Dal - there is no doubt a qb who improved his reads, throws the ball to the open receivers vs forcing it, accuracy, and accelerates his decision making would be better from his prior performance. Hell, throwing to open receivers will even improve his RAC output. That would indeed be a wonderful off season of improvement.Now - what did you see in Glennon's performance that would make you think that was going to happen, or is this change to Tedford, or simply a second year in the NFL - bc I don't recall having seen such across the board changes... in anyone... but I am still thinking about it trying to recall such a turnaround...
Look at his girlfriend....need anymore reason ??
Exactly... She knows a winner.
The fact that he played well as a rookie is now proof to you he is no good. Can he get better taking care of the ball? Marginally yes but ball security is a good thing. Now you extrapolate from that one skill to "he is already a finished product" and so he's done. History alone disproves this because most QB's see their highest jump in performance from year 1 to year 2 in the NFL.Accuracy in a clean pocket is important. Mobility is stupid and overrated in terms of running, moving in the pocket he is certainly no worse than Flacco or Elii for example. Neither of them are good in the sense of how Brady moves in the pocket but that is elite levels of movement. Arm strength is binary, enough or not. His arm isn't legendary but his arm among guys like Foles, Smith, Bradford, and Brady. In other words, good enough.His accuracy was good, his decision making wasn't that good. He missed a lot of wide open guys and not so much even passing up long for short throws (he wasn't tossing the ball short inordinate amounts of times his short throw % was less Luck's for example) but just missing open receivers. Now, a lot of that is that he passed up open players to throw to VJax which I can sorta understand but at the same time decision making in the pocket is one of the things you expect to get better in the NFL. So in other words, as he learns to understand what he is seeing from defenses and understand his offense he should throw the ball to the right guy more often. You speed up that decision making you reduce the burden on the OL, increase completion % which also pumps up his YPA.Talking about 32nd ranked passing is silly since we also threw the ball 27th in the league. Attempts = yards so playcalling dictated his low total output. You also look at his stats and see the pitiful RAC we put out. Whereas some QB's got bonus yards from their receivers we didnt. Glennon was dead last in % of yards from YAC but 13th in yards in the air of his passes. He was above av erage throwing the ball but he demonstrably had zero help.
Who said he played well? He was the quarterback of the last place offense/passing attack. Pretty sure I mentioned that. Not well. No, not well at all. What is the source of your stats at the end? I'd be interested in looking at those. He was last amongst regular starters in yards per pass attempt (unless you count Cousins or Freeman as regular starters). I show the Bucs as 26th in pass team pass attempts and pass attempts per game (Freeman's 3 games being pretty much identical in terms of average attempts per game). I thought I explained, that the "strengths" of his game have limited upside. You don't go into anything in your post to argue against that opinion. Except a general statement on quarterbacks generally improving. You said he can "marginally" improve his ball security through the air. I'm not sure how that is possible. It was freakishly outstanding. Again, it was mostly the result of running out of bounds and throwing the ball away or taking the dump off well short of the 1st down on 3rd. I guess if he actually moves the offense well through the air while continuing that tremendous TD/Int rate it would improve the ball security. I didn't mention his fumbles in ball security and I should. He fumbled 7 times in 67 fumble opportunities (combine rushes with sacks). I don't know how 10.5% fumbles compares to other quarterbacks tbh. That part of his game could certainly be cleaned up some though. We could theoretically see improvement there. Dude, Bradford and Smith (certainly young Smith) have/had significantly stronger arms. Foles was who I was thinking of in comparison. Again, amongst the bottom starters in the league who are not old dudes in arm strength. I definitely think that is important. We watched how that affected our offense as Mike HAD to be clean and on schedule to deliver accurately down the field. That is a great disadvantage to an offense. Saying mobility as unimportant (stupid, overrated, however you want to put it) is so short sighted imo. I don't see how you can watch football and not see what an amazing advantage for an offense it is to have a quarterback that can affect defenses with his legs. Do some make it work without it? Yeah, sure they do. Obviously though they have to make up for their lack of mobility by being superior in other areas. The quarterbacks with the gift of mobility have a much much larger margin for error in their overall level of play (to achieve the same results on the field). Especially watching the last 2-3 seasons of NFL (or the last 15-20 in college). You lose a lot of respect (and I do respect your opinion as a poster) in my eyes when you do not recognize it's glaring advantages. Your opinion of Glennon diverges from many of his supporters. I agree with you that his presnap reads, vision in the pocket were not nearly as good as many state. When he looked the best was always when we had scripted plays for him with predetermined reads early in games. That's when his intermediate accuracy did shine through. When he took a regimented drop, set his feet, and threw to a wide open receiver in perfect rhythm. Then when defenses adjusted and he had to read defenses out, we turned to shit. I saw very little off schedule or improvised success from Mike, and that's quite a bit of any NFL QBs success. I don't care what system you run or who is playing around you.
