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

CJ Stroud year 2

thunderkyss said:
My point was that he actually showed progress.

In that first game he played (preseason) he was pressured often & early & he didn't look good at all.

In that 2nd game he played "they" were going on about how he "improved" from the previous game. Of course he played better, he wasn't pressured.

Sunday he ran backwards & didn't take a giant sack. Excellent. I'd rather he not run backwards. Step forward, step to the side, run into the back of your RT, I don't care. Don't take a giant sack.

A couple of times he got out of the pocket & ran forward. A couple of times he was indecisive, run/don't run/run.... once you make that decision, you gotta go. This is different from buying time. If that's the decision you make, to buy time, then buy time. If you make the decision to pick up yards, especially if you decide to pick up the first down yourself & move the chains... gotta go.

Then he doesn't know how to slide... more evidence that running is not a part of his game. We know that, we knew that. It's not an insult to say it. He needs to learn how to slide, he needs to learn how to give himself up, he needs to learn how to dive.
Click to expand...
Would it be okay if CJ runs into back of Tunsil rather than RT? Less dangers of a 300 falling backwards on our QB. The way our line collapsed, fans may need to shout AVALANCHE!
 
steelbtexan said:
It's also very predictive of a QB's future success in the NFL.

You cant deny the results of poor S-2 has so far equaled poor NFL QB play. Hopefully Stroud can break this trend, but I wouldn't bet the future of the franchise on this like Hannah did just to fill a few seats.
Click to expand...
What's not true about this post?

Sportsfantic?
 
Texansballer74 said:
That’s exactly what it is Dejaview. And as you can see a select few is running with it like it true data. I watched a lot of games on yesterday. I witnessed several quarterbacks retreating backwards when the defense brought the heat. But like I said a book nerd who probably never played organized football a day in his life camp up with this crap. And those select few actually believe in that data. Wow is all I can say.
Click to expand...
The data doesn't lie

But your post does because you don't like the data.
 
steelbtexan said:
It's also very predictive of a QB's future success in the NFL.

You cant deny the results of poor S-2 has so far equaled poor NFL QB play. Hopefully Stroud can break this trend, but I wouldn't bet the future of the franchise on this like Hannah did just to fill a few seats.
Click to expand...
What's not true about this post?
 
sprtsfanatic said:
How about your very first sentence "It's also very predictive of a QB's future success in the NFL"...thats a flat out lie.
There is no proof one way or the other for the S-2 test. So for you to boast about how it is...IS A STRAIGHT BLATANT LIE.
Click to expand...
Expect for the results that are very true over a 7 year period. That's enough time to draw conclusions on the validity of the test. IMHO Feel free to disagree but tell me how much more time you think would be needed to make the test valid?
 
steelbtexan said:
Expect for the results that are very true over a 7 year period. That's enough time to draw conclusions on the validity of the test. IMHO Feel free to disagree but tell me how much more time you think would be needed to make the test valid?
Click to expand...
show us these "very true results over a 7yr period"....b/c everything ive ever heard of it is that it doesnt have ANY definitive results that can be used to predict the future success of ANY player.
 
sprtsfanatic said:
show us these "very true results over a 7yr period"....b/c everything ive ever heard of it is that it doesnt have ANY definitive results that can be used to predict the future success of ANY player.
Click to expand...
It says that some QBs that score well still perform poorly. But no QB that's scored poorly on the test has done well in the NFL.
 
steelbtexan said:
It says that some QBs that score well still perform poorly. But no QB that's scored poorly on the test has done well in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Again w/ you just saying shite...I asked that you post some source that "proves" your point and you cant...you just keep spewing the same stuff over and over again.
If it was the end all, be all test to evaluate talent then EVERY TEAM in the NFL would use it as a measuring stick....but instead only 16 of them do....that alone should tell you all you need to know about it.
 
sprtsfanatic said:
Again w/ you just saying shite...I asked that you post some source that "proves" your point and you cant...you just keep spewing the same stuff over and over again.
If it was the end all, be all test to evaluate talent then EVERY TEAM in the NFL would use it as a measuring stick....but instead only 16 of them do....that alone should tell you all you need to know about it.
Click to expand...
Look at the Athletic article that's been posted up thread or Google it.

They only sell their product to a select few teams. Obviously you don't have a clue about what you're talking about.
 
steelbtexan said:
It says that some QBs that score well still perform poorly. But no QB that's scored poorly on the test has done well in the NFL.
Click to expand...

