Wish to make a one time donation? Make it here.

The all encompassing DW4 good plays thread

Speedy

Yeller Dweller
Great QB's make those around them better.

What part of this offense looks better because of Watson ? .... Other than Watson?
LMAO. See, this is what I’m talking about elsewhere where I talk about those of you who are quick and often to point out his faults, but you rarely, and some, never, acknowledge the overall body of work.

Dude has the 2nd most yardage in the league, the top 2 or 3 in completion percentage, a passer rating that is up there as well, and is #1 in Y/A, so he’s not dinking and dunking throws to help pad that completion percentage. So he’s making somebody around him better. And all with instant and constant pressure he gets and zero run game. Not to mention the sacks he avoids to make the o-line at least appear to look better.

But that stuff simply gets ignored because of whatever bullshit agenda against him you have.

If not for Watson, this offense would match their league worst defense and they’d probably be 0-16 getting blown out in every game instead of at least being in almost all their games. But hey, agenda MFer, to hell with anything else.
 

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
I remember seeing a QB throw for 530 yards & 4TDs in a losing effort in a bowl game. I thought to myself, poor kid. Somebody is going to draft him thinking he'll do good things.

But I knew the kid was a loser. & sure enough, he was drafted #1 overall.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
I remember seeing a QB throw for 530 yards & 4TDs in a losing effort in a bowl game. I thought to myself, poor kid. Somebody is going to draft him thinking he'll do good things.

But I knew the kid was a loser. & sure enough, he was drafted #1 overall.
You left out the part about his NFL career ending with 14 TDs to 36 INTs.

But I assume you likely thought that this comparison actually made sense. Do you also write letters to Congress saying "Fix the economy, stupid!"
 

Earl34

All Pro
Great QB's make those around them better.

What part of this offense looks better because of Watson ? .... Other than Watson?
That might work in basketball, but how does that work in football? For example, how does Watson make David Johnson a better RB when the OC is constantly calling A gap runs? How does he make the OL better when they cannot block a simple stunt? How does he make the TE group block better? How can he make Hargreaves cover better? How can he improve Mercilus' speed?

With the current roster around him, exactly how are you expecting Watson to make those around him better? Besides Tunsil, how many of the players on offense around Watson can start for a playoff team? I don't get how you can ignore the scheme, roster, underperforming OL, the coaching staff and simply say, great QBs make those around them better.
 
Last edited:

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
You left out the part about his NFL career ending with 14 TDs to 36 INTs.

But I assume you likely thought that this comparison actually made sense. Do you also write letters to Congress saying "Fix the economy, stupid!"
Its not a comparison. The two are nothing alike. The point is stats don't mean crap in a loss. It's like guys dancing after tackling a dude for a three yard loss when his team is down by 3 scores with 50 seconds left in the game.
 

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
With the current roster around him, exactly how are you expecting Watson to make those around him better? Besides Tunsil, how many of the players on offense around Watson can start for a playoff team?
I don't agree with him but Corrosion explicitly stated many times if Watson played the short game more frequently (not to be confused with check downs) sustained drives, we'd probably score more. Keep our defense off the field & win more games. That would make all of them look better.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
That might work in basketball, but how does that work in football? For example, how does Watson make David Johnson a better RB when the OC is constantly calling A gap runs? How does he make the OL better when they cannot block a simple stunt? How does he make the TE group block better? How can he make Hargreaves cover better? How can he improve Mercilus' speed?

With the current roster around him, exactly how are you expecting Watson to make those around him better? Besides Tunsil, how many of the players on offense around Watson can start for a playoff team?
It's a stupid question. Unless Watson is throwing the ball and also catching it himself. If a QB is throwing for more TD passes, then that also means receivers are catching more TD passes, which in turn makes them "look better."

This is a sort of "Watson is like James Harden" argument where certain posters believe Watson is "getting his" at the expense of team success. That's a real possibility in basketball since a player has responsibilities that go beyond scoring. So you can imagine a situation where a basketball player averages 35 points on 50% shooting but contributes nothing else, playing a significant role in his team's lack of success. It's much harder to find fault in a QB who ranks at the top of the League in nearly all metrics since a QB's job in its strictest sense is to complete passes for TDs. And again, a completed pass for Watson also means a reception for a receiver, so the argument that he's not making anything on the offense look good besides himself is non-sensical.

The way I look at it, the Texans are simply a bad team, and Watson's performance given the circumstances this season has defied all expectation. I personally thought losing Hopkins would lead to a dramatic decrease in his production. To the contrary, he's having his best statistical year (which is what you always hope for for any player...who wants a player to post worse stats than he did the year before?), yet the focus somehow is on his shortcomings, and not the fact that the running game completely disappeared this season. There's also this huge gaping hole in logic with certain posters where the difference between last year's 11-5 record and this year's 4-11 record is Watson's improved completion %, lower INT%, substantially higher passer rating, and higher number of TD passes. You can't make this stuff up.
 

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
This is a sort of "Watson is like James Harden" argument where certain posters believe Watson is "getting his" at the expense of team success.
I don't think that's what he is saying. More about Watson approaching the game in a way he (I totally disagree) believes is more conducive to winning.

Move the chains, matriculate down the field instead of always trying to move in chunks.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
I don't agree with him but Corrosion explicitly stated many times if Watson played the short game more frequently (not to be confused with check downs) sustained drives, we'd probably score more. Keep our defense off the field & win more games. That would make all of them look better.
Mahomes does not play the short game frequently. Peyton Manning did not play it frequently either, at least at his peak when he was threw for 49 TDs. You don't have a 5,000 yard passing season by throwing a bunch of short to intermediate completions.

I'm also confounded by the fact that certain posters want this ball control offense with long, sustained drives yet give short shrift to the fact that the Texans rank second to last in rushing. How do you have a ball control offense with long sustained drives while simultaneously ranking 31st in rushing and 32nd in rushing first downs (the Texans are technically dead last in rushing since Watson accounts for 432 of the team's rushing yards).
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
I don't think that's what he is saying. More about Watson approaching the game in a way he (I totally disagree) believes is more conducive to winning.

Move the chains, matriculate down the field instead of always trying to move in chunks.
I think some posters have been rather explicit about Watson only making himself look good--whether he is doing so intentionally or unintentionally. It's a ridiculously stupid point since everypass has a recipient. More TD passes and fewer INTs means the passing offense as a whole looks better, not worse. It's not zero-sum.
 

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Mahomes does not play the short game frequently. Peyton Manning did not play it frequently either, at least at his peak when he was threw for 49 TDs. You don't have a 5,000 yard passing season by throwing a bunch of short to intermediate completions.

I'm also confounded by the fact that certain posters want this ball control offense with long, sustained drives yet give short shrift to the fact that the Texans rank second to last in rushing.
Yes. Watson has to make up the difference. More short game in place of the run game. He doesn't have the team Peyton had or Mahomes had.

High percentage plays, move the chains. Control the game.
 

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
I think some posters have been rather explicit about Watson only making himself look good--whether he is doing so intentionally or unintentionally. It's a ridiculously stupid point since everypass has a recipient. More TD passes and fewer INTs means the passing offense as a whole looks better, not worse. It's not zero-sum.
List them. Call them out.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
You're missing the point all together. I believe he's saying Watson needs to approach it as if his job is to win games. Not complete passes & TDs.
I'm not missing the point. I'm clear on what posters said. I'm not even addressing one poster specifically since there is a medley of posters espousing a similar sentiment.

And the point is still stupid (the one you claim I'm not understanding above) because there is no world in which more TD passes, a higher completion rate and fewer INTs does not assist the goal of winning games. It's not basketball where you have a guy who's exclusively focused on scoring and nothing else. Lebron scores the basketball, blocks shots, sets screens, gets rebounds, etc. There are myriad ways for any one player to impact a game. A QB is much more limited since his primary responsibility is to complete the passes he throws.

You claim I don't understand the point being made, but it's not clear you really understand the point I'm making.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
Yes. Watson has to make up the difference. More short game in place of the run game. He doesn't have the team Peyton had or Mahomes had.

High percentage plays, move the chains. Control the game.
Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. No team will ever have success ranking dead last in running and defense. So I'll flip the question around here.

Would the Texans score more if they ranked, say, 19th in rushing rather than dead last?
 

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
And the point is still stupid (the one you claim I'm not understanding above) because there is no world in which more TD passes, a higher completion rate and fewer INTs does not assist the goal of winning games.
I know of 11 such instances.
 

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Would the Texans score more if they ranked, say, 19th in rushing rather than dead last?
I'm sure they would. A 19th ranked defense against the run would help too.

Like I said, I don't agree with his point. I like Watson's approach to the game.

But yeah, if Watson played as if he understood he doesn't have a 19th ranked run game, or defense we could win more games.

I don't believe that. But that's what I understand Corrosion to be saying.

Still, I went back & watched our two first drives of the Bengals game & that's exactly what Watson tried to do. The first drive, ended with Hansen dropping a short pass that hit him right in the hands, chest high. Looked like he wanted to turn & run & make a big play instead of securing the first down.

The second drive we were in 3rd & long, because we couldn't pick up more than 3 yards on a 2nd down run play. Watson hits Warring 3 or 4 yards from the LOS & Warring didn't convert.

So what you going to do?
 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
You're missing the point all together. I believe he's saying Watson needs to approach it as if his job is to win games. Not complete passes & TDs.
Why aren’t any of you gents talking about the 6 games he drove that team down and took the lead. Only for the defense to blow it. So he actually did his job and he put them in position to win. So I really don’t understand whoever that was train of thought.
 

Earl34

All Pro
I'm sure they would. A 19th ranked defense against the run would help too.

Like I said, I don't agree with his point. I like Watson's approach to the game.

But yeah, if Watson played as if he understood he doesn't have a 19th ranked run game, or defense we could win more games.

I don't believe that. But that's what I understand Corrosion to be saying.

Still, I went back & watched our two first drives of the Bengals game & that's exactly what Watson tried to do. The first drive, ended with Hansen dropping a short pass that hit him right in the hands, chest high. Looked like he wanted to turn & run & make a big play instead of securing the first down.

The second drive we were in 3rd & long, because we couldn't pick up more than 3 yards on a 2nd down run play. Watson hits Warring 3 or 4 yards from the LOS & Warring didn't convert.

So what you going to do?
It seems that some posters are still basing their opinions of Watson on the 2019 season or even the first 4 games of the 2020 season. It's unfortunate because they are missing the overall progress he has made this season.
 
Last edited:

thunderkyss

Just win baby!!!
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Why aren’t any of you gents talking about the 6 games he drove that team down and took the lead. Only for the defense to blow it. So he actually did his job and he put them in position to win. So I really don’t understand whoever that was train of thought.
Watson's an awesome QB. Best in the NFL. I'm sure if we add a decent RB, he'll cure cancer.

If that's what you want to talk about, let's do it. But if ClemsonTiger & Corrosion want to talk about Watson's approach, we can do that too. Plenty of room on this board.

What we don't need to do is talk about what we want to talk about. Or about what we don't want to talk about.

I've got my opinion, you've got yours, & they have theirs.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
It seems that some posters are still basing their opinions of Watson on the 2019 season or even the first 4 games of the 2020 season. It's unfortunate because they are missing the overall progress he has made this season.
Last year, the Watson narrative could be supported with statistical data. This year, it can't, and that's created a bit of cognitive dissonance.

2019 Watson was considered by some to mediocre or average to above average. This was a narrative that could be supported by the data.

11th in passer rating
21st in INT% (lower is better)
13th in total yards
11th in TDs thrown
12th in adjusted net yards per attempt
28th highest sack rate
12th highest rated QB according to PFF going into '19 season

This year's data makes it a lot harder to support the same narrative.

2nd in passer rating
5th in INT%
2nd in total yards
9th in TDs thrown
3rd in adjusted net yards per attempt
33rd highest sack rate
2nd highest rated QB according to PFF during '20 season

There's not much data to support the same arguments anymore so it's become a lot of "I know what I see" kind of drivel.
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
Last year, the Watson narrative could be supported with statistical data. This year, it can't, and that's created a bit of cognitive dissonance.

2019 Watson was considered by some to mediocre or average to above average. This was a narrative that could be supported by the data.

11th in passer rating
21st in INT% (lower is better)
13th in total yards
11th in TDs thrown
12th in adjusted net yards per attempt
28th highest sack rate
12th highest rated QB according to PFF going into '19 season

This year's data makes it a lot harder to support the same narrative.

2nd in passer rating
5th in INT%
2nd in total yards
9th in TDs thrown
3rd in adjusted net yards per attempt
33rd highest sack rate
2nd highest rated QB according to PFF during '20 season

There's not much data to support the same arguments anymore so it's become a lot of "I know what I see" kind of drivel.
Numbers?

Fumbles and Int's with the game on the line, is there a number for that? Like the Pittsburgh game for instance.
 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
Watson's an awesome QB. Best in the NFL. I'm sure if we add a decent RB, he'll cure cancer.

If that's what you want to talk about, let's do it. But if ClemsonTiger & Corrosion want to talk about Watson's approach, we can do that too. Plenty of room on this board.

What we don't need to do is talk about what we want to talk about. Or about what we don't want to talk about.

I've got my opinion, you've got yours, & they have theirs.
And you miss the point which is he did his job. And that’s the bottom line. That’s not an opinion, that’s actually a fact.
And you really do not need to tell me this is his opinion, you have yours and etc. When someone repeats the same thing over and over, they tend to believe that certain opinion is factual data.
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
And you miss the point which is he did his job. And that’s the bottom line. That’s not an opinion, that’s actually a fact.
And you really do not need to tell me this is his opinion, you have yours and etc. When someone repeats the same thing over and over, they tend to believe that certain opinion is factual data.
Yes you do.
 

Corrosion

Idealist
Staff member
That might work in basketball, but how does that work in football? For example, how does Watson make David Johnson a better RB when the OC is constantly calling A gap runs? How does he make the OL better when they cannot block a simple stunt? How does he make the TE group block better? How can he make Hargreaves cover better? How can he improve Mercilus' speed?
There , again you take the anomaly and state it as if its happening on a vast majority of plays and as I said elsewhere and you deflected , that's disingenuous.
Yep , they have a couple of those every game but in general pass protection has been adequate on the vast majority of plays.



With the current roster around him, exactly how are you expecting Watson to make those around him better? Besides Tunsil, how many of the players on offense around Watson can start for a playoff team? I don't get how you can ignore the scheme, roster, underperforming OL, the coaching staff and simply say, great QBs make those around them better.
But to answer the question , how does he make the OL better ? How bout start with getting the ball out quickly ? Particularly if you believe they are such a poor unit - Common sense would tell you that you have to get the ball out in a hurry if they are so poor as a unit.

The statistics tell the tale as well .... as I showed in another post , getting the ball out in under 3 seconds he's sacked once in 45.3 plays while when he holds it longer than 3 seconds he's sacked once out of 5.9 plays.

One sack every 45 snaps boils down to less than 1 sack in an average game .... That's making that unit look pretty solid.

One sack every 6 plays sucks and that's making that unit look like a dumpster fire.

On 46.1% of all passing plays he holds it longer than 3 seconds. That's not helping them look good.
Which is it , are they adequate or do they suck ?

He's also the guy calling the protections and quite often its a failure on his part to diagnose presnap that leads to breakdowns in protection and those free rushers.

How do you make WR's and RB's look better with quality QB play ? Ball placement .... (that's that accuracy thing I talked about months ago) the difference between in the catch radius and where the pass catcher can do something with it after the catch or is the only guy with a chance to catch it.

Last season DHop 25th in the league in total YAC but 3rd in catches. That 25th was the high on the team for 2019.

This year Brandin Cooks leads the team in YAC at 37th in the league , not another Texan in the top 80. Hopkins on the other hand is 7th and a 20% increase in YAC while the catch numbers are similar to last season.

The QB's for the top 3 pass catchers in the league in 2020 YAC - Brees , Mahomes , Rodgers.

How does a QB help his defense ? Keep them off the field. We've been thru the sustained drives conversation .... This team just doesn't do that often , they generally score quickly or punt.
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
There , again you take the anomaly and state it as if its happening on a vast majority of plays and as I said elsewhere and you deflected , that's disingenuous.
Yep , they have a couple of those every game but in general pass protection has been adequate on the vast majority of plays.




But to answer the question , how does he make the OL better ? How bout start with getting the ball out quickly ? Particularly if you believe they are such a poor unit - Common sense would tell you that you have to get the ball out in a hurry if they are so poor as a unit.

The statistics tell the tale as well .... as I showed in another post , getting the ball out in under 3 seconds he's sacked once in 45.3 plays while when he holds it longer than 3 seconds he's sacked once out of 5.9 plays.

One sack every 45 snaps boils down to less than 1 sack in an average game .... That's making that unit look pretty solid.

One sack every 6 plays sucks and that's making that unit look like a dumpster fire.

On 46.1% of all passing plays he holds it longer than 3 seconds. That's not helping them look good.
Which is it , are they adequate or do they suck ?

He's also the guy calling the protections and quite often its a failure on his part to diagnose presnap that leads to breakdowns in protection and those free rushers.

How do you make WR's and RB's look better with quality QB play ? Ball placement .... (that's that accuracy thing I talked about months ago) the difference between in the catch radius and where the pass catcher can do something with it after the catch or is the only guy with a chance to catch it.

Last season DHop 25th in the league in total YAC but 3rd in catches. That 25th was the high on the team for 2019.

This year Brandin Cooks leads the team in YAC at 37th in the league , not another Texan in the top 80. Hopkins on the other hand is 7th and a 20% increase in YAC while the catch numbers are similar to last season.

The QB's for the top 3 pass catchers in the league in 2020 YAC - Brees , Mahomes , Rodgers.

How does a QB help his defense ? Keep them off the field. We've been thru the sustained drives conversation .... This team just doesn't do that often , they generally score quickly or punt.
Great post
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
How do you make WR's and RB's look better with quality QB play ? Ball placement .... (that's that accuracy thing I talked about months ago) the difference between in the catch radius and where the pass catcher can do something with it after the catch or is the only guy with a chance to catch it.
Luckily, PFF grades ball placement. So it's not like we have to rely on Corrosion's eyes and recollection when PFF has an analysis of all 505 passing attempts.

YAC can be a function of QB ball placement but not necessarily so. Tom Brady's receivers actually have fewer YAC than Watson's this season. If the screen pass is a big part of an OC's playcalling, then a team will have more YAC. This is why the Rams rank 2nd in the NFL in YAC. A lot of the time YAC is not a result of a super accurate throw but rather a well-designed and executed screen play where a shifty running back or receiver makes something happen. Or it could be a shifty tight end that is hard to bring down (i.e., Kelce and Gronk).

In essence, you're making an inference from YAC that has *some* correlation with accuracy but a very loose one. Unless we're all ready to concede that whoever SF has under center right now is the 3rd most accurate QB in the NFL.

PFF makes an attempt to not reward a QB for a play where he does very little of the work. A designed screen play to Tyreek Hill where he takes it 40 yards to the house is one such play. Their method of evaluation is imperfect (which method isn't), but I appreciate the fact they at least make the effort to distinguish between truly accurate throws and screen passes that go for long YAC instead of blindly attributing those yards to a QB, which is what most people basically do.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
Funny here that the very first example of a "big time throw" is a Watson TD pass against the Patriots. Watson is Top 3 in "big time throws" this season, but somehow still doesn't "throw receivers open" or throw with anticipation. I still haven't heard anything close to resembling a logical explanation for how this could be the case.

 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
Earl good question and the true answer is you can’t. I don’t give a bleep who you are, you’re not making that offensive line better for starters. They can’t block simple stunts or better yet a freaking four man rush. You can try to get the ball out quicker but how can you do that when your center is pushed back into your lap.

Let’s talk realistic football versus a dream/fantasy. No team out there will consistently control the clock and keep the opposing team on the sideline like that. Yes you will be able to do that sometimes but not for an entire game let alone every game. That’s not being realistic at all. So no you can not make that atrocious defense better by keeping them off the field. I’ve seen too many times this season alone where it was less than a minute on the game clock and defense couldn’t stop the from scoring. And I’m talking about going the length of the field. Lol

Oh and guess what Earl when you don’t have a running game. Why! Because the offense line just can’t block worth a crap. ( not the quarterback fault) then you will not be able to control the clock/ time of possession.
So no sir no quarterback will be able to make those players better. That’s a fantasy if you believe that and it’s most definitely not being realistic.

And that my friend is a quote from the truth book
 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
Luckily, PFF grades ball placement. So it's not like we have to rely on Corrosion's eyes and recollection when PFF has an analysis of all 505 passing attempts.

YAC can be a function of QB ball placement but not necessarily so. Tom Brady's receivers actually have fewer YAC than Watson's this season. If the screen pass is a big part of an OC's playcalling, then a team will have more YAC. This is why the Rams rank 2nd in the NFL in YAC. A lot of the time YAC is not a result of a super accurate throw but rather a well-designed and executed screen play where a shifty running back or receiver makes something happen. Or it could be a shifty tight end that is hard to bring down (i.e., Kelce and Gronk).

In essence, you're making an inference from YAC that has *some* correlation with accuracy but a very loose one. Unless we're all ready to concede that whoever SF has under center right now is the 3rd most accurate QB in the NFL.

PFF makes an attempt to not reward a QB for a play where he does very little of the work. A designed screen play to Tyreek Hill where he takes it 40 yards to the house is one such play. Their method of evaluation is imperfect (which method isn't), but I appreciate the fact they at least make the effort to distinguish between truly accurate throws and screen passes that go for long YAC instead of blindly attributing those yards to a QB, which is what most people basically do.
This is quote from the Truth book.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
PFF is one chapter in a bible.

It's not the entire bible.
Correct. We have NFL Next Gen stats (same data PFF has as well), ordinary box score statistics, more granular PFF data, Total QBR, etc. But I never said any one data point was the end-all, be-all. I've always said you need to look at all of the data.

However, PFF is really the only outlet that I'm aware of that keeps detailed tracking of ball placement. They have data on passes that are high, low, behind the receiver, through tight windows, into double coverage, "turnover worthy" plays, etc. Have you been keeping track of this data for all 32 starting QBs this season?
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
I think people also underestimate the extent to which Mahomes is still a young QB who has all the same struggles all young QBs do. He still struggles with pre and post-snap recognition as you would expect from a guy who's only been in the NFL for 4 years. He's been kinda reckless with the football this season, which is why PFF has knocked him down a few pegs.


What would the commentary be if Watson set an NFL record for most potential intercepted passes?
 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
Correct. We have NFL Next Gen stats (same data PFF has as well), ordinary box score statistics, more granular PFF data, Total QBR, etc. But I never said any one data point was the end-all, be-all. I've always said you need to look at all of the data.

However, PFF is really the only outlet that I'm aware of that keeps detailed tracking of ball placement. They have data on passes that are high, low, behind the receiver, through tight windows, into double coverage, "turnover worthy" plays, etc. Have you been keeping track of this data for all 32 starting QBs this season?
No only just Watson
 

Corrosion

Idealist
Staff member
Watson ranking highly in Big Time Throws .... really supports the "chunk play" narrative being that the starting point for that statistically is 20+ yards downfield and it's also a very subjective , eye of the beholder "what if" because it doesn't even require a completion.


Bottom line , this team is 4-11 while Watson posts some pretty numbers that don't correlate to points (22nd in scoring) or wins - Only 2 teams have fewer wins and half of the Texans wins came against one of those two teams.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
Watson ranking highly in Big Time Throws .... really supports the "chunk play" narrative being that the starting point for that statistically is 20+ yards downfield and it's also a very subjective , eye of the beholder "what if" because it doesn't even require a completion.
Here's the first thing we (and especially you) need to acknowledge here. We do not know the game plan or the offensive philosophy of the man calling the plays.

You seem to be under the impression that a QB can just do whatever he wants. That's not the case. Some coaches really want to aggressively push the ball downfield. I'm going to post that video (again) about how Brady's offensive philosophy (short passes) runs completely counter to Arians' (frequent deep throws) and how Brady struggled to fit into that system. Brady does not play exactly the same way he did in New England because he has a different coach with a different philosophy. It's no different from NBA coaches who want to run and gun vs those who want to play slow half court sets vs those who want to shoot a barrage of 3 pointers (which is practically the entire NBA now). ESPN had a special last season where Kirk Herbstreit interviewed Dabo Swinney during an open practice and Swinney told Herbstreit that he wants Lawrence to keep his eyes downfield and extend plays instead of leaving yardage on the field with short throws since his overall philosophy is that the big strikes (and misses) outweigh the value of the short throws in the end.

So not you, or me, or steele or anyone else really know what Watson *should* be doing on any one play. You seem loathe to admit that and instead make these sweeping statements about what should be happening all the time.

And the Big Time Throws do not support your narrative. Saying the same tired line several times doesn't make it true.

And saying PFF is subjective is a bit non-sensical considering that most of what you say is subjective. They at least establish criteria around what they consider a "difficult" throw and it's not hard to distinguish a dropped pass from a caught one. You and others make statements like "Watson doesn't throw receivers open" and "Watson does not throw with anticipation" while people who get paid to analyze football for a living say the opposite. So who has more credibility here? You or them?
 
Last edited:

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
For the people who complain about big chunk plays, and want an offense that chews up clock (even though KC doesn't do this yet is the envy of the NFL), then the Texans should hire a HC, offensive coordinator and an offensive line coach that can teach them to run screens effectively. That would likely solve 50% of the team's offensive woes and lead to higher red zone scoring.

 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
I think people also underestimate the extent to which Mahomes is still a young QB who has all the same struggles all young QBs do. He still struggles with pre and post-snap recognition as you would expect from a guy who's only been in the NFL for 4 years. He's been kinda reckless with the football this season, which is why PFF has knocked him down a few pegs.


What would the commentary be if Watson set an NFL record for most potential intercepted passes?
I believe some fans listens to the hype from the media. They really don’t factor in the coaches and the team around said player. KC for example has a HOF HC who is actually elite play caller. He knows how to build a team and he’s really good at spotting talent in the later rounds of the draft. That’s why Mahomas and every other that’s played in that system is so successful statistical wise. That’s why Coach Andy’s teams are always a threat. We never had that heat in Houston. Kubiak had a pretty good offensive philosophy but it took him too long to build his defense.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
I believe some fans listens to the hype from the media.
1. Most fans don't watch that many games. Even very knowledgeable fans only have so much time to watch games. So the vast majority of fans really have no idea what is happening with other teams aside from the W-L record and the stat columns.

2. Football probably has by far the highest ratio of fans who have never played the game. So most don't really understand what's happening outside of the very obvious. Contrast this against something more niche like gymnastics or even tennis where the only people discussing it have likely done it at a competitive level and understand more of the nuances.
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
Correct. We have NFL Next Gen stats (same data PFF has as well), ordinary box score statistics, more granular PFF data, Total QBR, etc. But I never said any one data point was the end-all, be-all. I've always said you need to look at all of the data.

However, PFF is really the only outlet that I'm aware of that keeps detailed tracking of ball placement. They have data on passes that are high, low, behind the receiver, through tight windows, into double coverage, "turnover worthy" plays, etc. Have you been keeping track of this data for all 32 starting QBs this season?
I think stats are important and these type sites have their place. What these sites stats dont tell you are the very important things like how you start and finish games. Can you pick up a 3rd and 2 by running the ball with 2:30 left in the game and put the game away. Can the ST's turn field postion/make a FG in the 3rd qtr that allows you a chance to win if you're behind or be up by 2 scores late in the game which puts the oher team in a panic position.

Can the defense get a stop to get you the ball back and give you a chance to win the game late in the 4th qtr. Can the defense make a stop with a lead and 1:00 to go in the game. These are the kinds of things the stat/DVOA geeks dont seem to get. There's much more to the game of football than a bunch of stats.

For all of the scheme talk/strategy/coaching this sometimes comes down to when you're dogazz tired late in the 4th qtr can you physically kick the guy across from you azz.
 

ClemsonTexan

Waterboy
These are the kinds of things the stat/DVOA geeks dont seem to get. There's much more to the game of football than a bunch of stats.
I disagree with this. I'm not sure who you're referring to when you say "stat/DVOA geeks" but the analytics community (i.e., PFF, Nylon Calculus, etc.) doesn't believe any sport starts and ends on a stat sheet. Sure, you have people who don't really understand what a stat is trying to explain who throw them around all the time, but then you also have people who don't understand the stats and make no effort to who refer to people who prefer a more analytical approach as "geeks."

Statistics have limited explanatory power. However, they come in very hand to refute assertions that are absolutely incorrect.
 


Top