Chronicle: The Mallett/Hoyer Competition

[CloakNNNdagger]

If you want the picture you can just ask here and not on twitter.

[/

QUOTE]

Great pic, DX-TEX!!!! Thanks for putting it in its full-size glory (didn't notice that it was automatically resized to so small when I posted it here). How did you come up with this creation?

[Dang, it resized it again]

 

[infantrycak]

[Dang, it resized it again]

Don't quote. Copy the image url

 

[thunderkyss]

But come on Obsi, all those guys ceilings are so low.......

It's not the size of the dog in the fight...

 

[steelbtexan]

So with your philosophy, you would have totally missed out on Kurt Warner, Warren Moon, Tom Brady, Joe Montana, hell even Tony Romo. Don't recall them being "hot prospects" when they came out either.

On the bright side, you probably would have drafted Ryan Leaf or Jeff George; them being "hot prospects" and all.

But all QB's that are good/great have to be 1st rd picks.

 

[infantrycak]

So with your philosophy, you would have totally missed out on Kurt Warner, Warren Moon, Tom Brady, Joe Montana, hell even Tony Romo. Don't recall them being "hot prospects" when they came out either.

And nobody drafted past the 3rd round has made it since Brady 15 years ago.

Might want to put Moon aside as an example of racism rather than missed talent.

 

[Runner]

Why is Savage still being discussed? He isn't even relevant to the QB situation at all. He is just our third string back up and he isn't taking anyone's job. Move on.

Such and easy question - because he's a Texan! If he was the starter or second stringer for the Jags or Cleveland or someone like that he'd be used as an example of why those are "loser" franchises. Put on that Texans helmet and his upside skyrockets while his downside can be explained away.

 

[thunderkyss]

Such and easy question - because he's a Texan! If he was the starter or second stringer for the Jags or Cleveland or someone like that he'd be used as an example of why those are "loser" franchises. Put on that Texans helmet and his upside skyrockets while his downside can be explained away.

Like that Blake Bortles guy?

 

[Runner]

Like that Blake Bortles guy?

Exactly.

 

[noxiousdog]

So with your philosophy, you would have totally missed out on Kurt Warner, Warren Moon, Tom Brady, Joe Montana, hell even Tony Romo. Don't recall them being "hot prospects" when they came out either.

On the bright side, you probably would have drafted Ryan Leaf or Jeff George; them being "hot prospects" and all.

Here's a history of late round quarterbacks

Short version, Between 1994 and 2013, 188 quarterbacks have been selected outside the 1st round. Their combined record is 1267-1404.

So, yeah, we have a 1% chance. Probably much worse, because undrafted is probably an even worse ratio.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Don't quote. Copy the image url

Thanks, CAK! Will do next time.

 

[thunderkyss]

Exactly.

Well... in all honesty, while there are some differences between the two, Bortles is more athletic, Savage has the stronger arm, I think Savage is just as good a prospect as Blake Bortles. Or, more "accurately" I don't believe Blake Bortles is any better a prospect than Tom Savage.

 

[disaacks3]

Here's a history of late round quarterbacks

Short version, Between 1994 and 2013, 188 quarterbacks have been selected outside the 1st round. Their combined record is 1267-1404.

So, yeah, we have a 1% chance. Probably much worse, because undrafted is probably an even worse ratio.

Fantastic read.

 

[Runner]

Well... in all honesty, while there are some differences between the two, Bortles is more athletic, Savage has the stronger arm, I think Savage is just as good a prospect as Blake Bortles. Or, more "accurately" I don't believe Blake Bortles is any better a prospect than Tom Savage.

But you think Bortles will hold back the Jags for years, and Savage is the Texans best prospect for the future, right?

 

[thunderkyss]

Here's a history of late round quarterbacks

Short version, Between 1994 and 2013, 188 quarterbacks have been selected outside the 1st round. Their combined record is 1267-1404.

So, yeah, we have a 1% chance. Probably much worse, because undrafted is probably an even worse ratio.

I still don't follow that line of thinking.

