Derek Carr. What's happened?

[fortdetroit]

he should stop wearing so much eye shadow.

[lod01]

Del Rio's bonehead move of letting the OC walk ended up turning Derek Carr into David Carr.

[CKSteeler]

On 12/29/2017 at 1:26 PM, tonyto36 said:

 

I'm sure he'll have more great years to come, but he's like any of Dalton, Flacco, Ben, Wentz, Goff, etc.   All are capable of having great years in great situations.

This is the dumbest grouping of QB's I've seen in a while. We're lumping in middling veteran QB's with young guys in year 2 who have all the physical talent in the world and a future HOF QB.

It's a shame we never really got to see Tom Brady in anything less than ideal situation.

Carr as a passer reminds me of Carson Palmer. I think that's basically who he is.

On 12/28/2017 at 12:28 AM, Forge said:

Dalton through year 3 wasn't just the quarterback purgatory we view him as now. He was viewed as a potential franchise quarterback type. 

I don't know how many people seriously thought Dalton had the tools to be a legitimate 'franchise' guy at any point in his first three years. He had like half a season where people actually talked him up as an MVP candidate, but that was past the year 3 point mentioned.

Dalton simply can't make all the throws. Never could and never will be able to. And NFL coaches always knew that.

[tonyto36]

5 hours ago, CKSteeler said:

This is the dumbest grouping of QB's I've seen in a while. We're lumping in middling veteran QB's with young guys in year 2 who have all the physical talent in the world and a future HOF QB.

It's a shame we never really got to see Tom Brady in anything less than ideal situation.

Do you have anything to actually back up your claims besides bold and angry blanket statements?

If you think Brady has had ideal situations for even half his career... you apparently haven't followed the NFL for very long or very intently.

Anyone suggesting Brady has had consistently great offensive talent around him has no idea what they're talking about.  And especially given the run of defenses since 2011 the Patriots had (still two superbowls...) it's even more hilarious to suggest Brady has had anywhere close to an ideal situation for even half his career.  He's had Belichick, and a couple stretches of years of a handful of great players along with a whole lot of mediocre.

Tell me, how many Patriots in the past 20 years are going to the HOF?

I'll wait, but not expecting an answer (because the answer instantaneously destroys your argument).  

[CKSteeler]

31 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

Do you have anything to actually back up your claims besides bold and angry blanket statements?

If you think Brady has had ideal situations for even half his career... you apparently haven't followed the NFL for very long or very intently.

Anyone suggesting Brady has had consistently great offensive talent around him has no idea what they're talking about.  And especially given the run of defenses since 2011 the Patriots had (still two superbowls...) it's even more hilarious to suggest Brady has had anywhere close to an ideal situation for even half his career.  He's had Belichick, and a couple stretches of years of a handful of great players along with a whole lot of mediocre.

Tell me, how many Patriots in the past 20 years are going to the HOF?

I'll wait, but not expecting an answer (because the answer instantaneously destroys your argument).  

I like how a statement on Brady being in the ideal situation to you must mean he played with overwhelming offensive talent. The most talented offensive team Brady played with ended up 18-1 and only put up 14 points in the Super Bowl (after he laughed and mocked the notion that they'd only score 17). A game which, if Brady had a bit more arm talent, could have been won or been a blow out. How many times did he miss his HOF WR deep that game?

Brady has played his career with a coach who has always maximized his strengths  allowing him to do what he does well while minimizing his weaknesses. He's played on a team that has pretty much always held up around him. So, if the worst offensive supporting cast Brady ever had was 2006, he was pretty lucky to make the AFCCG given his own performance against San Diego. This followed a season when he basically crapped his pants against a mediocre Broncos team that simply dared to blitz the hell out of him.

