The Michael McCorkle "Mac" Jones Thread

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
Since we drafted him the thread has not been decent, it’s been so rosy colored it’s obnoxious.
Yeah, real rosy-colored reactions here...

He is valuable on a rookie deal. Do I like Mac Jones? No. He was one of the few people I didn't want them to draft. But this can work - Mac keeps the cost at QB down. If you fix his mechanics and throwing motion there is untapped velocity and ball placement to add.
Going to riff a little on Mac Jones.

The thing with any fairly-immobile pocket-passer is you have limitations. Mac can work around them with his pocket-presence and he has better escape moves than Trask but there will always be limitations to his game. You can scheme around them. You can have success with a pocket passer. The issue with Mac to me is his arm is fringy and I am not sold that he is an elite processor. If you have his skill-set you need to have a perfect surrounding, a great OL, good skill players, etc. But if Mac Jones can develop there is a case for him having more ceiling than at first blush.

You can fix some of Mac's issues mechanically which should stop balls from dying on him but he isn't going to be a guy who ever operates a vertical passing offense. In a lot of ways Mac Jones and Lamar Jackson have similar arms. They can attack the middle of the field and the short to intermediate areas but are going to struggle outside the numbers. If you can get his delivery more compact and less fading off his back leg he should gain both velocity and ball placement with the latter concerning me more with his next step the pro game.

Intangibles are important and I can tell you why I liked Mac Jones much more as I got into his 2020 tape. At the start of the process I only had Mac's 2019 tape and I had a 6.49 on him, a backup grade. One of his worst games was vs Auburn in 2019. One of Mac's biggest issues was adjusting to a post snap coverage that was different from pre-snap coverage. He couldn't see it. You know what happened this year when teams tried to pull the same shit on him? He saw through it. He actually improved and you could see defenses not fooling him. That is significant.

It was hard to get a read on him. Mac Jones was one of the most challenging evals and not just for me but for most NFL forecasters and evaluators... It's hard to evaluate a guy with a fringy arm, with inconsistent ball placement, with shitty mobility who plays on an absolutely loaded team for a phenomenal coordinator who has an offense that doesn't actually ask Mac to process a ton on most plays. Jones had around 58% of plays via screen, RPO, or play-action. Good thing for him the Patriots like play-action and screens too.

Let's look at his strengths and weaknesses:

Strengths: pocket presence, can get the ball out quickly, is one of the better field readers, has good general accuracy, hard worker, a locker-room leader. Works the short and intermediate areas of the field well and can have success downfield with timing and anticipation and will be aided through play-actions. Some of the best short and intermediate touch and anticipation.

Weaknesses: fringe to average arm strength, inconsistent to poor ball placement, lack of mobility, can be too quick to get the ball out and leave plays on the field, needs to learn when to throw it away because he doesn't have the arm or athleticism to play back-yard ball.

I like dual-threats. I like mobile guys. I like the Lamar Jacksons, Justin Fields, Trey Lance's of the world. I don't like guys who have narrower paths to success and have, and this is true whether you love Mac or not, fewer tools in the tool belt. But as long as Mac Jones can win as a pocket passer he can be a quality starter. If Jones can add arm strength, become more of an athlete which would lead to better mobility in the pocket as well as another way to increase his arm strength, fix his mechanics which would then lead to ball placement improvement and velocity increases he has the makings of a Matt Ryan kind of a QB prospect on the high end and a Marc Bulger on the low end. Guys who have elite mental traits like Brady, Ryan, Manning, Brees are rare but there is a path to a higher ceiling QB based on RARE elite traits. Does he have them? Will he have the chance to develop them? Remains to be seen. His mental progression from 2019 is a cause for optimism though.

I guess another reason I was a little lower on him is I am a human being, he isn't my type, and I wish I was going to watch a flashier, sexier, toolsier prospect for my favorite team. But if I can talk myself into liking Mac Jones and being rational and not petty about it after an entire off-season of dreading him... well, and I don't know who else needs to hear this, maybe you can too :)

Now let's get some DBs, RBs, and OTs. And a WR would be nice too. Got to keep the weaponz fresh for Mac Daddy. Only the best for our country-club QB. Hey. I had to get one dig in, right?


The thing I like the most about Mac is his cost. They have a 2-4 year window with last years draft, the rest of this years draft, and the free-agents they got this year. The only realistic way imo they were doing that is by having a rookie QB on that sweet sweet rookie deal. With the way Mac improved from 2019-2020 if he can starter by the end of this year they could be in contention for the division next year.

There is a negative side too. If Mac Jones was more a product of a loaded team and a great scheme and who is more immobile and doesn't continue to develop as a pocket passer he could absolutely be a bust but then again that is true of any QB.
@SMU_Sox post zeroes in on the philosophy behind this. Even if Mac is a reach at 15, he's a system QB who's likely a good fit for the system. BB HAS built the offense so that it would greatly benefit any QB and having good weapons everywhere in lieu of an elite WR, TE, or RB lends itself to a QB who can find the best matchup.

I'm sure BB did his homework and rightfully expects Mac to get the most he can out of his body in becoming a pro. Tactically, because Mac will presumably struggle with downfield throws BB will need to figure out how to scheme around press coverage and Cover 0 setups where the D dares the Pats to go deep. Then again, the TEs running seam routes should help significantly in that regard.

My biggest fear with Mac is that his height may prevent him from seeing the field well from the pocket. Most traditional NFL QBs seem to fall into the 6'4'' - 6'5'' range, and Mac is listed at 6'2'' - 6'3''. Dalton, Fitzmagik, and Bridgewater are listed at 6'2'', Carr and Cousins are listed at 6'3'', Ryan and Brady are listed at 6'4'', Wentz and Big Ben listed at 6'5'' etc.

