NFL 2011 Season

[SpecialAgentCooper]

Looks like the Niners nabbed QB Josh Johnson from Tampa Bay...I really like this move...guy has a good skill-set and Harbaugh is more than versed with what he can do...Go Niners!!!


Coop

[Axl4Prez2004]

Looks like the Niners nabbed QB Josh Johnson from Tampa Bay...I really like this move...guy has a good skill-set and Harbaugh is more than versed with what he can do...Go Niners!!!
Coop

My money's on Johnson starting by mid-season.  Harbaugh wanted that guy before last season. 

[SpecialAgentCooper]

My money's on Johnson starting by mid-season.  Harbaugh wanted that guy before last season.

It wouldn't shock me...Johnson wanted to be a 49er..his childhood team...plus he's from Cali..just a good fit all around. Worst case...he pushes Kaepernick to develop quicker


Coop

[AxlsMainMan]

Jacob Tamme to the Broncos.

[pilferk]

Even most Tebow-haters would agree that he was at least an average QB last year in what was essentially his first season as a full-time starting QB (I believe he was a Pro Bowl alternate selection); I'm expecting that he'll become a better passer, but nobody knows that one way or the other.  Sanchez, too, has been about average, except it's been 3 years with little to no improvement.

Tebow had average numbers in a stunt offense designed ENTIRELY around him...that I think NFL defenses will/would figure out pretty quick (Steelers brain farts not withstanding).  He was not, IMHO, in an offense that could be sustained long term, and he's shown no signs at being able to run a true pro style offense.  I don't expect that will change any time soon...but we'll see.

Sanchez has been average in a pro style offense that, even though it's been conservative (in fact, it's been MOST successful when it's been allowed to be conservative), IS sustainable.

There's a big difference.

[pilferk]

I really don't get this move at all. We give Sanchez that contract then trade for Tebow?

From what I've heard, that deal they gave Sanchez saved them money up front and really didn't show they were committed to him long term.  It may have "looked" that way, but in the grand scheme of things, that isn't necessarily the case. 

It depends on your definition of "long term".  It ties them to Sanchez for the next 2 seasons (2 years guaranteed), in some way, shape. or form.  It's not the 5 year circle jerk some people have portrayed it to be, though.

I see them getting Tebow for 3 different reasons.  1) They believe the guy could be something special, either in time as he develops into a better QB or right now as a change of pace type of guy.  2) They hope to light a fire under Sanchez, as Mark Brunell wasn't exactly doing that.  3) They simply want to be the talk of the town.

See #3.  I don't think they believe #1, I don't think #2 is productive, considering the state of their locker room, and I absolutely believe they would do #3 just because of the circus they've become.

I thought the Jets were on the right track a few years back and was actually worried they were going to take over the AFC East.  Last year couldn't have gone any worse for them, and I don't honestly see how this helps them.

They've been the anti-Giants.  Where, with the G-men, pretty much every decision looks good, and is executed with the utmost class, and done "the right way"...with the Jets, they can't get out of their own way.

[pilferk]

Yeah, I think the Texans could be serious players next year.  They were on the brink up until last season when they finally broke out.  Who knows what would've happened if Shaub didn't get hurt.  Though, that seems to be a recurring problem for them.

The injury bug seems to bite them hard.  What's odd is...it's not usually the same players getting hurt.  Different batch each year.  Makes you wonder about their training staff.

What I don't get with the Packers is why their defense was so bad last year.  Wasn't it basically the same defense that played so well the year before when they won the Super Bowl?  What happened?

If you look at the Packers in 2010-2011, you'll see the defense did NOT play all that great during the regular season.  They were largely the reason the Packers record was what it was.  They got hot, and played well, for the playoffs.  Then, last year....back to "regular season" form.

Add to that age, a couple injuries, and a couple FA leaving.....and you saw what happened.  I wouldn't expect them to get much better (unless they sign someone/trade for someone out of the blue) next year.  If anything, they may get a little worse.

As for Manning ending up in Denver.  I was surprised too.  Obviously San Fran had the best talent, but the NFC is more loaded than the AFC these days, so that may have played a role.  Also, his agent also represents Alex Smith, so that could've gotten weird.

I think that hit the nail on the head.   I don't think Peyton wanted to deal with the NFC, for a variety of reasons (depth, preparedness, and the fact his little brother plays there).  If he'd found a PERFECT fit...he likely would have done it.  But, as good as SF is in terms of talent, I'm not sure it was a good fit off the field (and, literally, ON the field...since the field, itself, can be tricky).

[pilferk]

I think some of you are over reacting to the Tebow thing.  The dude has proven he has what it takes to be a playmaker in this league, nobody said anything about him being a starting QB.  He is great for 3rd and 5, and some red zone opportunities.  The Jets also gave up nothing for him, so if it doesn't work out so what? 

No, he hasn't.  He's proven he can be famous.  He's proven he can have short term success in a stunt offense that, IMHO, would have been CRUSHED next season now that the league has gotten to see it.  He's proven he can run the ball.

He has NOT "proven he's a playmaker".  Not by a long shot.  He's got a ways to go to prove that.

And enough about Sanchez, he has been coddled for 3 years, its about time the Jets stop breastfeeding him and challenge him to do better, Tebow will light a fire under his ass.

Agree that THIS year is the year Sanchez has to produce.

Disagree that, in this locker room, using Tebow to "light a fire" is productive.  It's not.  It's a distraction, at best, and a fracture waiting to divide your locker room and kill your team, at worst.

Manufacturing a QB controversy is counterproductive to the message they WERE sending to the locker room with the Sanchez extension.
 

The real bad deal of the week is how much the Bronco's spent on Manning.  The dude is past his prime and coming off of how many neck surgeries?  Very risky, they just mortgaged the whole future on a guy who might not even play a full season with them.  Could it work out ?  Sure.  But it is far from a sure thing.

They've built in a couple of different safety valves in that contract that will help the Broncos if things go south with Manning's health.  Productivity is a different story...but that's true with any FA signing.

[pilferk]

I think some of you are over reacting to the Tebow thing.  The dude has proven he has what it takes to be a playmaker in this league, nobody said anything about him being a starting QB.  He is great for 3rd and 5, and some red zone opportunities.  The Jets also gave up nothing for him, so if it doesn't work out so what? 

And enough about Sanchez, he has been coddled for 3 years, its about time the Jets stop breastfeeding him and challenge him to do better, Tebow will light a fire under his ass.

The deal in and of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing.  Worth a shot.  The Jets overall are just a mess right now.  You have Rex Ryan predicting Super Bowls every year.  You have Santonio Holmes not giving it his all.  You have anonymous guys questioning Mark Sanchez.  You have Antonio Cromartie questioning the team for making a deal for Tebow.  You had the Jets interested in Manning, then giving Sanchez an extension, then trading for Tebow.  Sending some mixed messages there.

Just seems like an epic mess to me.

If it was "Bruce Smith 2.0", it would be a decent deal.  Without the name, and with the same skill set, it MIGHT make SOME football sense, in their offense.  The wildcat, as much as the league has abandoned it, can work in some spots (and it forces other teams to prep for it...which is reps you take away from prepping for the standard offense).  I still think they overpaid, but there's some usefulness there.

But it's not.  It's Tebow, "Tebow-mania", and all it brings with it.  It's a guy who started and won games, last year, on your roster....arguably THE most famous guy on your roster, now....who could (without actually trying to) make MORE of a mess of your locker room than it already is (and that's pretty damn messy).  It undermines the guy you just signed to be your starting QB and, rather than light a fire, it makes the guy SCARED to fail.  There's a difference.

To me...it's another bad move in a string of bad moves.

[pilferk]

I have to completely agree! Being a Niner fan I wanted to see us give Manning a try, but I know that Trent Baalke didn't probly offer him more than a three year contract which is the logical thing to do...the Broncos are a desperate team if you ask me..and I still think they are...Elway is trying to make a splash in the NFL as a GM...well buddy you're in the water now...lets see if you can swim lol 

It made a big splash for the Broncos.

It solved Elway's "Tebow problem".  The guy did NOT want Tebow QBing that team....but he couldn't get out from under Tebow-mania.  If he trades him, the fans in Denver LYNCH him.  Bring Manning in, though...and he's lauded as the greatest thing since sliced bread and Elway can quietly pack Tebows bags and ship him out in the middle of the night (until the contract snafu, that is).

