Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Chronicle: The Mallett/Hoyer Competition

Brisco_County said:
To be fair, even Tom Brady wouldn't have much confidence playing within the Cleveland support structure.
Click to expand...

Due to the marked deficiencies of their QBs, there is a deep misconception by many about Cleveland's OL. Here are 2014 PFF OFFENSIVE LINE RANKINGS (2013 rankings in parentheses):

6. Cleveland Browns (12th)

Pass Blocking Ranking: 2nd, Run Blocking Ranking: 7th, Penalties Ranking: 16th

Stud: What a year from Joe Thomas (+33.5). The sure-fire Hall of Famer continues to amaze with his play, never having an off year, looking like the best tackle of his generation.

Dud: When Alex Mack went down, Nick McDonald (-28.3) got 481 snaps at center. It did not go well… at all. Truth be told, anyone who got snaps at center struggled after the loss of Mack.

Breakdown: The pickup of Joel Bitonio reaped immediate rewards with this line playing as well as any. That was until they lost Mack for the year and that was a hammer blow to their chances of the top spot. Still, there aren’t many lines with as much talent on their roster as the Browns.

5. Houston Texans (16th)

Pass Blocking Ranking: 12th, Run Blocking Ranking: 3rd, Penalties Ranking: 10th

Stud: Nobody mentions his name much, but Brandon Brooks (+18.7) has quietly put together two very good seasons with his run blocking being of the standout variety.

Dud: Rookie Xavier Su’a-Filo (-8.5) was supposed to be an instant contributor. His 130 snaps highlight how that has proven to not be the case.

Breakdown: They looked a line in need of a rebuild with a new head coach in town, but those same elements responded to Bill O’Brien and played extremely well. A special mention to Derek Newton whose turn around has been one of the most remarkable of anyone in 2014.
Click to expand...
 
Safety first! One might pull a groin or something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
WolverineFan said:
If Hoyer indeed wins the job then, instead of criticizing Bill O'Brien, you guys should be questioning Ryan Mallett...
Click to expand...
^This.

Playoffs said:
This is Mallett's job to lose...

1) He's bigger/taller, stronger armed,
2) he has spent his entire professional career in this offense,
3) with the OC George Godsey as his personal QB coach,
4) he's not had the injuries that Hoyer has had (ACL, shoulder),
5) and opposed to some urban myths he's plenty smart.
6) He's obviously confident, since he chose to sign/compete against a guy with whom he has good familiarity. (Could've started for Jets.)

Situationally, you couldn't ask for a better hand. Pads on, Mal is up.

Had Mallett been here for OTAs/training camp in 2014, imo, Fitzpatrick would have only seen the field due to injury.
Click to expand...

From what I read, while neither was great, Mallett was better Monday in pads. Mallett had been dirting two or three very short passes per practice, which was WTF, and was slower getting the ball out. Needs to fix both, Monday was a start.

Looking forward to what we see at WAS, in Hard Knocks, in pre-game.
 
infantrycak said:
Get serious. No coach making a mistake in a case like this is thinking in terms of pejoratives or with ill intent. But they have some personal misweighting in one or more factors in the evaluation which favors a particular person or type of person. Hoyer calls him sir v. Mallett calling him Bill. Hoyer sits in the front row of meetings v. Mallett sitting in the back of class. Wtfever. People have biases which lead them to make mistakes with perfectly good intentions and HCs are people too.
Click to expand...

It's definitely true that people will behave in such a manner. But that doesn't mean that is the case here. It could be. It also may not be. Not really any way to know.

However, you seem to have convinced yourself that this is absolutely the case here and have given OB no room whatsoever to maneuver. If he doesn't name Mallett the starter then the whole thing was a sham. That pretty much seems to be your position. There is no room for "well maybe he's just not very good seeing as he was a 27-year old FA in a weak QB market and got zero offers outside of Houston".

Fans are people too and they tend to let their bias get the better of them much more often than HC's do. JMO.
 
WolverineFan said:
However, you seem to have convinced yourself that this is absolutely the case here and have given OB no room whatsoever to maneuver. If he doesn't name Mallett the starter then the whole thing was a sham. That pretty much seems to be your position. There is no room for "well maybe he's just not very good seeing as he was a 27-year old FA in a weak QB market and got zero offers outside of Houston".
Click to expand...

No, I have commented on the media. It has been virtually uniform since before the 1st OTA that Hoyer was the destined starter. The team's actions on timing, contracts, etc. do lend some credence to this reporting.

