deshaun Watson is a great QB, and he will win games.

- Deshaun Watson has some noticable flaws at QB, and he'll lose games.

Both are true. And that's been my position since I brought this particular topic up.

[Scoundrel]

6 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

[SkippyX]

You presented a false narrative that the Texans lines were good before Watson and he was the nefarious agent who damaged the O-line.

 

You justify their putrid state in 2021 with 3 new guys on the line (because the bad rating in 2021 does not fit your agenda)

2016:  Brown (12) X-SF (15) Greg Mancz (16)  Jeff Allen(14)  Chris Clark(14)

2017:  Clark(8) moved to LT X-SF (16)  Nick Martin (14) Jeff Allen (16)  Breno Giacomini (16)

2018: Julie'n Davenport (15) Senio Kelemente (16) Nick Martin (16) Zach Fulton (13) Kendall Lam (13)

2019: Penalty Tunsil (14) Max Sharping (14) Nick Martin (16) Zach Fulton (15) Tytus Howard (8)

2020:  All 5 guys returned. They were not great, but at least they had the same line for once. (Anyone seen Nuk Hopkins? or a run game?)

That's 9 new starters on the line in 4 years.

 

So the questions are with your selective memory of 2021 new guys while ignoring 2017, 2018, and 2019.

• Did you forget?
• Were you just watching the games in a fog of ignorance?
• Do you have an agenda over facts bias in this?

Edited August 20, 2022 by SkippyX

[SkippyX]

FYI: ET has been listening to the guys on 610 killing this O-line for 5 years just like I have. He knows the truth.

These are not just Jim Rome types on 610. They are former NFL players and the Texans own radio broadcasters.

Edited August 20, 2022 by SkippyX

[Scoundrel]

9 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

You presented a false narrative that the Texans lines were good before Watson and he was the nefarious agent who damaged the O-line.

 

You justify their putrid state in 2021 with 3 new guys on the line (because the bad rating in 2021 does not fit your agenda)

2016:  Brown (12) X-SF (15) Greg Mancz (16)  Jeff Allen(14)  Chris Clark(14)

2017:  Clark(8) moved to LT X-SF (16)  Nick Martin (14) Jeff Allen (16)  Breno Giacomini (16)

2018: Julie'n Davenport (15) Senio Kelemente (16) Nick Martin (16) Zach Fulton (13) Kendall Lam (13)

2019: Penalty Tunsil (14) Max Sharping (14) Nick Martin (16) Zach Fulton (15) Tytus Howard (8)

2020:  All 5 guys returned. They were not great, but at least they had the same line for once. (Anyone seen Nuk Hopkins? or a run game?)

That's 9 new starters on the line in 4 years.

 

So the questions are with your selective memory of 2021 new guys while ignoring 2017, 2018, and 2019.

• Did you forget?
• Were you just watching the games in a fog of ignorance?
• Do you have an agenda over facts bias in this?

If you have to post your own dunking gif you already lost. Shameful.

[ET80]

30 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

You presented a false narrative that the Texans lines were good before Watson and he was the nefarious agent who damaged the O-line.

So ...you cannot refute the pass block win rate metric. You do not refute the concept that a QB who makes quick decisions can make an OL look better. Instead, you rely on bringing up individual parts, oblivious to the fact that an OL is a unit and that unit is more important than the sum of its parts.

Knock yourself out, but don't pretend anyone doesn't see through you.

At this point, you're demonstrating you favorite "Dunning Krueger" model to a T - you simply lack any sort of tangible knowledge on this particular subject, but when actual knowledge is presented to you, you say "Nuh uh, I'm smrat!" while repeating your same talking points with no reference or dispute to data that directly challenges your frame of mind.

It's why it's much easier to put you on ignore.

[ET80]

28 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

FYI: ET has been listening to the guys on 610 killing this O-line for 5 years just like I have. He knows the truth.

I've heard Seth Payne knocking the scheme and coaching. I've heard Wade Smith (a former OL under Gary Kubiak) eco that sentiment.

I've heard both say (ad nauseam) that if a scheme is bad, then you can have five Orlando Pace's on the OL and it'll still fail. 

So "killing this OL" is subjective, and it's more due to poor scheming from the likes of Mike Devlin and Bill O'Brien. What I have NOT heard is individual criticism - they collectively believe Laremy Tunsil is a top 5 LT, they collectively believe Tytus Howard is a better T than G and a guy you rebuild the OL around (which is why they didn't feel Icky Ekwonu or Evan Neal was an appropriate pick at 1.3) they collectively understood that a scheme under George Warhop would be more beneficial to the entire unit.

I've been listening very carefully for the past five years - whereas you see to incorrectly pick up talking points, then flip to 790 to hear Sean Salisbury brag about his elite 11 camps.

[SkippyX]

How pathetic do you have to be to endlessly troll as a mod who is immune to the ignore feature? I think we are up to 3 of them now.  (This does not in any way include @ET80 who is an actual man with integrity who can follow basic rules on a forum where he is supposed to be a mod) We disagree often but I have full respect for ET (he may have less for me and for a few others but he's still professional about it) I'm here right now debating the sad state of the Texans O-line. I'm not sure why the 2 or 3 guys with moderator tags are still angry from past discussions and just can't get over it.

 

I welcome them to add anything at all to the discussion besides throwing poo.

 

[ET80]

Church is now in session, @SkippyX.

12 hours ago, ET80 said:

I found a stat that literally said they were middle of the pack - 16th in pass block win rate. In a league consisting of 32 teams, 16 is dead center (check my math of you must). Is it great? No. Is it horrible? No. It's mediocre, and the circumstances of blocking for a guy like Watson exacerbates that, making it look worse. With a QB such as Tom Brady (who is a master of pre snap looks and probably gets rid of the ball within 2.5 seconds on a very slow developing play by his standard) the effort and win rate of that OL would probably make it look better than it actually is - simply because pressure and sacks would drop. The ball is out decisively, pressure isn't breaking the pass protection, sacks aren't happening. (Please tell me if you don't get that - it's pretty much accepted as fact, via the ambiguous eye test, empirical study of the sport as well as advanced stats).

QB/OL is symbiotic in nature. No QB is getting a 5-6 second pocket, a QB needs to bail their OL out of holding their pass pro as much as an OL needs to buy time for a QB. (It's the mirror of the symbiotic relationship between a pass rush and pass coverage - better pass rush gets coverage to be easier, better coverage enhances a pass rush).

If you cannot refute these statements, let me know.

Until this is reasonable articulated against, I am done with you - I have no more use for you, and will ignore you for the duration of this particular thread.

[SkippyX]

20 minutes ago, ET80 said:

So ...you cannot refute the pass block win rate metric. You do not refute the concept that a QB who makes quick decisions can make an OL look better. Instead, you rely on bringing up individual parts, oblivious to the fact that an OL is a unit and that unit is more important than the sum of its parts.

Knock yourself out, but don't pretend anyone doesn't see through you.

At this point, you're demonstrating you favorite "Dunning Krueger" model to a T - you simply lack any sort of tangible knowledge on this particular subject, but when actual knowledge is presented to you, you say "Nuh uh, I'm smrat!" while repeating your same talking points with no reference or dispute to data that directly challenges your frame of mind.

It's why it's much easier to put you on ignore.

Tell me more about pass block win rate. If 4 guys win and 1 guy fails miserably and the play is blown up is that an 80% win rate across the line?

Its just one stat. It does not define everything. You know this to be true about QB rating and lots of other stats.

Is a win on a 2 second screen the same as a 4 second 7 step drop?

How many plays does the QB make when the O-line loses on pass blocking? (I'd guess its higher for Wilson and Watson with their mobility)

Its great to point to it but if its the only thing supporting lots of horrific results, I don't see how its all that important.

Edited August 20, 2022 by SkippyX

[Scoundrel]

You only get what you deserve.

Defenders of predators get nothing more from me. I will reserve my actual conversations for those that deserve them here.

[skywindO2]

4 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

This does not in any way include @ET80 who is an actual man with integrity

lol

[Scoundrel]

2 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Church is now in session, @SkippyX.

If you cannot refute these statements, let me know.

Until this is reasonable articulated against, I am done with you - I have no more use for you, and will ignore you for the duration of this particular thread.

He can’t. He’s been dancing around it. And I agree it’s best to just ignore from this point forward and we should all stop wasting our time reading and responding.

[Scoundrel]

If you type basically any Texans defenders name on Twitter they are attached to at least one tweet talking about how they are going to injure Watson in his first game back. It’s quite interesting.