Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Mike Sullivan to stay with Buccaneers « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 13372
Offline
#45 : January 15, 2013, 01:55:43 PM

as for freeman missing receivers that are where they're supposed to be, he was never the most accurate passer so i'm not going to be up in arms over that. if you want to talk about how he stares down his primary target or doesn't move past the LOS then i'll agree, he's a donkey when it comes to those things. but i think billick had it right when he said his problem is not so much accuracy as it is decision making...which can only get better as both he and his receivers have some systematic continuity.

even during the 1-3 start the only really bad game he had was vs. dallas, then he didn't have another until the back-to-back stinkshows vs. NO and STL. take away the 8 picks thrown in those two games and he put up a 27/9 season. lots of people want to focus on the negatives, well he's not going to ever have pinpoint accuracy, and he's now shown he can bounce back from a terrible season and put up some decent numbers. has everyone forgotten that they were in playoff contention in part because of freeman's play? yeah they finished 1-5, but only 2 of those 5 losses you can argue were on #5, the rest of them IMO are on the secondary and the o-line depth starting to show why its depth and not starting. they should have beat atlanta. manning had to come back to beat them in his own house, and the greatness that is nick foles goes off for 400+ ...but somehow its on freeman. if those 3 games were W's instead of L's they would have been in contention for the last playoff spot...all this after a 4-12 season


The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.  I just don't get the, "well, if you don't look at this, this, and this..then Freeman was pretty good". I really hope the coaching staff doesn't do this when evaluating Freeman. Sure, he can bounce back and have decent numbers...and that's great for those who love to sit around and masturbate to a stat sheet webpage on ESPN.com...but stats rarely tell the whole story. We weren't in playoff contention for the last month of the year...hard to argue that we were in contention when it actually mattered. The Bucs went 1-5 down the stretch because the whole team faltered....not just the defense, and not just Freeman. Freeman was not blameless in any of those last 5 losses. Should have beaten Atlanta, and beating Atlanta are two completely different things. The team that deserved to win that game, won. Period. I wouldn't exactly call that loss against Denver a product of a great manning comeback...also Freemans pick 6 pretty much put things out of reach in that one. You certainly like to play a lot of "ifs".


What if the picks were a result of the receiver running the wrong route? We do know that a guard whiffed on a block at Denver allowing a blindside shot that caused the pick six. Saw that on the lead up to the Denver-Baltimore game. And did you see the receiver slip and fall in the Rams game? That created a pick six on a ball that was actually well thrown. How about having the lead down the stretch against ATL and having a ball dropped on third down that would have kept the drive going and ran time off the clock? Remember Philly? How about giving up a huge run and a huge pass at the end of the Redskins game? Remember NY? Yes the eight picks happened, but as you say, stats (even int stats) don't tell the whole story.  Even with those, We could have easily been 10-6 or even 11-5.

I don't know of anyone who says Freeman is without fault in the results of this season. At the same time, to say he sucks or that he isn't a good QB is wrong.

Of course there are multiple factors that result in INTs...and yes, the INT stat is one that doesn't tell the whole story...which is exactly why I try to stray away from using the INTs as a main piece of evidence of his inconsistency. The INTs were originally brought up by jlb and I was just responding to his attempt at omitting all the picks in those 2 games.

As for the Pick 6. From the snap to the moment he was hit, Freemans head was turned to the right side of the field and he never looked away from V-Jax. He also didn't see the hit coming, and was hit a split second after releasing the ball. He threw the ball to V-Jax even though he was doubled and Miller had dropped off making him the 3rd defender within 5 yards of V-Jax. Faultless? I think not.

The first shot shows shortly after the snap...notice that his head is turned toward the right side of the field, he never looks anywhere else.  The second shot is just as Miller is jumping up for the pick....why the hell would he throw this ball with that many people around?? He already had his mind made up about throwing to V-Jax way before he got hit.