My other comment was generic. Fans act like the HC* always picks the best guy when truth is sometimes they make mistakes.

* During the honeymoon.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Due to the marked deficiencies of their QBs, there is a deep misconception by many about Cleveland's OL. Here are 2014 PFF OFFENSIVE LINE RANKINGS (2013 rankings in parentheses):
Click to expand...

Hoyer with Mack last year
90/149 (60%)
1224 Yards (8.2 YPA)
7 TD
1 INT
99.5 QB Rating


Hoyer without Mack
152/289 (52.6%)
2102 Yards (7.3 YPA)
5 TD
12 INT
64.7 QB Rating


So when he had one of the best Center's in the league in front of him he played pretty well. When he lined up behind a black hole at Center he was awful.
 
WolverineFan said:
Hoyer with Mack last year
90/149 (60%)
1224 Yards (8.2 YPA)
7 TD
1 INT
99.5 QB Rating


Hoyer without Mack
152/289 (52.6%)
2102 Yards (7.3 YPA)
5 TD
12 INT
64.7 QB Rating


So when he had one of the best Center's in the league in front of him he played pretty well. When he lined up behind a black hole at Center he was awful.
Click to expand...

That's a hell of a stat.
 
WolverineFan said:
So when he had one of the best Center's in the league in front of him he played pretty well. When he lined up behind a black hole at Center he was awful.
Click to expand...

And that will be the case here, as well. The one way to beat Brady (in this offense) has been to pressure him up the middle. Why Ben Jones and protecting our A gaps is so important, imo.
 
WolverineFan said:
Hoyer with Mack last year
90/149 (60%)
1224 Yards (8.2 YPA)
7 TD
1 INT
99.5 QB Rating


Hoyer without Mack
152/289 (52.6%)
2102 Yards (7.3 YPA)
5 TD
12 INT
64.7 QB Rating


So when he had one of the best Center's in the league in front of him he played pretty well. When he lined up behind a black hole at Center he was awful.
Click to expand...

Having a great center or not is maybe a reason for poorer performance, but NOT an excuse for having so many INTs. In Cleveland's offense, Hoyer had the option to roll away from the pressure or check out of the play or throw balls away. I watched him last year and I can tell you for certain he virtually schizzed out under any pressure, leading to bad throws and bad decisions.
 
I have this feeling that Mallet is going to be named the starter for the first 8 games, go 3-5 with out Foster, and then Hoyer will come in the last 8 games with Foster and go 8-0. Mallet them will be sent packing, Hoyer stays, Foster released, then we go 4-12 with Mallet leading his new team 11-5 (probably the chiefs, redskins, bears, or bills.) Call me crazy.
 
TexansBull said:
I have this feeling that Mallet is going to be named the starter for the first 8 games, go 3-5 with out Foster...
.
Click to expand...

Part of my doom & gloom is that Hoyer will be named starter. I saw him last year when his offense was not 100%. They couldn't move the ball on offense. Couldn't run, couldn't throw. Teams put pressure on him & he shat the bed.

I saw Mallett without Arian last year. Alfred Blue. We were making plays in the passing game, & the running game. Alfred Blue looked like a starter. The Browns couldn't get to Mallett, he was too quick. That pass defense that combobulated most QBs was stymied by Ryan Mallett.

Maybe it's the system. Maybe.
 
TexansBull said:
I have this feeling that Mallet is going to be named the starter for the first 8 games, go 3-5 with out Foster, and then Hoyer will come in the last 8 games with Foster and go 8-0. Mallet them will be sent packing, Hoyer stays, Foster released, then we go 4-12 with Mallet leading his new team 11-5 (probably the chiefs, redskins, bears, or bills.) Call me crazy.
Click to expand...
OK! You're crazy! Just kidding...
 
thunderkyss said:
Part of my doom & gloom is that Hoyer will be named starter. I saw him last year when his offense was not 100%. They couldn't move the ball on offense. Couldn't run, couldn't throw. Teams put pressure on him & he shat the bed.

I saw Mallett without Arian last year. Alfred Blue. We were making plays in the passing game, & the running game. Alfred Blue looked like a starter. The Browns couldn't get to Mallett, he was too quick. That pass defense that combobulated most QBs was stymied by Ryan Mallett.

Maybe it's the system. Maybe.
Click to expand...
I think all the QBs are now aware that they have to get through their progressions and get rid of the ball quicker when necessary. That is why I think we are in much better shape at QB than the national press thinks.
 
thunderkyss said:
Part of my doom & gloom is that Hoyer will be named starter. I saw him last year when his offense was not 100%. They couldn't move the ball on offense. Couldn't run, couldn't throw. Teams put pressure on him & he shat the bed.