His back-ups have basically played better than he did when he first became the starter in NE. He plays with the top head coach probably in NFL history. I can get into some of the shadier aspects of the Pats organization, like Ernie talking into his headset, but why bother? Brady has never been perfect. He's a guy who plays small ball. Plays within himself. And over time, with the hell of Bill and Ernie, he's managed to figure out most coverages defenses will throw at him while staying healthy. And, oh yea, Tom Brady was a liability twice against the Rex Ryan led Jets in the playoffs. It was Mark Sanchez on the other sideline when he failed to even put up a fight.f

His back-up QB's have stepped in and basically looked better than he did in 2001 or even 2002. I'm old enough to remember what Tom Brady actually did for those teams and what kinds of throws he was making.

But I'll move beyond that to your statement on Goff and Wentz. You want to paint Tom Brady as a QB who defies situation. It's OK. Lots of Pats fans do and laughably think he's been almost carrying Belichick rather than the other way around. Well, here's the reality. Goff and Wentz both, by far, have superior physical talent than Brady. Wentz in particular blows him out of the water and was playing at a far higher level than Tom Terrific did in the first few years of his career. You are writing off young QB's who are simply putting better performances on film than a young Tom Brady could or ever did.

You have the nerve to ask me to provide something to back up my claims when you did nothing but make the sort of sweeping, condescending comment that only a Patriots fan who hasn't watched the game long enough could actually make. You naively think that Tom Brady goes out there ever week and wills his team to victory even though his second and third string QB's got that team to 3-1, and Matt Cassell had them at 11-5. It doesn't seem like Tom Brady at his best is worth much more than maybe 2 extra wins a year from what I've seen.

[Jlowe22]

1 hour ago, tonyto36 said:

 And especially given the run of defenses since 2011 the Patriots had (still two superbowls...)

The Patriots have had a top ten scoring defense every year since 2012, and in 2011, it was top 15.  They also got 34 takeaways in 2011, ranked 3rd, and 41 takeaways in 2012, ranked 2nd.  

Although, I suppose after being used to #6, #1, #3, #4 scoring defenses, it seems like some bad defenses.  The Pats since 2001 have also averaged about 30 takeaways a season.

[#1RAIDER FAN]

What are everyone's thoughts on how Gruden would affect Carr's progression? 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

37 minutes ago, #1RAIDER FAN said:

What are everyone's thoughts on how Gruden would affect Carr's progression? 

Probably make him a better player. The entire offense really.

[BrownLeader]

Carr was great last year. That "he was never that good" take is pure hindsight bias. But the Raiders did indeed set him up to be successful.

Coming out of Fresno, Carr dropped in part because he didn't handle pressure all that well. Fresno's spread allowed him to get the ball out quick, but when it wasn't there, he staggered. The Raiders fully knew this and placed a huge chunk of their resources into fortifying the OL.

When I was looking at Carr coming out of Fresno, I underestimated his ability to read defenses and process quickly,  but I also noted that he was an entirely different QB when he was forced off his spot. Even though he's a decent athlete and can throw on the move, he just crumbled when forced to move. It's not physical, it's a psyche thing.

I think the basis for this actually goes back to his big brother. The narrative as the Carr's would have it, is that David was ruined by taking too many sacks. I guarantee that narrative was on Derek's mind when he entered the league. (and still is) And the Raiders for their part, were determined to not let that happen again.

But after rarely seeing much pressure last season he still randomly broke his leg late in the year. Now this season it's his back. This year's team isn't as good as previous years'. They have a sub par running game. The WRs have regressed. The coaching and playcalling isn't as good. He's seeing more pass pressure. All of that factors in. But Carr's healthy...if he wasn't he wouldn't be cleared to play. He's just clearly skittish...but the issue is he's always been a guy that performed best when things were on schedule. When things go awry...he's not the guy you want improvising. My comp for him when he came out was Josh McCown....it should have been Kerry Collins. When Collins had a clean pocket, he could take you to the SB....when it got muddy, he got mediocre.

 

[tonyto36]

13 hours ago, Jlowe22 said:

The Patriots have had a top ten scoring defense every year since 2012, and in 2011, it was top 15.  They also got 34 takeaways in 2011, ranked 3rd, and 41 takeaways in 2012, ranked 2nd.  