Yup, saw MW19 slip on the JJ pick six. That doesn't excuse nearly an entire game poor throws by Freeman. Yup, saw the Underwood drop when we had a 7 point lead and had to kick a FG. All you are doing here is pointing out one play that wasn't Freeman's fault. Sure, I remember Philly and being shut out in the first half....etc...etc...etc...

I'm not sure what you are trying to sell me on. Freeman was not blameless, nor was he the sole blame for any losses. Sure, we could have been 10-6...but we weren't. Could-have-beens mean nothing. They were 7-9, because the team played like a 7-9 team.


Until preseason, you stay classy Red Board.

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 13372
Offline
#46 : January 15, 2013, 02:05:44 PM

The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.  I just don't get the, "well, if you don't look at this, this, and this..then Freeman was pretty good". I really hope the coaching staff doesn't do this when evaluating Freeman. Sure, he can bounce back and have decent numbers...and that's great for those who love to sit around and masturbate to a stat sheet webpage on ESPN.com...but stats rarely tell the whole story. We weren't in playoff contention for the last month of the year...hard to argue that we were in contention when it actually mattered. The Bucs went 1-5 down the stretch because the whole team faltered....not just the defense, and not just Freeman. Freeman was not blameless in any of those last 5 losses. Should have beaten Atlanta, and beating Atlanta are two completely different things. The team that deserved to win that game, won. Period. I wouldn't exactly call that loss against Denver a product of a great manning comeback...also Freemans pick 6 pretty much put things out of reach in that one. You certainly like to play a lot of "ifs".

no doubt those 8 INTs exist, but thats where we differ. it seems to me lots of people see things very black and white on the freeman situation when in reality there are varying shades of grey. too much context is lost looking at things in such stark terms. and if that "context" gets labeled as excuses, so be it. labelling them as excuses doesnt change the fact that all these "what if's" significantly impact the way #5 is viewed and to an extent, dealt with. i use the secondary and the lack of o-line depth because those are two significant factors that led to this team losing games (along with freeman's play in a few games). you can call them excuses, but the reality is they are two issues that are realistically going to be addressed this offseason, and if done correctly should help this team win games, as well as reducing the pressure on freeman to win it himself (and make bonehead decisions in the process).

bottom line is if you step back, you can see that while freeman did contribute to this team's failures this season, he is hardly the team's biggest problem (not yet anyway). and IMO the positives as i can see them significantly outweigh the negatives of freeman's game, some of which are nitpicky at best. again, that's not to say he doesn't have his faults but QB is the least of their worries at this point.

My argument isn't, and has never been, that Freeman is the biggest issue with the team. Of course the secondary needs to be addressed. Of course the pass rush needs to be bolstered. Of course the OL needs to be solidified. We could probably stand to use another playmaker or two on offense. All that being true, Freeman still shows things that are very concerning and hopefully are not brushed under the rug by the coaching staff. Personally, I feel that we can solidify this team to the point of where we are close to the strength of a 49ers, and I still doubt we would win a title because there needs to be some sort of consistency at the QB position. I haven't seen enough to convince me that he has the heart, leadership, decision-making, ability to read a defense, or the consistency to bring a Lombardi back to Tampa...no matter how much we realistically upgrade problem positions. So while I feel that we could possibly be a playoff qualifying team with Freeman...I'm not convinced this could be a championship team with him. Hope he proves me wrong next year.


Until preseason, you stay classy Red Board.

BucBalla85

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 18440
Offline
#47 : January 15, 2013, 02:06:05 PM

Agree Chase. They did. From beginning to end they played like a 7-9 team. They build on it and have a great offseason, they can be better than that. Playoffs arent too far off.

Chief Joseph

User is banned from postingMuted
******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4309
Offline
#48 : January 15, 2013, 02:52:49 PM

 " but if he's not "elite" after 4 years, not perfect on every throw, well then he's a donkey. "

Are you arguing with the imaginary people again? You'd think that, sooner or later, you'd be capable of winning an argument against an imaginary opponent but I guess not.