So....it says nothing basically. Like the Wonderlic, this test is a joke and is the latest failure by the NFL to attempt to bring science and data to a sport that does not lend itself to it. let me pick your statement apart.


A. We already know the success rate of qbs taken anywhere in the draft is low. its only slightly higher for those taken in the first 2-3 rounds b/c yes, on average those guys are more talented/ready to go......but what's often not talked about is how those same guys also on average get more of an opportunity/time to be "the guy" than say that 4th - 6th rounder. So in that regard the slight increase in success rate of 1st rounders vs. qbs taken elsewhere could simply b/c those guys get more of an opportunity. All of this is also to say that the test is already skewed towards a very low % of success period.

The 2nd thing is its stated evaluation of perception skills:
  1. Perception Speed
  2. Search Efficiency
  3. Tracking Capacity
  4. Visual Learning
  5. Instinctive Learning
  6. Decision Complexity
  7. Distraction Control
  8. Impulse Control
  9. Improvisation .....These are at best snapshots of what a player might be at now........maybe They're not neccessarily what said player can be in the future with improved coaching & physical/emotional maturity....The bottom line here is some guys just learn differently & the potential for growth and the ability to predict that is the same as it always has been..i.e. you just don't know.

3rd & lastly, those guys selected at the top of a draft b/c of whatever combo of criteria a scout used...they often go to the worst teams. Everyone's talking about Brock Purdy & are using him as the poster child for why the S2 is "the" tool to use to uncover those hidden gems b/c he scored high on the S2.....completely neglecting the nice situation Purdy came in under in SF. Would he still be performing as well as he is if he was drafted at the top of the draft to a team with a significantly worse roster? Maybe....Maybe not. But what noone can deny is the kid has gotten a much more comfortable start to his career than any of the guys selected at the top of his draft. If Trey Lance is even able to stay healthy long enough to put 7-10 games worth of film on tape, Purdy's probably still on the bench in SF.
 
Mr teX said:
So....it says nothing basically. Like the Wonderlic, this test is a joke and is the latest failure by the NFL to attempt to bring science and data to a sport that does not lend itself to it. let me pick your statement apart.


A. We already know the success rate of qbs taken anywhere in the draft is low. its only slightly higher for those taken in the first 2-3 rounds b/c yes, on average those guys are more talented/ready to go......but what's often not talked about is how those same guys also on average get more of an opportunity/time to be "the guy" than say that 4th - 6th rounder. So in that regard the slight increase in success rate of 1st rounders vs. qbs taken elsewhere could simply b/c those guys get more of an opportunity. All of this is also to say that the test is already skewed towards a very low % of success period.

The 2nd thing is its stated evaluation of perception skills:
  1. Perception Speed
  2. Search Efficiency
  3. Tracking Capacity
  4. Visual Learning
  5. Instinctive Learning
  6. Decision Complexity
  7. Distraction Control
  8. Impulse Control
  9. Improvisation .....These are at best snapshots of what a player might be at now........maybe They're not neccessarily what said player can be in the future with improved coaching & physical/emotional maturity....The bottom line here is some guys just learn differently & the potential for growth and the ability to predict that is the same as it always has been..i.e. you just don't know.

3rd & lastly, those guys selected at the top of a draft b/c of whatever combo of criteria a scout used...they often go to the worst teams. Everyone's talking about Brock Purdy & are using him as the poster child for why the S2 is "the" tool to use to uncover those hidden gems b/c he scored high on the S2.....completely neglecting the nice situation Purdy came in under in SF. Would he still be performing as well as he is if he was drafted at the top of the draft to a team with a significantly worse roster? Maybe....Maybe not. But what noone can deny is the kid has gotten a much more comfortable start to his career than any of the guys selected at the top of his draft. If Trey Lance is even able to stay healthy long enough to put 7-10 games worth of film on tape, Purdy's probably still on the bench in SF.
Click to expand...
Good post, I believe the S-2 tells scouts, GM's about a QB's ability to process information quickly or not so quickly. This is probably the most important part of playing QB in the NFL. Although you do need a certain level of athletic ability to play QB in the NFL.

You kinda made my point with the Purdy, Lance comparison. Purdy looked better than Lance because he can process information much faster than Lance. Although since the 49ers spent so much draft capital to draft Lance, without the Lance injury Purdy wouldn't have ever gotten a shot, even if Lance didn't play well. Which Lance was very avg in his starts. Which should have been expected since Lance had played so little.
 
steelbtexan said:
Look at the Athletic article that's been posted up thread or Google it.