So yeah, I'm OK with BB betting that Mac can become good enough during his rookie deal to get the ball out to the right talented guy, but I still wish he'd have gone for Fields since he can paper over talent or scheme disparities with his tools.
That's just 2 from me and one from Zososoxfan. Others were skeptical too. He was 50-something on my own board which is admittedly an amateur board but I was never a Mac Jones guy.

I don't think your criticism of the community is warranted and furthermore it does nothing to further the actual discussion about Mac Jones. I'll respond to your other posts but I think you need to reread the thread. This isn't a Mac Jones love-fest. A lot of us have serious concerns about him.
 

elias

lurker
Aug 22, 2006
263
NY, NY
Yeah, real rosy-colored reactions here...





That's just 2 from me and one from Zososoxfan. Others were skeptical too. He was 50-something on my own board which is admittedly an amateur board but I was never a Mac Jones guy.

I don't think your criticism of the community is warranted and furthermore it does nothing to further the actual discussion about Mac Jones. I'll respond to your other posts but I think you need to reread the thread. This isn't a Mac Jones love-fest. A lot of us have serious concerns about him.
Maybe it’s not warranted, the draft threads were much more balanced.

Go back and read the Cam threads, and read some of the most recent “font” and personal attack responses to my posts, versus the way harsh critics of Cam were called out…they were reasoned with, not mocked.

Happy to see more and more Mac criticism, it is very warranted, as it is of the team’s decision to start him in this manner.
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
228
Maybe it’s not warranted, the draft threads were much more balanced.

Go back and read the Cam threads, and read some of the most recent “font” and personal attack responses to my posts, versus the way harsh critics of Cam were called out…they were reasoned with, not mocked.

Happy to see more and more Mac criticism, it is very warranted, as it is of the team’s decision to start him in this manner.
My dude, you're getting personal attacks because you're doing inane stuff like insinuating that Jones is causing players to get injured. You're not getting ridiculed because you're being critical of Mac, or because you really like Cam, you're getting mocked because you're going about both in ways that, to quote @Bergs, would fail to hold up to "any level of intellectual/factual/logical scrutiny beyond that employable by your average high school freshman," --and I think that's a bit unfair to high school freshmen. Your arguments aren't being engaged with because they are, quite frankly, not worth the minimal amount of mental effort typically applied on an internet message board.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
14,838
Mac is in the near worst-case scenario right now?

LOL what in the world?

They *should* be 3-2 if not for the Harris fumble vs. Miami. They *could* be 4-1 if not for the Folk FG miss (which would have been a great kick and why I don't put it in the "should" category). Mac Jones has command of the offense. He's completing a ton of passes and moving the ball up and down the field. There's a lot of work to be done and a lot of space to improve. But to call this a "near worst-case scenario" right now is completely laughable.

That said....I agree with Elias in that I thought that Cam should have started the year. But once BB went to Mac, fine. "Near worst-case scenario"? LOLOL
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
How is the fact that Mac Jones being the QB having a losing record, relating to the loss of the best defensive player on the team, which will lead to more losses and looks like a punt on the season…not an important part of the discussion of his thread?

Isn’t the point of his thread to assess his impact on the team, at least in part? I know it’s so much fun talking about his completion percentage…after we just spent 20 years telling people, mocking people in fact because those kinds of cherry picked individual stats aren’t as important as w’s.

Look at the injury reports for the two teams this week…sure you can point to BB’s injury report gamesmanship…maybe that’s true here…but the Cowboys look a lot healthier and a lot “winnier”. Cowboys made the right decision with their QB, Pats didn’t. Mac Jones is the Pats QB so is it ok in his thread to compare him to his upcoming opponent?
The Gilmore situation has nothing to do with Mac. They are completely unrelated. There is a Gilmore thread on this board that discusses how the situation unfolded. Gilmore wanted out. The Pats were up against the cap. They don't have any restructure options unless they want to add years to veterans deals. They might not have been able to do that anyway or even wanted to do that given the veteran options to execute that strategy with. They would have done the same thing had they been 4-0 at the time or 0-4. I would suggest, if you have access to The Athletic, reading Jeff Howe's article about why the Gilmore situation evolved as it did. Last year when they were 2-5 at the deadline Bill resisted trading Gilmore and Thuney because he would rather have them and compete and the team thought they were close to being competitive. Bill isn't a raise the white flag guy.

No one here is advocating using QB wins as a stat. This isn't that kind of board. We had a good discussion on which NFL advanced stats were useful and why they were useful as well as their limitations here. Most football stats are incredible imperfect. Also, recently we were discussing one proprietary stat, CPOE, and what it is useful measuring.

Cowboys comments make no sense at all. They’ve hit on more draft picks including QB recently. Jerry got lucky on Dak. If the league knew he’d be this good they would have taken him earlier. Drafting is an imperfect exercise. Sometimes guys show you stuff in the NFL they even struggled mightily with in college - look at Herbert. His touch and reads right now in year 2 are spectacular.


If I’m Cam I‘m waiting until later in the season or until next season to have a full offseason with a team, and then calling myself cooked if it still looks no good. Then spending the rest of my pst career split between that team and Carolina, honoring the Carolina fans and including the last team in my orbit.

Yes 6 preseason quarters and 500 practice reps mean that Mac Jones was better than Cam Newton…it’s preposterous actually, it’s more than revisionist history…it’s just bad football management. And the results of this season back it up.
Cam probably doesn’t fare much better this year. Why? Cam isn’t a fast release guy and the line is leaking pressure. Cam worked well with a good line and run game. He wouldn’t have had that this year. He also couldn’t run the offense the way they wanted him to. With a rookie you know the guy is going to struggle a bit early on. You make the move to give him more experience and time to develop live if he can handle the mental part of the game. If the rookie can’t handle the mental part of the game he needs to sit. Mac is a normal rookie starter in a floundering offense. He gets the mental aspect of the job. He’s not reading the wrong coverages. He’s manipulating guys with his eyes which is a trait some QBs don’t pick up until year 3 or 4! I have my doubts about Mac Jones but he was ready to start.