Illuminator is a good poster. He sticks to his guns and makes good points. Some don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t like that.

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27556
Offline
#49 : January 15, 2013, 03:01:38 PM

The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.
The point is you can only lose a game once, so if a QB is going to throw X number of INT's over a season, you're better off having as many of them in as few games as possible. If your QB throws 17 INT's like Freeman did, you're going to win a lot more games if he threw 8 in 2 games and 9 in the other 14 games (with zero in 7 games) than if he threw at least 1 INT in every single game.

FRG is the most logical poster on this board.  You guys just don\'t like where the logical conclusions take you.

BucBalla85

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 18440
Offline
#50 : January 15, 2013, 03:09:51 PM

The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.
The point is you can only lose a game once, so if a QB is going to throw X number of INT's over a season, you're better off having as many of them in as few games as possible. If your QB throws 17 INT's like Freeman did, you're going to win a lot more games if he threw 8 in 2 games and 9 in the other 14 games (with zero in 7 games) than if he threw at least 1 INT in every single game.

I think its encouraging that he did throw the majority of them in just a couple of games. The 7 games that he didnt throw one could be what he is. The truth is probably somewhere in between. Thing is though that its the NFL. Even Brees had a few really bad games where he threw multiple ints. Im not saying its ok to throw Ints. If you are keeping it minimal then your doing ok. For 7 games without one is pretty good. Pretty much half of the season he was taking care of the ball very well. That means he was making pretty good decisions with the ball then. I dont think that its coincidence that he threw the majority of his ints when we were losing ground on the playoffs. Kid had to make plays by himself to win that playoff spot. He wasnt good enough to do that. I dont expect him to. Maybe others do but I dont. I want him to make good decisions and hit the important throws that lead to TDs or points. I also want a solid team to back him up to make up for his mistakes when he makes them. Hes gonna make them and hes not going to be the most accurate guy but he can have a solid defense and ST to make up for those times. Since hes been in the league, doesnt really seem like hes had that.

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 13372
Offline
#51 : January 15, 2013, 03:50:17 PM

The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.
The point is you can only lose a game once, so if a QB is going to throw X number of INT's over a season, you're better off having as many of them in as few games as possible. If your QB throws 17 INT's like Freeman did, you're going to win a lot more games if he threw 8 in 2 games and 9 in the other 14 games (with zero in 7 games) than if he threw at least 1 INT in every single game.

I don't disagree, and the INTs aren't one of my main issues with Freeman, as I stated in a later post.

My point about responding to the INTs was that some like to omit certain portions of Freeman's play, be that the INTs/inaccuracy/etc.


Until preseason, you stay classy Red Board.

1sparkybuc

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7267
Offline
#52 : January 15, 2013, 03:51:35 PM

Whats funny is that I dont even think of them as "excuses" (age, second year in system, bad coaching early in his career) but as realistic reasons for why he could turn his game around. Call me the "excuse man" all you want but they are legit reasons for why the guy could turn his game around.

I have said since the 2009 draft that Freeman was better than Mark Sanchez. I still believe that. Even with two years experience under his belt, Sanchez has shown he can't overcome a bad team. He would have totally sucked four straight years had the Bucs drafted him. The Jets would still be in trouble with Freeman now, but I believe they would have at least made it to the SB once with him. Situations do make a difference no matter how much the haters want to ignore them.

BucBalla85

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 18440
Offline
#53 : January 15, 2013, 03:55:58 PM

The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.
The point is you can only lose a game once, so if a QB is going to throw X number of INT's over a season, you're better off having as many of them in as few games as possible. If your QB throws 17 INT's like Freeman did, you're going to win a lot more games if he threw 8 in 2 games and 9 in the other 14 games (with zero in 7 games) than if he threw at least 1 INT in every single game.

