Ha! That would be the day....
Lol I see what you did there
Glennon's YPA was low for several reasons that I'll explain:1. He missed open receivers for check downs2. He had receivers who rarely could make people miss or break tackles, outside of Vjax, so YAC were low3. His receivers dropped plenty of balls4. He often didn't put the ball in an ideal spot to allow the receiver to "catch on the run" allowing for them to get caught from behind or tackled when a better ball would let them run.5. I personally believe that the system was a boom or bust system and considering Glennon's inability to hit a deep ball with any frequency further contributed to his YPA.Some is on Mike, some not. Having a low YPA as a rookie isn't a surprising thing. Mike had a successful rookie season. That's not the question, the question should be can be do significantly better in 2014 because as he was good for a rookie, he was lower half or lower 3rd overall of QBs. The team with the better QB wins a large percentage of games.YPA has a high correlation to winning, so doesn't having the QB with the higher passer rating. As passer rating differential increases (difference between the two QB passer ratings), chances of winning increases.
6. He's not a risk taker that often throws a covered WR open (jump balls, etc). If he doesn't see clear separation, he'll move thru his progressions/check down.
Had a bad year, yeah. Glennon had no right to ever be on the field this year. Do you honestly think that given another year, Glennon's Y/A is going to be the same?
Yes I do because he looked like the same exact QB he was at North Carolina State. He is what he is. If everything is perfect and he has time, he will make the throw and look very good ....but as soon as the play breaks down he is done for. He's not a QB that can make things happen himself and make everyone around him look better. He is a guy that will be solid if you surround him with great talent and everyone stays healthy and everything goes perfect....which rarely happens.
You would expect Glennon to look the same whether he was playing in Tedford's or Sully's offense? Whether he was playing with last year's O-line or a better O-line? (How could that be with your comment in bold?) With Martin or without? With or without Williams? (How could that be with your comment in bold?)I think you're trying to say he doesnt have a high celing, but it comes out like your saying we got his best last year, which is hard to understand no matter what one thinks of Glennonalmost by defintiion, Glennon should be better next year . . in an offense that fits him . . with a better offensive line . . a solid running game . . and a better defense . . right?
game over, jdub
Had a bad year, yeah. Glennon had no right to ever be on the field this year. Do you honestly think that given another year, Glennon's Y/A is going to be the same?
Yes I do because he looked like the same exact QB he was at North Carolina State. He is what he is. If everything is perfect and he has time, he will make the throw and look very good ....but as soon as the play breaks down he is done for. He's not a QB that can make things happen himself and make everyone around him look better. He is a guy that will be solid if you surround him with great talent and everyone stays healthy and everything goes perfect....which rarely happens.
You would expect Glennon to look the same whether he was playing in Tedford's or Sully's offense? Whether he was playing with last year's O-line or a better O-line? (How could that be with your comment in bold?) With Martin or without? With or without Williams? (How could that be with your comment in bold?)I think you're trying to say he doesnt have a high celing, but it comes out like your saying we got his best last year, which is hard to understand no matter what one thinks of Glennonalmost by defintiion, Glennon should be better next year . . in an offense that fits him . . with a better offensive line . . a solid running game . . and a better defense . . right?
game over, jdub
The question isn't can he better it's how much better can he be? I don't think anyone would say he can't improve from #37 in YPA to #27, #26 in completion percentage to #20, and #21 in QB rating to #15, but can he get into the top 5 or top 10? That's the only thing that matters. You're going to lose games just the same if your QB has the #27 YPA as #37.
Had a bad year, yeah. Glennon had no right to ever be on the field this year. Do you honestly think that given another year, Glennon's Y/A is going to be the same?
Yes I do because he looked like the same exact QB he was at North Carolina State. He is what he is. If everything is perfect and he has time, he will make the throw and look very good ....but as soon as the play breaks down he is done for. He's not a QB that can make things happen himself and make everyone around him look better. He is a guy that will be solid if you surround him with great talent and everyone stays healthy and everything goes perfect....which rarely happens.
You would expect Glennon to look the same whether he was playing in Tedford's or Sully's offense? Whether he was playing with last year's O-line or a better O-line? (How could that be with your comment in bold?) With Martin or without? With or without Williams? (How could that be with your comment in bold?)I think you're trying to say he doesnt have a high celing, but it comes out like your saying we got his best last year, which is hard to understand no matter what one thinks of Glennonalmost by defintiion, Glennon should be better next year . . in an offense that fits him . . with a better offensive line . . a solid running game . . and a better defense . . right?
game over, jdub
The question isn't can he better it's how much better can he be? I don't think anyone would say he can't improve from #37 in YPA to #27, #26 in completion percentage to #20, and #21 in QB rating to #15, but can he get into the top 5 or top 10? That's the only thing that matters. You're going to lose games just the same if your QB has the #27 YPA as #37.
the fallback
The OL effect is being seriously overrated. Glennon had the 6th longest average time in the pocket of any QB in the league at 3.00 seconds. Glennon's average sack happened at 4.22 seconds, which was the 10th most time in the league. Sure we saw some quick pressures (several due to poor protection schemes/assignments) but on average he is getting/taking more time than most other QBs to make a play.
Had a bad year, yeah. Glennon had no right to ever be on the field this year. Do you honestly think that given another year, Glennon's Y/A is going to be the same?
Yes I do because he looked like the same exact QB he was at North Carolina State. He is what he is. If everything is perfect and he has time, he will make the throw and look very good ....but as soon as the play breaks down he is done for. He's not a QB that can make things happen himself and make everyone around him look better. He is a guy that will be solid if you surround him with great talent and everyone stays healthy and everything goes perfect....which rarely happens.
You would expect Glennon to look the same whether he was playing in Tedford's or Sully's offense? Whether he was playing with last year's O-line or a better O-line? (How could that be with your comment in bold?) With Martin or without? With or without Williams? (How could that be with your comment in bold?)I think you're trying to say he doesnt have a high celing, but it comes out like your saying we got his best last year, which is hard to understand no matter what one thinks of Glennonalmost by defintiion, Glennon should be better next year . . in an offense that fits him . . with a better offensive line . . a solid running game . . and a better defense . . right?
game over, jdub
The question isn't can he better it's how much better can he be? I don't think anyone would say he can't improve from #37 in YPA to #27, #26 in completion percentage to #20, and #21 in QB rating to #15, but can he get into the top 5 or top 10? That's the only thing that matters. You're going to lose games just the same if your QB has the #27 YPA as #37.
As long as your QB doesn't turn the ball over, I don't think you're going to lose games just because your QB has the #27 YPA. I don't think YPA has anything to do with it. I think its all about how secure your quarterback handles the ball. And I think a rookie QB who had an absolutely terrible O-line to play behind, and his stud RB out, and his #2 WR out, and no true TE to throw the ball to (until maybe the last 4 games)who STILL throws for a 2:1 ratio, completes 60% of his passes, throws 12 Touchdowns and ZERO int's in the redzone - deserves a shot at running our offense for at least 16 games next season. If he sucks it up, then we move on... but rookie qb play like that doesn't just come around every year
As long as your QB doesn't turn the ball over, I don't think you're going to lose games just because your QB has the #27 YPA. I don't think YPA has anything to do with it.
The teams with the top 11 YPA's all finished 8-8 or better. Eight made the playoffs. Only one team in the bottom 10 for YPA made the playoffs.
Beardmcdoug, YES! Also a high correlation to winning with a QB who doesn't throw interceptions!
I don't like all these numbers. I hate numbers
Beardmcdoug, YES! Also a high correlation to winning with a QB who doesn't throw interceptions!
There is a high correlation between not throwing INTs and winning. Eight of the top nine teams in fewest INTs made the playoffs. The team that did not make the playoffs had the #24 YPA. The Bucs were a pretty respectable tie for #10 in fewest INTs but we of course know they went 4-12. It's not enough to just not throw INTs. You have to not throw INTs while pushing the ball down the field.
Beardmcdoug, YES! Also a high correlation to winning with a QB who doesn't throw interceptions!
There is a high correlation between not throwing INTs and winning. Eight of the top nine teams in fewest INTs made the playoffs. The team that did not make the playoffs had the #24 YPA. The Bucs were a pretty respectable tie for #10 in fewest INTs but we of course know they went 4-12. It's not enough to just not throw INTs. You have to not throw INTs while pushing the ball down the field.
I think having 2 out of the top 3 offensive weapons back should help glennon do that, and maybe add a new one that can play in the middle of the field
Beardmcdoug, YES! Also a high correlation to winning with a QB who doesn't throw interceptions!
There is a high correlation between not throwing INTs and winning. Eight of the top nine teams in fewest INTs made the playoffs. The team that did not make the playoffs had the #24 YPA. The Bucs were a pretty respectable tie for #10 in fewest INTs but we of course know they went 4-12. It's not enough to just not throw INTs. You have to not throw INTs while pushing the ball down the field.
Interesting FRG. 8 of top 9 teams with fewest INT made playoff.9 of top 10 QBs in YPA made playoffs7 of top 10 QB in passer ratings made playoffs6 of top 10 QBs in passing yards made playoffs5 of top 10 QBs in completion percentage made playoffs5 of top 10 QBs in passing TDs made playoffs6 of top 10 QBs with most 40+ yard plays made playoffsSo correct me if I'm wrong but if you are in the top 9 in fewest ints but also in the top 10 in YPA and Passer rating that gives you a 99.62% chance of making the playoffs....Soooo, lets just do that then...
Beardmcdoug, YES! Also a high correlation to winning with a QB who doesn't throw interceptions!
There is a high correlation between not throwing INTs and winning. Eight of the top nine teams in fewest INTs made the playoffs. The team that did not make the playoffs had the #24 YPA. The Bucs were a pretty respectable tie for #10 in fewest INTs but we of course know they went 4-12. It's not enough to just not throw INTs. You have to not throw INTs while pushing the ball down the field.
Interesting FRG. 8 of top 9 teams with fewest INT made playoff.9 of top 10 QBs in YPA made playoffs7 of top 10 QB in passer ratings made playoffs6 of top 10 QBs in passing yards made playoffs5 of top 10 QBs in completion percentage made playoffs5 of top 10 QBs in passing TDs made playoffs6 of top 10 QBs with most 40+ yard plays made playoffsSo correct me if I'm wrong but if you are in the top 9 in fewest ints but also in the top 10 in YPA and Passer rating that gives you a 99.62% chance of making the playoffs....Soooo, lets just do that then...
So the question becomes then:What types of plays are generally low-risk for interceptions and have potential for high yardage?If we base the offense around those types of passing plays, shouldn't that give us the best chance to make the playoffs?Screen plays are what come to mind for meAnd slant passesAnd maybe 1on1 deep balls to jackson
can you imagine a team actually taking that approach - the reverse statistics approach . . . "hey, all we need to do is . .:
