100%. There were dozens of excuses.In fairness, a lot of people said this about Drew Bledsoe in 2000 and 2001 as well.
100%. There were dozens of excuses.In fairness, a lot of people said this about Drew Bledsoe in 2000 and 2001 as well.
Of course...Bledsoe/Brady had Pat HOF, if not NFL HOF, quality LTs (Armstrong, Light). Mac has... Wynn?100%. There were dozens of excuses.
So he was 2 short completions off what he was averaging, basically? So if 'Mondre gets dropped by the first tackler instead of breaking it for 18 yards, and Mac throws the screen left instead of taking a sack on the first play of the game, it's no change, essentially?Against Bears, Jets #1, and Colts, Mac completed 14 passes of <5 yards on mostly 1st or second and long, for a total of 12 yards. That's 20% of his pass attempts, 30% of his completions, on plays that went nowhere. That seems quite different to me than 3 completions (out of 27) for 10 yards. 11% of his attempts, 13% of his completions.
First of all, I'm far from a Mac stan.I'm not sure a 2001 parallel supports the Mac-stans perspectives
If that's all it is, then I think we can expect fewer/no games like Jets #2 and more like the previous 5. I think it is an open question.So he was 2 short completions off what he was averaging, basically? So if 'Mondre gets dropped by the first tackler instead of breaking it for 18 yards, and Mac throws the screen left instead of taking a sack on the first play of the game, it's no change, essentially?
Yes.Just so I am clear, the point here is that if the O-line was better and the WRs were better, Mac would probably look better, too?
I'm just pointing out that while 11% sounds a lot less than 20%, on a sample of ~25 we're talking a difference of only 2 when we talk about actual numbers. It would be more weird for a stat like this to stay consistent than it would be to fluctuate.If that's all it is, then I think we can expect fewer/no games like Jets #2 and more like the previous 5. I think it is an open question.
I was simply saying that Mac is far from the first QB who could be better if his OL and WR were better. Including our own Pats HOFer Drew.I'm not sure a 2001 parallel supports the Mac-stans perspectives
Part of the problem is that Mac's critics change the definition of "playing badly" over time, even going to far as to lable a game where he completed 85% of his pass attempts for 9.1 yards per attempt despite poor line play "bad."I was too. I mean, I'd be richer if I got paid more and had inherited a fortune - but I don't get to skip out on my mortgage payments because that's not the case. Yeah, Mac (like every other QB) would look better if he had clean pockets, lots of time, and great receivers. But I'm not sure he gets a pass on playing badly just because his situation is sub-optimal.
I think this is a fair point. And let's say that the Pats had gotten two TD runs in the game against the Jets. Let's say on their FG drive, Stevenson's 5 yard run down to the Jet 10 had counted (wiped away by an illegal formation penalty, and it was downhill after that), and then on the next play ran it in for a TD. Then let's say that on the next possession, Mac's 3 yard scramble for a first down, down to the Jet 4 had counted (wiped away by a holding penalty), and then Harris punched it in from there. Those runs - which didn't happen but which we are imagining did - would have had nothing to do with Mac Jones' performance at QB. But it would have meant that the Patriots would have scored two offensive TDs instead of zero.Part of the problem is that Mac's critics change the definition of "playing badly" over time, even going to far as to lable a game where he completed 85% of his pass attempts for 9.1 yards per attempt despite poor line play "bad."
Turnovers are a negative, but three consecutive games of nearly turnover free play is not a positve, etc.
"Good" because he was kicking into the wind. Terrible because he should have kicked it out of bounds and prevent any kind of return. Based on Saleh's comments after the game, I think the latter was supposed to have happened.What's interesting is that the Jets guys also call it a good punt. Which I saw a lot of places. And then, postgame, Saleh said the punter fucked up. Just another warning that watching the game it's really really hard to know what was supposed to happen and knee-jerk responses on whose fault things are may not stand up.
Yes--that's exactly what I mean. Watching the game people were like "good punt" and only when we heard what was actually supposed to happen did we know he messed up."Good" because he was kicking into the wind. Terrible because he should have kicked it out of bounds and prevent any kind of return. Based on Saleh's comments after the game, I think the latter was supposed to have happened.