Dal - there is no doubt a qb who improved his reads, throws the ball to the open receivers vs forcing it, accuracy, and accelerates his decision making would be better from his prior performance. Hell, throwing to open receivers will even improve his RAC output. That would indeed be a wonderful off season of improvement.Now - what did you see in Glennon's performance that would make you think that was going to happen, or is this change to Tedford, or simply a second year in the NFL - bc I don't recall having seen such across the board changes... in anyone... but I am still thinking about it trying to recall such a turnaround...
It isn't a turnaround, it is called development. Go look at most QBs who played in year 1 and then look at year 2 and compare who they are in year 2 to their career averages. It is awfully close, within the range of normal variation. I'm not sure what part of his games makes you not see him getting better at it. He wasn't incompetent at making the right reads. In most cases he blew the best but was throwing to the next best - and again most of that was passing up open guys like Underwood for throw it to VJax which might not always be the worst choice anyways. . I don't see a lot of brain fart level decisions which say he can't read. I see a lot of second best throw type reads which says familiarity and confidence in the #2 and 3 type players. RAC isn't really about him as much as scheme and personnel. Our scheme last year didn't create a lot of RAc and the players we had certainly didn't.
The fact that he played well as a rookie is now proof to you he is no good. Can he get better taking care of the ball? Marginally yes but ball security is a good thing. Now you extrapolate from that one skill to "he is already a finished product" and so he's done. History alone disproves this because most QB's see their highest jump in performance from year 1 to year 2 in the NFL.Accuracy in a clean pocket is important. Mobility is stupid and overrated in terms of running, moving in the pocket he is certainly no worse than Flacco or Elii for example. Neither of them are good in the sense of how Brady moves in the pocket but that is elite levels of movement. Arm strength is binary, enough or not. His arm isn't legendary but his arm among guys like Foles, Smith, Bradford, and Brady. In other words, good enough.His accuracy was good, his decision making wasn't that good. He missed a lot of wide open guys and not so much even passing up long for short throws (he wasn't tossing the ball short inordinate amounts of times his short throw % was less Luck's for example) but just missing open receivers. Now, a lot of that is that he passed up open players to throw to VJax which I can sorta understand but at the same time decision making in the pocket is one of the things you expect to get better in the NFL. So in other words, as he learns to understand what he is seeing from defenses and understand his offense he should throw the ball to the right guy more often. You speed up that decision making you reduce the burden on the OL, increase completion % which also pumps up his YPA.Talking about 32nd ranked passing is silly since we also threw the ball 27th in the league. Attempts = yards so playcalling dictated his low total output. You also look at his stats and see the pitiful RAC we put out. Whereas some QB's got bonus yards from their receivers we didnt. Glennon was dead last in % of yards from YAC but 13th in yards in the air of his passes. He was above av erage throwing the ball but he demonstrably had zero help.