Although, I suppose after being used to #6, #1, #3, #4 scoring defenses, it seems like some bad defenses.  The Pats since 2001 have also averaged about 30 takeaways a season.

"BUT DVOA!!!"

Come on, they were not an above average defense in those years.  In 2011 we had Julian Edelman starting for us on defense and started more UDFA than any team in SB history.   The Patriots cobbled enough together coupled with Brady dominating games so teams either played one dimensional or in bad field position, consistently.    It's why last year I thought the defense was good but not #1 in the league.

[riceman80]

13 hours ago, #1RAIDER FAN said:

What are everyone's thoughts on how Gruden would affect Carr's progression? 

One reason why ive been the biggest Chucky to the Raiders supporter on here. Chucky would hands down be the best OC he's ever had. Chucky runs a very complex offense but if Carr could grasp it, i'd expect him to progress by leaps and bounds.

His system turned a middling Rich Gannon into an MVP. Advanced route concepts, timing based drops, heavy use of backs in the passing game, lots of pre-snap motion, different formations, power blocking run concepts. Basically the polar opposite of Downing.

[Jlowe22]

1 hour ago, tonyto36 said:

"BUT DVOA!!!"

Come on, they were not an above average defense in those years.  In 2011 we had Julian Edelman starting for us on defense and started more UDFA than any team in SB history.   The Patriots cobbled enough together coupled with Brady dominating games so teams either played one dimensional or in bad field position, consistently.    It's why last year I thought the defense was good but not #1 in the league.

It doesn't matter who started on defense, it got 34 takeaways, which is really above average, and also top 15 in scoring.  Trying to credit Brady for that is silly.  The Saints defense that same year got 16 takeaways, and Brees was dominating games also, and the Saints had the highest scoring %, pts/drive and 3rd down conversion % in the league.

Saints defense in 09 was bad, but they got 39 takeaways, and voila, the Saints go 13-0 and win a superbowl.  Takeaways can turn a bad defense into a great defense, as long as the offense is competent enough to take advantage and not give the ball right back.  It was the same thing with the Packers in 2011, who had a bad defense that got 38 takeaways. 

it's not that Brady hasn't been great, but it is that Brady has consistently had good/great defenses his entire career, and that's a fact.  

[tonyto36]

23 hours ago, Jlowe22 said:

It doesn't matter who started on defense, it got 34 takeaways, which is really above average, and also top 15 in scoring.  Trying to credit Brady for that is silly.  The Saints defense that same year got 16 takeaways, and Brees was dominating games also, and the Saints had the highest scoring %, pts/drive and 3rd down conversion % in the league.

Saints defense in 09 was bad, but they got 39 takeaways, and voila, the Saints go 13-0 and win a superbowl.  Takeaways can turn a bad defense into a great defense, as long as the offense is competent enough to take advantage and not give the ball right back.  It was the same thing with the Packers in 2011, who had a bad defense that got 38 takeaways. 

it's not that Brady hasn't been great, but it is that Brady has consistently had good/great defenses his entire career, and that's a fact.  

The Patriots allowed the 30th most yards in the NFL this season but were 5th in points allowed.  Patriots were also #1 in offensive yards and #1 in turnovers.

If you really can't see how this helps the defense, I don't know what to tell you.

The Patriots were also 25th in the NFL in takeaways this season so that pretty definitively shows how wrong your argument is.

[Jlowe22]

4 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

The Patriots allowed the 30th most yards in the NFL this season but were 5th in points allowed.  Patriots were also #1 in offensive yards and #1 in turnovers.

If you really can't see how this helps the defense, I don't know what to tell you.

It doesn't help nearly to the extent you want it to.  There are plenty of examples of bad offenses with good/great defenses, and good offenses with bad/awful defenses.  

 

[Jlowe22]

18 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

The Patriots were also 25th in the NFL in takeaways this season so that pretty definitively shows how wrong your argument is.

But wait, I thought Brady's dominance allowed his defense get a lot of takeaways?