Team Mac or Team Zappe?

My QB1 is


  • Total voters
    363
  • Poll closed .

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,138
Yates isn’t being fed garbage either. He is tight with the Belichicks off the field.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,450
Los Angeles, CA
I guess Bill saw the video with the guy wire.

Kidding. But wouldn’t it be something if an unseen camera support changed the course of history.

It was still a bad throw. Looked scary from the moment it left his hands. I think the wire did affect its trajectory but not much - possibly enough to move the ball from just being out of reach. It didn’t look like a throwaway. If it was a throwaway it was still terrible.
 
Aug 9, 2015
867
I think they have to rebuild Mac. Simplify the offense again. Run the ball. Similar to where they were 5 or 6 weeks into last season. Take selective shots. Maybe after a few weeks they can open it up downfield again, progressively. The bad INTs are just fucking him up and if he throws more this week, he might lose confidence for the whole season. FWIW, I thought he responded in the best way possible to his hook. In the back of his mind he had to think Zappe was going to stumble at some point soon, so he kept himself positive, which I’m sure did not go unnoticed in the locker room and facilitated BBs decision.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
I guess Bill saw the video with the guy wire.

Kidding. But wouldn’t it be something if an unseen camera support changed the course of history.

It was still a bad throw. Looked scary from the moment it left his hands. I think the wire did affect its trajectory but not much - possibly enough to move the ball from just being out of reach. It didn’t look like a throwaway. If it was a throwaway it was still terrible.
Honestly I don't think it mattered, same way I think if it was dropped he still gets yanked. Mac did not look remotely comfortable in the pocket and made a number of bad decisions/throws
 

PedrosRedGlove

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2005
653
I guess Bill saw the video with the guy wire.

Kidding. But wouldn’t it be something if an unseen camera support changed the course of history.

It was still a bad throw. Looked scary from the moment it left his hands. I think the wire did affect its trajectory but not much - possibly enough to move the ball from just being out of reach. It didn’t look like a throwaway. If it was a throwaway it was still terrible.
The ball didn't actually hit the wire, it's far in the background, the video clip is an optical illusion. For that to hit the SkyCam wire the camera would've had to be near the ground in the middle of the Chicago defense. There's also a SkyCam shot of Mac throwing the interception taken from overhead behind him.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdMQcWcRGio
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,118
Boston
That's fine, probably makes the most sense. Mac until the bye, if he plays like he has the rest of the season, you go to Zappe. Otherwise, it's Mac.
Completely agree with this. Monday was a mess but the whole team was awful. Just move onto the Jets. With Mac healthy, assess progress over the next two games and adjust on the bye week as needed.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,838
Mansfield MA
I think they have to rebuild Mac. Simplify the offense again. Run the ball. Similar to where they were 5 or 6 weeks into last season. Take selective shots. Maybe after a few weeks they can open it up downfield again, progressively. The bad INTs are just fucking him up and if he throws more this week, he might lose confidence for the whole season. FWIW, I thought he responded in the best way possible to his hook. In the back of his mind he had to think Zappe was going to stumble at some point soon, so he kept himself positive, which I’m sure did not go unnoticed in the locker room and facilitated BBs decision.
I think one of the problems is that they don't run the ball consistently well. The rush attack was awful Monday night. When it looks good, the passing offense tends to follow, but they lay an egg run blocking a good chunk of the time.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
8,578
I think one of the problems is that they don't run the ball consistently well. The rush attack was awful Monday night. When it looks good, the passing offense tends to follow, but they lay an egg run blocking a good chunk of the time.
How much of this is defensive gameplan though? Chicago seemed to be daring Mac to beat them with a loaded box.
 

Bigdogx

lurker
Jul 21, 2020
57
How much of this is defensive gameplan though? Chicago seemed to be daring Mac to beat them with a loaded box.
It is a smart play and most likely what the Jets will do this weekend.

Mac hasn't shown any ability to be a threat this year, right now if you stop the patriots running attack you stop the patriots.
I just hope the excuses end with Mac because Tuesday was just annoying as hell listening to sports talk in this area.