Who said he played well? He was the quarterback of the last place offense/passing attack. Pretty sure I mentioned that. Not well. No, not well at all. What is the source of your stats at the end? I'd be interested in looking at those. He was last amongst regular starters in yards per pass attempt (unless you count Cousins or Freeman as regular starters). I show the Bucs as 26th in pass team pass attempts and pass attempts per game (Freeman's 3 games being pretty much identical in terms of average attempts per game). I thought I explained, that the "strengths" of his game have limited upside. You don't go into anything in your post to argue against that opinion. Except a general statement on quarterbacks generally improving. You said he can "marginally" improve his ball security through the air. I'm not sure how that is possible. It was freakishly outstanding. Again, it was mostly the result of running out of bounds and throwing the ball away or taking the dump off well short of the 1st down on 3rd. I guess if he actually moves the offense well through the air while continuing that tremendous TD/Int rate it would improve the ball security. I didn't mention his fumbles in ball security and I should. He fumbled 7 times in 67 fumble opportunities (combine rushes with sacks). I don't know how 10.5% fumbles compares to other quarterbacks tbh. That part of his game could certainly be cleaned up some though. We could theoretically see improvement there. Dude, Bradford and Smith (certainly young Smith) have/had significantly stronger arms. Foles was who I was thinking of in comparison. Again, amongst the bottom starters in the league who are not old dudes in arm strength. I definitely think that is important. We watched how that affected our offense as Mike HAD to be clean and on schedule to deliver accurately down the field. That is a great disadvantage to an offense. Saying mobility as unimportant (stupid, overrated, however you want to put it) is so short sighted imo. I don't see how you can watch football and not see what an amazing advantage for an offense it is to have a quarterback that can affect defenses with his legs. Do some make it work without it? Yeah, sure they do. Obviously though they have to make up for their lack of mobility by being superior in other areas. The quarterbacks with the gift of mobility have a much much larger margin for error in their overall level of play (to achieve the same results on the field). Especially watching the last 2-3 seasons of NFL (or the last 15-20 in college). You lose a lot of respect (and I do respect your opinion as a poster) in my eyes when you do not recognize it's glaring advantages. Your opinion of Glennon diverges from many of his supporters. I agree with you that his presnap reads, vision in the pocket were not nearly as good as many state. When he looked the best was always when we had scripted plays for him with predetermined reads early in games. That's when his intermediate accuracy did shine through. When he took a regimented drop, set his feet, and threw to a wide open receiver in perfect rhythm. Then when defenses adjusted and he had to read defenses out, we turned to **CENSORED**. I saw very little off schedule or improvised success from Mike, and that's quite a bit of any NFL QBs success. I don't care what system you run or who is playing around you.
. Don't care about running, I care about passing. If I get passing and running great but I can live without the former. Plenty of teams do. The spread option wasn't even a big part of any offense last year and the overall effectiveness of it went down quite a bit. He is as mobile as guys like Manning, Dalton and Eli or Brady. His problem isn't mobility it is pocket awareness and movement within the pocket. Franlkly 26th or 27th isn't worth my time re opening the link to see if I miscounted. The point is you cant gripe about total output if we didn't throw the ball a lot. Low attempts = low yardage. You clearly were not paying attention to or didn't comprehend the air yards vs RAC discussion which should have clued you in that his YPA was not as bad as it looked. I can be even more specific and say that on the attempts where he threw under 10 yards we got on average 2 fewer YPA than did guys like Rodgers and Brady. In other words, the dominant feature pulling down his YPA is not his throwing short but short throws not turn into anything more than short gains. Going back to the RAC issues. I can't help you if you watch Bradford Smith and their ilk and think they have anything in terms of arms. That just says you don't know what you are looking at. The idea that he didn't improvise or that he was only running scripts is also silly. You can watch his head and see that isn't the case. He was looking at the field. He was much better when the script went away and we went hurry up and spread systems as opposed to the tighter 2 WR sets. Recall the whole Rutgers we didn't practice thing line about that. Here is my overall take. He is a natural pocket passer. He has adequate mobility. His problem isn't scrambling but pocket awareness. That likely will not get better - that is more instinct than learned. What will lessen the effect of that awareness is getting rid of the ball faster which should come with experience. I see good accuracy, not elite accuracy. I see a guy who makes good decisions with the ball but those decisions take time. I think some of that will get better but I am not sure how much better he will get on the decision making. His delivery is a bit slow because of his length, this also magnifies the problems in his pocket awareness. Again, as his decision making speeds up it will limit the downside of this but it will take a lot of work to fix his delivery. He might develop into the sort of QB that kills you like Daltin and Flacco by being just good enough to get you into the playoffs but always being the worst QB in the playoffs. I wouldn't want to tie my future to a guy I look at as the weak link on a playoff team BUT there may be more upside to him than I have seen because of the poor cast and coaches he had around him. I'm willing to see if there is more upside on a team I expect to be better after he has had a shot to develop more. I'm not settling in for the long haul, he needs to break out next year or I'm looking to th future again.
Pretty simple - he is raw, young, intelligent, trainable and the game is not too big for him. . Just like most top tier rookie quarterbacks.Most, if not all of the top tier 6-10 QBs in this draft can also be as described above. Doubling down makes a ton of sense if they see a guy they like especially because of competition and a benchmark Glennon would be held against.We all know, when a regime picks a QB in the first round, especially top 10 - they are most likely married to him. Glennon isn't this regimes guy so he isat risk like everyone else. Problem is not a lot of completely sound options for the Bucs this draft at seven. So get a vet and two babies. Unless something truly unexpected happens at seven or in FA, our 2nd rounder will be for QB. (If they are determined to get one of these guys this year.)
Glennon will be good if everything is perfect around him ie no injuries good coaching strong defense. Basically every player has to up their game around him for him to be good. Unfortunately very rarely do all these things happen. He's doesn't have that kind of talent to overcome these deficincies which are bound to come up. He's not a franchise guys hes a guy u can get by with but probably won't lead you to where we all want to go (super bowl).
You should know in year 2 for most QBs short of some odd events. Yes there are outliers, but if you don't know at the end of next year it means you don't have the guy. This isn't a long term commitment and teams are too loathe to see what is in front of their eyes as QBs develop or fail to. Freeman was especially odd since his second year he did look like the answer and then fell apart in a way almost no QB has done in history.
The ultimate tease. Sans injury, a true aberration.
. Don't care about running, I care about passing. If I get passing and running great but I can live without the former. Plenty of teams do. The spread option wasn't even a big part of any offense last year and the overall effectiveness of it went down quite a bit. He is as mobile as guys like Manning, Dalton and Eli or Brady. His problem isn't mobility it is pocket awareness and movement within the pocket. Franlkly 26th or 27th isn't worth my time re opening the link to see if I miscounted. The point is you cant gripe about total output if we didn't throw the ball a lot. Low attempts = low yardage. You clearly were not paying attention to or didn't comprehend the air yards vs RAC discussion which should have clued you in that his YPA was not as bad as it looked. I can be even more specific and say that on the attempts where he threw under 10 yards we got on average 2 fewer YPA than did guys like Rodgers and Brady. In other words, the dominant feature pulling down his YPA is not his throwing short but short throws not turn into anything more than short gains. Going back to the RAC issues. I can't help you if you watch Bradford Smith and their ilk and think they have anything in terms of arms. That just says you don't know what you are looking at. The idea that he didn't improvise or that he was only running scripts is also silly. You can watch his head and see that isn't the case. He was looking at the field. He was much better when the script went away and we went hurry up and spread systems as opposed to the tighter 2 WR sets. Recall the whole Rutgers we didn't practice thing line about that. Here is my overall take. He is a natural pocket passer. He has adequate mobility. His problem isn't scrambling but pocket awareness. That likely will not get better - that is more instinct than learned. What will lessen the effect of that awareness is getting rid of the ball faster which should come with experience. I see good accuracy, not elite accuracy. I see a guy who makes good decisions with the ball but those decisions take time. I think some of that will get better but I am not sure how much better he will get on the decision making. His delivery is a bit slow because of his length, this also magnifies the problems in his pocket awareness. Again, as his decision making speeds up it will limit the downside of this but it will take a lot of work to fix his delivery. He might develop into the sort of QB that kills you like Daltin and Flacco by being just good enough to get you into the playoffs but always being the worst QB in the playoffs. I wouldn't want to tie my future to a guy I look at as the weak link on a playoff team BUT there may be more upside to him than I have seen because of the poor cast and coaches he had around him. I'm willing to see if there is more upside on a team I expect to be better after he has had a shot to develop more. I'm not settling in for the long haul, he needs to break out next year or I'm looking to th future again.