I think it's more about preparation & opportunity. I believe Kubiak would have been as successful with Tj Yates as he was with Schaub. I think OB will be more successful with Mallett (3rd round), Savage (4th round), & Hoyer (undrafted) than Lovie Smith will be with Jameis Winston (1st round).

 

[Mollywhopper]

I still don't follow that line of thinking.

I think it's more about preparation & opportunity. I believe Kubiak would have been as successful with Tj Yates as he was with Schaub. I think OB will be more successful with Mallett (3rd round), Savage (4th round), & Hoyer (undrafted) than Lovie Smith will be with Jameis Winston (1st round).

You're just completely discounting talent?

 

[noxiousdog]

I still don't follow that line of thinking.

I think it's more about preparation & opportunity. I believe Kubiak would have been as successful with Tj Yates as he was with Schaub. I think OB will be more successful with Mallett (3rd round), Savage (4th round), & Hoyer (undrafted) than Lovie Smith will be with Jameis Winston (1st round).

There's no chance Kubiak would have been as successful with Yates. I watched those games, I have the statistics for those games, and Kubiak went through years of practices with Yates.

As for the latter, I think you may be right, but that doesn't have anything to do with the round, it has to do with the player. I see bust written all over Winston and Mariota.

 

[thunderkyss]

But you think Bortles will hold back the Jags for years, and Savage is the Texans best prospect for the future, right?

I think Schaubish is probably the most we can expect from either of them. However, if a damn good QB prospect is available in the next draft, or the one after... say at 11, 18, or 24, we're more apt to grab him (depending on how Mallett/Hoyer does) than Jacksonville would be.

I think if Matthew Stafford, Matt Ryan, or Zach Mettenberger were to become available in the near future, we're more apt to grab them than Jacksonville will be in the next two or three years.

I think we'll be just as successful with Hoyer/Mallett/Savage as Jacksonville will be with Bortles. But of the three, I like Mallett the most.

 

[thunderkyss]

You're just completely discounting talent?

Not at all. I just don't think the most talented player gets drafted earlier. Not all the time anyway. I don't think Andy Dalton is any more talented than Brandon Weeden, or Blaine Gabbert. He was just in a better situation.

 

[infantrycak]

I think we'll be just as successful with Hoyer/Mallett/Savage as Jacksonville will be with Bortles.

Your mixing individual against team horribly. Bad QBs play on good teams and vice versa.

 

[thunderkyss]

NVM

 

[thunderkyss]

Your mixing individual against team horribly. Bad QBs play on good teams and vice versa.

I don't think we'd be any better with Bortles.

 

[Mr teX]

Eh, the whole qb drafted after the 3rd round success rate thing sort of goes out of the window with a guy like Savage b/c his situation is such an anomaly..The only 2 people who even comes close in my mind is Staubach who was a stud out the gate at Navy & Warner who was buried behind 3 guys who came out of college with more fanfare & more raw talent than him at the time. In that regard Savage being drafted in the 4th wasn't because there was an issue with talent it was largely because he'd bounced around so much in college; Indeed every analysis you read about him coming out said that the measureables and overall talent was there they just wondered about his maturity & they almost always cited his unstable college career. I firmly believe that had he stayed put at 1 school for at least 3 years and been a starter...or even if he did transfer but only did it once, he probably sneaks into the 3rd...possibly the 2nd if he his stat are good...Especially when you consider the types of guys teams have reached for in drafts immediately before and preceeding...Brock Osweiler (2nd), Nick Foles (2nd)..hell even Blake Bortles...He's at least as talented as all those guys.

 

[HOU-TEX]

I don't really have a dog in this race. Like several have said, I just want to win. All I (and everyone else) can do is go with what OB chooses to do and hope for the best.

I will say, the biggest thing about last weeks game that bothered me was Hoyer coming out after the first series. Heck, I'm sure it's been discussed somewhere in this thread. I just think if it was truly a QB competition the QBs would get an equal amount of reps in these first two preseason games.

 

[Mr teX]

I don't really have a dog in this race. Like several have said, I just want to win. All I (and everyone else) can do is go with what OB chooses to do and hope for the best.

I will say, the biggest thing about last weeks game that bothered me was Hoyer coming out after the first series. Heck, I'm sure it's been discussed somewhere in this thread. I just think if it was truly a QB competition the QBs would get an equal amount of reps in these first two preseason games.

Well if that was the only thing that bothered you, then you truly do have a dog in the race...anyone but Hoyer lol.

 

[infantrycak]

Well if that was the only thing that bothered you, then you truly do have a dog in the race...anyone but Hoyer lol.

Why, what else should have bothered him to be 'fair'?

I don't get pulling Hoyer after 4 pass attempts either. They've had a crud load of time to watch them both practice. Presumably the reason they haven't decided already based on practice is to see them in live games and OB blew off the opportunity to see Hoyer do that in large part.

 

[Marcus]

Deleted

 

[ChampionTexan]

Why, what else should have bothered him to be 'fair'?

I don't get pulling Hoyer after 4 pass attempts either. They've had a crud load of time to watch them both practice. Presumably the reason they haven't decided already based on practice is to see them in live games and OB blew off the opportunity to see Hoyer do that in large part.

The only thing I'll throw in on this is that there's 17 games worth of tape showing Hoyer as a starting NFL QB to review. I realize they're not showing the same offense as the Texans run, but it's over three seasons, and shows him in the offense of 3 different coordinators. With Mallett, they have two starts, one of which may or may not be meaningful due to an injury he played with part or all of the game.

 

[infantrycak]

The only thing I'll throw in on this is that there's 17 games worth of tape showing Hoyer as a starting NFL QB to review. I realize they're not showing the same offense as the Texans run, but it's over three seasons, and shows him in the offense of 3 different coordinators. With Mallett, they have two starts, one of which may or may not be meaningful due to an injury he played with part or all of the game.

I agree with that. To me that logically leads to 1 qtr for Hoyer, 2 for Mallett and 1 for Savage (at most). I just don't understand giving your 3rd stringer substantial playing time until you've figured out your starter.

 

[ChampionTexan]

I agree with that. To me that logically leads to 1 qtr for Hoyer, 2 for Mallett and 1 for Savage (at most). I just don't understand giving your 3rd stringer substantial playing time until you've figured out your starter.

It will be interesting to see how PT shakes out tomorrow night.

 

[Hervoyel]

It will be interesting to see how PT shakes out tomorrow night.

I'd go with the 1st quarter for Mallet, second for Hoyer, and maybe the third as well. Then Savage (like infantrycak said one post up). That would make sense to me (and would have last week with Mallet and Hoyer reversed. I don't get the 4 passes and pulled thing either.

 

[ChampionTexan]

I'd go with the 1st quarter for Mallet, second for Hoyer, and maybe the third as well. Then Savage (like infantrycak said one post up). That would make sense to me (and would have last week with Mallet and Hoyer reversed. I don't get the 4 passes and pulled thing either.

I honestly don't see Hoyer getting that much time this week. There is a pretty large contingent on this board that is convinced they know exactly how Hoyer will play if made the starter, and are pretty close minded to the idea that he might positively surprise them.

While I would hope that OB doesn't hold that exact stance on the issue, it wouldn't surprise me if he had established in his mind both a floor and a ceiling for Hoyer's play (which likely wouldn't be too far apart), and the only thing he had left to finalize his opinion of was the likelihood that Mallett surpasses that ceiling. After all, what good does it do to watch Hoyer when the only thing you're still a little unclear on is how good (or bad) Mallett has the capability of being?

 

[infantrycak]

I honestly don't see Hoyer getting that much time this week. There is a pretty large contingent on this board that is convinced they know exactly how Hoyer will play if made the starter, and are pretty close minded to the idea that he might positively surprise them.

While I would hope that OB doesn't hold that exact stance on the issue, it wouldn't surprise me if he had established in his mind both a floor and a ceiling for Hoyer's play (which wouldn't be too far apart), and the only thing he had left to finalize his opinion of was the likelihood that Mallett surpasses that ceiling. After all, what good does it do to watch Hoyer when the only thing you're still a little unclear on is how good (or bad) Mallett has the capability of being?

