Glennon's sacks are his fault and interceptions are now a good thing. Only on The Red Board does stupid junk like this get said.
As I said earlier, either the offensive line suddenly played significantly worse than they have in ten years or Glennon takes a lot of sacks. If you want to believe this years line was a lot worse than previous versions that featured Sean Mahan, Kenyatta Walker, Cosey Colemen, Jeremy Trueblood, Jeff Faine, Keydrick Vincent, James Lee, and Derrick Hardman, that's your choice.
I've said all along I don't think INTs are all that bad for rookies. The reason Manning threw all those INTs is because he was trying to play like a great QB as a rookie but he wasn't great yet. Glennon threw a low number of INTs because he wasn't trying to play like a great QB. At some point if Glennon wants to be a great QB, he's going to have to try to play like one.
lol, the part in bold -- how in the heck would you know that?
Lol 4real
It should be pretty clear the two players adopted different risk/reward strategies in their rookie seasons. Manning was will to take more risks because his arm couldn't execute what his eyes could see was there and he threw a lot of INTs. After his rookie season, Manning received a tremendous reward for being able to complete these difficult plays. Glennon was anti-risk and thus didn't throw a lot of INTs, but he also didn't get much reward, as evidenced by his #37 YPA and the team having the #32 offense. If the Bucs are ever going to know reward with Glennon, he's going to have to take more risks, like Manning. But that's another thread. This thread was supposed to be how the Bucs gave up a monumental amount more sacks as soon as Glennon started playing.
It seemed pretty apparent to me that Schiano and Co had drilled it into his head to protect the football at all cost.
**Sack 1 -****Snap: 32:45**
**Pressure/Sack: 32:46**
**Sack 2 -****Snap: 37:37**
**Pressure/Sack: 37:39**
**Sack 3 -****Snap: 38:02**
**Pressure/Sack: 38:04**
**Sack 4 -****Snap: 1:04:56**
**Pressure/Sack: 1:04:58**
**Sack 5 -****Snap: 1:12:20**
**Pressure/Sack: 1:12:22**
**Sack 6 -****Snap: 1:12:53**
**Pressure/Sack: 1:12:56**
**Sack 7 -****Snap: 1:16:50**
**Pressure/Sack: 1:16:53**
A factor many miss is losing Doug Martin left us with no real burner in the backfield, meaning teams could tee off on the QB on more downs with no fear of being burned by a run. Rainey had some moments, but actually isn't that fast. Elusive, as teams found out, but not very fast.Perhaps Gruden's best move in 2002 was signing LT Roman Oben and moving Kenyatta Walker to RT. That gave us for one year probably the best overall O'line we'd ever had. Glennon's sacks last season are stats with very little real significance given all our offensive woes last season and the fact he was a rookie. He's not a QB who can overcome a meh run game with 1 WR who can run a route and a non-blocking TE.
I've said all along I don't think INTs are all that bad for rookies. The reason Manning threw all those INTs is because he was trying to play like a great QB as a rookie but he wasn't great yet. Glennon threw a low number of INTs because he wasn't trying to play like a great QB. At some point if Glennon wants to be a great QB, he's going to have to try to play like one.
lol, the part in bold -- how in the heck would you know that?
Lol 4real
It should be pretty clear the two players adopted different risk/reward strategies in their rookie seasons. Manning was will to take more risks because his arm couldn't execute what his eyes could see was there and he threw a lot of INTs. After his rookie season, Manning received a tremendous reward for being able to complete these difficult plays. Glennon was anti-risk and thus didn't throw a lot of INTs, but he also didn't get much reward, as evidenced by his #37 YPA and the team having the #32 offense. If the Bucs are ever going to know reward with Glennon, he's going to have to take more risks, like Manning. But that's another thread. This thread was supposed to be how the Bucs gave up a monumental amount more sacks as soon as Glennon started playing.
I meant that there may be an external reason why Glennon was particularly conservative with INTs last year . . . . I guess that could be "not trying to play like a great QB" but we don't know if that means if that was because he is a bad QB or a good soldier . . or most likely, a little of both
Hater's gonna hate. Glennon was sacked 40 times, which is bad, but Brady was sacked 40 times as well.RGMe was sacked 38 times in 13 games as well.Brees was sacked 37 times last year.I guess they are bad qbs for taking sacks
Don't forget that Glennon didn't even play a full year so...yea, that's way too many sacks!
Glennon also missed TONS of wide open guys because he is scared to make any kind of mistake. So instead of making a play, he took a sack.
**Sack 1 -****Snap: 32:45****Pressure/Sack: 32:46****Sack 2 -****Snap: 37:37****Pressure/Sack: 37:39****Sack 3 -****Snap: 38:02****Pressure/Sack: 38:04****Sack 4 -****Snap: 1:04:56****Pressure/Sack: 1:04:58****Sack 5 -****Snap: 1:12:20****Pressure/Sack: 1:12:22****Sack 6 -****Snap: 1:12:53****Pressure/Sack: 1:12:56****Sack 7 -****Snap: 1:16:50****Pressure/Sack: 1:16:53**
That's a lot of jailbreaks...
**Sack 1 -****Snap: 32:45****Pressure/Sack: 32:46****Sack 2 -****Snap: 37:37****Pressure/Sack: 37:39****Sack 3 -****Snap: 38:02****Pressure/Sack: 38:04****Sack 4 -****Snap: 1:04:56****Pressure/Sack: 1:04:58****Sack 5 -****Snap: 1:12:20****Pressure/Sack: 1:12:22****Sack 6 -****Snap: 1:12:53****Pressure/Sack: 1:12:56****Sack 7 -****Snap: 1:16:50****Pressure/Sack: 1:16:53**
That's a lot of jailbreaks...
That Rams team did that to a lot of offensive lines.
That Rams team did that to a lot of offensive lines.
So you admit there was nothing Glennon could have done then? That's a first step. Then again you think stats are not concrete and are subject to change. Oh and opinions are now facts.
When the offense is geared to run the ball and take deep shots... you have to run the ball.
| SACKED | RUNyards | PassAtt | RushAtt |
| 3 | 65 | 31 | 25 |
| 1 | 160 | 22 | 33 |
| 3 | 97 | 41 | 22 |
| 2 | 80 | 43 | 31 |
| 2 | 94 | 43 | 21 |
| 3 | 111 | 44 | 28 |
| 3 | 48 | 51 | 14 |
| 3 | 205 | 23 | 38 |
| 2 | 140 | 21 | 37 |
| 2 | 186 | 23 | 38 |
| 4 | 22 | 21 | 24 |
| 5 | 66 | 21 | 20 |
| 1 | 165 | 25 | 36 |
| 4 | 39 | 34 | 12 |
| 7 | 59 | 26 | 23 |
| 2 | 75 | 41 | 18 |
That Rams team did that to a lot of offensive lines.
So you admit there was nothing Glennon could have done then? That's a first step. Then again you think stats are not concrete and are subject to change. Oh and opinions are now facts.
The Bucs never played a good pass rushing team any of the past ten years. It was just 2013. Poor Glennon. What bad luck.
That Rams team did that to a lot of offensive lines.
So you admit there was nothing Glennon could have done then? That's a first step. Then again you think stats are not concrete and are subject to change. Oh and opinions are now facts.
The Bucs never played a good pass rushing team any of the past ten years. It was just 2013. Poor Glennon. What bad luck.
So you can look at those pics and still blame Glennon? Poor delusional soul.
That Rams team did that to a lot of offensive lines.
So you admit there was nothing Glennon could have done then? That's a first step. Then again you think stats are not concrete and are subject to change. Oh and opinions are now facts.
Actually Glennon could have changed some protection calls.
I guess nobody remembers the preseason? If you didn't know by Labor Day that the O-line had major issues, you weren't paying attention.
To me, this is the point of the thread. The sack numbers were always thrown in the face to those that said the OL wasn't protecting the passer well. The OL really didn't play all that much worse than they have in the past 5-6 years, but the QB was sacked quite a bit more.
Actually, the OL was significantly worse this season. That's the point being made by the poster you responded to. It was bad whether it was Josh or Mike back there. Neither QB played stellar last year, but the line was awful and it was clear even before the season started.