I saw Mallett without Arian last year. Alfred Blue. We were making plays in the passing game, & the running game. Alfred Blue looked like a starter. The Browns couldn't get to Mallett, he was too quick. That pass defense that combobulated most QBs was stymied by Ryan Mallett.

Maybe it's the system. Maybe.
Click to expand...

I forgot that Mallet was playing without Foster that game. Thanks for the reminder. Rep coming your way...oh wait.
 
Hervoyel said:
I read this and see the little costume lady from "The Incredibles" saying "No Capes!"
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
WolverineFan said:
Hoyer with Mack last year
90/149 (60%)
1224 Yards (8.2 YPA)
7 TD
1 INT
99.5 QB Rating


Hoyer without Mack
152/289 (52.6%)
2102 Yards (7.3 YPA)
5 TD
12 INT
64.7 QB Rating


So when he had one of the best Center's in the league in front of him he played pretty well. When he lined up behind a black hole at Center he was awful.
Click to expand...
Interesting stats.

This could also be relevant, regarding Nick McDonald, the third center Hoyer played with last year.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/12/29/refo-browns-ravens-week-17/

Also, the Browns offense relied on play action. McDonald was terrible in both pass pro and the running game, thus further compromised the passing game.
 
WolverineFan said:
Hoyer with Mack last year
90/149 (60%)
1224 Yards (8.2 YPA)
7 TD
1 INT
99.5 QB Rating


Hoyer without Mack
152/289 (52.6%)
2102 Yards (7.3 YPA)
5 TD
12 INT
64.7 QB Rating


So when he had one of the best Center's in the league in front of him he played pretty well. When he lined up behind a black hole at Center he was awful.
Click to expand...

That was 5 games with Mack. In four of the five games he threw 1 TD. He averaged 30 attempts a game. Three times threw for 220 or less. In four of the five games Cleveland rushed for 191, 122, 176 and 158.

So with one of the best centers in the game and a crushing ground game to take the pressure off, his best play last year was at Fitz level. Great.
 
thunderkyss said:
Part of my doom & gloom is that Hoyer will be named starter. I saw him last year when his offense was not 100%. They couldn't move the ball on offense. Couldn't run, couldn't throw. Teams put pressure on him & he shat the bed.

I saw Mallett without Arian last year. Alfred Blue. We were making plays in the passing game, & the running game. Alfred Blue looked like a starter. The Browns couldn't get to Mallett, he was too quick. That pass defense that combobulated most QBs was stymied by Ryan Mallett.

Maybe it's the system. Maybe.
Click to expand...
The problem with projecting that one game as proof proof the offense will work with Mallett is the fact that Alfred Blue amassed 156 yds on 36 carries in that game. Jonathan Grimes added another 54 yds on 13 carries. The Browns finished dead last against the run so quite naturally, O'Brien ran it down their throats. All that to say, IMHO, the 'star' of that game wasn't Mallett, it was the O-line and the running game. Mallett threw two TDs that game; one of which was the out-of-the-box call where J.J. Watt caught a TD pass. I'm sorry and to kind of spin off what Sandman said about Hoyer, I'm not overly impressed by Mallett producing 211 yds in the air when his complimentary ground game produced 213 and his defense smothered the other team.

No wonder O'Brien hasn't made up his mind.
 
ObsiWan said:
The problem with projecting that one game as proof proof the offense will work with Mallett is the fact that Alfred Blue amassed 156 yds on 36 carries in that game. Jonathan Grimes added another 54 yds on 13 carries. The Browns finished dead last against the run so quite naturally, O'Brien ran it down their throats. All that to say, IMHO, the 'star' of that game wasn't Mallett, it was the O-line and the running game. Mallett threw two TDs that game; one of which was the out-of-the-box call where J.J. Watt caught a TD pass. I'm sorry and to kind of spin off what Sandman said about Hoyer, I'm not overly impressed by Mallett producing 211 yds in the air when his complimentary ground game produced 213 and his defense smothered the other team.

No wonder O'Brien hasn't made up his mind.
Click to expand...
Honestly, the way I saw it was that Mallett allowed the running game to open up. Blue was struggling in the first few plays before Mallett started hitting different receivers. When that happened, the Cleveland defense couldn't rush therefore allowed Blue to get more yards. With Foster in the lineup, he probably could have had a career day.
 
sandman said:
That was 5 games with Mack. In four of the five games he threw 1 TD. He averaged 30 attempts a game. Three times threw for 220 or less. In four of the five games Cleveland rushed for 191, 122, 176 and 158.