Well IMO everyone around here including OB is planning/assuming/hoping Hoyer will be substantially better than he was in Cleveland playing in OB's system. Might be good to see if that's actually the case.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

I honestly don't see Hoyer getting that much time this week. There is a pretty large contingent on this board that is convinced they know exactly how Hoyer will play if made the starter, and are pretty close minded to the idea that he might positively surprise them.

While I would hope that OB doesn't hold that exact stance on the issue, it wouldn't surprise me if he had established in his mind both a floor and a ceiling for Hoyer's play (which wouldn't be too far apart), and the only thing he had left to finalize his opinion of was the likelihood that Mallett surpasses that ceiling. After all, what good does it do to watch Hoyer when the only thing you're still a little unclear on is how good (or bad) Mallett has the capability of being?

A very logical approach to what may be happening. I guess what some of us believe is that just as Mallet plays more in game situations, he may play himself INTO a starting position, so can Hoyer the more he plays in game situations, possibly play himself OUT OF the starting position.

 

[Mr teX]

The only thing I'll throw in on this is that there's 17 games worth of tape showing Hoyer as a starting NFL QB to review. I realize they're not showing the same offense as the Texans run, but it's over three seasons, and shows him in the offense of 3 different coordinators. With Mallett, they have two starts, one of which may or may not be meaningful due to an injury he played with part or all of the game.

This was along the lines of what i was thinking. People forget that this time last year, Mallet wasn't on the roster & BoB didn't get to put Mallet through the rigors in 2014. For all we know, he may have split the snaps with Mallet, Savage and Fitz the same way last year as he's done it thus far this year if Mallet had been here. I think that, combined with the fact that BoB has a pretty good idea of what Hoyer's gonna look like between what he's seen in practice & his game tape & the fact that Hoyer finished his drive with a TD & 2 pt conversion is the main reason Hoyer was pulled after 1 drive. Besides a few more drives in a meaningless game against 2's and 3's wasn't gonna change his view on Hoyer much anyway...At least I don't think it would've. Mallet and Savage on the other hand both need the reps since there's like 9.5 quarters of a real tape out there between the 2 of them.

 

[noxiousdog]

I'm pretty sure it's going to be a quarter each for Mallet and Hoyer with 2 for Savage.

But then I was shocked that Hoyer got only one drive last week, so....

 

[ChampionTexan]

Well IMO everyone around here including OB is planning/assuming/hoping Hoyer will be substantially better than he was in Cleveland playing in OB's system. Might be good to see if that's actually the case.

Again, the only assumption I think it's safe to believe OB is making regarding Hoyer is that he will be a better QB in this system than Fitzpatrick was. Given the fact that their career QB ratings are less than 3 points apart (including a year for Fitzy under OB/Godsey that exceeded his career avg. by approx. 20 percent), and given that Hoyer has a lifetime record as a starting QB of 10-7 compared to Fitzy's of 33-55-1, I feel like I can give him the benefit of the doubt on that - at least for now.

The other thing I can't help but go back to when thinking about this is how much better Mallett looked running this offense in his one healthy game than Fitzpatrick ever did. If training camps working under Brady, Belichick, and the NE OC was even in part responsible for that, I can completely understand where OB's coming from on Hoyer vs. Fitzy (and yes I know there have been interceding years in Hoyer's case).

 

[infantrycak]

Given the fact that their career QB ratings are less than 3 points apart (including a year for Fitzy under OB/Godsey that exceeded his career avg. by approx. 20 percent)

I get what you're saying but Fitz last year in the system was just shy of 20 pts higher (and 12 on QBR). That's a big freaking leap.

 

[ChampionTexan]

A very logical approach to what may be happening. I guess what some of us believe is that just as Mallet plays more in game situations, he may play himself INTO a starting position, so can Hoyer the more he plays in game situations, possibly play himself OUT OF the starting position.

And I guess what I'm saying is there's a good chance that good bad or indifferent, Hoyer's play on the field factors very little into this decision. But I obviously agree that the idea of Malett playing himself into (or out of) the starting position is huge, and FWIW, I think the Niners game was a step in the "into" direction. Put another way, I feel like if Mallett has a good game tomorrow vs. Denver, he wins the job regardless of how well Hoyer might play, just like if he stinks up the joint, he goes into the season as #2, even if Hoyer stinks it up more.