This is really about 2022. The team knows they aren’t a super bowl team right now. Lombardi said that directly. His friends in the organization told him that they think with Mac they could at least be competitive for a wild card spot and if Mac and the offense can grow during the season maybe they catch lightning in a bottle… but at the very least Mac will have had a full year starting which will be a boon for him in year 2. It’s not an indefensible football decision. There is no revisionist history going on here. It’s a calculated risk. Right now all aspects of the passing game have issues. Again, Cam wouldn’t be faring any better in these rough waters.

Yeah, I never said Cam was statistically good last year, or that there was no chance he would stink this year. I am arguing it was a catastrophic mistake not to make sure of that for all kinds of reasons. That should weigh in on Mac’s evaluation.

I do think it was an epic season for Cam filling in for Brady, and keeping them in the playoff hunt the whole year is one of the most impressive seasons in NE history…and I’m predicting much more impressive than Mac’s current season and likely career future, if not for probability alone. How much longer will the pats last in playoff contention this year…we’ll see I guess…and that’s with 150 million more in talent…

We are in near worst case scenario with Mac.

The worst case scenario with Cam is that we are right where we are now, and people are hopeful Mac can turn it around…Best case scenario with Cam is 5-0, and I’d say at least 3-2 with a chance gilmore is sticking around bolstering the defense and maybe Cam having a mini renaissance…let alone if he keeps progressing with the team and actually has a good year for him.
5-0? With this offensive line and the way they’ve been playing? With the complete lack of the run game? With these skilled guys playing like they have been? (To be fair not all the skilled guys have been bad). Give me a break. Again, Cam is only going to moderately improve run production at best behind this line. That modest increase isn’t going to get you to 5-0. If Cam is so good why didn’t Miami bring him in over JB? Why hasn’t anyone signed him? He’s willing to be a backup. It’s because he’s an extremely limited QB and has a shoulder that is barely attached to his shoulder.

Who cares if he is the best of four lousy looking rookie Qb’s on losing teams?

How is it so hard to see the Pats offering Gilmore what he wanted if they thought they were in contention this year?

It’t not just down on Mac, it’s that since the draft it’s been clear this was a dumb idea, as clear as it was for the 49ers to trade up to draft this guy.

Since we drafted him the thread has not been decent, it’s been so rosy colored it’s obnoxious. Why is this guy getting such a long leash? He’s a rookie? Why wouldn’t Cam get the same for a year back from injury during Covid? How can you possibly say one is more likely an indicator of performance over the other? It’s an opinion at best.

And that’s the point, its all incomplete and small sample size and that’s exactly the reason why it was the wrong move to start Mac Jones unles you were sure he was a hit…and so far, since drive 1, he’s not.

Maybe he will be. Probably not.
You don’t start Mac unless you think he’s ready to start. It’s that simple. They thought he was ready. I think he’s proven he is ready. This is how rookies perform. You seem to be so sure they would have been better with Cam but I don’t think that argument has much merit minus the slight improvement to the run game (and a decrease in passing effectiveness most likely especially behind the OL). Net net we might even be worse with Cam. I’d bet we probably are. And I even thought Cam would start the season.

Enough with the Gilmore shit. You’re going against everything that credible people have reported in terms of even if Gilmore wanted to play for the Pats, what he wanted from them, and if it was possible to give him that when they had about 54,000 in cap space before the release/trade. You realize they would have had to be paying Cam too if he stayed. So how to they suddenly have even more cap room to give Gilmore what he wanted? Your argument not only makes no logical sense, has no basis in the reality of the situation and what we know of it, and financially is an impossibility.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
51,850
New York City
Who the fuck is this guy, and why are we letting him drag an otherwise decent thread down a rabbit hole?
It is incredible that a few people joking around in a thread, trying to make each other laugh, will have "management" flying in off the top rope to be like, "Stop having fun you guys and gals, this is a no fun allowed zone. If you're looking to joke, take it to www.jokesandlaughter.com."

But this elias just goes on and on, trolling a thread, and it continues apace.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
33,411
Melrose, MA
Cam doesn't have a job now because there isn't anywhere that is looking for a starter, and he's a rough fit as a backup, not because he wouldn't be better than a lot of rostered QBs. (also he's unvaccinated which is an issue in a backup QB).
Probably true, but there is a level of QB talent where a guy is going to be signed if he is available, and Cam is quite clearly below that line.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
2,672
Worcester
I think that @elias is correct in one part. There is a certain bias that I think that we hold against quarterbacks who look/act a certain way... we don't like quarterbacks who constantly throw the ball into the turf 5 feet in front of a wide-open receiver.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
51,850
New York City
So this is getting way off track, and Elias is way out there but....

There is also a whole lot of revisionist history going on with Cam. The idea that Mac clearly beat him out and that was what everyone reported in camp is definitely not true. They were in a tight battle, and they went with Mac for a variety of reasons (Mac is a high cost rookie, Cam is an aging vet who didn't decisively win, Mac is a better fit for the offense Josh prefers to run, etc.). Most of the camp reports were that it was tight, and their pre-season performances were not too dissimilar (and Cam started all of them), plenty of people with good insight on the team thought Cam would be the week 1 starter.

Cam doesn't have a job now because there isn't anywhere that is looking for a starter, and he's a rough fit as a backup, not because he wouldn't be better than a lot of rostered QBs. (also he's unvaccinated which is an issue in a backup QB).
Your assertion is that Cam is too good and that is why he isn’t on an NFL team?

People on this very website were begging for Cam to be cut because he cannot throw the football with accuracy or consistency. I don’t see any revisionist history going on.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
21,317
Newton
Obviously a lot rides on Mac working out for the Pats. It’s kind of important to divorce the team record from his performance. This could be a 4-1 team – or a 1-4 team. But most of the variance has nothing to do with Mac as the Saints game is the only one where his performance was part of the L. No shame in that really as the Saints defense is really good.

My sense having watched all but the Texans game is that Mac is a pretty adequate manager – which is less of a backhanded compliment than it seems. He’s a rookie and so far a plus decision maker. Now that he’s maybe entering the second phase of his season and trying to stretch things out a bit, he seems to be running into maybe a bit more friction – forcing passes into tight windows, etc.

As for the Dallas game, this is probably a key marker in his development. Does he improve his decision making while still trying to open things up? Or do the lights get a little too bright, as Steve Marriucci once said about one of the Brady Six? Some of it may depend on whether the team is playing from behind or if the defense is keeping the Pats in it.

Either way, I find it all kind of interesting and fun after years of expecting excellence and hoping we wouldn’t fail. As with the Red Sox this season, it can be a fun process when things come together earlier than you expect.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,634
Your assertion is that Cam is too good and that is why he isn’t on an NFL team?

People on this very website were begging for Cam to be cut because he cannot throw the football with accuracy or consistency. I don’t see any revisionist history going on.
No, my assertion is that Cam is a unique skillset guy who because of the need to build a particular offense to utilize him, and his history and personality is a bad fit as a backup.

And this site is full of crazy shit, the opinions of this site is not what is revisionist history, the people who cover the team like Lazar and Howe thought Cam was likely to start, the idea that it was a foregone conclusion because Mac so badly outperformed him is revisionist history. Honestly even on this site, go check out the Pre-season QB thread, even there the majority of posts going into cutdown day thought he was going to be the Week 1 starter.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,842
Hingham, MA
No, my assertion is that Cam is a unique skillset guy who because of the need to build a particular offense to utilize him, and his history and personality is a bad fit as a backup.

And this site is full of crazy shit, the opinions of this site is not what is revisionist history, the people who cover the team like Lazar and Howe thought Cam was likely to start, the idea that it was a foregone conclusion because Mac so badly outperformed him is revisionist history. Honestly even on this site, go check out the Pre-season QB thread, even there the majority of posts going into cutdown day thought he was going to be the Week 1 starter.
I think that was far more because no one ever thought they would cut Cam as opposed to not watching Mac play better in the preseason games.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
16,249
No, my assertion is that Cam is a unique skillset guy who because of the need to build a particular offense to utilize him, and his history and personality is a bad fit as a backup.

And this site is full of crazy shit, the opinions of this site is not what is revisionist history, the people who cover the team like Lazar and Howe thought Cam was likely to start, the idea that it was a foregone conclusion because Mac so badly outperformed him is revisionist history. Honestly even on this site, go check out the Pre-season QB thread, even there the majority of posts going into cutdown day thought he was going to be the Week 1 starter.
Personally I thought Mac slightly out played Cam, I wanted Mac to start but thought Bill wouldn’t do it and I thought Cam would be the Week 1 starter. Mac didn’t vastly outperform him in the stats but I didn’t see any reason if they were even close to run another season of Newton and that’s outside of his vaccination status at the time.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
33,411
Melrose, MA
No, my assertion is that Cam is a unique skillset guy who because of the need to build a particular offense to utilize him, and his history and personality is a bad fit as a backup.
How true is this, really? He's certainly not a pocket QB, so the Pats offense in 2019 and 2021 would not have been a fit for him. But the Pats made adjustments for him in 2020, and there are probably several teams that have more Cam-friendly stuff in their offenses than the Pats did.

And this site is full of crazy shit, the opinions of this site is not what is revisionist history, the people who cover the team like Lazar and Howe thought Cam was likely to start, the idea that it was a foregone conclusion because Mac so badly outperformed him is revisionist history. Honestly even on this site, go check out the Pre-season QB thread, even there the majority of posts going into cutdown day thought he was going to be the Week 1 starter.
Everyone though Cam was going to start, but mostly by default. He didn't get a lot of preseason time and didn't do a lot to help (or hurt) his cause in that time. The fact that he didn't play much suggested that it wasn't an even competition. Most people assumed that what that meant was Cam was going to start and was just getting some time to tune up in the preseason.

What actually turned out to be the case (IMO) was that Mac was the only QB competing for a job this preseason. He could win it (and start) or not win it (in which case Cam would start).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,634
How true is this, really? He's certainly not a pocket QB, so the Pats offense in 2019 and 2021 would not have been a fit for him. But the Pats made adjustments for him in 2020, and there are probably several teams that have more Cam-friendly stuff in their offenses than the Pats did.

Everyone though Cam was going to start, but mostly by default. He didn't get a lot of preseason time and didn't do a lot to help (or hurt) his cause in that time. The fact that he didn't play much suggested that it wasn't an even competition. Most people assumed that what that meant was Cam was going to start and was just getting some time to tune up in the preseason.

What actually turned out to be the case (IMO) was that Mac was the only QB competing for a job this preseason. He could win it (and start) or not win it (in which case Cam would start).
I think other teams have more stuff, and some teams are built to do what Cam does well, but others aren't, some teams Cam is a decent scheme fit, but not locker room. Now that he's vaccinated I think the chances he takes a backup job increase.

As to the latter, that's my point. I was responding to a bunch of people who were saying that Mac clearly was so much better than Cam and it was obvious he was winning the job. That was very much not the case, we were getting daily camp updates that seemed to indicate a similar level of performance, even in pre-season, the performance level was similar (except maybe the last game). Mac won the job by not being any worse than Cam, but people looking back were making it out like it was some foregone conclusion, when just about everyone watching the team had it as a toss-up.

I get why it happens. Same reason people are taking Mac being the best of the 4 rookies (who are all including Mac in the bottom 3rd of the league) through 4-5 games and declaring the QB situation settled long term... it's fun and exciting to think you have a franchise QB, even if the jury is very much still out on that, and his being okay so far leads people to say "oh yeah he was so much better than Cam in camp" because... Cam isn't a top starter, he's a bottom of the league starter (as he was last year).

Mac is very much a work in progress.. he's shown some good things, he's struggled with some things. We probably won't really know what we have for at least another year, barring a massive breakout. He's not a Herbert or Kyler type who has both elite tools and good performance. He's had solid to good performance, but some tools questions. He could be Kirk Cousins, he could be Cody Kessler, too early to tell.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
33,411
Melrose, MA
I get why it happens. Same reason people are taking Mac being the best of the 4 rookies (who are all including Mac in the bottom 3rd of the league) through 4-5 games and declaring the QB situation settled long term... it's fun and exciting to think you have a franchise QB, even if the jury is very much still out on that, and his being okay so far leads people to say "oh yeah he was so much better than Cam in camp" because... Cam isn't a top starter, he's a bottom of the league starter (as he was last year).

Mac is very much a work in progress.. he's shown some good things, he's struggled with some things. We probably won't really know what we have for at least another year, barring a massive breakout. He's not a Herbert or Kyler type who has both elite tools and good performance. He's had solid to good performance, but some tools questions. He could be Kirk Cousins, he could be Cody Kessler, too early to tell.
There seems to be an expectation among some that what you see is what you get with Mac, unlike the other 4, which I don't buy.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,634
There seems to be an expectation among some that what you see is what you get with Mac, unlike the other 4, which I don't buy.
Yeah, I hope what you see isn't what you get, because that's a backup QB.

I think all of them have projectability, I think what some people think (and it tends to be true) is that the ceiling on guys with elite physical tools is higher. So people look at Fields and say.. "okay, he needs to get the ball out faster, but he can run like the wind and has a good NFL arm" now, reading the field and getting the ball out isn't something every QB learns, but if he does, his ceiling is really high. Where a guy like Mac... he can get the ball out faster and read the field better, but he's always going to be immoble, and people wonder how much arm strength he can add. I think it's also that people look at past rookie QBs, and a lot more got better at reading the field and making decisions, than saw major physical improvements.

Nothing has really changed since the draft in some ways. Mac needs to be elite at reading defenses, decision making, accuracy and release time to be a top QB, some of the other guys just need to be good at those things, because they are very good or elite in terms of physical attributes.

From what I've seen, I don't see any of the rookies as showing me a lot more, or a lot less than I expected out of them. They all are pretty bad (as expected) but none seem to have insurmountable challenges either.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
1,446
Given that it’s been a long time since I’ve been this invested in watching every snap of a currently bad-to-mediocre quarterback, I’m really blanking - who in the last 5-10 years would be a good example of an above average decision making QB who sucked in action because of their physical tools? Not counting end of career Peyton** I feel like those guys are pretty rare, which admittedly is most likely an indictment of my attention or Mac’s ceiling. I really can’t think of too many NFL qb’s that feel like a good analog for Mac’s first 5 games. But my gut says there’s gotta be plenty.

**obligatory “I’m not saying Mac Jones has the defense reading talent of Peyton Manning” disclaimer
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
30,508
Mac looks weak throwing outside the numbers if he does not have his feet under him and is able to step into the throw. He seems to do everything else either well already or shows enough to believe he's on a path to get there with more reps.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,248
Given that it’s been a long time since I’ve been this invested in watching every snap of a currently bad-to-mediocre quarterback, I’m really blanking - who in the last 5-10 years would be a good example of an above average decision making QB who sucked in action because of their physical tools? Not counting end of career Peyton** I feel like those guys are pretty rare, which admittedly is most likely an indictment of my attention or Mac’s ceiling. I really can’t think of too many NFL qb’s that feel like a good analog for Mac’s first 5 games. But my gut says there’s gotta be plenty.

**obligatory “I’m not saying Mac Jones has the defense reading talent of Peyton Manning” disclaimer
My guy Pennington is the first that comes to mind. He had a decent arm in college but he had injuries as a pro
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,634
Given that it’s been a long time since I’ve been this invested in watching every snap of a currently bad-to-mediocre quarterback, I’m really blanking - who in the last 5-10 years would be a good example of an above average decision making QB who sucked in action because of their physical tools? Not counting end of career Peyton** I feel like those guys are pretty rare, which admittedly is most likely an indictment of my attention or Mac’s ceiling. I really can’t think of too many NFL qb’s that feel like a good analog for Mac’s first 5 games. But my gut says there’s gotta be plenty.

**obligatory “I’m not saying Mac Jones has the QB brain of Peyton Manning” disclaimer
Cody Kessler, Sam Bradford, Brian Hoyer, AJ McCarron, Case Keenum, Matt Schaub, Matt Flynn, Kellen Moore etc. Basically guys who kick around the league as backups for a long time tend to be in the category of "reads the field pretty well, accurate on short stuff, doesn't have the arm for someone to commit to him as their starter. Now if you're ELITE at the mental side, you can be Drew Brees and throw nothing over 10 yards and still be good.

Kessler threw less per game than Mac has as a rookie, but his results were better (lower INT% being the big driver), Bradford is another comp.

The flip side is, there aren't a lot of guys with low end arm strength who have long good careers. There are some, but other than Brees, they don't tend to be Stars, so they get cycled out for someone new.

Jones doesn't seem to have terrible arm strength, but also, he's not an elite decision maker either. Where he improves will determine if he's a career backup or a good starter. The odds he's a top 5-7 QB in the league seem pretty low, but it's not impossible.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,248
But he was a Pro Bowl type player until those injuries.
True. Not many guys go into BB house in a meaningful Christmastime game and give his D a beat down like this

45408

How sad is this, the 3 greatest Jets games I may have witnessed in a row were these 2 and the beating of Peyton’s ass 41-0 the next week in the wild card round. Beat downs of Brady/Favre/Manning (think Brady was hurt but he played). Lost @ Raiders then Penny was hurt and never the same.

edit: All this Penny success followed the “you play to win the game, HELLO” speech that October. What a year. Almost 20 years ago….alright alright enough of this nostalgia story time.

edit 2:fuck it, I will make my kids watch all the 2002 Berman Jets highlights tomorrow for the bye week. This team has sucked and been a joke for their entire life and they don’t know what my problem is, they need to see where an addiction can come from.

View: https://youtu.be/oRpKq3tV5Bc
 
Last edited:

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
33,411
Melrose, MA
Where a guy like Mac... he can get the ball out faster and read the field better, but he's always going to be immoble, and people wonder how much arm strength he can add. I think it's also that people look at past rookie QBs, and a lot more got better at reading the field and making decisions, than saw major physical improvements.

Nothing has really changed since the draft in some ways. Mac needs to be elite at reading defenses, decision making, accuracy and release time to be a top QB, some of the other guys just need to be good at those things, because they are very good or elite in terms of physical attributes.
So, here is where I disagree with this line of thinking: on the non-physical aspects of playing QB, I think Mac is a rookie with a lot to learn, not a finished product or anything remotely close to one. He can do some things well enough, but he's made plenty of mistakes so far, has lots of room for improvement.

Also, plenty of room for improvement with mechanics, etc. A lot of his bad throws have been off his back foot, etc.

Also, I think 'immobile' is a bit of an exaggeration. To my eye he runs better than Brady or Bledsoe did. Also can throw accurately on the move.
 
Last edited:

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Given that it’s been a long time since I’ve been this invested in watching every snap of a currently bad-to-mediocre quarterback, I’m really blanking - who in the last 5-10 years would be a good example of an above average decision making QB who sucked in action because of their physical tools? Not counting end of career Peyton** I feel like those guys are pretty rare, which admittedly is most likely an indictment of my attention or Mac’s ceiling. I really can’t think of too many NFL qb’s that feel like a good analog for Mac’s first 5 games. But my gut says there’s gotta be plenty.

**obligatory “I’m not saying Mac Jones has the defense reading talent of Peyton Manning” disclaimer
Sam Bradford? Teddy Bridgewater? Just as long as we're setting the bar at reasonably recent high draft picks, otherwise there are tons of those guys.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,634
So, here is where I disagree with this line of thinking: on the non-physical aspects of playing QB, I think Mac is a rookie with a lot to learn, not a finished product or anything remotely close to one. He can do some things well enough, but he's made plenty of mistakes so far.

Also, plenty of room for improvement with mechanics, etc. A lot of his bad throws have been off his back foot, etc.

Also, I think 'immobile' is a bI tof an exaggeration. To my eye he runs better than Brady or Bledsoe did. Also can throw accurately on the move.
Oh I think he can improve a lot, I just think he likely has a physical ceiling that means he has to be better at those things than someone who is a good runner, or can flick a backfoot throw 45 yards. Like Lamar Jackson doesn't have to be elite at anything passing-wise to be an MVP candidate, because he's a terror with his running ability.

I mean, Brady has no mobility, he makes up for it by being an all-time great in a number of other areas. Bledsoe played in the stone-age when everyone on the defense was nowhere near the speed they are now. You drop Bledsoe for 1995 into a game today he gets obliterated. Mac is immobile in the sense that he will likely never be able to consistently make plays with his legs. There are some degrees, but Mac is going to be closer to the Brady tier than the competent scrambler tier. Now like Brady he can make up for that with good reads, pre-snap identification, quick release, etc, but it just means he has less margin for error.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,248
Oh I think he can improve a lot, I just think he likely has a physical ceiling that means he has to be better at those things than someone who is a good runner, or can flick a backfoot throw 45 yards. Like Lamar Jackson doesn't have to be elite at anything passing-wise to be an MVP candidate, because he's a terror with his running ability.

I mean, Brady has no mobility, he makes up for it by being an all-time great in a number of other areas. Bledsoe played in the stone-age when everyone on the defense was nowhere near the speed they are now. You drop Bledsoe for 1995 into a game today he gets obliterated. Mac is immobile in the sense that he will likely never be able to consistently make plays with his legs. There are some degrees, but Mac is going to be closer to the Brady tier than the competent scrambler tier. Now like Brady he can make up for that with good reads, pre-snap identification, quick release, etc, but it just means he has less margin for error.
Someone in this league would be very happy with and figure out how to use 1995 Drew Bledsoe. Jesus man, you are hardly allowed to touch the QB in the pocket now.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
Not to nitpick but he isn’t accurate on the move consistently. Right now half the time his mechanics get out of whack and the ball dies.
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,255
around the way
Not to nitpick but he isn’t accurate on the move consistently. Right now half the time his mechanics get out of whack and the ball dies.
That's not a nitpick. He made a few nice throws while on the move and some frigging doozies. Best you can say about his throwing on the run is that results are mixed.

Fwiw, that's one of the skills that I expect him to improve over the next few years. Mechanical shit like that can be learned, and he has developed a rep already as a hard worker.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
12,286
Given that it’s been a long time since I’ve been this invested in watching every snap of a currently bad-to-mediocre quarterback, I’m really blanking - who in the last 5-10 years would be a good example of an above average decision making QB who sucked in action because of their physical tools? Not counting end of career Peyton** I feel like those guys are pretty rare, which admittedly is most likely an indictment of my attention or Mac’s ceiling. I really can’t think of too many NFL qb’s that feel like a good analog for Mac’s first 5 games. But my gut says there’s gotta be plenty.

**obligatory “I’m not saying Mac Jones has the defense reading talent of Peyton Manning” disclaimer
Mac's weakness right now isnt his physical tools, it's really about his willingness and ability to complete the intermediate/deep throws.

So...Alex Smith?
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
Jul 18, 2005
28,580
Alexandria, VA
But he was a Pro Bowl type player until those injuries.
Yeah, Pennington is still #32 all-time for career adjusted net yards/attempt, #23 for passer rating. He retired at #1 in completion % (currently #7).

Those stats are the most sympathetic to him, for sure. But if you consider him mediocre-to-bad, you may have been spoiled by Brady.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,248
Yeah, Pennington is still #32 all-time for career adjusted net yards/attempt, #23 for passer rating. He retired at #1 in completion % (currently #7).

Those stats are the most sympathetic to him, for sure. But if you consider him mediocre-to-bad, you may have been spoiled by Brady.
I think he was mediocre by the end of his career and it was purely because of his arm betraying him

edit: and I probably just wanted to talk about Chad Pennington
 
Last edited:

Cotillion

lurker
Jun 11, 2019
1,575
I think he was mediocre by the end of his career and it was purely because of his arm betraying him

edit: and I probably just wanted to talk about Chad Pennington
Where on your body do you have your Chad Pennington tattoo? Did you go just his number? Photorealistic portrait? Throwing motion upper (waist up of Pennington)? Or full figure Pennington?
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
33,411
Melrose, MA
Not to nitpick but he isn’t accurate on the move consistently. Right now half the time his mechanics get out of whack and the ball dies.
This is absolutely right. He's made a few great throws on the run and a lot of lousy ones. To me, the poor throws are an indication that he has a lot of work to do on his mechanics. The great ones suggest that if he does it will pay off in better performance.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
21,317
Newton
What actually turned out to be the case (IMO) was that Mac was the only QB competing for a job this preseason. He could win it (and start) or not win it (in which case Cam would start).
That’s an interesting thought. Here’s another:

What if this was the plan in 2020 as well and Stidham just didn’t outplay Newton?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I still don't get the talk about how you need mobility to evade rushers when we have pretty solid evidence that mobile QBs run into pressure at a higher rate than they avoid it through athleticism. The only mobile QB to consistently have great sack rates is Mahomes, and by now we can all agree sacks and pressures over a large enough sample size are QB driven, right? If you look at the QBs that historically haven't been touched by defenders, it's all pocket guys. Mac has more than enough athleticism to succeed as an NFL QB, the arm worries me a whole lot more. I think he can't afford to be late on throws right now and I fear that realization may lead him to stop trying tight windows.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
13,624
Just wanted to come back to this to point out that Geno Smith hasn't started a game in 4 years. And Cam is still on the street.
The advantage for Smith is that he's been on the Seahawks roster since 2019 and so has familiarity with the system, playbook, etc. It's probably a wash between him and Cam at this point for that reason, and since Smith is already there, he gets the nod.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,207
I still don't get the talk about how you need mobility to evade rushers when we have pretty solid evidence that mobile QBs run into pressure at a higher rate than they avoid it through athleticism. The only mobile QB to consistently have great sack rates is Mahomes, and by now we can all agree sacks and pressures over a large enough sample size are QB driven, right? If you look at the QBs that historically haven't been touched by defenders, it's all pocket guys. Mac has more than enough athleticism to succeed as an NFL QB, the arm worries me a whole lot more. I think he can't afford to be late on throws right now and I fear that realization may lead him to stop trying tight windows.
I think "mobility" is too broad a term. The mobility of guys like Brady and Marino was to be able to shift a few feet to the left or right to give themselves a half second more time to step up -- into a clear spot -- and throw. Right now, it looks like Jones is only stepping directly forward which may not always be the best direction to get his body into the throw on a particular play, which is something he really has to do. I think that experience and a less shitty O-line will help in this regard. The announcers' phrase "sense where the pressure is coming from" (or anticipate where it *will* be coming from )comes to mind here.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
33,411
Melrose, MA
Cody Kessler, Sam Bradford, Brian Hoyer, AJ McCarron, Case Keenum, Matt Schaub, Matt Flynn, Kellen Moore
UDFA, first overall pick bust, UDFA, 5th round pick,. UDFA, 3rd round pick, 7th round pick, UDFA.

So, the list of 8 QBs you rattled off as comps for Mac Jones included one very high profile first round bust but was otherwise mostly UDFAs (4) and low draft picks.

It includes only 2 guys who got significant playing time as rookies, only one of whom (Bradford) won the job in camp. The other, Kessler, was the third person his team started at QB that year.

It includes 4 guys who started a total of 25 games in their whole careers, only one of whom is still active but got only 4 starts in 6 years coming into this season.

It includes a guy, Hoyer, who was good enough to win the backup job behind Brady as a UDFA rookie, but who was never seen by the Patriots as a potential starter. After 3 years backing up Brady, the Patriots cut him to make room for the immortal Ryan Mallet, whom they later traded for a 7th to make room for an acqual QB of the future. Then they re-acquired Hoyer in 2017, then they cut him 2019 to make room for Jarrett Stidham before reacquiring him again last year, but also grabbing Cam Newton, who is not exactly a fit for BB's style. Despite the dissappointing 2020 season, Hoyer got only one start.

The only guy on this list who is a reasonable comp for Mac Jones (someone who was highly drafted and won the starting job in his first camp) is Bradford, and even he is a poor comp. He played 4 years with the Rams, started 49 games, and completed under 60% of his passes in that span. That's... not Mac Jones. Bradford was in the bottom half of the league in completition percentage where Mac is 5th.

Anyway, there's a lot different about Mac than all of those other guys, and if the Pats saw him as another Hoyer type they weren'y going to spend a 1st round pick on him and then cut Cam Newton to clear they way for him.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
UDFA, first overall pick bust, UDFA, 5th round pick,. UDFA, 3rd round pick, 7th round pick, UDFA.

So, the list of 8 QBs you rattled off as comps for Mac Jones included one very high profile first round bust but was otherwise mostly UDFAs (4) and low draft picks.

It includes only 2 guys who got significant playing time as rookies, only one of whom (Bradford) won the job in camp. The other, Kessler, was the third person his team started at QB that year.

It includes 4 guys who started a total of 25 games in their whole careers, only one of whom is still active but got only 4 starts in 6 years coming into this season.

It includes a guy, Hoyer, who was good enough to win the backup job behind Brady as a UDFA rookie, but who was never seen by the Patriots as a potential starter. After 3 years backing up Brady, the Patriots cut him to make room for the immortal Ryan Mallet, whom they later traded for a 7th to make room for an acqual QB of the future. Then they re-acquired Hoyer in 2017, then they cut him 2019 to make room for Jarrett Stidham before reacquiring him again last year, but also grabbing Cam Newton, who is not exactly a fit for BB's style. Despite the dissappointing 2020 season, Hoyer got only one start.

The only guy on this list who is a reasonable comp for Mac Jones (someone who was highly drafted and won the starting job in his first camp) is Bradford, and even he is a poor comp. He played 4 years with the Rams, started 49 games, and completed under 60% of his passes in that span. That's... not Mac Jones. Bradford was in the bottom half of the league in completition percentage where Mac is 5th.

Anyway, there's a lot different about Mac than all of those other guys, and if the Pats saw him as another Hoyer type they weren'y going to spend a 1st round pick on him and then cut Cam Newton to clear they way for him.
Then again they were also ok going forward with Jimmy in lieu of Brady and I don't think Garoppolo is the kind of guy you can consistently win with if he's not surrounded with great talent. Is Mac's skillset distinctly different/better than Jimmy's?
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
33,411
Melrose, MA
Then again they were also ok going forward with Jimmy in lieu of Brady and I don't think Garoppolo is the kind of guy you can consistently win with if he's not surrounded with great talent. Is Mac's skillset distinctly different/better than Jimmy's?
As poorly as Jimmy iseems to be thought of these days, he is 26-10 in 36 starts. He was 5-0 as a starter in 2017 on a team that went 1-10 with other starters, and 3-3 last year on a team that went 3-7 with other starters. I think Jimmy would maybe be a Patriot now had the 49ers stiuck to their (alleged) original plan and drafted Jones.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,773
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
As poorly as Jimmy iseems to be thought of these days, he is 26-10 in 36 starts. He was 5-0 as a starter in 2017 on a team that went 1-10 with other starters, and 3-3 last year on a team that went 3-7 with other starters. I think Jimmy would maybe be a Patriot now had the 49ers stiuck to their (alleged) original plan and drafted Jones.
Sure, and I think we'd be looking at a competitive team that with their current talent level would be no threat in the AFC. At least with Mac we have the hope he can ascend past that level (even if the chance he won't is likely higher than most of us would like to admit).
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
21,317
Newton
I doubt that. I think they went and got Cam because they didn't see Stidham as ready.
I agree. But given all the buzz we heard about Stidham in the run up to last year as well as the fact that they effectively did the same thing a year later (having a young guy face a vet), it’s not an impossibility. And given how little we actually ever hear about the Patriots’ methods, you can’t entirely discount that they were giving Stidham a chance to compete for the job and he just didn’t perform in camp and that was pretty much that.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,634
The only guy on this list who is a reasonable comp for Mac Jones (someone who was highly drafted and won the starting job in his first camp) is Bradford, and even he is a poor comp. He played 4 years with the Rams, started 49 games, and completed under 60% of his passes in that span. That's... not Mac Jones. Bradford was in the bottom half of the league in completition percentage where Mac is 5th.

Anyway, there's a lot different about Mac than all of those other guys, and if the Pats saw him as another Hoyer type they weren'y going to spend a 1st round pick on him and then cut Cam Newton to clear they way for him.
I mean, the question is who are guys who had physical limitations that prevented them from being top QBs, not "who is a comp for Jones". I pointed out Bradford as a guy who had a weak arm and was known as accurate (later in his career his arm was worse, but he was very accurate) Overall though, draft placement is a bad way to compare QBs once they are in the league, QB evaluation is a far from perfect science, lots of guys drafted early bust (particularly outside the top 5), a decent number of mid to late round guys turn out as good or better. Mac Jones going 1st round has little bearing on his performance, just as

Mac is a tough comp for a couple reasons:
1. For NFL comps he's played 5 games.
2. Not a lot of recent 1st round picks are great physical comps. Tua I guess? Christian Ponder? Most first round QBs drafted recently have big arms, rushing ability or both.
 
Feb 19, 2015
4,368
Just by the eye test so far I'm supremely confident that Mac is going to be a solid NFL starter for years to come, barring injury. I think he's done a great job so far considering the issues with the offensive line. I fully admit I could be very wrong, but that's my non-expert opinion and I'm sticking with it.