So with one of the best centers in the game and a crushing ground game to take the pressure off, his best play last year was at Fitz level. Great.
Click to expand...

Is that the same "Fitz level" O'Brien felt was a better choice over Mallet for half of last season?

Right or wrong, it is clear O'Brien doesn't rate Mallet as high as many fans do.
 
Runner said:
Is that the same "Fitz level" O'Brien felt was a better choice over Mallet for half of last season?

Right or wrong, it is clear O'Brien doesn't rate Mallet as high as many fans do.
Click to expand...

Turn it around - that (the best of Hoyer) is the same Fitz level Mallett has already beat out.
 
It is disconcerting to me as a fan that none of the QBs on the roster are good enough to secure the starting position before TC. It leads me to believe they are just Fitz 2.0 and we will still be looking for a decent QB in 2016.

I have rooted for Mallett, but only because of the unknown. I've never been impressed with Hoyer, and Savage is a project.
 
Runner said:
Is that the same "Fitz level" O'Brien felt was a better choice over Mallet for half of last season?

Right or wrong, it is clear O'Brien doesn't rate Mallet as high as many fans do.
Click to expand...

Disingenuous argument. OB named Fitz as starter in June. The Texans executed the trade for Mallett on August 31st, exactly one week before the season opener. There was never an opportunity to evaluate the two players side by side. Mallet was named the starter 60 days later. That to me seems a reasonable timeframe - within the constraints of the regular season and trying to win games - to evaluate Mallett and prepare him to start.
 
sandman said:
Disingenuous argument. OB named Fitz as starter in June. The Texans executed the trade for Mallett on August 31st, exactly one week before the season opener. There was never an opportunity to evaluate the two players side by side. Mallet was named the starter 60 days later. That to me seems a reasonable timeframe - within the constraints of the regular season and trying to win games - to evaluate Mallett and prepare him to start.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with this.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Having a great center or not is maybe a reason for poorer performance, but NOT an excuse for having so many INTs. In Cleveland's offense, Hoyer had the option to roll away from the pressure or check out of the play or throw balls away. I watched him last year and I can tell you for certain he virtually schizzed out under any pressure, leading to bad throws and bad decisions.
Click to expand...

Not making excuses for Hoyer. Personally I don't even really like Hoyer. We all know what he is and that is not very good. I would prefer Mallett to start. However, I want this team to win games and if Hoyer is better than Mallett then he should play. Judging from all the practice reports they are pretty even or Mallett is slightly ahead. That's pretty disconcerting IMO because if you cannot cleanly beat out Brian Hoyer in a QB competition then you just aren't very good.
 
WolverineFan said:
Not making excuses for Hoyer. Personally I don't even really like Hoyer. We all know what he is and that is not very good. I would prefer Mallett to start. However, I want this team to win games and if Hoyer is better than Mallett then he should play. Judging from all the practice reports they are pretty even or Mallett is slightly ahead. That's pretty disconcerting IMO because if you cannot cleanly beat out Brian Hoyer in a QB competition then you just aren't very good.
Click to expand...

Agree that the best starts. Just as I'm not discounting Mallett at this point when most of the off-season has been glorified passing drills, I'm not going to give Hoyer any extra credit because he looks pretty in shorts. I personally believe that in real game situations this pre-season is where all of the differentiation will show between the two. Mallett has said he is a gamer and better with pads on. Let him prove it. Hoyer has a reputation based on an entire year of stats as a starter. Let him disprove it.
 
WolverineFan said:
Not making excuses for Hoyer. Personally I don't even really like Hoyer. We all know what he is and that is not very good. I would prefer Mallett to start. However, I want this team to win games and if Hoyer is better than Mallett then he should play. Judging from all the practice reports they are pretty even or Mallett is slightly ahead. That's pretty disconcerting IMO because if you cannot cleanly beat out Brian Hoyer in a QB competition then you just aren't very good.
Click to expand...

I feel Mallet and Hoyer will clearly separate themselves only when the bullets start flying.
 
sandman said:
That was 5 games with Mack. In four of the five games he threw 1 TD. He averaged 30 attempts a game. Three times threw for 220 or less. In four of the five games Cleveland rushed for 191, 122, 176 and 158.

So with one of the best centers in the game and a crushing ground game to take the pressure off, his best play last year was at Fitz level. Great.
Click to expand...
The most important thing is the score board.