 

[ChampionTexan]

I get what you're saying but Fitz last year in the system was just shy of 20 pts higher (and 12 on QBR). That's a big freaking leap.

And yet Hoyer's record as a starter last season was better than Fitzy's on a team that's widely considered to be a dumpster fire. They had an OC who was being texted plays on the sideline by the GM, and a rookie QB who was there only because the owner wanted him.

Look, I'll freely admit that I don't know how to evaluate players in general, much less QB's. What I do feel like I can do is try to understand the thought process that goes into some of these decisions where those decisions speak loud and clear as to what those who do evaluate talent are saying, and I'm saying it's OB's decision that Hoyer will be better in this offense than Fitzy was. While I clearly recognize that decision has the potential to be incorrect, I simply don't see any reason based on either of these two guys NFL resume's to assume it's wrong like so many seem to be doing.

 

[Mr teX]

Everyone agrees that the biggest difference between Mallet and Hoyer is mallet's upside & I think BoB wants to see Mallet play more to that consistently. In other words, it's not enough for him to play just good enough to show he knows the offense and manage the game..He's got a game manager of that ilk in Hoyer already.. BoB wants to see if Mallet has it in him to be that game changer...talent is there, i just don't think Mallet has done anything thus far to make BoB sit up and take notice..that includes his start in cleveland as well.

 

[infantrycak]

Oh I'm sure OB thinks Hoyer will be better than Fitz and he may/probably/hopefully will be. I was just noting it's a bigger leap than just to Fitz' career avg performance. He's not bridging a 3 pt gap to improve on Fitz with the Texans.

Everyone agrees that the biggest difference between Mallet and Hoyer is mallet's upside & I think BoB wants to see Mallet play more to that consistently. In other words, it's not enough for him to play just good enough to show he knows the offense and manage the game..He's got a game manager of that ilk in Hoyer already.. BoB wants to see if Mallet has it in him to be that game changer...talent is there, i just don't think Mallet has done anything thus far to make BoB sit up and take notice..that includes his start in cleveland as well.

Now you're just taking a WAG. The QB has some control in this offense but he's not out there calling his own plays, setting his own tone. The coaches call the plays and set the tone. I guarantee they didn't tell Mallett before the last game they wanted him looking deep and aggressive as much as possible. The coaches had the receivers running all those underneath routes.

Now if you've seen the all 22 and can say X was open and Mallett missed him, that's another matter.

 

[Mr teX]

I see why you might think that, & it likely is a WAG..but imo, it seems to me BoB has been reluctant to the pull the trigger on fully getting himself behind Mallet since he arrived. It took for Fitz to turn into a full on turd before BoB even gave the kid a chance & even after showing competence in the Cleveland game, BoB still felt the need to go out and not only get a guy like Hoyer in the offseason, but actually pay him more to make sure he got him and open up the job to competition. Now, i'm not saying Mallet should've just been handed the job, but he should've at least been given the upper hand. So far, it doesn't feel like he has the upper hand. It feels like BoB is waiting for something from him.
Take that play from the hard knocks episode where apparently Mallet thought a qb sneak was called and bob was telling him like "c'mon dude, you know we wouldn't call that there....correct it etc..." Mallet's response was "I'm just trying to do what you tell me.." Instead of thinking it through and calling something more appropriate/asking for clarification on the play... or a timeout..or something...just 1 play but it shows the disconnect. Mallet's out there acting like a robot instead of being an extension of the coaching staff out on the field...like all the great HC-QB tandems. I agree with you that they didn't tell Mallet to be looking deep and become ultra agressive, but what i do believe is that Bob is looking for a little bit more from him in terms of helping exploit things he sees on the field so that Bob can be more agressive & stretch the field.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