They only sell their product to a select few teams. Obviously you don't have a clue about what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
You go buy your magic bean stalk seeds and keep talking yourself in circles like a dog chasing its own tail.
In the end IF we can get him a decent Oline that gives him protection and time for plays to develop...then and only then will we be able to tell how good CJ can and will be.
Question is IF it ever happens, and he succeeds...will you disregard & cast aside your S2 and CJ bias ways? I highly doubt it, but we will see.
 
Last edited:
sprtsfanatic said:
Again w/ you just saying shite...I asked that you post some source that "proves" your point and you cant...you just keep spewing the same stuff over and over again.
If it was the end all, be all test to evaluate talent then EVERY TEAM in the NFL would use it as a measuring stick....but instead only 16 of them do....that alone should tell you all you need to know about it.
Click to expand...
The biggest one of them all is the Texans doesn’t use it either. Haha but dude keeps bringing it. Did they list which teams used that tool ?
 
steelbtexan said:
Good post, I believe the S-2 tells scouts, GM's about a QB's ability to process information quickly or not so quickly. This is probably the most important part of playing QB in the NFL. Although you do need a certain level of athletic ability to play QB in the NFL.

You kinda made my point with the Purdy, Lance comparison. Purdy looked better than Lance because he can process information much faster than Lance. Although since the 49ers spent so much draft capital to draft Lance, without the Lance injury Purdy wouldn't have ever gotten a shot, even if Lance didn't play well. Which Lance was very avg in his starts. Which should have been expected since Lance had played so little.
Click to expand...

Lol, I don't think you can say anything about Lance right now after just 1.5 regular season starts in his career....... other than he can't stay healthy...That will be his downfall imo. Purdy just took advantage of the situation, but technically Purdy hasn't even played in 16 full games & we still haven't seen him when he doesn't have the ridiculous amount of talent around him. Time will tell, but if he falters..........Like say Carson Wentz did in 2016 after coming off a near MVP season, i wonder if you/folks will still be touting his S2 scores as a reason why he can still be good.
 
Number19 said:
Almost all of his completions were short. Had only 3 greater than 10 yds and the longest of these three was 15 yds plus. You think the coaches are aware of this and will game plan accordingly.
Click to expand...
John Harris said before the game the Ravens were emphasizing not giving up any cheap and deep passes. That may play a part.
 
Look bottom line is there was nothing the kid did that was overtly bad...Had he come out and was forcing the ball into double coverage left and right, looking like a deer in headlights or wildly inaccurate, i'd be like Ok, we might've goofed here. But none of that happened. He not only took care of the ball, he was pretty damn accurate with it; a few completions he made were surgical. 1 of the things pointed out that isn't getting enough run here by critics is where he was throwing..alot over the middle of the field. Archuleta made a point in saying that most rookie qbs don't like to throw in that area b/c its too congested. Not this kid...he looked comfy throwing in there. He was accurate. He made off script plays when he had to. He took care of the ball for the most part which his counterparts.....& some vets (looking at you Josh Allen :hankpalm: ) can't say. The ONLY reason he has a TO credited to him is b/c the coaching staff put in an o-linemen at RT that wasn't supposed to be in there at that position....But even in that situation, you don't really blame him..he had his eyes downfield like a qb is supposed to.

Takeways for me on him so far are:

He has to learn to throw the ball away when there's nothing there.
He has to get better at managing the game

Learning to live to fight another day is the biggie right now. He took some horrible sacks in the Baltimore game that could've been avoided if he just threw the ball away. He also made a few ill-advised throws into bad coverage b/c he refused to give up on a play on a few of his rollouts.

The managing the game part...some of that is on him, but i also partially blame Slowik and the coaching staff on this too b/c in some of those sitations, you gotta help the kid out by getting the play in on time. Wasted like 2 TO's coming out the half b/c there appeared to be some confusion about personnel and/or what they were doing.
 
sprtsfanatic said:
You go buy your magic bean stalk seeds and keep talking yourself in circles like a dog chasing its own tail.
In the end IF we can get him a decent Oline that gives him protection and time for plays to develop...then and only then will we be able to tell how good CJ can and will be.
Question is IF it ever happens, and he succeeds...will you disregard & cast aside your S2 and CJ bias ways? I highly doubt it, but we will see.
Click to expand...
I'm hoping he succeeds, if he succeeds he will be the 1st to score terrible on the S-2 and become a championship level QB. Think about this for a moment.

As far as the ol goes, Mills.dealt with it and played well as a rookie. (Welcome to Mills world) I expect the same from Stroud after week 4. You should expect this too. No lowered expectations.
 
steelbtexan said:
I'm hoping he succeeds, if he succeeds he will be the 1st to score terrible on the S-2 and become a championship level QB. Think about this for a moment.

As far as the ol goes, Mills.dealt with it and played well as a rookie. (Welcome to Mills world) I expect the same from Stroud after week 4. You should expect this too. No lowered expectations.
Click to expand...
I agree..i see some struggles to come in the first 4 games until we get a what I hope to be a competent healthy Oline back in week 5.
In the mean time Im gonna take it week by week and opponent by opponent...next is Indy and I think we should get a W as long as we stop dropping like flys due to this injury bug.
 
steelbtexan said:
I'm hoping he succeeds, if he succeeds he will be the 1st to score terrible on the S-2 and become a championship level QB. Think about this for a moment.

As far as the ol goes, Mills.dealt with it and played well as a rookie. (Welcome to Mills world) I expect the same from Stroud after week 4. You should expect this too. No lowered expectations.
Click to expand...

lol are you forgeting Mills performance against the Bills in his 1st real game action? Was an absolute **** show. You can't seriously say that Mills played "well" & be taken serious.
 
Mr teX said:
Look bottom line is there was nothing the kid did that was overtly bad...Had he come out and was forcing the ball into double coverage left and right, looking like a deer in headlights or wildly inaccurate, i'd be like Ok, we might've goofed here. But none of that happened. He not only took care of the ball, he was pretty damn accurate with it; a few completions he made were surgical. 1 of the things pointed out that isn't getting enough run here by critics is where he was throwing..alot over the middle of the field. Archuleta made a point in saying that most rookie qbs don't like to throw in that area b/c its too congested. Not this kid...he looked comfy throwing in there. He was accurate. He made off script plays when he had to. He took care of the ball for the most part which his counterparts.....& some vets (looking at you Josh Allen :hankpalm: ) can't say. The ONLY reason he has a TO credited to him is b/c the coaching staff put in an o-linemen at RT that wasn't supposed to be in there at that position....But even in that situation, you don't really blame him..he had his eyes downfield like a qb is supposed to.

Takeways for me on him so far are:

He has to learn to throw the ball away when there's nothing there.
He has to get better at managing the game

Learning to live to fight another day is the biggie right now. He took some horrible sacks in the Baltimore game that could've been avoided if he just threw the ball away. He also made a few ill-advised throws into bad coverage b/c he refused to give up on a play on a few of his rollouts.

The managing the game part...some of that is on him, but i also partially blame Slowik and the coaching staff on this too b/c in some of those sitations, you gotta help the kid out by getting the play in on time. Wasted like 2 TO's coming out the half b/c there appeared to be some confusion about personnel and/or what they were doing.
Click to expand...
Agreed especially on the horrible sacks. Only thing I'd add is he needs to fix the uncharacteristic misses. First game so not really worried yet but there were like 4 passes he missed that we really need him to make. Every QB misses throws but the frequency there just needs to go down.
 
Khelar said:
Agreed especially on the horrible sacks. Only thing I'd add is he needs to fix the uncharacteristic misses. First game so not really worried yet but there were like 4 passes he missed that we really need him to make. Every QB misses throws but the frequency there just needs to go down.
Click to expand...
He’s going to have those type of throws in every game. This was his first game playing behind by far the worst line in NFL this year. So those type of uncharacteristic throws are to be expected. Y’all acting like he was doing that in a clean pocket. Lol come on people
 
Texansballer74 said:
He’s going to have those type of throws in every game. This was his first game playing behind by far the worst line in NFL this year. So those type of uncharacteristic throws are to be expected. Y’all acting like he was doing that in a clean pocket. Lol come on people
Click to expand...
He was also making some good throws with not having a good running game to begin with.
 
Mr teX said:
lol are you forgeting Mills performance against the Bills in his 1st real game action? Was an absolute **** show. You can't seriously say that Mills played "well" & be taken serious.
Click to expand...
Get your facts correct. Mills' first start was game 3 against the Panthers, after starting.the second half in game 2 against the Browns. Mills performed admirably against the Panthers and had better stats than Stroud had against the Ravens.

I'll have to take a look at 2021 game 4.
 
santo said:
He was also making some good throws with not having a good running game to begin with.
Click to expand...
Exactly and against a top 3 defense who are pretty darn excellent in exotic blitzes.

Bro is so much miscommunication from that offensive line. And we expect a rookie to do what lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top