And also, a QB can only execute the game plan as given to him.

Hoyer had two games in which he threw for less than 220 yards, but the Browns won both game.

In the game against the Saints, he led them to a 26-24 comeback win.
Isn't that what matters the most?

In the other game, against the Steelers, the Browns jumped out to a big lead with Hoyer playing a good part in it.
Then, as with the norm, the Browns were more interested in chewing out the clock, en route to a 31-10 win.

And wait.
There's more.
After those five games, Hoyer rated no. 1 in the NFL in the long ball department.

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news...-the-NFL/f84ccaa4-8e55-402c-a253-58b175c113ab

One INT in five games; I'll take it in a heartbeat.

Fitz can only dream to be that efficient.
 
76Texan said:
And wait.
There's more.
After those five games, Hoyer rated no. 1 in the NFL in the long ball department.
Click to expand...

Ignore that this is about Hoyer...typical PFF where the hell did that come from stat. Most yds in passing over 16 yds in the air. There's a typical cutoff for "long ball."
 
76Texan said:
The most important thing is the score board.

And also, a QB can only execute the game plan as given to him.

Hoyer had two games in which he threw for less than 220 yards, but the Browns won both game.

In the game against the Saints, he led them to a 26-24 comeback win.
Isn't that what matters the most?

In the other game, against the Steelers, the Browns jumped out to a big lead with Hoyer playing a good part in it.
Then, as with the norm, the Browns were more interested in chewing out the clock, en route to a 31-10 win.

And wait.
There's more.
After those five games, Hoyer rated no. 1 in the NFL in the long ball department.

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news...-the-NFL/f84ccaa4-8e55-402c-a253-58b175c113ab

One INT in five games; I'll take it in a heartbeat.

Fitz can only dream to be that efficient.
Click to expand...

You going to take the 2 TD's, 9 INT and a rating somewhere around 60 in his last 6 games as well? They were 2-4 in those games, for scoreboard context. Or was that the game plan or someone else's fault?
 
Hoyer also had 4 fourth quarter comebacks last year tying him 2nd in the NFL with Brady and Romo. Only Stafford (5) had more.
 
sandman said:
You going to take the 2 TD's, 9 INT and a rating somewhere around 60 in his last 6 games as well? They were 2-4 in those games, for scoreboard context. Or was that the game plan or someone else's fault?
Click to expand...
You're moving the goal posts, my man.

We were talking about games with Mack under center.
 
infantrycak said:
Ignore that this is about Hoyer...typical PFF where the hell did that come from stat. Most yds in passing over 16 yds in the air. There's a typical cutoff for "long ball."
Click to expand...
Forget about the stats; 5 completions of 24 yards or longer in one game; in which his team jumped out to a big lead - thus no longer requires an agressive passing mode.
 
76Texan said:
You're moving the goal posts, my man.

We were talking about games with Mack under center.
Click to expand...

So again, with one of the best centers and rushing attacks in the first five games, he game manages 3 wins, has a comeback win and leads an obscure PFF stat. Well, Fitz led the league last year in most single game TD's. Obscure stat right back at ya.

And technically you are correct about two games UNDER 220 because I rounded down the 222 yards in his first game of the season. That 6 feet will definitely make a difference in discussing his place against the all time greats.

Listen, I'm not saying Mallett is the future of this franchise. I'm not enamored with either of these guys. But crap on a cracker Hoyer has a significant enough body of work to show that he probably isn't the guy. And while people keep saying "well Mallett hasn't shown he can beat out Hoyer", Hoyer hasn't shown he can beat out Mallett, a career backup with two starts to his name.
 
76Texan said:
Forget about the stats; 5 completions of 24 yards or longer in one game; in which his team jumped out to a big lead - thus no longer requires an agressive passing mode.
Click to expand...

"Forget about the stats; now look at how big my stat is."

Not playing this one game stuff. By that standard we are idiots to give up Fitz and his 358 yds, 6 TDs, 0 INTs 45-21 win (jumped out to a 24-0 lead).
 
Last edited:
sandman said:
Disingenuous argument. OB named Fitz as starter in June. The Texans executed the trade for Mallett on August 31st, exactly one week before the season opener. There was never an opportunity to evaluate the two players side by side. Mallet was named the starter 60 days later. That to me seems a reasonable timeframe - within the constraints of the regular season and trying to win games - to evaluate Mallett and prepare him to start.
Click to expand...

When you put it that way...... still!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top