Of course I'm more interested in passing. However, running ability is even more of a bonus for a young quarterback who doesn't really know what's going on yet. It can mask deficiencies and allow an offense to function without a great passing quarterback. Also scrambling outside the pocket to make throws down the field. Again, I am interested in those statistics. Would appreciate the link to where you get them. Especially if it's a free site. I am not discounting them. All I have to go on is what I see, and then the basic stats from like NFL.com.I might be blending arm strength with mobility in some regard as I see Bradford and Smith both make throws down the field at much lower angles while moving then anything I've seen come off Mike Glennon's hand. I see those guys delivering intermediate passes at low angles (less air time) on the move. Without having to set their feet. I don't see that from Mike so I absolutely put their arms in a different category then Mike. With Mike it seem like every throw that is not feet set and square is a lofted pass if it's traveling more then 30 yards in the air. I don't think I am imagining that. I would not put Bradford or Smith anywhere close to the strongest arms in the NFL. However they are on a different plane (maybe slightly in comparison to the best, I can concede that) imo then Glennon. Great final paragraph. Agree with a lot of that. Damn near all of it I guess. Except the mobility part. The guys with the lollipop arms need to be able to move around better (imo).
Site with air yards and YAC and a whole ton of other stuff: http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/quarterback-air-yards/2013/
Thank you and bookmarked. Gonna go snoop around there a bit. *goodness, what kind of freak compiles that information? That's not official coming from the team/NFL is it?*
Site with air yards and YAC and a whole ton of other stuff: http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/quarterback-air-yards/2013/
Thanks! Fabulous!
I saw a guy who was going through his progression extremely well for a rookie, not locking on to one player or one half the field, and was accurate in everything other than deep go routes, which he got better at as the season went on. Also someone who was taking command of the huddle, and making pre-snap reads, all of this while being a rookie was mega freaking impressive to me. I got the sense that he is probably one of the smarter dudes in the league in truly/hopefully a kid who's going get better every year, and we;ve already heard enough about how great his work ethic is. I also saw that none of this paid off for him in 2013 because of the receivers and Mike Sullivans garbage system where Glennon has to wait for the WR to decide how he's going to adjust pretty much and they were never open (noticed this as a real issue, and not an excuse when I attended the two games I went to). From what I saw from Glennon myself, and what I learned about Tedfords offense, Mike Glennon is gonna shock a lot of fans here next season.
This. I think some people will wind up howling at the moon if we draft a QB next year and busts and Glennon moves on to develop into a beast. The dude can read a D, go through his progression, makes good decisions, and throws an accurate ball....not even a third of the QB's in the league possess that trait, and he was a rookie. The USA has gotten into "instant gratification or bust" mode and its pretty stupid.
Nice link Dal
Glennon will be good if everything is perfect around him ie no injuries good coaching strong defense. Basically every player has to up their game around him for him to be good. Unfortunately very rarely do all these things happen. He's doesn't have that kind of talent to overcome these deficincies which are bound to come up. He's not a franchise guys hes a guy u can get by with but probably won't lead you to where we all want to go (super bowl).
That is a complete crock of sht right there. He spent large parts of last season "being good", when everyone around him was being sht.There are no Andrew Lucks this year. If we draft a QB, he is almost certainly going to look as bad as or worse than Glennon next year.