I'll bet you, in his heart of hearts, Elway believes it was worth EVERY penny of the Manning money to get Tebow out of town.  He'll never admit it...but still.

Also I've heard alot about the "health/surgery clause" in Manning's contract, but haven't heard the details of how it would work exactly ....any thoughts?

He has to pass a team physical, next year, and be cleared to play. Physical takes place either right on, or right before, the official start of the league year.  If he fails....contract goes bye bye, basically.

Also...I think that Tebow in NY could end up being a good thing for them in the end...if not it may spell the end for old Rex
Coop

Maybe, but I'd be shocked.  On the field? Maybe, slightly, sort of.  Of the field? Disaster.

[GeorgeSteele]

Even most Tebow-haters would agree that he was at least an average QB last year in what was essentially his first season as a full-time starting QB (I believe he was a Pro Bowl alternate selection); I'm expecting that he'll become a better passer, but nobody knows that one way or the other.  Sanchez, too, has been about average, except it's been 3 years with little to no improvement.

Tebow had average numbers in a stunt offense designed ENTIRELY around him...that I think NFL defenses will/would figure out pretty quick (Steelers brain farts not withstanding).  He was not, IMHO, in an offense that could be sustained long term, and he's shown no signs at being able to run a true pro style offense.  I don't expect that will change any time soon...but we'll see.

Sanchez has been average in a pro style offense that, even though it's been conservative (in fact, it's been MOST successful when it's been allowed to be conservative), IS sustainable.

There's a big difference.

That's not quite accurate.  Denver added the read option to its offense to take advantage of Tebow's running skills; however, his passing plays were predominantly pro style sets, which he executed reasonably well under the circumstances.  Now had the offense incorporating passing plays used in Urban Meyer's spread offense, THAT would be an offense designed ENTIRELY around Tebow (and you would have seen better passing numbers).

[pilferk]

That's not quite accurate.  Denver added the read option to its offense to take advantage of Tebow's running skills; however, his passing plays were predominantly pro style sets, which he executed reasonably well under the circumstances.  Now had the offense incorporating passing plays used in Urban Meyer's spread offense, THAT would be an offense designed ENTIRELY around Tebow (and you would have seen better passing numbers).

They instituted the read option (and ran it almost exclusively) because Tebow couldn't run a pro style set with regularity.  ENTIRELY for him.

I don't consider an under 50% (SIGNIFICANTLY under) completion rate on his pro style sets, with a pretty low avg yds per pass (6.00-ish) to be "reasonably well".  Basically, when operating out of an offense that would be sustainable...he sucked.

Now, granted, they didn't go the Urban Meyer route...they also didn't expect Tebow to be the starting QB going into the season and had to redesign their offense on the fly.  As much as they could have..they DEFINITELY designed the offense ENTIRELY around Tebow, and his limitations.  If they'd had a different QB in there...you really think their offense would have looked even remotely the same?

Look...I know EVERY team tailors/tweaks their offense to their QB's strengths, to some extent.  But they're still running a predominantly pro offense, that's sustainable.  But not the Broncos, last year.  That was more than tailored, more than tweaking.  That was "This is pretty much all our starting QB can do, so we're stuck with it".

[GeorgeSteele]

They instituted the read option (and ran it almost exclusively) because Tebow couldn't run a pro style set with regularity.  ENTIRELY for him.

I don't consider an under 50% (SIGNIFICANTLY under) completion rate on his pro style sets, with a pretty low avg yds per pass (6.00-ish) to be "reasonably well".  Basically, when operating out of an offense that would be sustainable...he sucked.

Now, granted, they didn't go the Urban Meyer route...they also didn't expect Tebow to be the starting QB going into the season and had to redesign their offense on the fly.  As much as they could have..they DEFINITELY designed the offense ENTIRELY around Tebow, and his limitations.  If they'd had a different QB in there...you really think their offense would have looked even remotely the same?

Look...I know EVERY team tailors/tweaks their offense to their QB's strengths, to some extent.  But they're still running a predominantly pro offense, that's sustainable.  But not the Broncos, last year.  That was more than tailored, more than tweaking.  That was "This is pretty much all our starting QB can do, so we're stuck with it".

Denver did change the offense for him, but did so incompetently.  Tebow never ran the option in Florida, but it was the best they could do to exploit his talents.  They just didn't know any better.  Denver's offensive coordinator flat out admitted that he came up with option plays as the season went along by watching college football games on Saturdays.  And, again, nothing was done with the offense's passing plays to accommodate Tebow, they just ran them less often.

In any case, I don't think that adding a facet to a team's offense to accommodate a player's skills and reducing the plays he doesn't execute well is necessarily a mark against that player.  In Tebow's case, you're talking about a player with a combination of power, quickness and running instincts that is unprecedented for a QB.   So, yeah, of course you try to re-design your offense to take advantage of that.  And there's no "catching up" to that.  He's a great runner and was and will continue to be effective in that aspect of his game.

Conversely, he's not a good passer, so his passing opportunities were minimized.  Even still, his passing rating was not far off from Sanchez's, which is either reasonably well under the circumstances or he sucked, which is to say that Sanchez sucked too.  So Sanchez can't touch Tebow as a runner, is a marginally better passer than him, but is somehow the better QB?

Given that Tebow had zero experience with pro-style passing plays, rarely had the opportunity to throw other than on 3rd down, never had enough attempts in a game to establish any rhythm as a passer, had a coaching staff that was clueless on how to use him, but still led a 1-4 team to the playoffs and was still selected as a Pro Bowl alternate; yeah I'd say he did reasonably well under the circumstances.

[pilferk]

Denver did change the offense for him, but did so incompetently.  Tebow never ran the option in Florida, but it was the best they could do to exploit his talents.  They just didn't know any better.  Denver's offensive coordinator flat out admitted that he came up with option plays as the season went along by watching college football games on Saturdays.  And, again, nothing was done with the offense's passing plays to accommodate Tebow, they just ran them less often.

Which is to say they designed the offense around Tebow.  That's what I said.

Whether they did it well, all things considered, is up for debate.  Given they had 1 game to get the new scheme up and running....they didn't do too badly.  It's funny, though, that you'll give all the credit to Tebow for the wins they had...but then call the coaches incompetent.  I don't think you can have that both ways.

The truth is:  The coaches designed a system Tebow could run, prayed nobody figured it out too quickly, and Tebow executed in an unsustainable stunt offense, almost entirely on his legs. More power to them....

In any case, I don't think that adding a facet to a team's offense to accommodate a player's skills and reducing the plays he doesn't execute well is necessarily a mark against that player.  In Tebow's case, you're talking about a player with a combination of power, quickness and running instincts that is unprecedented for a QB.   So, yeah, of course you try to re-design your offense to take advantage of that.  And there's no "catching up" to that.  He's a great runner and was and will continue to be effective in that aspect of his game.

That's being a bit kind to Tebow, and ignoring how drastically that "facet" changed the Broncos offense.  They redesigned the offense because they HAD to...not because they wanted to.  He COULD NOT function in a pro style offense, every down, and actually move the ball.  That was (and is) my point.  You just made it for me.  Thanks.

As for "catching up"...it was stunt offense.  Witness the way New England and Detroit, after having some game tape to watch, completely crippled it.  Same guy on the field...couldn't move the ball.  No matter how much athleticism he displayed.  Had the Steelers used their brains (like NE did the next game)....I think that first round playoff game would have gone quite differently.

Look, I'm not a believer in Tebow as a QB.  He has not shown nearly enough to make me one.  Make him an RB, a HB, or even a TE...use him like Bruce Smith in the wildcat....and maybe he can be successful.  But you can't be a starting/front line QB in the league and not be able to pass for shit, in a pro style offense.  He's athletic, for sure.  He just can't throw in the NFL.

Conversely, he's not a good passer, so his passing opportunities were minimized.  Even still, his passing rating was not far off from Sanchez's, which is either reasonably well under the circumstances or he sucked, which is to say that Sanchez sucked too.  So Sanchez can't touch Tebow as a runner, is a marginally better passer than him, but is somehow the better QB?

I assume you're actually talking about QBR, not passer rating.  Tebows passer rating was pretty good (WAY better than Sanchez)...which is fine until you dig into the meat of the stat and realize it's meaningless considering sample size and situation.

With QBR, you can largely attribute the equalities to Tebows success in the 4th quarter...and not much else.

The fact is, Sanchez had a completion rate of about 57% (around 10% higher than Tebow) and 6.4 yds per pass (admittedly, as per previous discussions, not great).  BUT, he's an average QB running in a 100% pro-style offense.  I'll take average numbers there rather than slightly below average numbers in an unsustainable offensive scheme, tailored to Tebow.

By the By...I don't think Sanchez is anything more than an average QB (witness previous discussions...there are plenty who say he sucks, too). 

Given that Tebow had zero experience with pro-style passing plays, rarely had the opportunity to throw other than on 3rd down, never had enough attempts in a game to establish any rhythm as a passer, had a coaching staff that was clueless on how to use him, but still led a 1-4 team to the playoffs and was still selected as a Pro Bowl alternate; yeah I'd say he did reasonably well under the circumstances.

He doesn't have much experience because HE CAN'T DO IT.  That's what every scout, every coach, and every expert will tell you.  If he tries, he's going to be on his back more often than not.  And the stats sure make it look like they're right.

WINNING isn't the metric, when looking at his personal performance.  THAT'S your issue.  You're giving him credit for his RB, his special teams, and his defense.  His stats suck when he's forced into a pro-style offense.  It's that simple.   Sure, he's charismatic...he's famous...people want to see him.  By all accounts he's s a great guy.  He is NOT a good NFL QB, and there's no sign he'll be one, soon.  HIS team was reasonably successful.  HE was not.

And now I'm done beating the dead horse.

[GeorgeSteele]

^ To be clear, I was talking about traditional passer rating, not QBR.  Tebow's 2011 rating was 72.9, Sanchez was 78.2 (though to compare each guy's 1st year performance, Sanchez was only 63.0 in his first year).  I expected that you would minimize QBR, so I didn't bother bringing it up, but note that while it stresses 4th quarter production, that happened to be when Tebow threw more often.  So when he was given the opportunity to throw more frequently, he performed better. 

As to your point that he could not function in a 100% pro-style offense, therefore what?  So a team has to design an offense for him that is "unsustainable"?  And your evidence that it's unsustainable is that you point to a couple bad games against a playoff team in his 2nd game and the AFC Champion?  While minimizing the outstanding game he had against Pittsburgh, who had the #1 defense in the NFL but suddenly turned stupid in a playoff game?  Talk about having it both ways, when he plays great, the other guys must have been dumb. 

I'll just go by his overall performance.  He was an excellent runner last year, so any running plays an offense executes for him in the future can expect to see consistent success in that regard.  As for his passing. he wasn't good, but not much worse than Sanchez and IMO he showed enough to build on and improve upon.   Thing is, Tebow doesn't get that opportunity, while the Sanchezs of the league get 5 years to suck before people decide it's time to move on.   

[pilferk]

My last comments, just for clarification on outstanding items and to answer questions:

^ To be clear, I was talking about traditional passer rating, not QBR.  Tebow's 2011 rating was 72.9, Sanchez was 78.2 (though to compare each guy's 1st year performance, Sanchez was only 63.0 in his first year).  I expected that you would minimize QBR, so I didn't bother bringing it up, but note that while it stresses 4th quarter production, that happened to be when Tebow threw more often.  So when he was given the opportunity to throw more frequently, he performed better. 

His plays led to more points.  His throwing stats aren't all that different (other than yds per).  Late and close in the 4th, he had a 48.5 % completion rate (averaging almost 10 yds per).  Simple 4th quarter split they were 53.8% and 8.21 yds per....better, but not good (the yds per is not too shabby).  His 4th quarter attempts were more than attempts in the 1 - 3, but not enough (based on completion #) to throttle his QBR as much as it did.  It was the yards per that boosted him, and the points (6TD's in the 4th vs 6 COMBINED in 1-3).

You're right about passer rating...I was looking at Tebows playoff PR and comparing it to Sanchez regular season.  Blame it on the drop downs.  Given those stats....you're basically saying that Tebow is to Sanchez as Sanchez is to Hasselback/Newton, in terms of passer rating.  That's about right.

As to your point that he could not function in a 100% pro-style offense, therefore what?  So a team has to design an offense for him that is "unsustainable"?  And your evidence that it's unsustainable is that you point to a couple bad games against a playoff team in his 2nd game and the AFC Champion?  While minimizing the outstanding game he had against Pittsburgh, who had the #1 defense in the NFL but suddenly turned stupid in a playoff game?  Talk about having it both ways, when he plays great, the other guys must have been dumb. 

My evidence is: It's unsustainable.  Watch it.  When defenses prepped for it, they couldn't move the ball.  Every NFL analyst I've heard talk about it agrees with me.  You can not run a stunt offense, geared toward a QB run as option #1, and be successful in the NFL.  It's a passing league, for better or worse.  You'll either lose, or get your QB killed (of course, if your O-line sucks like the Jets did, you might get your QB killed AND put your front office in position to create a QB controversy...but that's from another, older, discussion).

More than a couple.  NE x2, Buffalo, KC, Chicago (Denver won, but couldn't move the ball for 90% of the game) and Detroit.  Yes, I think Pittsburgh turned stupid.  So do most NFL analysts...so I'm in good company.  Watching the game, with no horse in the race, I'm not sure how you could come to any other conclusion.  Every person watching new exactly what was going to happen, and Pittsburgh lined up in the wrong defensive formations ALL THE TIME, to stop it.  I'm not sure what other explanation there could be.  It wasn't just poor execution...it was piss poor coaching/prep by Pittsburgh. 

I'll just go by his overall performance.  He was an excellent runner last year, so any running plays an offense executes for him in the future can expect to see consistent success in that regard.  As for his passing. he wasn't good, but not much worse than Sanchez and IMO he showed enough to build on and improve upon.   Thing is, Tebow doesn't get that opportunity, while the Sanchezs of the league get 5 years to suck before people decide it's time to move on.   

He can run.  I agree.  Use him as an RB, or "Bruce Smith 2.0".  I'm not questioning his legs.

Tebow hasn't gotten the opportunity because he hasn't shown he's worthy of it. That should tell you something.   Elway took the first opportunity he could to get him out of town without controversy.  That should tell you something else.

 It's his throwing MECHANICS that's the problem.  They're the same as they were when he was playing in college.  Again, pretty much every NFL analyst agrees with that.  He can't be a pocket passer throwing that way.

And now..done...really. 

[GeorgeSteele]

^ I was starting to get offended that you weren't responding.   

I'm done too, just 2 last points to address and that's it.

1.  I think Tebow doesn't get the opportunity and Elway dumped him, not because he's unworthy, but because coaches insist on failing or succeeding on their system and their terms and he doesn't fit the prototype of any NFL coach's offense. 

2.  I'll disagree, again, that a Tebow-centric offense is unsustainable.  First, the running element.  I have no doubt that part would be effective for a few reasons.  One, he's fucking awesome.  Two, having 10 blockers on a running play is better than 9.  Three, run-oriented offenses help defenses tremendously (more rest, fewer possessions; people talk about how good Denver's defense was last year --- they were dead last in defense the year before).  Passing, I think he showed enough that he deserves a sustained opportunity to develop into an effective passer (though within the confines of a run-oriented offense).  Interesting you mentioned how they didn't move the ball most of the game against Chicago; when they had no choice but to let him throw, he goes 18-of-24 for 191 yards in the 4th Q and OT.  That's pretty damn good and against a top-notch defense too.

[Bodhi]

Hey awesome news today guys, the NFL will now review ALL turnovers, without the coaches having to challenge.  Fantastic, lets make the games even fucking longer!  Seriously I can't remember the last time I watched a game from start to finish besides this past Super Bowl. 

[GeorgeSteele]

Hey awesome news today guys, the NFL will now review ALL turnovers, without the coaches having to challenge.  Fantastic, lets make the games even fucking longer!  Seriously I can't remember the last time I watched a game from start to finish besides this past Super Bowl. 

Sports is a strange thing.  It's supposed to be about entertainment/escape, but we're willing to endure more boredom and wasted time if that's what it takes to 'get it right'.  Definitely not easy watching entire games these days, in any sport.