I see why you might think that, & it likely is a WAG..but imo, it seems to me BoB has been reluctant to the pull the trigger on fully getting himself behind Mallet since he arrived. It took for Fitz to turn into a full on turd before BoB even gave the kid a chance & even after showing competence in the Cleveland game, BoB still felt the need to go out and not only get a guy like Hoyer in the offseason, but actually pay him more to make sure he got him and open up the job to competition. Now, i'm not saying Mallet should've just been handed the job, but he should've at least been given the upper hand. So far, it doesn't feel like he has the upper hand. It feels like BoB is waiting for something from him.
Take that play from the hard knocks episode where apparently Mallet thought a qb sneak was called and bob was telling him like "c'mon dude, you know we wouldn't call that there....correct it etc..." Mallet's response was "I'm just trying to do what you tell me.." Instead of thinking it through and calling something more appropriate/asking for clarification on the play... or a timeout..or something...just 1 play but it shows the disconnect. Mallet's out there acting like a robot instead of being an extension of the coaching staff out on the field...like all the great HC-QB tandems. I agree with you that they didn't tell Mallet to be looking deep and become ultra agressive, but what i do believe is that Bob is looking for a little bit more from him in terms of helping exploit things he sees on the field so that Bob can be more agressive & stretch the field.

I'm confused about where this came from. Did I miss an interview or something that explained the story behind the curious QB sneak?

 

[Mr teX]

I'm confused about where this came from. Did I miss an interview or something that explained the story behind the curious QB sneak?

Noone really said if in fact there was or wasn't a qb sneak actually called. Everything that i put in that post was said on the field during the game by both guys..more or less anyway...Obrien's part was a little more wordy than what i put.

 

[infantrycak]

Noone really said if in fact there was or wasn't a qb sneak actually called. Everything that i put in that post was said on the field during the game by both guys..more or less anyway...Obrien's part was a little more wordy than what i put.

If you'll look up thread you'll find I and several others saw it differently - the play was called by Godsey.

 

[ChampionTexan]

Oh I'm sure OB thinks Hoyer will be better than Fitz and he may/probably/hopefully will be. I was just noting it's a bigger leap than just to Fitz' career avg performance. He's not bridging a 3 pt gap to improve on Fitz with the Texans.

I understand that you're not comparing Hoyer to Fitzpatrick's career, you're comparing him to Fitzpatrick's 2014 season. Yet the fact that he came in and performed at a level that's 20 percent above his career level, and at least 12 points higher than any of his previous seven seasons now seems to be being held against OB.

If it had been his best season out of 2 or 3, maybe you chalk it up to he played well and maybe he just had a good season, but for a 31 or 32 year old QB who's been in the league since 2005 to outperform his career averages by that much has to have some substantial amount of the credit given to the coaching and the system. I guess you're describing it as OB is planning/assuming/hoping that Hoyer will be substantially better than he was in Cleveland like the onus is on Hoyer, and I'm saying OB and staff are taking that onus upon themselves. The complaints about Hoyer seem very similar to the complaints about Fitzpatrick a year ago, and now we're having this conversation. I believe at a minimum, OB and staff have earned a wait and see attitude.

 

[thunderkyss]

I think any QB will show marked improvement when he goes from never having a RB like Arian to having a RB like Arian.

Call me crazy, but I bet Fitz's numbers would have been even better had we kept Owen Daniels.

 

[infantrycak]

I understand that you're not comparing Hoyer to Fitzpatrick's career, you're comparing him to Fitzpatrick's 2014 season. Yet the fact that he came in and performed at a level that's 20 percent above his career level, and at least 12 points higher than any of his previous seven seasons now seems to be being held against OB.

That is certainly not my intention. I agree OB gets much of the credit.

 

[EllisUnit]

Noone really said if in fact there was or wasn't a qb sneak actually called. Everything that i put in that post was said on the field during the game by both guys..more or less anyway...Obrien's part was a little more wordy than what i put.

Haha Obrien "there's only 2 QBS in the league that can do that" very true cause Brady and Manning always move when trying to draw the D offsides.

 

[Seegara]

I'm confused about where this came from. Did I miss an interview or something that explained the story behind the curious QB sneak?

If QB sneaks had been called on the goal line the extended goal line stand wouldn't have happened.