Everything from poor Mac was mistreated by Evil Bill to lol the fans, yes the fans are to blame for Mac going out three straight series and looking as pathetic as his first 3 games of this season. I think the best though were some radio
host even discussing sabotage by patriots coaches who don't like Mac lmao. I mean give me a fning break with some of this noise, can they not try and be so obvious to use this situation to bash a head coach they clearly all don't like.

My guess is we are going to see the same Mac we have seen weeks 1,2,3 and 3 series of monday night. Not sure what those of you who feel Mac is being misused or treated have seen in him this season, maybe i missed it while i was using the bathroom or something IDK....
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,925
Park Slope, Brooklyn
I think one of the problems is that they don't run the ball consistently well. The rush attack was awful Monday night. When it looks good, the passing offense tends to follow, but they lay an egg run blocking a good chunk of the time.
Along with the weak running game, the Harris drop was to Mac what the Jakobi muffed handoff was to Bailey — both massive momentum killers. I’ll add one thought I have not seen mentioned yet which is that, in real time, it looked to me that Tyquan should have left his feet and stretched out for Mac’s sideline throw that went off his fingertips.

If either of those are secured and the chains moved, Mac gets some wind in his sails against Eberflus’s good scheme and highly energized squad. Monday was horrific, but there were a bunch of contributing factors and surer hands in a couple key spots could have sent things in a slightly different direction.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
I think one of the problems is that they don't run the ball consistently well. The rush attack was awful Monday night. When it looks good, the passing offense tends to follow, but they lay an egg run blocking a good chunk of the time.
I think the clear answer there is that nobody in the whole league can run well consistently when teams sell out against it, at least outside of the few very worst defenses. CHI is a competent D, they had no respect for either QB. Zappe burned them a couple times, but even then one of them came on a blown coverage. The Parker sideline throw is the one you have to make, Mac didn't take it, Zappe did and it lead to one of our scores. Zappe's problem is he struggles to make certain throws, Mac's in his series was he didn't try to make them.
Mac is the more talented QB, but he's a decision-making mess right now. He bails on pockets too early, he tries crazy throws off his back foot like he has prime Rodgers arm-talent (he doesn't) but then sometime just doesn't take the step-in throws he needs to.


Along with the weak running game, the Harris drop was to Mac what the Jakobi muffed handoff was to Bailey — both massive momentum killers. I’ll add one thought I have not seen mentioned yet which is that, in real time, it looked to me that Tyquan should have left his feet and stretched out for Mac’s sideline throw that went off his fingertips.

If either of those are secured and the chains moved, Mac gets some wind in his sails against Eberflus’s good scheme and highly energized squad. Monday was horrific, but there were a bunch of contributing factors and surer hands in a couple key spots could have sent things in a slightly different direction.
Sorry, but Mac was really bad, and the idea that a drop on a 5 yard pickup to set up 3rd and 5 was the killer is just ridiculous. Honestly the bigger issue on that play is Mac not taking the shot to Parker, that's what the play is designed for and he had a good coverage for it. This idea that Mac who was terrible on every play he tried to throw just needed to get one dump-off to get "rhythm" is ridiculous. That drop is a nothing play, it's not why Mac threw the pick on the next play, it was because he got panicky in the pocket and tried a terrible off-balance throw, like he did all night and has done in basically every game this year.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
I think the clear answer there is that nobody in the whole league can run well consistently when teams sell out against it, at least outside of the few very worst defenses. CHI is a competent D, they had no respect for either QB. Zappe burned them a couple times, but even then one of them came on a blown coverage. The Parker sideline throw is the one you have to make, Mac didn't take it, Zappe did and it lead to one of our scores. Zappe's problem is he struggles to make certain throws, Mac's in his series was he didn't try to make them.
Mac is the more talented QB, but he's a decision-making mess right now. He bails on pockets too early, he tries crazy throws off his back foot like he has prime Rodgers arm-talent (he doesn't) but then sometime just doesn't take the step-in throws he needs to.
Along with the weak running game, the Harris drop was to Mac what the Jakobi muffed handoff was to Bailey — both massive momentum killers. I’ll add one thought I have not seen mentioned yet which is that, in real time, it looked to me that Tyquan should have left his feet and stretched out for Mac’s sideline throw that went off his fingertips.

If either of those are secured and the chains moved, Mac gets some wind in his sails against Eberflus’s good scheme and highly energized squad. Monday was horrific, but there were a bunch of contributing factors and surer hands in a couple key spots could have sent things in a slightly different direction.
Sorry, but Mac was really bad, and the idea that a drop on a 5 yard pickup to set up 3rd and 5 was the killer is just ridiculous. Honestly the bigger issue on that play is Mac not taking the shot to Parker, that's what the play is designed for and he had a good coverage for it. This idea that Mac who was terrible on every play he tried to throw just needed to get one dump-off to get "rhythm" is ridiculous. That drop is a nothing play, it's not why Mac threw the pick on the next play, it was because he got panicky in the pocket and tried a terrible off-balance throw, like he did all night and has done in basically every game this year.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,838
Mansfield MA
How much of this is defensive gameplan though? Chicago seemed to be daring Mac to beat them with a loaded box.
Half of Mac's (and Zappe's) passes were to RB, so they were taking away the receivers too. I just don't think the Patriots had any answers for how they were being defended.
 

catomatic

thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,925
Park Slope, Brooklyn
Sorry, but Mac was really bad, and the idea that a drop on a 5 yard pickup to set up 3rd and 5 was the killer is just ridiculous. Honestly the bigger issue on that play is Mac not taking the shot to Parker, that's what the play is designed for and he had a good coverage for it. This idea that Mac who was terrible on every play he tried to throw just needed to get one dump-off to get "rhythm" is ridiculous. That drop is a nothing play, it's not why Mac threw the pick on the next play, it was because he got panicky in the pocket and tried a terrible off-balance throw, like he did all night and has done in basically every game this year.
Ever been on a big stage and blown a small line? It takes a bit of recovery time. If Tyquan lays out and Harris secures the ball, Mac feels differently going forward. Especially after a few weeks of not experiencing game speed. And I said slightly different direction, not entire game-changer. Would you agree Jakobi’s muff reversed some pretty good momentum for Bailey? Those lights are bright on a Monday night in a real-time QB competition against a fired-up D. If the score is closer later in the game the pressure on both is alleviated. Granted, there are no excuses for the chronic, systemic failures on D against Fields’ mobility. That was, as you say, the killer.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
24,191
Newton
Bedard with some good old fashioned throwing shit at a wall:

If Belichick doesn't definitively back Jones on Thursday, then we will have the biggest piece of evidence yet that they are enamored [assume this is a typo and supposed to be NOT enamored] with Jones and his future is in doubt here. Belichick would essentially be leaving the competition wide open.

I don't expect him to do that. I expect him to, at least tepidly, back Jones.

But the injury report thing put my antenna up. Jones is not fully healthy. We all know this. Belichick himself said Sunday that the plan was to rotate the QBs due to Jones' health.

Q: I believe you told ESPN that the intention was to play both quarterbacks in this game. Was that because of Mac Jones' health?

BB: Yeah, that was a factor, yes.

So two days later, Jones' health is of zero concern? Who believes this?

This could be Belichick telling Jones — either directly or through the injury report: "I don't want to hear anything about your ankle. You can't blame anything on Sunday on your ankle. You've been pushing and pushing me to play, that it's your job. Here, now you have it. Don't say anything about your ankle. Even though I didn't give you enough time to knock off the rust, you were expected to hit the ground running against the Jets."

He may have added: "I HATE the Jets. If you cost us this game — and a loss would basically be the season — I'm taking the injury excuse off the table. If you fail, it's because you're no longer good enough."

And then all bets would be off. They could go back to Bailey Zappe. And, quite frankly, I wouldn't rule out a trade of Jones, either before Tuesday's deadline or, more likely, in the offseason as Belichick throws his whole weight behind Matt Patricia and Joe Judge.

I do expect Belichick to send the right message to his team — he knows locker room dynamics and how messages can effectively be sent via the media to his team better than anyone; he's a master — and the Patriots to start back on their upward descent.

But I can't yet rule out the other scenario, not with that injury report maneuver. It's too ... odd.
Be prepared for Bill to trade Mac, guys. It could happen!
 

Bigdogx

lurker
Jul 21, 2020
57
A trade, with who?

I don't see teams banging the door down for a guy that clearly is showing he cant hang in this league right now!
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,974
A trade, with who?

I don't see teams banging the door down for a guy that clearly is showing he cant hang in this league right now!
Teams gave up huge draft bounties for Sam Darnold and Carson Wentz and Baker Mayfield.

I expect this is all Bedard click bait nonsense. He is way out over his skis parsing the injury report for meaning that isn’t there.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
26,213
So two days later, Jones' health is of zero concern? Who believes this?
I assume Bedard knows this -- to the extent he "knows" anything -- but the action Jones did see Monday, plus presumably waking up on Tuesday without his leg feeling like shit, is probably enough to move from "it *was* a concern" to "it's no longer enough of a concern to hold him back."

Medical patients are in one stage of recovery right up until the micro-nano-millisecond they are moved into another. Who believes this?
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,743
Bedard being a blowhard but he's right that they are going to finish in last if they lose to the Jets on Sunday.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
10,324
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I think the whole "we have to go back to running the ball and being PA heavy for Mac to be successful" line of thinking, while likely true, is also an admission he shouldn't be the guy going forward. It's throwing your hands up and giving up trying to develop him into a QB that can be the engine behind the offense and going back to "don't fuck it up" mode.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,836
Berkeley, CA
That miss on the sideline throw to Thornton really hurt in retrospect. It would have gained them much better field position even if they had to punt. Plus, it would have prevented a 3 and out and given him perhaps a little more leash with the fans. Given that he had the pressure of having to at least match Zappe's recent excellent performances on top of the pressure of a Monday night game, there was a lot at stake in those early drives. Once the Pats were pretty much stymied at the line when trying to run the ball, it was frustrating to then see Mac throw to receivers in the same area. I'd like to see him at least strike out on receivers 8+ yards down the field.

He ran well. My only concern is he'll rely on it too much going forward rather than hanging tight for a receiver getting open. Granted, that's a very fine line to balance on - but that's what separates wheat and chaff. Finally, I thought the slide where he put his leg high up at the last moment and spiked the tackler was dicey. Perhaps it was a reaction to keep the tackler from falling on him, but it did feel like the leg going up was unnecessary otherwise. There doesn't seem to be any outcry though, so it's probably an overreaction on my part.
 

Cabin Mirror

Member
SoSH Member
That miss on the sideline throw to Thornton really hurt in retrospect. It would have gained them much better field position even if they had to punt. Plus, it would have prevented a 3 and out and given him perhaps a little more leash with the fans. Given that he had the pressure of having to at least match Zappe's recent excellent performances on top of the pressure of a Monday night game, there was a lot at stake in those early drives. Once the Pats were pretty much stymied at the line when trying to run the ball, it was frustrating to then see Mac throw to receivers in the same area. I'd like to see him at least strike out on receivers 8+ yards down the field.

He ran well. My only concern is he'll rely on it too much going forward rather than hanging tight for a receiver getting open. Granted, that's a very fine line to balance on - but that's what separates wheat and chaff. Finally, I thought the slide where he put his leg high up at the last moment and spiked the tackler was dicey. Perhaps it was a reaction to keep the tackler from falling on him, but it did feel like the leg going up was unnecessary otherwise. There doesn't seem to be any outcry though, so it's probably an overreaction on my part.
I saw that as an intentional cheap shot. It's probably not likely, but I did wonder if that was one of the reasons BB pulled him, if for no other reason than to protect him. I am guessing the Bears D would have liked to have a shot at him after that.
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
5,998
Pasadena, CA
I saw that as an intentional cheap shot. It's probably not likely, but I did wonder if that was one of the reasons BB pulled him, if for no other reason than to protect him. I am guessing the Bears D would have liked to have a shot at him after that.
He did it on both his slides, it just might be a natural reaction. I agree he should fix it, though it’s not like “spiking” someone in baseball.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,836
Berkeley, CA
He did it on both his slides, it just might be a natural reaction. I agree he should fix it, though it’s not like “spiking” someone in baseball.
I disagree that he did it on both slides. The first time his leg stays relatively low and parallel to the ground, then folds as he passes a would-be tackler. The second time is much different. His leg is down and parallel to the ground and then there's - to my eyes - a separate motion up. Again, it might be, as you say, a natural reaction to a player rushing toward him from the front, but that's going to matter little to the player who's getting spiked.
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
5,998
Pasadena, CA
I disagree that he did it on both slides. The first time his leg stays relatively low and parallel to the ground, then folds as he passes a would-be tackler. The second time is much different. His leg is down and parallel to the ground and then there's - to my eyes - a separate motion up. Again, it might be, as you say, a natural reaction to a player rushing toward him from the front, but that's going to matter little to the player who's getting spiked.
Football players don't wear "spikes", I'm sure it's not pleasant to get kicked but it's not the same thing as spiking someone in baseball.

I don't really think either is that big of a dealt, but the first time I saw anything about this was a Dov Kleiman tweet talking about the first slide. (btw, what is Kleiman's deal, he's super overboard on the Mac hate).

View: https://twitter.com/NFL_DovKleiman/status/1585481326236401665?s=20&t=FBF2FSYc62LS_nRCbhZ19A
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,836
Berkeley, CA
Football players don't wear "spikes", I'm sure it's not pleasant to get kicked but it's not the same thing as spiking someone in baseball.

I don't really think either is that big of a dealt, but the first time I saw anything about this was a Dov Kleiman tweet talking about the first slide. (btw, what is Kleiman's deal, he's super overboard on the Mac hate).

View: https://twitter.com/NFL_DovKleiman/status/1585481326236401665?s=20&t=FBF2FSYc62LS_nRCbhZ19A
Okay, he got "sneaked." It wasn't a kick - at least the way I understand a kick. He seemed to get his leg up so the sneaker's sole would be the contact point - for whatever purpose. Was using the term "spiked" to describe Jones' shoe/sneaker/boot's up position to impact the opposing player's leg.

Kleiman's fishing on that comparison as there's nothing similar to my eye. Jones is just passing the would-be tackler when he folds the leg. I'm guessing he's folding the leg to prevent his foot from sticking in the turf. I'll admit that it looks odd though, but Jones seems to be an awkward slider at best to date - much like Brady. At that moment, It doesn't seem he'd be sneaking a guy that he's passed and whose momentum is only going to carry him further away.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
1,566
Melbourne, Australia
Shown that way, you really can see the extra leg kick end of the video. Trying to catch him between his legs... and Brisker did actually come out of the game after that Mac slide. Mac definitely "sneaked" Brisker there.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,836
Berkeley, CA
Shown that way, you really can see the extra leg kick end of the video. Trying to catch him between his legs... and Brisker did actually come out of the game after that Mac slide. Mac definitely "sneaked" Brisker there.
Forgive all this hijack, but since we're here - I just rewatched on full screen and you're right, that leg movement has nothing to do with the slide and is, hell, dirty. Did Brisker come out because of injury or simply substitution? All these videos must go over well in film rooms across the league. Mac Dobler.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
I think the whole "we have to go back to running the ball and being PA heavy for Mac to be successful" line of thinking, while likely true, is also an admission he shouldn't be the guy going forward. It's throwing your hands up and giving up trying to develop him into a QB that can be the engine behind the offense and going back to "don't fuck it up" mode.
Yeah one of the problems is... yeah we could probably help Mac by going into "backup QB protect" offense... but if that's all Mac can do then he's not your QB, and what are you getting out of it... 7 wins instead of 5?
 
Aug 9, 2015
867
Yeah one of the problems is... yeah we could probably help Mac by going into "backup QB protect" offense... but if that's all Mac can do then he's not your QB, and what are you getting out of it... 7 wins instead of 5?
Or he needed a little more foundation building and the change in coordinators and a desire to “do more” fucked him up a bit. He’s not Burrow or Herbert, who looked like stars in year 2, but they won’t really know what they have for another season, at which point they can fish or cut bait. The injury didn’t help either.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
Or he needed a little more foundation building and the change in coordinators and a desire to “do more” fucked him up a bit. He’s not Burrow or Herbert, who looked like stars in year 2, but they won’t really know what they have for another season, at which point they can fish or cut bait. The injury didn’t help either.
If you don't improve year 1 to 2 the team should be looking for someone new going into year 3 (now maybe you can't get one, but you don't need to be 3 years in to know what you likely have) the number of guys who don't improve year 1 to 2 is very small. I get the concerns about opening up the playbook and new coordinators.... but if he gets to the end of 2 years in, doesn't have elite physical traits and can't run complex offense.... that's probably a career backup... a Case Keenum maybe. Guys who don't have great tools need to win by being able to understand and execute at a high level on complex offense, if you can't do that you aren't an NFL starter.
 
Aug 9, 2015
867
If you don't improve year 1 to 2 the team should be looking for someone new going into year 3 (now maybe you can't get one, but you don't need to be 3 years in to know what you likely have) the number of guys who don't improve year 1 to 2 is very small. I get the concerns about opening up the playbook and new coordinators.... but if he gets to the end of 2 years in, doesn't have elite physical traits and can't run complex offense.... that's probably a career backup... a Case Keenum maybe. Guys who don't have great tools need to win by being able to understand and execute at a high level on complex offense, if you can't do that you aren't an NFL starter.
I think a sure fire way to end up in the QB churn is to give up too early on a guy. (That’s part of why it’s so satisfying to watch the Jets overreact every year.) Mac has to clean things up, but I’d be looking for improvement rather than any kind of mastery of the offense this year. I agree he has to show you something, but I don’t think you can assess him as a finished product.
 

Bigdogx

lurker
Jul 21, 2020
57
I think a sure fire way to end up in the QB churn is to give up too early on a guy. (That’s part of why it’s so satisfying to watch the Jets overreact every year.) Mac has to clean things up, but I’d be looking for improvement rather than any kind of mastery of the offense this year. I agree he has to show you something, but I don’t think you can assess him as a finished product.
How long is the leash then, do you just give him a few games even if he has thrown 3 int's 0 td's and has 98 yards in the 4th quarter this weekend? I mean have we even seen anything this season that points to Mac being the guy, showing some promise, because i must of missed it. Maybe the problem isn't so much Patricia and Judge with the play calls but Mac not being able to execute them. Zappe comes in and is throwing Deep the same as Mac, except Mac over throws his man by 10 feet and gets scared, rolls out of the pocket and chucks it off his back foot into trip coverage to the other team!

Put it this way, i would be happy and think it's a large improvement if he gets a 100 yards, no touchdowns but doesn't have a turnover, i don't care if the Pats get beat by 30! I just want to see him not make dumb idiot plays like the one he did on monday night, which rightfully i might add, sent him to the bench where he belonged that game!
 

FL4WL3SS

my name sucks
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,283
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
If you don't improve year 1 to 2 the team should be looking for someone new going into year 3 (now maybe you can't get one, but you don't need to be 3 years in to know what you likely have) the number of guys who don't improve year 1 to 2 is very small. I get the concerns about opening up the playbook and new coordinators.... but if he gets to the end of 2 years in, doesn't have elite physical traits and can't run complex offense.... that's probably a career backup... a Case Keenum maybe. Guys who don't have great tools need to win by being able to understand and execute at a high level on complex offense, if you can't do that you aren't an NFL starter.
Guys have had much shorter leashes than what Mac has had under BB. Ideally Mac would have sat behind an actual starting QB for a year or two, but unfortunately that wasn't an option.
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
5,798
Overland Park, KS
This is from the Zack Cox Q&A today:
Since the infamous three-pass wind game in Buffalo, Jones has made nine starts (including one in the playoffs) and thrown 10 touchdown passes with 13 interceptions, completing 62.2% of his passes and posting a passer rating of 75.9. In his 12 starts before the Buffalo game, he had 16 touchdowns, eight interceptions, a 70.3% completion rate, and a 97.1 passer rating.
Mac has been pretty mediocre for a while. I don't think it's all his fault but his ball security has sucked, and we know BB values being careful with the ball. He was bad at the end of last year under Mcdaniels. I like Mac but I think the Pats are screwed. His ceiling is a middling QB. If you want to win you need a Mahomes, Brady, or an Allen or you need an absurdly good roster around at least a top 10 QB.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
I think a sure fire way to end up in the QB churn is to give up too early on a guy. (That’s part of why it’s so satisfying to watch the Jets overreact every year.) Mac has to clean things up, but I’d be looking for improvement rather than any kind of mastery of the offense this year. I agree he has to show you something, but I don’t think you can assess him as a finished product.
How many guys have actually been given up too early on though? If teams were giving up on guys too early then they went to their new team and broke out, I'd buy that. That doesn't really happen though, I can't think of any examples. Teams that churn bad QBs usually do it because.... they don't have good QBs. Especially with young guys.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,424
Hingham, MA
How many guys have actually been given up too early on though? If teams were giving up on guys too early then they went to their new team and broke out, I'd buy that. That doesn't really happen though, I can't think of any examples. Teams that churn bad QBs usually do it because.... they don't have good QBs. Especially with young guys.
The only guy that comes to mind is Tannehill, who to me is fairly similar to Mac and the Pats seem like they are in a similar situation to where Miami was with Tannehill. He's been pretty good for the Titans, but a lot of that seems to be because of their running game and defense. Again, very similar to Mac. And while once upon a time he led the Titans to a 3 score lead in the AFCCG, it would take a pretty perfect storm for him to win a SB. It's possible, but highly unlikely.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
The only guy that comes to mind is Tannehill, who to me is fairly similar to Mac and the Pats seem like they are in a similar situation to where Miami was with Tannehill. He's been pretty good for the Titans, but a lot of that seems to be because of their running game and defense. Again, very similar to Mac. And while once upon a time he led the Titans to a 3 score lead in the AFCCG, it would take a pretty perfect storm for him to win a SB. It's possible, but highly unlikely.
Tannehill also got SIX years in MIA, I feel like anybody who got a 2nd contract wasn't given up on too soon. Mostly with Tannehill too, he had a couple good year in TEN and they already drafted someone they hope will replace him.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
26,213
How many guys have actually been given up too early on though? If teams were giving up on guys too early then they went to their new team and broke out, I'd buy that. That doesn't really happen though, I can't think of any examples. Teams that churn bad QBs usually do it because.... they don't have good QBs. Especially with young guys.
Is it too early to say Geno Smith was given up on too early?
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,368
Dallas
Tannehill is a weird example. He was up and down for the Dolphins and landed in Arthur Smith's system in TEN which involves a lot of schemed touches and PA passes. He put up monster numbers in a QB friendly system but I don't want to penalize him for executing well. He also came out of college new at the position. He didn't test but Tannehill was athletic. He had ~1,500 yards as a receiver at TAMU.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
Is it too early to say Geno Smith was given up on too early?
possible, but not really the same either, it took him 10 years and like 5 teams, even then my guess is this Geno season is like the Tannehill 2 years, or the occasional great Fitzpatrick year, or even Foles, where you catch lighting in a bottle for a while before it falls apart.
 
Aug 9, 2015
867
How many guys have actually been given up too early on though? If teams were giving up on guys too early then they went to their new team and broke out, I'd buy that. That doesn't really happen though, I can't think of any examples. Teams that churn bad QBs usually do it because.... they don't have good QBs. Especially with young guys.
I have too many kids under age 3 to do this myself but I’d be interested more in an analysis of the guys that sputtered early and went on to ultimately successful careers because they were given more time. When a guy gets an early hook I think it messes them up too much to base the assessment entirely on their subsequent performance. FWIW, I would put Brees in the “too early” category, and that situation had a similar physical limitations bias. (Not comparing the two otherwise.)
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
29,108
I have too many kids under age 3 to do this myself but I’d be interested more in an analysis of the guys that sputtered early and went on to ultimately successful careers because they were given more time. When a guy gets an early hook I think it messes them up too much to base the assessment entirely on their subsequent performance. FWIW, I would put Brees in the “too early” category, and that situation had a similar physical limitations bias. (Not comparing the two otherwise.)
Brees got his whole rookie deal and a franchise tag year. If anything that's a great case for... Better safe than sorry with QBs because they drafted a QB and plugged him right in without any real downgrade when Brees left in FA. If they waited they would have been in rough shape
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
49,837
If you're waiting for players to be 100% they would never play.
 

katnado

lurker
Aug 14, 2016
572
Very true. But numbness is waaaaaayyyy different from aches and pains.
Waiting for our resident Docs to weigh in, but from my searching the numbness is normal and nothing to worry about for him or anyone else. But I'm no doc, just married to a NICU nurse who's way smarter than me. Haha