I don't disagree, and the INTs aren't one of my main issues with Freeman, as I stated in a later post.

My point about responding to the INTs was that some like to omit certain portions of Freeman's play, be that the INTs/inaccuracy/etc.

I think his inaccuracy is what scares me most about him. Im really hoping he can improve that aspect of his game.

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 27556
Offline
#54 : January 15, 2013, 04:29:00 PM

The thing is, those two games and 8 ints exist, whether people want to acknowledge them or not.
The point is you can only lose a game once, so if a QB is going to throw X number of INT's over a season, you're better off having as many of them in as few games as possible. If your QB throws 17 INT's like Freeman did, you're going to win a lot more games if he threw 8 in 2 games and 9 in the other 14 games (with zero in 7 games) than if he threw at least 1 INT in every single game.

I don't disagree, and the INTs aren't one of my main issues with Freeman, as I stated in a later post.

My point about responding to the INTs was that some like to omit certain portions of Freeman's play, be that the INTs/inaccuracy/etc.
I don't think anyone is completely omitting them. It's just being pointed out that it's not something that shows up in every game he plays or even a decent percentage of his games, like some of his other deficiencies.

FRG is the most logical poster on this board.  You guys just don\'t like where the logical conclusions take you.

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 13372
Offline
#55 : January 15, 2013, 04:51:03 PM

Hey guys, guys...Mark Sanchez sucks....so therefore, Freeman is better than Mark Sanchez.

We're good.

Someone inform Dom and Coach S. I'm sure they will be relieved.


Until preseason, you stay classy Red Board.

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
#56 : January 15, 2013, 05:30:21 PM

My first thought when looking at the screenshots above, was why are there three offensive linemen on one DE, while a free rusher is coming up the middle untouched?

My next thought is why didn't Free throw the check down to a wide open Lorig in the flat? Probably because he got flustered and forgot he was there. Probably never even looked that way. Just lock on and throw to his primary.
: January 15, 2013, 05:32:48 PM JDouble


QaZ

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2001
Offline
#57 : January 15, 2013, 05:56:04 PM

Hey guys, guys...Mark Sanchez sucks....so therefore, Freeman is better than Mark Sanchez.

We're good.

Someone inform Dom and Coach S. I'm sure they will be relieved.

It isn't about if we are good(Freeman better than Sanchez) or bad (Freeman worse than Rodgers). Its not about what we did in the past, whether we would have won if K2 does not draw that PI or Freeman does not throw 4 INT against NO.
Its about how to make this TEAM better how to win games next season (and beyond).

So we do not have to compare Freeman to Sanchez or Rodgers, f/e compare him to Geno Smith (thinking we could atleast get him by trading up). If he is better than Freeman, draft him, and start to think what's best for this TEAM regarding Freeman, trading him or w/e. But if Freeman is better than Geno Smith, i want this franchise  to stick to Freeman, atleast until another QB becomes available so we can compare him to again.

No one here refuses to pick up a elite QB instead of Freeman. But as it seem the Freeman hater just want to make sure the bad QB keeping us from winning is not called Freeman.

BucBalla85

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 18440
Offline
#58 : January 15, 2013, 05:58:11 PM

I'll say this. He can be very frustrating to watch. He's been like that since the beginning. Maybe it's just that I really don't want to go through another QB again. He's about as good as we're gonna get for now. Our luck with QBs has been awful. I don't doubt we would go in another slump of those guys for the next guy. Problem is if they aren't Rodgers or Brady then they are crap to the fans and will want a new guy until they get that guy. It's never ending until you get that guy. Which isn't easy.

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
#59 : January 15, 2013, 06:05:29 PM

I don't get the infatuation of Geno Smith. We could give Baltimore a 3rd for Tyrod Taylor and get the same guy for a lot less. In fact, Tyrod is probably better.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Mike Sullivan to stay with Buccaneers « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools